The trainee advocates said in a response to a consultation on the plans that they were “particularly concerned” by a presumption that certain substantive hearings would be dealt with online.

They wrote: “It will become harder for devils to develop excellence in oral advocacy when hearings in relation to such substantive matters as petitions for judicial review, legal debates on the procedure roll, proofs in commercial actions, reclaiming motions and appeals are all generally to be held electronically.”

Furthermore, they expressed fear over “the damage done to Scotland’s centre of legal excellence and the loss of collegiality”.

They stated: “Where substantive hearings are to be conducted from advocates’ spare rooms there will be a reduced need to attend Parliament House or the Advocates Library. Each will remain quieter than before the pandemic. The collegiate atmosphere and the opportunity to seek informal guidance from senior advocates will be significantly reduced. This, in turn will be likely to lead to a loss of support provided to devils and junior advocates. This will make devilling a less attractive prospect.”

They concluded: “However, a continuation of ideas and rules written for an emergency is a dangerous way to proceed when the proposals are so widespread and consequential.”