header-logo header-logo

LASPO declared a damaging failure

25 October 2018
Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail

LASPO has failed, the Bar Council has declared in a withering assessment of the controversial legislation five years on.

The Bar Council submitted evidence this week to the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) ahead of the MoJ’s review of LASPO (the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012). LASPO, which came into force in April 2013, slashed legal aid across most areas of civil and family law. The Bar Council has also published the results of a survey of its members into LASPO’s impact.

In its response, the Bar Council delivers a dire warning that the Act has impeded public access to justice, jeopardised the operation of the justice system and damaged the future of the publicly funded legal professions.

In its survey, more than 91% of respondents reported a significant increase in the number of individuals struggling to get legal advice and representation. The same number of barristers reported a significant increase in the number of litigants in person (LiPs) in family cases, while 77% reported a significant increase in LiPs in civil cases.

The cuts have had a knock-on effect further down the line—77% reported a significant delay in family court cases due to the increase in LiPs, while nearly half the barristers (48%) do less legal aid work than before LASPO and, worryingly, nearly 25% have stopped doing legal aid work altogether.

Andrew Walker QC, Chair of the Bar, said: ‘LASPO has not just failed: it has caused untold damage to our justice system and to access to justice. 

‘The Ministry and the government cannot and must not hide from this. The review itself cannot and must not gloss over what barristers and other legal professionals, the judiciary and the public are seeing happening in our courts. 

‘The fact there are significant delays in the family and civil courts is a red flag. For those at the front-line, the results are clear: the true costs of LASPO, and the harm it has caused, are far greater than the government has admitted. We need a significant change of direction to rectify five years of failure.’

The Bar Council expressed grave concerns that the MoJ may not have gathered the necessary evidence about LASPO’s impact on all aspects of the justice system or consequential costs caused to other government departments.

It called on the government to reverse the ‘innocence tax’ where those acquitted of criminal offences are unable to recover the reasonable costs of a privately funded defence; reintroduce legal aid in a range of family law proceedings, including private law children proceedings; and reintroduce a legal help scheme for welfare benefit cases.

And it urged the government to relax the criteria for exceptional case funding in coroner’s inquests where the death occurred in the care of the state and the state has agreed to provide separate representation for one or more interested persons; and to raise the eligibility threshold for legal aid.

Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Taylor Rose—nine promotions

Taylor Rose—nine promotions

Leadership strengthened across core practice areas with nine new partners

Fieldfisher—Rebecca Maxwell

Fieldfisher—Rebecca Maxwell

Real estate team welcomes partner inBirmingham

Ward Hadaway—14 trainee solicitors

Ward Hadaway—14 trainee solicitors

Firm strengthens commitment to nurturing future legal talent

NEWS
Government plans for offender ‘restriction zones’ risk creating ‘digital cages’ that blur punishment with surveillance, warns Henrietta Ronson, partner at Corker Binning, in this week's issue of NLJ
Louise Uphill, senior associate at Moore Barlow LLP, dissects the faltering rollout of the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 in this week's NLJ
Judgments are ‘worthless without enforcement’, says HHJ Karen Walden-Smith, senior circuit judge and chair of the Civil Justice Council’s enforcement working group. In this week's NLJ, she breaks down the CJC’s April 2025 report, which identified systemic flaws and proposed 39 reforms, from modernising procedures to protecting vulnerable debtors
Writing in NLJ this week, Katherine Harding and Charlotte Finley of Penningtons Manches Cooper examine Standish v Standish [2025] UKSC 26, the Supreme Court ruling that narrowed what counts as matrimonial property, and its potential impact upon claims under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975
In this week's NLJ, Dr Jon Robins, editor of The Justice Gap and lecturer at Brighton University, reports on a campaign to posthumously exonerate Christine Keeler. 60 years after her perjury conviction, Keeler’s son Seymour Platt has petitioned the king to exercise the royal prerogative of mercy, arguing she was a victim of violence and moral hypocrisy, not deceit. Supported by Felicity Gerry KC, the dossier brands the conviction 'the ultimate in slut-shaming'
back-to-top-scroll