header-logo header-logo

07 March 2019 / Jonathan Wheeler
Issue: 7831 / Categories: Opinion , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail

Inequality of arms

That bereaved families have so little hope of obtaining legal aid for inquests is indicative of the UK’s broken system, says Jonathan Wheeler

 

With only a week to go before the opening of the inquests into the 1974 Birmingham pub bombings last month, the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) rejected the victims’ application for legal aid. Northern Ireland firm KRW Law, representing half of the families, was instead awarded only a tenth of the funding requested—certainly insufficient for the well-resourced legal team it required.

The following day, a crowdfunding page was created in a last-ditch attempt to source the funds desperately needed for the families’ legal representation. This was, however, too little too late, after a succession of snubs by LAA, and when a boycott of the inquest by the families had been floated as a serious option. The fact that the families found themselves in this situation at such a late stage is indicative of the broken legal aid system in the UK.

Exceptional cases only

The

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll