Friday, October 03, 2008

[lawyers] make 'em all circuit judges


Here's the thing on lawyers which you won't remember that this blogger threatened to post.  It arose from an ongoing discussion over this way - hope you like it.

The first in the series was called "small government".  This is the second.

In a nutshell, we alter the whole paradigm in law.  All current lawyers either join the circuit of travelling magistrates [or indeed fixed ones] and all civil and criminal law is handled through them.  No need for solicitors, just clerks.  No need for juries or jury service, just magistrates.

All law works on precedent and on standard procedures developed and written up over the years, certainly in civil matters and there can easily be available blueprints on how to proceed. 

So it works this way.  

Two people are contracting to buy and sell a home.  The estate agent has the standard forms and explanatory notes on site and these are explained to the two parties and copies given.  However, there is a dispute over the exact boundary of the property and this needs resolution.

First step [gratis] is for the estate agent clerk who handles the legal side to sit down with the two parties and talk common sense.  It should resolve the majority of issues.  But let's say one party has dug his heels in and so they need to get a "travelling" arbiter in who, if almost all lawyers have joined this service, will be like well paid JPs.  His decision is final and is binding in law.  He is paid by the plaintiff, if he was the victor as the loser has lost out.  This reduces spurious dispute.

In criminal matters, the magistrate acts as just that.  There is provision for appeal to three magistrates sitting empanelled.

The thing is, the enormous sums saved by eliminating the legal gravy train go back into ordinary people's pockets but the lawyers themselves don't lose out.  They still earn a decent sum as magistrates and as it was in the case of good lawyers/bad lawyers, people can choose which ones to co-opt and which not to.

By changing the whole nature of adversarial law, all the sophistry, all the hanky-panky and all the rip-offs are swept away.

4 comments:

  1. Interesting post James.
    I now quote Jim Morrison who once said...in relation to creating a better world...'First, we kill all the lawyers' :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'd hoped to do a better job expounding this idea which was not mine, actually but RL issues today [quite good ones actually] meant there wasn't the time.

    One reader said that my more in depth posts are better where I've researched and linked. Trouble is that time is the constraining factor and it's not possible to do only those.

    Have to find a happy medium.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I like the variety in your posts. Some are fun some are serious and some are in depth! Even if you can't do a full research and link as often as you like, I think the variety will keep people interested.

    I am glad RL has been good for you today :-) xx

    ReplyDelete
  4. All your posts are most interesting and unique, even the mini posts. :)

    I know I, for one, like a bigger dose of Higham.

    ReplyDelete

Comments need a moniker of your choosing before or after ... no moniker, not posted, sorry.