header-logo header-logo

10 January 2018
Issue: 7776 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail

Legal aid evidence victory

Five-year time limit abandoned for domestic violence victims

A major evidential obstacle to legal aid for domestic abuse victims has been dropped by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) following a campaign by lawyers and support organisations.

As of this week, there will be no time limit on abuse evidence in private family law disputes-previously, victims had to prove they had suffered, or been at risk of suffering, domestic abuse or child abuse in the previous five years. Opponents said the restrictions prevented about 50% of domestic abuse victims receiving legal aid.

The range of documents accepted as evidence of abuse has also been widened, and will now include statements from domestic violence support organisations and housing support officers.

The Court of Appeal held the evidence requirements set out in LASPO (Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) 2012), unlawful in February 2016, in R (on the application of) Rights of Women v Lord Chancellor [2016] EWCA Civ 91. The MoJ made the reforms after consulting with charities and legal bodies, including the charity Rights of Women, which brought the legal challenge.

Carol Storer, director of Legal Aid Practitioners Group, said less than half of victims fleeing domestic abuse have been able to access legal aid due to the evidence requirements.

‘The evidence was time limited, failing to recognise that the impact and risk associated with abuse can be lifelong,’ she said.

‘The ability to obtain the necessary evidence is difficult and random and often has a cost involved. Obtaining it is usually inconsistent with the lifestyle of the vast majority of victims fleeing domestic abuse.’ Moreover, obtaining evidence of emotional, psychological, financial abuse or coercive control rather than physical abuse was often difficult.

‘It has taken a long time to bring about these changes, and there are still many hurdles in place.’

Law Society vice president Christina Blacklaws said the reform ‘will make it easier for victims to qualify for legal aid and access essential help and support’.

Former justice minister Dominic Raab said: ‘We have listened to victims’ groups and carefully reviewed the criteria for legal aid for victims of domestic abuse in family cases.’

 

Issue: 7776 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll