Hong Kong’s legal system had long been criticised for lagging behind other common law jurisdictions in recognising electronic filing of legal papers.

Since last year, e-filing of legal papers has been allowed at the Hong Kong District Court for personal injury cases, tax claims, civil action and employees’ compensation cases, and simple cases at the Magistrate’s Court involving summonses.

To make the switch, law firms and litigants must be registered on an electronic case management system.

According to the judiciary, only 43 law firms out of more than 900 in the city, had registered at the end of last month. The system has been used to handle around 13 per cent of cases eligible for the system since last May.

Chief Justice Andrew Cheung Kui-nung said at the opening of the legal year last month that the system would be rolled out at all levels of the courts next year.

Lawyer Chan said a full switch to filing and exchanging documents electronically could save up to tens of thousands of dollars for litigants.

For example, in personal injury cases, which formed the bulk of cases that used e-filing over the past year, there could be thousands of sheets of court documents.

Litigants were then charged for printing three sets of documents for the court, the opposing party and the litigant’s lawyer. The total bill would also include fees for manpower and time involved in printing and delivering the documents.

But Chan said more incentives were needed for more firms to use the system, as some legal clerks and firms were reluctant to submit court documents electronically for fear of missing court deadlines if there were mistakes.

“If we file physically, the counter staff would let us know if they spot any errors, but if we file electronically, we can’t be alerted to mistakes immediately,” he said.

He suggested the courts adopt document checking software powered by artificial intelligence to speed up their processing and reassure court users the system would not present additional risks.

The judiciary said the receipt time of electronic submissions would be counted the same as in-person ones at courts to ensure parity.

Users can currently send, receive, search and inspect filed documents and other information related to cases on the system.

Electronic payments can also be made through the system, where users can enjoy a 20 per cent discount on the court’s document handling fees for five years.

A judiciary spokesman said authorities would continue to explore and make greater use of technology to enhance the efficiency of court operations and consult the stakeholders on the implementation details.

According to the judiciary, about 80 law firms have registered for a system demonstration, which began last month and would run to the end of February.

Lawyer Eric Chan Pak-ho, 34, who runs his own firm, CPH Legal, agreed that a switch to electronic filing would save time and costs for smaller firms like his, but said going fully digital could be difficult for firms run by an older team.

He added that the courts’ strict technical requirements for the format of electronic bundles had discouraged older and smaller firms from getting on board.

His firm was in the process of registering an account with the judiciary’s e-filing system, and said he hoped it would be easy to use.

The courts also intend having more remote hearings, first introduced for civil proceedings in 2020 after the Covid-19 pandemic brought stringent social distancing.

A public consultation was held last June for a proposal to change the law to allow criminal trials to be heard remotely, with plans for a bill to go before the legislature this year.

Veteran criminal lawyer Stephen Hung Wan-shun said that for criminal proceedings, which generally required fewer documents, remote hearings would work for preliminary hearings rather than trials themselves.

He cautioned against holding criminal trials electronically as they prevented the judge and lawyers from observing witnesses’ demeanour and tone to gauge their credibility.

Hung said appeals could work well remotely too, as it was uncommon for defendants and lawyers to communicate during those hearings.

“I don’t think my clients would insist on going to court,” he said.

Hung said an early attempt to introduce electronic documents in trials 10 years ago was unpopular, but attitudes had changed.

“Older lawyers like me will retire soon. As young lawyers are much more able to handle electronic equipment, using electronic bundles in trials can be achieved,” said Hung, who has been practising for almost 30 years.

Lawyer Eric Chan said he supported using more technology in court, but had reservations about referring to e-documents on a tablet computer during trials.

“Sometimes, one or two pages might be missing from the judge’s bundle during a trial. When this happens, I can immediately pull out the missing pages from my bundle to remedy the problem,” he said.

“But if the same problem happens with a 20,000-page e-bundle, the solution might be to have a physical copy available as a contingency.”

A spokesman from the Law Society of Hong Kong told the Post the professional body supported moves to improve efficiency and access to justice and had been helping members keep up with digitalisation at the courts.

It had encouraged lawyers to learn to use digital tools and disbursed government funding for law firms and barristers’ chambers to get the technology systems needed.

“The Law Society has been working closely with the judiciary to improve efficiency of case management and promote the use of technology in court, especially during the pandemic,” he said.