header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
13 September 2024 / Clare Hughes-Williams , Sharon Glynn
Issue: 8085 / Categories: Features , Profession , Pro Bono
printer mail-detail

Pro bono: fee-free, but not claim-free

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
188813
Clare Hughes-Williams & Sharon Glynn on why lawyers should treat pro bono work & paid work equally
  • Unpaid work comes with the same liabilities as fee-paying work, as highlighted in a number of cases involving pro bono.
  • Sets out the steps lawyers should take when carrying out pro bono work.

Pro bono work is becoming a significant part of law firms’ practices, with some firms recording up to 80 hours per year per UK lawyer. It plays an important role in the value that law firms provide to their communities and their clients, and it is an issue that their employees also regard as important. But what is it?

The Law Society defines pro bono work as ‘legal advice or representation provided free of charge by legal professionals in the public interest. This can be to individuals, charities or community groups who cannot afford to pay for legal help and cannot get… any other… funding.’ This area has continued to evolve and grow, however, and retired partners

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
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
Read All
NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR
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?
NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap
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
NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases
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
Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll