header-logo header-logo

Bach backs ‘right to justice’ law

22 September 2017
Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-detail

The Bach Commission has urged political parties of all hues to back a new Right to Justice Act that would guarantee minimum standards on access to justice.

In its final report, published this week, the commission, chaired by former Justice minister Lord Willy Bach, warned the poorest in society are being failed by a two-tier system, with thousands effectively cut off from legal advice and representation.

The proposed Act would codify existing rights to justice and establish a new right for individuals to receive reasonable legal assistance without costs they cannot afford. A Justice Commission would be created to monitor and enforce this right, and a set of principles established to guide interpretation of the right.

‘There is too much ambiguity and therefore too much discretion about what our right to justice means in practice, as the supreme court judgment on employment tribunal fees recently acknowledged,’ the commission states in the report.

‘We believe that a single, statute-based right to justice will bring the clarity necessary to reset our justice system and ensure that everyone can access justice.’

The commission called for an urgent review of LASPO (the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, which abolished legal aid for large areas of civil and family law in 2013)-something consecutive governments have promised but so far failed to deliver.

And it set out a plan for immediate action, including: widening the scope of legal aid; replacing the Legal Aid Agency with an independent body; and improving the public’s understanding of the law.

‘No person should be denied justice simply because they cannot afford it,’ said Lord Bach, who began work on the report in 2015.

‘We need a new Act which defends and extends the right to justice, and we need a new body tasked with implementing it. The government must take urgent action to address the crisis in our justice system. This means broadening the scope of legal aid, reforming eligibility requirements and taking action to improve the public’s understanding of the law.’

The report also proposed: ensuring all benefit recipients automatically qualify for legal aid; restoring legal aid for all matters concerning legal support for children; simplification of legal aid administration; and the re-establishment of early legal advice, particularly for family law.

Andrew Harrop, general secretary of the Fabian Society, which acted as secretariat to the commission, said: ‘This report sets out a radical new approach to fix the crisis in the justice system.’

Richard Burgon MP, Shadow Justice Secretary, commended Lord Bach’s work and said he backed ‘the idea of a new legally enforceable Right to Justice, that would guarantee access just as we have for healthcare and education’.

He said Labour would bring forward detailed plans on how it would implement Lord Bach’s recommendations in government.

The Law Society also welcomed the report. ‘If people cannot access advice or protect their rights, then effectively those rights do not exist,’ said Law Society vice-president Christina Blacklaws.

According to figures obtained by the Fabian Society, LASPO aimed to save £450m per year when it was introduced but last year’s legal aid spend was £950m less than in 2010. It estimates that the costs of the proposals in Lord Bach’s report will be about an additional £400m per year.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Burges Salmon—Lillian Mackenzie

Burges Salmon—Lillian Mackenzie

Projects and infrastructure team appoints partner in Edinburgh

Gateley Legal—Brian Dowling

Gateley Legal—Brian Dowling

Partner joins residential development team in Reading

DWF—Don Brown

DWF—Don Brown

Banking and finance team expands with strategic partner hire

NEWS
David Bailey-Vella of Davis Woolfe and chair of the Association of Costs Lawyers explores the new costs budgeting light pilot scheme in this week's NLJ
Lord Neuberger, former president of the Supreme Court, shares his views on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in this week's NLJ with William Raven
In July, the Supreme Court quashed the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, ruling that trial judges had wrongly directed juries to treat profit-motivated Libor submissions as inherently dishonest. In this week’s NLJ, David Stern and James Fletcher of 5 St Andrew’s Hill reflect on the decision
In this week's issue of NLJ, Emma Brunning and Dharshica Thanarajasingham of Birketts unpack the high-conflict financial remedy case TF v SF [2025] EWHC 1659 (Fam). The husband’s conduct—described by the judge as a ‘masterclass in gaslighting’—included hiding a £9.5m deferred payment from the sale of a port acquired post-separation. Despite his claims that the port was non-matrimonial, the court found its value rooted in marital assets and efforts
Writing in NLJ this week, Nick Brett and Vicky Lankester of Brett Wilson dissect the chronic failures of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in meeting disclosure obligations. From the Post Office scandal to the collapsed trial of Liam Allan, they highlight how systemic neglect has led to wrongful convictions and miscarriages of justice
back-to-top-scroll