header-logo header-logo

22 October 2009
Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Family
printer mail-detail

Cuts too high for family legal aid?

Family lawyers have voiced concern at a new “uneconomic” fixed fee structure for family legal aid work.

The government published the long-anticipated results of its consultation, Family Legal Aid Funding from 2010, this week, setting out the rates for fixed fees that will replace hourly rates for family legal aid work in October 2010.

The Ministry of Justice and Legal Services Commission first consulted on the proposals in December 2008.

The figures represent a 40% cut to hourly rates that have already remained static for the last ten years, according to family lawyers association Resolution.

“Faced with this uneconomic scenario there is a very real danger that firms will walk away from legal aid work, further undermining access to justice,” said David Emmerson, chair of Resolution’s legal aid committee.

“We strongly urge the government to reconsider the fees for private law cases before they come into effect in October 2010.”

Barristers and solicitor advocates will be paid equally under the scheme.

Lawyers are concerned that family practitioners will desert legal aid, leaving clients forced to travel long distances to find representation.

Legal Aid Practitioners Group committee member and family lawyer, Wendy Hewstone said: "We are very worried about cases where there is a dispute over where the child lives, about contact to children or issues such as taking children abroad permanently.

“The fees for representation on financial disputes when people are divorcing are especially low. Our concern is that there will be fewer firms doing family work as a result and those that do will struggle to give a good service especially against private paying opponents and government bodies.”

Resolution estimates that for a simple child contact case taking around 14 hours a legal aid firm would currently receive £960 on the basis of the hourly rate. The new fixed fee would be £471—a cut of more than 50%.

A legal aid firm managing a straightforward divorce finance case which goes to full hearing would be paid £2,106 at present, but £1,299 under the new fixed fee rate.

However, the Association of Lawyers for Children (ALC) broadly welcomed the proposals, noting that they had been “revised following in particular extensive input from the leading practitioner groups and intervention by the President of the Family Division”.

ALC co-chair, Piers Pressdee, said: “The priority for family legal aid must be child protection. We welcome the government’s recognition of that priority and reality, together with the significant improvements to the scheme that have now been made.

"While we still have concerns about some elements of it, the scheme now proposed is immeasurably better, fairer and more practice-reflective than that originally devised.

"That shows the benefits of collaborative working within the family justice system.”

 

 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
FIFA’s 2026 Men's World Cup is already mired in controversy, with complaints over ‘excessive prices’ and opaque ticketing. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dr Ian Blackshaw of Valloni Attorneys warns that governing bodies may face scrutiny under EU competition law, with allegations of a ‘dominant—if not monopolistic—position’ in ticket sales
Ten years after Brexit, UK and EU trade mark regimes are drifting apart in practice if not principle. Writing in NLJ this week, Roger Lush and Lara Elder of Carpmaels & Ransford highlight tighter UK scrutiny after SkyKick, where overly broad filings may signal ‘bad faith’
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
back-to-top-scroll