header-logo header-logo

02 April 2020
Categories: Legal News , Covid-19 , Profession , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail

COVID-19: Hardship payments for legal aid lawyers

The Law Society and Bar Council have given a mixed reaction to the government’s announcement of extra support for legal aid lawyers

The support includes expanding the scope and relaxing the evidence requirements for hardship payments in Crown court cases, including reducing the threshold for work done to £1,000, rather than the current £5,000.

Legal aid fees for First Tier Tribunal immigration and asylum appeals have been aligned with HM Courts and Tribunals Service’s move to an online system for these cases.

The Legal Aid Agency has also increased payments for virtual hearings in appeals before the Mental Health Tribunal, and for remote advice in police custody to ensure they are in line with in-person hearings. It has halted pursuit of outstanding debts owed to it, and is encouraging law firms to make the most of existing help, such as the ability to apply for early payment for work already done on a case.

Chair of the Bar, Amanda Pinto QC, said the measures would ‘have little impact on the many criminal legal aid barristers whose livelihood depends on conducting important criminal trials.

‘The changes, albeit made in a spirit of helpfulness, will have no effect on the overwhelming majority of criminal barristers.’

Law Society President Simon Davis said: ‘It still remains difficult to judge the scale of this crisis.

‘Whether this response is adequate will depend, among other things, on how quickly the police and courts are able to find new ways of handling more routine work―and thus maintaining a volume of cases throughout this period.

‘It will also depend to what extent, if and when some form of normality resumes, workload increases above their pre-crisis levels―enabling practitioners to recover lost income. This cannot be presumed. Even if so, it would require practitioners to incur significant additional costs long before they see such an increase.

‘Thus, there is significantly more that needs to be done to ensure the criminal defence sector is able to make it through this crisis.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll