Writing in NLJ this week, Lloyd Firth of WilmerHale critiques Recommendation 44 of the Leveson Review, which proposes mandatory judge-alone trials for serious and complex fraud cases
Firth argues this reform undermines justice by removing the defendant’s right to choose trial by jury. He challenges the assumption that jurors cannot grasp complex fraud, citing evidence to the contrary and noting the lack of empirical support for the proposal. Firth also highlights issues like digital evidence overload and poor case management as more pressing causes of delays.
He warns that adopting judge-only trials without consent would erode public participation and legal fairness. Instead, Firth advocates for reforms that preserve choice and are grounded in data. The proposal, he concludes, offers negligible benefit and risks damaging a cornerstone of the justice system.
RELATED ARTICLES
