header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

The End

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
17 January 2008 / David Burrows
Issue: 7304 / Categories: Features , Legal services , Procedure & practice , Profession
printer mail-detail

Sadness and anger mark David Burrows’s decision to stop doing legal aid work

 

In September 2007 I decided that my firm could no longer do legal aid work. Mine is a small practice doing only family law work— including judicial review and professional negligence arising from family proceedings. My fee-earning staff had consisted of two fellows of the institute of legal executives (FILEX)—both had been with me nearly 10 years—working full-time on legal aid cases (mostly children proceedings); and a solicitor whose case load was about half legal aid (in terms of time spent). I have found one FILEX and her files another home—the other found her own job.

 

ACCESS TO JUSTICE?

The sorry history of legal aid since the Access to Justice Act 1999 (AJA 1999)—how sick is the euphemistic newspeak in that title?—has been rehearsed elsewhere. Things came to a head in March 2007 over a new contract which the Legal Services Commission (LSC) planned to impose on us. Judicial review applications were made, including a successful

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
Read All
Public Accounts Committee warn of ‘extinction’ risk for legal aid
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
NLJ this week: The insider returns
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
NLJ this week: Drawing the line on contempt
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
NLJ this week: Stop and search by the numbers
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
NLJ this week: Looking back on the prorogation that never was
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll