header-logo header-logo

16 January 2015
Issue: 7636 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Legal aid

G and others v Director of Legal Aid Casework and another (British Red Cross Society intervening) [2014] EWCA Civ 1622; [2014] All ER (D) 157 (Dec)

The claimants had been refused civil legal aid funding in cases that involved immigration issues. Their judicial review challenges had been successful. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, held that the judge had erred in his interpretation of when exceptional case funding was required by s 10(3)(a) of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. It further affirmed the judge’s conclusions that the second defendant Lord Chancellor’s Exceptional Funding Guidance (Non-Inquests) was not compatible with Arts 6(1) and, in immigration cases, Art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, nor was it compatible with Art 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. 

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

Anthony Collins—William Hallett & Lorna Scully

Anthony Collins—William Hallett & Lorna Scully

Anthony Collins hires two talented legal directors

Switalskis—five appointments

Switalskis—five appointments

Firm expands national abuse compensation team

Mathys & Squire—nine promotions

Mathys & Squire—nine promotions

IP firm announces new partners and senior promotions across UK offices

NEWS
A High Court ruling has sent a jolt through the legal profession after a newly qualified solicitor used an internal AI tool to produce court correspondence containing a fabricated legal citation
A significant data privacy ruling has clarified what counts as valid consent under UK data protection law
Executors may be overlooking billions of pounds in estate assets hidden in forgotten investments and misplaced share certificates
Britain’s booming non-surgical cosmetics market is operating in what some critics describe as a regulatory ‘Wild West’
Family contact disputes are becoming an increasingly prominent feature of Court of Protection litigation
back-to-top-scroll