header-logo header-logo

28 September 2017 / Dr Jon Robins
Issue: 7763 / Categories: Opinion , Legal aid focus , Profession
printer mail-detail

Bach’s big idea

Jon Robins welcomes Lord Bach’s proposal to put legal advice on a par with the right to free healthcare & education

There are many recommendations in the long-awaited report of the Bach Commission on Access to Justice published last week; but there is one big idea: ‘a new legally enforceable right to justice’. Coming after a number of post-LASPO (Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act) reports in recent months—ironically, the government’s own review of its legislation remains nowhere in sight—Lord Willy Bach and his fellow commissioners needed ‘a big idea’ to stand out from the crowd.

It is often said that legal aid is ‘a pillar of the welfare state’. If that’s true, our system of publicly-funded law has become so enfeebled that it is no longer load-bearing. The introduction of a right to justice is compelling because it re-establishes the connection between our system of legal aid to the principles upon which the welfare state was built.

The proportion of the population eligible for legal aid collapsed from eight out of 10

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll