In the third in an occasional series on Bermuda?s creaking justice system, The Royal Gazette spoke to Bermuda Bar Council president David Kessaram on what can be done to improve things.

?The system now appears to be run at the convenience of the lawyers and the judges rather than the parties. And that?s wrong.?

Surprising words from David Kessaram, who as president of the Bermuda Bar Council represents more than 300 of the Island?s lawyers.

But Mr. Kessaram believes justice in Bermuda could be greatly improved and made cheaper for clients by the adoption of the Woolf reforms which he says have transformed legal affairs in Britain since their adoption in 1999 and are now improving things in Caribbean islands.

He said: ?The system should be there for the benefit of the public to serve their interests. That?s one of the things the Woolf reforms were designed to ensure.?

In the UK, Woolf has revamped court rules and made civil courts more efficient and cheaper for clients.

One key change was a greater roles for judges who decided the timetable of cases, rather than leaving it to the parties. They also have the power to refer cases to mediation which can save clients a small fortune.

?The effect in the UK is more cases get settled more quickly than they did under the previous regime.

?What Woolf did was scrap all of the rules governing how actions are to be regulated and substituted a completely new regime which tightened it up and gave the judge a more interventionist role.

?It caused parties to consider the merits of their claim at an earlier stage rather when you are about to go to court.?

This had the effect of many cases being settled out of court or people dropping their claim.

?One of the ways they achieved that was by requiring parties to attest to the truth in their statement of claim.

?It?s improved the system of justice tremendously, it?s been adopted in the Bahamas and the BVI; there?s no reason why we shouldn?t at least consider them.?

But the key body for change, the law reform committee, is ?stuck in the mud? said Mr. Kessaram.

The committee, headed by the Cabinet Secretary, recommends changes to a subcommittee which refers them back before law changes go to Cabinet.

But a lack of parliamentary draftsmen had meant laws were not being drafted, said Mr. Kessaram.

?Several initiatives got put on hold because of that.

?The rules of the Supreme Court were being revised but because we couldn?t have a parliamentary draftsman to come up with new drafts, it became idle.

?As a result there?s no consideration being given to changes of substantive law in areas which affect the population.

?It seems when it comes to laws to do with international business or regulation of financial services that gets done fairly quickly and easily.

?But when it comes to other types of legislation, such as divorce law reform, they are dealt with less expeditiously.

?In fact divorce law reform has become stagnant.?

He said in undefended divorces, it was necessary for the parties to go to court meaning clients had to fork out for lawyers? fees.

?They have to stand up in the witness box and go through the petition which is wholly unnecessary. It all adds to the cost of a divorce. It?s a bit arcane now.?

In the UK, he said divorces could done by post. Meanwhile Bermuda?s laws dates back to 1974.

Bitter legal battles over distribution of marital property could also be reduced, said Mr. Kessaram.

He said technology improvements and training in the court registry could allow documents to be filed electronically.

The Bar Council is also pushing for the right of access to documents involved in judicial review.

Laws currently stopping law firms being incorporated need to be changed, said Mr. Kessaram, to protect them from being cleaned out in lawsuits.

?We are operating in a more litigious atmosphere these days, people are more inclined to take pot shots a lawyers than they were.

?Some of these awards, not only in Bermuda, but outside of Bermuda have seen professional accounting firms in the US made defendants in US actions.

?There is a real danger lawyers can be drawn into that sort of thing. The potential damages can be significant. They can wipe out a law firm.

?Incorporation would limit the liability of the partners.

?We are not asking to be just shielded as part of the price of being able to incorporate, it?s being suggested there be a requirement you carry a certain amount of professional indemnity insurance as a precondition.?

He said the Bar Council had appointed a judicial sub-committee to consider how to handle judicial appointments should be handled.

?We think it?s important and necessary to ensure we get the best applicants for the job and to ensure political influences remain out of it.

He regretted the public spat between the Premier and Governor over the appointment of a Chief Justice.

?I am sorry about the course it took. It caused a lot anguish and anxiety and hurt feelings I am sure.?