A senior judge has called for a new government to put an end to the “torrent” of legislation which has made the legal system incomprehensible to both judges and the public.

Speaking to The Times, Judge Charles Harris QC, president of the 600-strong council of circuit judges stated that criminal law had become so complex that judges had to have academic experts explain it to them.

He also felt that civil law was so complicated, terming some laws as being “completely beyond the grasp of people to whom they apply”.

“Law which is not readily comprehensive is unfair law, because those to whom it applies have to spend time, money and anxiety in finding out by litigation what their obligations are.”

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Judge Harris, who heads the judicial rank responsible for all serious cases in the Crown and county courts, stated that an average of 2,629 laws a year had been produced by the last three prime ministers.

He added that in the last eight years, there were between 40 and 70 Acts of Parliament and more than three thousand statutory instruments a year.

“Some substantive civil law is so complex that it is wholly inaccessible to the laymen to whom it applies and not much easier to understand for lawyers.”

He pointed out the consumer credit laws as a good example. “Academics graze contented in its thickets, while the people to whom the law applies have no choice but to sign contracts which they do not understand.”

The editor of Archbold, the criminal law compendium described the state of the criminal laws as a disgrace.

The sixty five-year old judge felt it was time for the passing of a bill to bring about the rationalisation and consolidation of the criminal laws, to weed out all statutes and to put an end to all legislation.

“It is vital to remember that laws should not be run up in haste and flung, as a palliative reaction, at every problem which may arise.”

Judge Harris comments came as another judge warned the public that they are “best off having nothing to do” with litigation.

Using lawyers’ bills and the complexities of modern court cases as an example, Lord Justice Mummery of the Court of Appeal stated that: “I am sympathetic to all litigants who get caught up in our legal system.”

Judge Mummery, Britain’s foremost employment law expert added: “The law is best kept as far away as possible; you’re best off having nothing to do with it”.

These comments came in the wake of the judge’s rejection of an appeal by a Devon lord of the manor against a bill for almost £15,000 that his company incurred after an Employment Tribunal hearing.

David Piper, Lord of the Manor of Warleigh’s argued that the compensation award following a claim for disability discrimination was “a travesty of justice”. However, when addressing the claim, Lord Justice Mummery stated that his challenge to the compensation had “no reasonable prospect of success”.