THE CIVIL JUSTICE REFORM IN HONG KONG: A CRITICAL REVIEW OF THE PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF THE REFORM
In the past, the judge in Hong Kong played a passive role in the resolution of cases. Untimely «non-intervention» had a negative impact on the course of civil proceedings. The root of the problem lies in court, his excessive use of the concept of «justice on the merits», which affects the procedural efficiency. Since the days of the Civil Justice Reform (CJR) in 2009, the purpose of civil proceedings exceeded the search for justice and covered a lot of different ways to promote the efficiency of the procedures and reasonable relationship of proportionality, as well as to encourage the settlement of the dispute out of court. New reforms in the civil law was given broad powers to the judge. The Court is now vested with broad powers to ensure compliance with the procedural time limits, limit and control the schedule of trials. These powers have huge implications for the process of establishing the facts in Hong Kong, in particular, to improve their effectiveness. More than three years have passed since the ratification of the reform. The reform has generally been considered a success. This article critically examines the impact of CJR to handle cases, focusing on the fact-finding, problem undue delay and the new regime of mediation. The practical consequences of CJR critically examined on the basis of three in-depth interviews with the district court judge, a leading lawyer and a leading mediator, based in Hong Kong. The article concludes that the reform made the civil process much more efficient and cost-effective than in the past.