header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
12 May 2016 / Steve Hynes
Issue: 7698 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Back to the drawing board

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7698_hynes

It’s time to rethink LASPO, says Steve Hynes

Four years ago the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) received royal assent. In the following April cuts to legal aid were introduced that according to the government’s own estimates denied access to justice to over 300,000 people. Since the controversial legislation was approved by parliament there have been calls for it to be reviewed (see “Overdue review?”, Jon Robins, NLJ, 22 April 2016, p 7). In the Cabinet Office guide to making legislation it was recommended that a review should take place three to five years after the legislation received royal assent. So a review of LASPO should happen soon.

Rather like a parliamentary equivalent of motherhood and apple pie no government or political party seems to disagree with the merits of a system of post-legislative scrutiny. Legislative reviews though, tend not to carry much weight or lead to any change unless the government of the day accepts that mistakes need to be rectified.

Start from scratch

LASPO has

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

Read All
Sponsored by
DWF—David Abbott & Claire Keat

DWF—David Abbott & Claire Keat

Senior appointments in insurance services and commercial services announced

Clyde & Co—Nick Roberts

Clyde & Co—Nick Roberts

Aviation disputes practice strengthened by London partner hire

Ellisons—Marion Knocker

Ellisons—Marion Knocker

Residential property lawyer promoted to partnership

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Renters’ Rights revolution begins—brace for tribunal chaos
he abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC
NLJ this week: Civil procedure gets a spring overhaul
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
NLJ this week: Why GP complaints are going nowhere
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
NLJ this week: Prenups meet a jurisdictional brick wall
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
NLJ this week: Has Rylands v Fletcher come back from the dead?
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll