header-logo header-logo

02 August 2007
Issue: 7284 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Fees
printer mail-detail

High Court ruling on unified contract

News

The new fixed fees for civil legal aid cases will be introduced as planned from October 2007, says the Legal Services Commission (LSC), despite a High Court ruling that the unified contract breaches European law.
The ruling follows the Law Society’s claim for judicial review, which challenged the LSC’s extensive right to amend the contract.
Mr Justice Beatson said changes to the contract should not be made if they would “alter the economic balance of the contract to the disadvantage of those who have entered into the unified contract”.

He said any proposed changes should be restricted to those envisaged by the initial white paper. The right to amend peer review processes and key performance indicators were also held to be incompatible with the obligation to set out technical requirements in the contract documentation.
The LSC insists the contractual provision enabling it to amend the unified contract in relation to fee levels and structures was lawful and it was only the requirements relating to amendments to the “technical specifications” of the contract which were found to breach EU procurement rules.

Carolyn Regan, LSC chief executive, says: “I am obviously pleasedthat the court has confirmed that it is lawful for the LSC to amend the unified contract to introduce the new civil legal aid fee schemes from October 2007.“
However, Legal Aid Practitioners Group director Richard Miller says: “At long last, we have seen the LSC held to account after trampling on the rights of the profession. We hope they will take from this the message that they are not above the law. Maybe we can now start to re-establish reasonable dialogue with a body that understands there are limits to its powers.
“Unfortunately, the initial signs are not good. The LSC’s own response to this judgment demonstrates no humility, no acknowledgement of their failure to comply with the law and a denial that the judgment has any implications for the introduction of fixed fees.”

Law Society president Andrew Holroyd says: “This judgment underlines the shortcomings of the LSC’s approach to the reforms of the legal aid system.”
Both the LSC and the Law Society are considering an appeal.
 

Issue: 7284 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Fees
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

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