header-logo header-logo

27 March 2024
Issue: 8065 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail

Civil legal aid: comparing & repairing

The government has pinpointed four initiatives for investigation, after comparing civil legal aid systems in other jurisdictions

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) report, Review of civil legal aid: comparative analysis of legal aid systems, published last week, analysed delivery in Australia, Canada, Finland, the Netherlands, the USA and Scotland.

The MoJ aims to examine a US initiative—enabling cross-government collaboration in resolving issues—and three initiatives from the Netherlands, a ‘tiered model’ for triaging and prioritising cases, building trust and autonomy between oversight bodies and providers, and feedback loops for continuous improvement.

It identified ten principles for effective provision, including long-term funding and investing in early intervention.

Law Society president Nick Emmerson said: ‘The report rightly recognises that “technology is not a panacea when it comes to legal aid”.

‘While technology offers the opportunity to provide people with more ways to get legal advice, there is no substitute for the face-to-face services that are particularly vital for those who are digitally excluded, complex cases or those involving people with particular vulnerabilities.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise & Plimpton—Mary Lavelle

Debevoise expands London secondaries team with addition of Mary Lavelle

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law—Hestia Private Client

Excello Law welcomes ex-Irwin Mitchell team to launch Hestia Private Client

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Carpmaels & Ransford—Christopher Stothers

Heavyweight patent litigator will bolster Carpmaels Ransford’s rapidly growing Litigation team as firm marks its 250th anniversary

NEWS
Lawyers have welcomed plans to create specialist rape and serious sex offences courtrooms at every Crown Court
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
back-to-top-scroll