header-logo header-logo

21 April 2016
Issue: 7695 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Call for review of LASPO

Legal aid solicitors still await government review

As the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) hits its three-year anniversary, legal aid solicitors are still waiting for a review.

LASPO took effect in April 2013, removing legal aid from vast tranches of civil and private family law, including housing (except where an imminent threat of homelessness exists) and social security law.

Writing in NLJ this week, columnist Jon Robins notes the latest figures from the Legal Aid Agency showing the workload for advice and assistance about a legal problem is now one third of pre-LASPO levels and civil representation is about two-thirds of what it was. Despite Ministry of Justice (MoJ) promises, however, there has been no government review of LASPO.

Robins points out that only 226 applications were granted out of 1,172 made to the exceptional funding regime, which was supposed to be a safety net against the LASPO cuts. The MoJ had anticipated that between 5,000 and 7,000 applications would be made each year.

“It’s no surprise as the cuts bite, law firms pull out of what remains of the legal aid scheme, not-for-profit advice agencies go to the wall, and then there is the maddening bureaucracy of legal aid,” Robins writes.

Steve Hynes, director of  the Legal Action Group, says: “The LASPO Act has denied tens of thousands of people access to justice and equality before the law. It should not be reviewed, but repealed.
 
“The MoJ seems to believe that justice is a public service to be rationed, rather than a set of principles to be adhered to.”

An MoJ spokesman said: “As we have already made clear, we are committed to having a review of the legal aid reforms in LASPO. Our legal aid system is still one of the most generous in the world and last year we spent £1.6bn on legal aid. We have made sure legal aid continues to be available in the highest priority cases, for example where people’s life or liberty is at stake, where they face the loss of their home, in domestic violence cases or where their children may be taken into care.”

Issue: 7695 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll