header-logo header-logo

17 September 2010 / John Ford
Issue: 7432 / Categories: Opinion , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail

Allocating access to justice

The LSC should pay due respect to its duty to ensure access to justice, says John Ford

It is more than 10 years since the landmark judicial review claim brought by Mackintosh Duncan challenging the Civil Contracting Scheme, R v Legal Aid Board and another, ex parte Duncan and another, [2000] All ER (D) 189. That case was decided before the Human Rights Act 1998 came into force. But it did take note of the measures which were to be enacted in the Access to Justice Act 1999 (AJA 1999).

The court recognised the serious impact of the proposed changes from the start: “Practitioners are seriously concerned at the effect of the contracting process on their clients. They believe that their clients will be denied access to justice. Many firms who specialise in social welfare areas of work often deal with people from deprived areas who desperately need access to effective legal help. They frequently do this work from a strong commitment to the vulnerable and disadvantaged because they believe that people

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll