Vol. 10 No. 6 (June 2000) pp. 353-354.

PATHS TO JUSTICE: WHAT PEOPLE DO AND THINK ABOUT GOING TO LAW by Hazel Genn. Oxford, United Kingdom: Hart Publishing, 1999. 382 pp.

Reviewed by Frank Cross, McCombs School of Business, University of Texas

PATHS TO JUSTICE presents considerable data about the resolution of "justiciable events" in the United Kingdom. Genn and several of her colleagues at the National Centre for Social Research randomly sampled over four thousand people in England and Wales and had one thousand of these people fill out a "long form" questionnaire that asked more detailed questions about subjects' experiences with dispute resolution systems. The promotional blurb claims that it reports on the "most wide-ranging survey ever conducted by an independent body or government agency into the experiences of ordinary citizens as they grapple with the kinds of problems that could ultimately end up in the civil courts." To its credit, the book reprints its survey instruments and provides details on its results. Indeed, 118 of the books 382 pages consist of appendices reporting the results of regressions, a technical report, and the questionnaires.

The first section of the book describes the "landscape of justiciable problems" confronted by the sample. About forty percent of the respondents had experienced one such problem within the past five years. The most common problems were consumer complaints, personal injuries, real property disputes, and "money problems." This is quite a bit lower than the incidence reported by other studies, such as that of the American Bar Association. Genn also reports the frequency of justiciable problems by age, income, and other variables.

The second section of the book addresses individuals' strategies for resolving the justiciable problems that arose. Unsurprisingly, she finds that most individuals initially attempt informal resolution. Some succeed, some fail and give up, and some seek out advice. A considerable number of claims are abandoned after informal self-help methods fail. About a quarter of those who seek outside advice consult attorneys. The chapter is full of information but cries out for more analysis. For example, the survey finds (a) that the cost of legal advice was a major deterrent and also (b) that there is no association between the respondents' income and consulting a solicitor. Such findings cry out for reconciliation.

The book's third section considers the response to justiciable problems of different types. Data are presented on the probability of seeking outside advice, according to the sort of dispute and which groups are more likely to seek such advice. Women were more likely to seek advice than men, but the critical determinant was the type of problem. Property and employment disputes were those most likely to provoke the respondents to seek such assistance.

Page 354 begins here

The fourth section is an interesting one. It addresses the respondents' success at achieving the objectives they sought from the dispute's resolution. About 20% of the disputes went to litigation. In this process, defendants were more likely to prevail. The study first identified the primary objective of the complaining individuals. About fifty percent of the time, this objective was money, but various other objectives were central in some cases (e.g., a change in the other party's behavior and "other"). According to the survey, the prevailing complainants were pretty happy, with 55% recovering about what they had hoped and another 25% getting more than they had hoped form. By contrast, those who had to pay were a little disappointed. 38% paid more than expected and only 5% did better than they thought. The survey also reported the negative and positive effects of participating in the legal process. Going to court was considered very stressful and caused 37% of the participants to suffer some sort of health problems (worse than cases with no resolution at all). The relative success of parties varied considerably by type of dispute. A considerable majority of those with health harms or employment problems achieved their objectives, while those with landlord problems were far less pleased. The book does not attempt to explain why these differences existed. 93% of those who won in court thought that the process was fair, while only 36% of those who lost thought it fair. Some other interesting results were that those who consulted a lawyer or seeking equitable relief were more likely to think the process fair, while men and those with higher incomes were less likely.

The final section concerns perceptions about the justice system. One candid participant declared: "The judge was fine, brilliant. In what way fine, brilliant? Well he gave me what I wanted . . .". Participants were relatively positive about the judicial experience (53% believed courts would be fair, 25% disagreed). Respondents were evenly divided on whether lawyer's fees were reasonable. However, 65% thought that judges were out of touch with the lives of ordinary people. A large majority (72%) believed that the legal system works better for rich people than for poor people. This latter figure did not seem consistent with the outcome data, but the book has no discussion of the association.

The concluding chapter on "paths to justice" contains the author's conclusions. This is a pretty straightforward summary of the results of the survey, though the author draws some conclusions about possible reforms. These include the need for more legal assistance, given the relative futility of self-help efforts and the need for more structured systems of alternative dispute resolution.

The book generally lacks a theoretical construct in which to place its data. The approach is entirely sociological and brushes pretty lightly upon economic or rational choice models of the litigation process. The book could be a valuable resource insofar as Genn presents enough evidence that the reader can test his or her own models. The data could also serve as a valuable resource for those who wish to compare the operation of the American and English systems of civil justice. I can't say it's a compelling read, but the book should be of interest to those interested in the operation of ordinary dispute resolution.