header-logo header-logo

24 November 2010 / Adam Makepeace
Issue: 7443 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Evolution not revolution?

The net result of government plans to wipe £350m off the legal aid budget is an attack on the welfare of some of the most vulnerable members of our society

A reduction in legal aid funding need not spell disaster, says Adam Makepeace

The net result of government plans to wipe £350m off the legal aid budget is an attack on the welfare of some of the most vulnerable members of our society and it will be up to those of us working in the sector to rise to the challenge if we want to preserve our clients’ access to justice. We can argue at the margins about a cut here and there or we can find ways to continue to give our clients the voice they deserve in the legal system.

A significant facet of the impending legal aid revolution will be an acceleration of the consolidation of legal aid businesses. However, the Law Society’s recent successful judicial review of the Legal Service Commission’s (LSC) family law bid tender process (which heralded an overnight

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll