This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2013/may/02/county-court-law-justice

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
From the archive, 2 May 1932: County courts help bring justice for all From the archive, 2 May 1932: County courts help bring justice for all
(5 months later)
The County Court as originally conceived some eighty-five years ago was intended to be a poor man's court. It was thought that it was the right of every man, however poor, to have justice administered to him conveniently, expeditiously, and cheaply. And so in the year 1846 county courts were established. As they exist to-day they bear very little resemblance to the original courts. The pecuniary limit of their jurisdiction has been extended. Upwards of one hundred Acts of Parliament have been passed conferring upon them jurisdiction in a great variety of matters. They now deal with many disputes in which wealthy men and substantial corporations are involved, where large sums of money are at stake and difficult questions of law and of fact are raised.The County Court as originally conceived some eighty-five years ago was intended to be a poor man's court. It was thought that it was the right of every man, however poor, to have justice administered to him conveniently, expeditiously, and cheaply. And so in the year 1846 county courts were established. As they exist to-day they bear very little resemblance to the original courts. The pecuniary limit of their jurisdiction has been extended. Upwards of one hundred Acts of Parliament have been passed conferring upon them jurisdiction in a great variety of matters. They now deal with many disputes in which wealthy men and substantial corporations are involved, where large sums of money are at stake and difficult questions of law and of fact are raised.
But the County Court is still the poor man's court. To it he brings the disputes he cannot otherwise settle. His sentiment, expressed in various dialects throughout the country, is, "Well, let us bring it before the Judge; whatever he says will be right." "The Judge" is, of course, the County Court Judge. The High Court Judge is only known to him as the terrifying representative of his Majesty who sits aloft in scarlet robes and sentences criminals. The County Court Judge is his own judge, with whose personality he is familiar, and whose sense of fairness he has learned to trust. All he wants to know is how he stands with regard to his rights. If his position is carefully explained to him he is, generally speaking, quite prepared to accept the decision whether it be for or against him. There is an inherent sense of justice in most people. They only want what is right.But the County Court is still the poor man's court. To it he brings the disputes he cannot otherwise settle. His sentiment, expressed in various dialects throughout the country, is, "Well, let us bring it before the Judge; whatever he says will be right." "The Judge" is, of course, the County Court Judge. The High Court Judge is only known to him as the terrifying representative of his Majesty who sits aloft in scarlet robes and sentences criminals. The County Court Judge is his own judge, with whose personality he is familiar, and whose sense of fairness he has learned to trust. All he wants to know is how he stands with regard to his rights. If his position is carefully explained to him he is, generally speaking, quite prepared to accept the decision whether it be for or against him. There is an inherent sense of justice in most people. They only want what is right.
There is to be found, of course, the man who wants a little more than his legal rights and the man who will avoid, if he can, his legal obligations. These men are not so easily satisfied, but it is comparatively rarely that they express any dissatisfaction in court. Possibly their sentiments, and their views with regard to the judge, are expressed on another and a safer occasion.There is to be found, of course, the man who wants a little more than his legal rights and the man who will avoid, if he can, his legal obligations. These men are not so easily satisfied, but it is comparatively rarely that they express any dissatisfaction in court. Possibly their sentiments, and their views with regard to the judge, are expressed on another and a safer occasion.
When the poor man is conducting his own case infinite patience is required. Having taken the oath, "I swear by my Almighty God" &c. (the word "my" is almost invariably inserted, though it forms no part of the oath, and the witness is reading from a card printed in large type), the plaintiff begins to open his case. "I said to the Missis, 'Jane, you've got to go for them trouses,' and she says: 'Bill, you know I've got washing to do, and little 'Enery to mind, and your dinner to get, and Jim and you drank them other trouses,' which we did, and so I says to her: 'Them trouses is not their trouses, Jane.'When the poor man is conducting his own case infinite patience is required. Having taken the oath, "I swear by my Almighty God" &c. (the word "my" is almost invariably inserted, though it forms no part of the oath, and the witness is reading from a card printed in large type), the plaintiff begins to open his case. "I said to the Missis, 'Jane, you've got to go for them trouses,' and she says: 'Bill, you know I've got washing to do, and little 'Enery to mind, and your dinner to get, and Jim and you drank them other trouses,' which we did, and so I says to her: 'Them trouses is not their trouses, Jane.'
If not stopped at this point the plaintiff will entertain the Court with a long account of a discussion which took place between himself and his wife as to his occasional lapses from sobriety. But sufficient has been said to make it clear that whatever else there may be in the case there is no doubt that it centres round a pair of trousers. Whose trousers they are, what the claim with reference to them may be, and what defence there is to such claim have yet to be ascertained.If not stopped at this point the plaintiff will entertain the Court with a long account of a discussion which took place between himself and his wife as to his occasional lapses from sobriety. But sufficient has been said to make it clear that whatever else there may be in the case there is no doubt that it centres round a pair of trousers. Whose trousers they are, what the claim with reference to them may be, and what defence there is to such claim have yet to be ascertained.
Possibly the defendant may be able to throw some light upon the matter. When appealed to he says: "Me and him had a bet on the Derby. He said Neverwon was a cert and I said it hadn't an earthly. It was evens, he never pays his bets. Do you, Bill? You know you don't, Bill, and it's no use saying you do. What about the November 'Andicap, and them other trouses?"Possibly the defendant may be able to throw some light upon the matter. When appealed to he says: "Me and him had a bet on the Derby. He said Neverwon was a cert and I said it hadn't an earthly. It was evens, he never pays his bets. Do you, Bill? You know you don't, Bill, and it's no use saying you do. What about the November 'Andicap, and them other trouses?"
Light begins to dawn upon the Court. Bets; trousers; and Neverwon did in fact win the Derby! The problem is capable of solution if carefully handled. The plaintiff must be questioned.Light begins to dawn upon the Court. Bets; trousers; and Neverwon did in fact win the Derby! The problem is capable of solution if carefully handled. The plaintiff must be questioned.
"Did you have a bet with the defendant on the Derby?""Did you have a bet with the defendant on the Derby?"
"Yes, I did. He said—""Yes, I did. He said—"
"Did you back Neverwon?""Did you back Neverwon?"
"Well, he said it couldn't win, and I said—""Well, he said it couldn't win, and I said—"
"In view of past experiences did he insist on having security for the bet?""In view of past experiences did he insist on having security for the bet?"
"That's it.""That's it."
"Did you deposit your Sunday trousers as security?""Did you deposit your Sunday trousers as security?"
"I did and all.""I did and all."
"When Neverwon won did you ask him to return your trousers?""When Neverwon won did you ask him to return your trousers?"
"I told him if he didn't—""I told him if he didn't—"
"Did he refuse to return them?""Did he refuse to return them?"
"He says he is going to keep them trouses for our bet on the Ceserwitch.""He says he is going to keep them trouses for our bet on the Ceserwitch."
The defendant when appealed to says: "That's about it."The defendant when appealed to says: "That's about it."
Quite clearly the deposit of the plaintiff's Sunday trousers was made for a specific purpose. The reason for the deposit no longer exists, and Jim has no right to retain Bill's Sunday trousers. There must, therefore, be judgment for the plaintiff for the return of the trousers or their value, four shillings and sixpence, and costs.Quite clearly the deposit of the plaintiff's Sunday trousers was made for a specific purpose. The reason for the deposit no longer exists, and Jim has no right to retain Bill's Sunday trousers. There must, therefore, be judgment for the plaintiff for the return of the trousers or their value, four shillings and sixpence, and costs.
[Click here to read the full version of this article.][Click here to read the full version of this article.]
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.