Can a court be sued?

A court provides a service for which one pays. If they are administratively incompetent (they often are!) is it possible to sue them just like any other service provider? (I'm leaving aside the slight problem of finding a solicitor prepared to do the job!). I'm interested in the UK situation but how it works elsewhere would be interesting too!

A law court of course! Been incompetent and cost me money? I've asked the same question of solicitors who tend to look uncomfortable and change the subject. No straight answer yet!

There's both criminal and civil cases- so guilt or innocence or maybe someone sueing someone or, say, a divorce. Courts can and do lose paperwork, misinform their customers, fail to get things done within a reasonable time: just like any service provider can do at times.

I have given enough info. The court has to be responsible for its own performance. If it performs badly, to the extent that it cuses its customers financial losses or serious inconvenience, then it should be liable in the same way a plumber would be if they caused damage in your house, or an accountant would be if they proved not to be competent. Of course, you can take the plumber or your accountant to court, but can you take the court to court? 

The outcome of the trial is a completely different thing and, if you don't like the outcome, you can seek leave to appeal. There is a procedure in place. I'm not talking about that at all! The court provides premises and administration and is very strict in civil cases if, say, one neglects to tick a box on a form. However, the court can fail to respond to important letters or emails, lose paperwork, or even fail to follow its own regulations with, it seems, a serene disregard of the consequences. It ought to take legal responsibility for its performamce of services. But does it?

I'm talking about the performance of the court managers and administrators and clerks and all the people engaged in running the court. They certainly exist as I have received correspondence from them which even went as far as to admit that, yes indeed, they had been incompetent! In civil cases and criminal cases the court requires each side to provide paperwork for the use of the judge and, also, for various forms to be presented to the court by each side. There are many standard forms and one must go through the correct procedures or ones case may never even reach a judge, let alone be judged. Evidence and statements need to be sent to the court by a deadline, usually some weeks before a hearing. If the court loses this documentation, and that is not unknown at all, then I think it should be liable.

Why is this posted on chess.com?

Why not? I thought there might be someone on here who would know the answer to my question. I don't think there's any restriction with regard to subject matter just so long as its not rude or illegal.

Yeah- off topic!

Thanks! You are still not clear what I'm getting at?

Not the complete story, but it provides the basic information:

Sovereign immunity in the United States is the legal privilege by which the American federal, state, and tribal governments cannot be sued.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_immunity_in_the_United_States

Interesting. I think this applies more to executive decisions by administrations rather than say a functionary mucking up the paperwork. Perhaps. The Government can certainly be sued in the UK for the behaviour of its employees. The courts are maybe in a different category but I don't know- hence my query.

In Finland, when the State (Justice System) causes financial or other losses to citizens, they just applies compensations from "Valtion Konttori" (State Insurance Agency).     

(false (reversed) verdicts, income losses, reputation losses, etc.)

Sounds good

 yes, sort of. you can complain about the process (but not about the decision - that would be an appeal)

http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/reports-and-consultations/reports/health/improving-public-service-a-matter-of-principle/12

If you slipped on the ice in front of the courthouse, I am sure you could sue them.

The courthouse, at least, if not the actual court.

I certainly know about the ombudsman and its the process I'm interested in. Are you saying it is not possible to sue a court even when they make errors in the process which turn out to be costly?

well, if there is an error in the process and it costs you money, you can be awarded compensation so it gets to the same point albeit that you're not actually "suing" the court. 

Ah.... interesting. So you are saying it's not possible to sue a court but the ombudsman can deal with the case if they think it has merit. instead Thus far, when I've asked this question, especially in legal circles, it's been met by an embarrassed silence and a quick change of subject! Apparently courts highly efficient and never make mistakes so, any evidence I have to the contrary, must be delusional in nature or, possibly,  politically motivated.