header-logo header-logo

Criminal legal thresholds too low

04 January 2007
Issue: 7254 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail

News

Three-quarters of adults in working households do not have the right to receive legal aid for cases before a magistrates’ court,
research by the New Policy Institute (NPI) shows.

The NPI claims that since means testing was re-introduced last October legal aid in magistrates’ courts is restricted to people not in work and those working in households with the lowest incomes—particularly those where part-time work only is being done. Peter Kenway, NPI director, says the thresholds which determine whether someone is eligible for legal aid should be revised upwards so that more people are included. Currently, single adults are eligible for legal aid if their gross annual income is below £11,590, while they are not eligible if it exceeds £20,740—between these limits, a further test is conducted to see if net income less a cost of living allowance exceeds £3,156.

Kenway says: “The question is whether the effects of what it has enacted are what Parliament expected. In particular, did it intend to remove eligibility from 75% of adults in working households?”

A government spokesman says: “The new means test has been designed to identify as fairly as possible an applicant’s genuine ability to pay. Even in circumstances where a defendant does not pass the means test, the hardship review provision will still afford an additional safety net for those applicants who face unusually high defence costs.”

 

 

 

Issue: 7254 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Birketts—trainee cohort

Birketts—trainee cohort

Firm welcomes new cohort of 29 trainee solicitors for 2025

Keoghs—four appointments

Keoghs—four appointments

Four partner hires expand legal expertise in Scotland and Northern Ireland

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Brabners—Ben Lamb

Real estate team in Yorkshire welcomes new partner

NEWS
Robert Taylor of 360 Law Services warns in this week's NLJ that adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) risks entrenching disadvantage for SME law firms, unless tools are tailored to their needs
The Court of Protection has ruled in Macpherson v Sunderland City Council that capacity must be presumed unless clearly rebutted. In this week's NLJ, Sam Karim KC and Sophie Hurst of Kings Chambers dissect the judgment and set out practical guidance for advisers faced with issues relating to retrospective capacity and/or assessments without an examination
Delays and dysfunction continue to mount in the county court, as revealed in a scathing Justice Committee report and under discussion this week by NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School. Bulk claims—especially from private parking firms—are overwhelming the system, with 8,000 cases filed weekly
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve charts the turbulent progress of the Employment Rights Bill through the House of Lords, in this week's NLJ
From oligarchs to cosmetic clinics, strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) target journalists, activists and ordinary citizens with intimidating legal tactics. Writing in NLJ this week, Sadie Whittam of Lancaster University explores the weaponisation of litigation to silence critics
back-to-top-scroll