The backlog of civil cases was slashed during the first half of this year. Photo: Matthew Mirabelli

The backlog of civil cases was trimmed in the first six months of this year, figures released by the Justice Ministry show.

For the first time in three years, there were more resolved civil cases than new ones between January and June.

One of the indicators used to assess court efficiency is the so-called clearance rate, which compares the number of resolved cases with that of newly-filed ones. This yardstick, used by European countries, is expressed as a percentage, with any rate above 100 per cent considered as positive.

Data for the first half of this year shows that the clearance rate was above 100 per cent in all courts except two tribunals. It indicates the extent by which the courts are tackling the backlog.

The Constitutional Court had a clearance rate of 168 per cent in the first six months of the year. This means that apart from concluding a number of cases equivalent to the amount of new applications, it also addressed 68 per cent of the pending caseload.

The figure, although more than double last year’s 75 per cent, was lower than the 215 per cent registered in 2013.

The clearance rate this year also surpassed the 100 per cent threshold in the civil appeals courts, the First Hall of the Civil Court, the Court of Magistrates and the Family Court. Compared to what happened in 2013, there were two courts struggling with a backlog in the first six months of that year and, last year, three had a clearance rate of below 100 per cent.

The situation is not so positive with regard to the Rent Regulations Tribunal (with 83 per cent) and the Land Arbitration Tribunal (38 per cent) boards. A Justice Ministry spokeswoman said the matter was being addressed.

There was a significant drop to 38 per cent from 580 per cent in 2013 in the cases decided by the Land Arbitration Board. On the other hand, there was a steep rise from 256 per cent to 567 per cent in the number of cases cleared by the Agricultural Leases Board.

The spokeswoman said cases pending before the Land Arbitration Board and the Agricultural Leases Board, although as important as any other case, were very few and, therefore, even one single judgment would distort the figures in an unrealistic manner.

She said that in the courts that statistically mattered the most (because of the number of cases they handled), the change had been substantial. These included the appeals courts, the Small Claims Tribunal and the Administrative Review Tribunal.

The ministry said measures that contributed to the marked improvement were mainly the dedication and commitment of the judiciary and court employees, new IT services and a better redistribution of the responsibilities based on scientific studies conducted by the newly-set-up Justice Department.