header-logo header-logo

Coalition legal aid U-Turn

27 September 2012
Issue: 7531 / Categories: Legal News , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-detail

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has dropped its controversial proposals for a “Supplementary Legal Aid Scheme”.

Under the proposed scheme, the MoJ would have skimmed off 25 per cent from general damages awarded to legally aided clients and used it to supplement the legal aid fund.

Brain-damaged children and their families were one of the most controversial categories of claimant affected. Legal aid is due to be withdrawn from clinical negligence in April 2013, but an exception has been made for babies who suffer brain damage at birth or are injured in the first eight weeks of life, and for women who are injured during pregnancy or labour.

Consequently, brain-damaged babies and their families would have lost a quarter of their compensation. Clinical negligence lawyers campaigned against the proposals.

Peter Walsh, chief executive of Action against Medical Accidents (AvMA), said: “We hope that this more enlightened approach will lead to further changes to protect access to justice for victims of clinical negligence. It beggars belief that their predecessors were prepared to raid the damages of children brain-damaged by clinical negligence to subsidise their department.”

An MoJ spokesperson said: “Having carefully considered the views expressed in a recent stakeholder engagement exercise, Ministers have decided not to proceed with implementation of the proposed Supplementary Legal Aid Scheme in April 2013.”

Issue: 7531 / Categories: Legal News , Damages , Personal injury
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Slater Heelis—Oliver Banks

Slater Heelis—Oliver Banks

Manchester firm strengthens Court of Protection expertise with partner hire

Talbots Law—Sara Pickerin & Nicholas Playford

Talbots Law—Sara Pickerin & Nicholas Playford

Agricultural law team expands with senior director appointments

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Kingsley Napley—Claire Green

Firm announces appointment of chief legal officer

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) has restated a fundamental truth, writes John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke, in this week's NLJ: only authorised persons can conduct litigation. The decision sparked alarm, but Gould stresses it merely confirms the Legal Services Act 2007
The government’s decision to make the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) the Single Professional Services Supervisor marks a watershed in the UK’s fight against money laundering, says Rebecca Hughes of Corker Binning in this week's NLJ. The FCA will now oversee 60,000 firms across legal and accountancy sectors—a massive expansion of remit that raises questions over resources and readiness 
The High Court's decision in Parfitt v Jones [2025] EWHC 1552 (Ch) provided a striking reminder of the need to instruct the right expert in retrospective capacity assessments, says Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell in NLJ this week
Paige Coulter of Quinn Emanuel reports on the UK’s first statutory definition of SLAPPs under the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023in NLJ this week
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold dives into the quirks of civil practice, from the Court of Appeal’s fierce defence of form N510 to fresh reminders about compliance and interest claims, in this week's Civil Way
back-to-top-scroll