header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
09 October 2014
Issue: 7625 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Family
printer mail-detail

Family woes

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Family legal aid cuts are having a major impact while falling crime has made further budget cuts unnecessary, according to the Bar Council

The latest government statistics show a drop of 15,000 per quarter in the number of people receiving legal aid for family court cases, and a drop of 40,000 per quarter for family law advice.

In April 2013, when the legal aid cuts came into force, 40,090 people received representation on legal aid for civil and family matters in the quarter before, but only 23,149 people did so in the quarter following, with the bulk of cuts hitting family law. Nicholas Lavender QC, chairman of the Bar, said the latest quarterly figures showed that families facing serious issues, such as disputes concerning children, were effectively being “shut out” of the justice system.

Issue: 7625 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Family
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: 40 years on, has PACE lost its edge?
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
NLJ this week: Stress-testing the City
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
NLJ this week: How sure is ‘sure’ enough?
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
NLJ this week: A deferred prosecution reprieve
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
NLJ this week: Mandelson, Epstein & the court of popular opinion
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll