CNA Explains: Why are lawyers using so much paper for court cases in this digital day and age?

“The charges accumulated because lengthy documents were reproduced in several sets. It illustrates how printing can become a significant item in an exceptional case, even though the charge per page is modest,” said Mr Raghavendra, adding that this is not typical of litigation today.

What needs to be printed?

Although the use of electronic hearing bundles by lawyers and the court are increasingly common, hard copies of hearing bundles are still required for certain types of hearings, said Mr Tan.

Judges and lawyers sometimes prefer to refer to and work off hard copies, he added.

Mr Ng said there are typically agreed bundles for criminal trials, containing evidence that both sides have admitted to by agreement.

If either party wishes to add any further documentary exhibits,  at least four to five hard copies of each document or bundle are generally required, he said.

These are for the judge, for the lawyers printing them, for opposing counsel, for the witness and for the interpreter if there is one, said Mr Ng.

At the end of a trial, written closing and reply submissions also need to be printed and exchanged, he added.

Mr Ng said the practice directions themselves require hard copies in “many cases”.

However, Mr Raghavendra said not everything filed in a case generally needs to be printed.

Why is there still a need for printing given the courts’ digitalisation?

Mr Ng said that while the courts have an e-filing system that handles filings, trials and other types of hearings still run largely on paper.

“During a trial, many judges and counsel prefer marking up physical bundles, and witnesses are referred to hardcopy documents in the witness box,” he said.

“Multiple copies of the same documents are needed to ensure that everyone is literally on the same page, which matters especially in complex trials when the documents can get voluminous.”

Mr Ng added that many lawyers, especially more senior ones, prefer to work with hard copies, as flipping physical tabs is generally faster and more reliable than using a PDF.

However, he said some lawyers have turned to softcopy solutions such as LiquidText – an editing application touted as “better than paper” – and some lawyers “swear by it”.

Mr Raghavendra said printing has “fallen substantially”.

“I now generally attend court with a laptop rather than a physical case file,” he said.

However, taking a digital case file for a simple mention or case conference that spans mere minutes is a different setting from a trial which can go on for days.

“A hard copy may still be required by a direction or useful when a witness, an unrepresented person or a client needs to follow a particular document,” said Mr Raghavendra.

Does the type of court matter?

Mr Raghavendra said a criminal matter in the State Courts generally features limited printing before trial.

At trial, particular documents may be required in hard copy form for a witness, an unrepresented person or the court.

A civil suit in either the State Courts or the High Court may involve more extensive affidavits, exhibits, submissions and hearing bundles, although these are increasingly prepared electronically, said Mr Raghavendra.

“The applicable procedure, directions or preferences for the specific hearing may determine what must be supplied in hard copy,” he said.

Mr Tan said High Court cases do not necessarily require more printing than a case in the State Courts.

However, cases in the High Court often involve higher-value and more complex disputes, which can mean a more comprehensive documentary trail adduced as evidence and therefore increased printing costs, said Mr Tan.

Mr Ng said documents for a complex trial in the State Courts could rival a High Court trial in terms of the volume of documents.

Who prints the documents?

Mr Raghavendra said printing is generally done in-house at his firm, although a reliable printing provider close to the office might be tapped on by firms when a large bundle needs to be produced quickly.

Mr Ng concurred that most of the printing at his law firm was done in-house, while the more complex or voluminous documents were outsourced.

Mr Tan similarly said modest printing jobs are undertaken by his firm.

However, each lawyer or law firm may have their own preferred printers for large-volume printing, he said.

He said Withers KhattarWong regularly works with several sets of external printers they have built up relationships with.

These printers are familiar with the law firm’s requirements and working style, he said.

Will printing costs remain a feature of disbursements?

Printing costs will remain a feature of disbursements where hard copies are reasonably needed, but Mr Raghavendra said he expects the amounts to continue declining.

“Courts, lawyers and clients increasingly use electronic documents. Printing is becoming more targeted to a particular hearing or person, rather than a routine exercise of reproducing the whole file,” he said.

Mr Tan said printing costs will continue to be a mainstay but the need for hard copies will decline as digital literacy and technology fluency grow.

Mr Raghavendra stressed that the distinction between billing a client and recovering costs from another party matters.

For costs orders in civil cases, lawyers may prepare a breakdown of filing fees, photocopying, binding and other expenses but if the amount cannot be agreed on, the court can determine it.

It does not follow that every expense is recoverable in full, he said.

Mr Tan said that while large printing figures can be eye-catching, they are often a reflection of the scale and complexity of the litigation, rather than the cost of producing paper alone.

“In major commercial disputes, the volume of evidence can be enormous, and the key question is generally whether the costs were reasonably incurred and proportionate to the needs of the case,” he said.