Remote interpreting has moved from emergency measure to everyday reality in the courts and tribunals of England and Wales. Used well, it saves time and cost and widens access to specialist dialect interpreters who would otherwise be unavailable. Used badly, it produces garbled evidence, lost hearings and frustrated judges. As an NRPSI-registered Arabic interpreter who works daily over the Cloud Video Platform (CVP), Microsoft Teams and tribunal video systems, I want to set out what good remote interpreting looks like β and what solicitors and barristers can do to make it work.
The platforms: CVP, Teams and tribunal systems
Most Crown Court and Magistrates' remote work runs over CVP, while many tribunals and conferences use Teams. Each behaves slightly differently, and an interpreter needs to be fluent in the one being used: how to join, how to manage audio, and how to interpret without disrupting the flow. An interpreter meeting the platform for the first time during a live hearing is a liability. I cover the practicalities of remote work on my remote interpreting page.
Consecutive versus simultaneous on video
On a video link, consecutive interpreting is usually the safer choice. Simultaneous whispering, which works in a physical courtroom, does not translate well to a single audio channel where two voices competing makes both unintelligible. A skilled remote interpreter will default to consecutive for evidence β letting each question and answer complete before rendering it β and will agree the approach with the bench at the outset. Where simultaneous is genuinely needed, a second channel or a separate device may be required, and that should be arranged in advance.
Technical preparation
- A wired connection where possible, or strong, stable Wi-Fi.
- A proper headset with a directional microphone β not laptop speakers, which cause echo and clipping.
- A quiet, private room free from interruption and background noise.
- A tested setup β joining early to check audio and video before the hearing starts.
- A backup β a phone number to dial in on if the video fails.
These are not luxuries; they are the baseline for evidence that can be relied upon. An interpreter who joins from a phone in a noisy corridor cannot deliver court-quality interpreting, however skilled.
Audio quality is evidence quality
On a remote link, the audio is the evidence. If the interpreter cannot hear a witness clearly, they cannot render the answer accurately, and the tribunal of fact is left with an approximation. Good remote interpreters are unafraid to interrupt and ask for a repeat when audio drops β silence or guesswork is far more dangerous than a brief pause. Solicitors can help by ensuring their own client's audio setup is adequate, particularly for vulnerable or elderly witnesses.
Interpreter positioning and visibility
In a remote hearing the interpreter should be visible, well-lit and clearly identified on screen, so the bench and parties know who is speaking and in which capacity. For a defendant in custody appearing by video link, arrangements for the interpreter to be heard by the defendant β without disrupting the open court β need to be settled before the hearing. These are small points, but they prevent the confusion that derails remote proceedings.
Confidential conferences over video
Pre-hearing conferences between a solicitor, counsel and an Arabic-speaking client are increasingly held remotely, and they raise their own issues. The interpreter must be on a secure, private connection, and everyone present should be identified at the outset so privilege is preserved. A breakout room or a separate, encrypted call is preferable to interpreting privileged discussion on an open hearing link. I treat remote conferences with the same confidentiality discipline as an in-person consultation.
Common remote-hearing failures β and how to prevent them
The recurring failures are predictable, which means they are preventable:
- Two people talking at once β solved by disciplined consecutive interpreting and clear turn-taking.
- Poor audio from one participant β solved by testing every link in advance.
- An interpreter unfamiliar with the platform β solved by instructing someone who works on it daily.
- Dialect mismatch β remote does not cure it; specify the dialect as you would in person.
- No fallback β solved by agreeing a dial-in number before the hearing.
The advantages, when it is done well
Done properly, remote interpreting lets a firm in Cardiff instruct a specialist Yemeni or Sudanese interpreter based elsewhere, with no travel charged and faster availability. For short hearings, conferences, tribunals and prison video links, it is often the most proportionate option β provided the interpreter treats the remote setting with the same rigour as the courtroom.
Instruct a remote-ready Arabic interpreter
I work daily over CVP, Teams and tribunal video systems, with a tested setup and the same standard as in-person attendance. For remote hearings, conferences and prison video links, request a booking, see remote interpreting, or call +44 7305 742888.