China: Hong Kong. Selective Adoption of the English Woolf Reforms

Abstract

In the past, the Hong Kong judge played a passive role in case management. Undue delay became a by-product of such judicial inactivity. Litigation became far too adversarial and procedural deadlines were often unenforced. The root of the problem lay in the court’s overemphasis on the notion of ‘justice on the merits’ at the expense of procedural efficiency. Since the Civil Justice Reform (CJR) in 2009, the goal of civil justice has transcended the search for pure substantive justice and embraced a multi-faceted agenda to promote procedural efficiency and reasonable proportionality, as well as to encourage settlement. The CJR conferred extensive case management powers to the judge. The court is now equipped with greater discretionary powers to enforce procedural deadlines, limit discovery and administer the litigation timetable. This chapter critically examines the impact of the CJR on case management in Hong Kong, placing particular focus on fact-finding, the problem of undue delay and the new mediation regime.