header-logo header-logo

High Court ruling on unified contract

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

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

DWF—19 appointments

DWF—19 appointments

Belfast team bolstered by three senior hires and 16 further appointments

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Cadwalader—Andro Atlaga

Firm strengthens leveraged finance team with London partner hire

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Knights—Ella Dodgson & Rebecca Laffan

Double hire marks launch of family team in Leeds

NEWS
Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve reports on Haynes v Thomson, the first judicial application of the Supreme Court’s For Women Scotland ruling in a discrimination claim, in this week's NLJ
Charlie Mercer and Astrid Gillam of Stewarts crunch the numbers on civil fraud claims in the English courts, in this week's NLJ. New data shows civil fraud claims rising steadily since 2014, with the King’s Bench Division overtaking the Commercial Court as the forum of choice for lower-value disputes
The Supreme Court issued a landmark judgment in July that overturned the convictions of Tom Hayes and Carlo Palombo, once poster boys of the Libor and Euribor scandal. In NLJ this week, Neil Swift of Peters & Peters considers what the ruling means for financial law enforcement
Small law firms want to embrace technology but feel lost in a maze of jargon, costs and compliance fears, writes Aisling O’Connell of the Solicitors Regulation Authority in this week's NLJ
Artificial intelligence may be revolutionising the law, but its misuse could wreck cases and careers, warns Clare Arthurs of Penningtons Manches Cooper in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll