This is for Civil, not Criminal law. EACH SIDE MEETS ITS OWN COST.
Most people are deterred from taking others to court, simply becausemost people cannot afford the law.
Most are not going to get legal-aid, nor are they able to afford to be represented.
If judges are paid from the public purse, and facilities are also paid for, then court fees etc don't need to be huge.
A losing party should only pay for their own lawyer.
If you want some fancy expensive one, then you should pay for it; but not expect the losing party to do so. They should be paying theirs, win or lose.
Expand McKenzie friend system, so anyone can speak in court for you.
Where there is a genuine new issue, then it should be heard for free ~ since its published precedent will be cited all over. Far better to have such judges reviewed live, so the correct matter is heard / mistakes sorted on appeal.
The maximum any higher court should charge any party is £250 per half-day; and small claims should cover anything up to £50k.
As an engineer (translates well to facts and queries on how law should be interpreted ~ it's a rule / precedent system), I had to represent myself in the US Federal Court (where no-one usually wins). If this was in the UK, I would not have been able to win on appeal.
Legal precedents and all cases, as they are fought in public courts, should be available (unless their is a qualifying / identity redaction issue ~ in which case Party A vs Party B in Court C)