At the same time clients are moving toward more efficient, accessible solutions, parts of the legal system are moving in the opposite direction.
A recent example highlights the issue.
The return to in person motions
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice has announced that many short family law motions in Toronto will return to in person hearings.
We addressed this in our recent article Returning Family Court Motions to In Person Hearings Is a Step Backward.
The concern is not theoretical. It is practical.
Cost implications
Remote hearings reduced:
- travel time
- waiting time
- unnecessary billing
In person hearings bring those costs back.
A one hour motion becomes:
- travel
- waiting
- attendance
- return
Clients pay for all of it.
Access to justice concerns
Remote hearings allowed participation from:
- home
- work
- local environments
They removed barriers such as:
- childcare
- transportation
- lost work time
Reintroducing in person requirements brings those barriers back.
Efficiency and delay
Courts are already under pressure.
In person hearings introduce inefficiencies unrelated to the legal issues:
- scheduling delays
- physical constraints
- time lost between matters
Technology had addressed many of these.
Safety considerations
Family law often involves conflict and power imbalance.
In person attendance can create:
- unwanted encounters
- intimidation
- emotional stress
Remote hearings reduced these risks.
The case for a hybrid model
Not all matters should be virtual.
Trials and complex hearings benefit from in person attendance.
But short procedural motions:
- are brief
- are structured
- are well suited to remote platforms
A hybrid model balances:
- cost
- efficiency
- fairness
- safety
The broader issue
While clients and technology are moving forward, parts of the system are stepping back. That gap will not hold.
It will either be addressed intentionally or filled indirectly.
Final takeaway
The legal system does not need to choose between tradition and technology. It needs to use both appropriately.
The goal should remain clear:
- accessible
- efficient
- fair
Anything that moves away from those principles deserves careful reconsideration.
At Russell Alexander Collaborative Family Lawyers, we continue to advocate for practical solutions that improve access to justice while maintaining the integrity of the legal process. Technology, used properly, is part of that solution.
