Facebook  Twitter  LinkedIn  Slideshare

At a glance
Home
About the CCJE
A word from the President
Secretariat
Activities
  MEETINGS
Calendar
Meeting reports
  EVENTS
10th anniversary of the CCJE
Conferences
  COOPERATION
Status and situation of judges in member States
Cooperation with other bodies
Documentation
ECHR Judgments
Reference documents
Press releases
  OPINIONS
CCJE Opinions and Magna Carta
Preliminary works
For a proper use of CCJE Opinions...
  SEARCH
Simple search
Advanced search
partners
Restricted access to the collaborative workspace
Coe Bodies, international organisations and research centers

NB_CE
Strasbourg, 27 January 2011

CCJE-GT(2011)1

CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL OF EUROPEAN JUDGES
(CCJE)

Questionnaire with a view of the preparation of Opinion No. 14 on the non-materialisation of the judicial process and the use of IT by judges and court staff

Questionnaire

ICELAND

Questionnaire with a view of the preparation of Opinion No. 14 on the non-materialisation of the judicial process and the use of IT by judges/court staff

1. Access to courts

The parts often send the plaintiff’s complaint and the defendant’s answer and the prosecution the indictments to the district courts by electronic means.
2. Procedure within courts

With parties who use electronic means themselves:

With other parties:

by traditional means?

by traditional means?

by using electronic communication? Yes

by using electronic communication?

both?

both? Yes

Judges

Court staff

to all court files?

    to all court files?

only to files within their jurisdiction? Yes.

    only to files within their jurisdiction? Yes.

3. Oral hearing

4. Information services for judges

Database run by State

Database run by a private institution

☐ national legislation Yes

☐ national legislation No

☐ European legislation No

☐ European legislation No

☐ national case-law Yes

☐ national case-law No

☐ international case-law No

☐ international case-law No

☐ law review articles No

☐ law review articles No

5. Practical court work

6. Internet

7. Use of private personal computers/laptops by judges and court staff

8. Use of data

9. Data security

10. Participation of judges

Who decides about the electronic infrastructure of a court? Are judges implicated in the relevant decisions concerning the implementation of IT in courts? The Judicial Council and the Supreme Court. The judges are not implicated in the relevant decisions in that concern.

11. Conclusion

Please give your opinion on the advantages and disadvantages of the development of IT in courts?

The advantages are overwhelming. All data information is accessible on a server and therefore easy to work with. Data security is therefore of high importance. There has been discussions in Iceland about using video taping of hearings and video conferencing but before the legislation must be amended.

Helgi I. Jónsson, Chief Judge, Reykjavik, Iceland