Court Forms as Part of Online Courts: Elicitation and Communication in the Early Stages of Legal Proceedings

Author:

Grieshofer TatianaORCID

Abstract

AbstractThe article explores court forms as an interactive genre essential for legal-lay communication in civil and family proceedings: court forms elicit key information from predominantly lay users for the purposes of court administration and the judiciary. The information presented in court forms defines the agenda and communicative focus of the subsequent hearings and settlement negotiations, and in some instances even the path the proceedings would take. It is thus important to consider court forms in terms of their comprehensibility as well as functionality for eliciting legally coherent narratives and facilitating efficient engagement of lay participants with the proceedings. The case study presented in the article draws on the combination of corpus linguistics and discourse analysis to explore two versions of the court form most frequently used by self-represented parties in England and Wales, ‘Form C100: Apply for a court order to make arrangements for a child or resolve a dispute about their upbringing’. The comparison of the paper form and its redesigned online version identifies the improvements made as part of the digitisation process but also indicates communicative challenges which can prevent the lay person from presenting the relevant information. The discussion provides an opportunity to reflect on the role of language in online courts.

Funder

Arts and Humanities Research Council

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Law,Language and Linguistics

Reference83 articles.

1. Adler, Mark. 2012. The plain language movement. In The Oxford handbook of language and law, ed. Peter Tiersma and Larry Solan, 67–83. Oxford: OUP.

2. Ainsworth, Janet. 2010. Miranda Rights: Curtailing coercion in police interrogation: the failed promise of Miranda v. Arizona. In The Routledge handbook of forensic linguistics, eds. Malcolm Coulthard and Alison Johnson, 95–111. London and New York: Routledge.

3. Allsop, James. 2019. Technology and the future of the courts. University of Queensland Law Journal 38: 1–14.

4. Askew, Susan, and Caroline Lodge. 2000. Gifts, ping-pong and loops-linking feedback and learning. In Feedback for learning, ed. Susan Askew, 1–18. London and New York: Routledge.

5. Assy, Rabeea. 2011. Can the law speak directly to its subjects? The limitation of plain language. Journal of Law and Society 383: 376–404.

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Issues in Translating, Interpreting and Teaching Legal Languages and Legal Communication;International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique;2023-07-14

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3