Three Years of Civil Justice Reform: Constructing a Cost-Effective and Efficient Civil Procedure in Hong Kong

In the past, the Hong Kong judge played a passive role in case management. Undue delay became a by-product of this ‘laissez-faire’ approach in civil litigation. The root of the problem lies in 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. These powers have immense implications for the fact-finding process in Hong Kong, particularly in enhancing efficiency in fact-finding. More than three years have passed since the implementation of the CJR. The reform is generally regarded a success. This article critically examines the impact of the CJR on case management placing particular focus on fact-finding, the problem of undue delay and the new mediation regime. The article concludes that the CJR made civil litigation much more efficient and cost-effective.