Fabien Gélinas et al, Foundations of Civil Justice: Toward a Value-Based Framework for Reform, Cham, Springer, 2015

The recent reform of the Quebec Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) prompts us to re-examine the foundations of civil justice. Foundations of Civil Justice: Toward a Value-Based Framework for Reform is a wonderful starting point to do so. The co-authors—Fabien Gélinas, Clément Camion, Katrine Bates, Siena Antis, Catherine Piché, Mariko Khan, and Emily Grant—are part of a working group on new procedural models at the Montreal Cyberjustice Laboratory. This multidisciplinary research project involves researchers from several countries and various disciplines (anthropology, history, information sciences, law, philosophy, psychology, sociology). As such, an interdisciplinary methodology was used for this book in order to examine the complexity of contemporary issues of access to justice. This first international study of civil justice reforms offers a critical analysis of existing literature, which has focused primarily on courts’ efficiency (i.e., delays, costs). It also highlights areas that need further research, particularly areas lacking empirical data on civil justice reform. Moreover, it identifies the core values that underpin every legal system that must be prioritized for any justice system reform. By using feminist and critical race theories as well as a legal pluralist approach, the authors propose a new research framework—namely a value-based framework. The thesis of the authors is that, in order to ensure the legitimacy and the success of civil justice reforms, we must take into account a complex set of values that are sometimes overlapping and even contradictory. Said values are divided in two main categories: 1) those relating to the satisfaction of the parties; and 2) those relating to the integrity of the judicial system. The first category includes participation (active or passive), trust (due process, fairness), procedural dignity (respect, care), and neutrality of third-party decision makers (impartial, independent). The second category includes accessibility (intellectual, procedural, and economic), truthfulness (in judicial or other contexts), and legitimacy (formalism and ritualism). While recognizing that improving efficiency is an important element in civil justice reform, efficiency is not included in the above-mentioned categories since it should not be “construed as a goal in and of itself.” Therefore, the new research framework aims to shift the focus from efficiency goals to the values in which civil justice systems should be grounded. The book is divided into five chapters, with the last chapter explaining this new research framework, based on the values identified in the four prior chapters. The reader’s attention is captured from the very beginning by the use of images, and maintained throughout the whole book. The use of short sections in each chapter facilitates comprehension and transitions between principal arguments and applications. The first chapter argues that civil justice systems’ legitimacy is reinforced by two competing factors: parties’ autonomy (participation) on the one hand, and judicial rituals and architecture, on the other. For instance, courthouse design provides symbolism for judicial systems' central values, such as monumentality (authority, independence, impartiality), transparency, representing its theatrical and pedagogical functions, and even greater access to justice for subjects of the law. In other words, the first chapter reveals the relationship between the state, the law, legal actors, and legal subjects (e.g., rationalization, secularization, and democratization of justice). Further empirical research is thus required regarding the impact of “deritualized” dispute resolution (i.e., private justice) on the legitimacy of civil justice systems. In the second chapter, the authors show the lack of systemic methodology in empirical studies on access to justice reforms. They use sources not only from Canada, but also from the United States and United Kingdom. Several factors may serve as impediments to access to justice. These include overly complex legal jargon, commercialization of the legal profession, and …