header-logo header-logo

Legal aid, judicial review & the fight for justice

03 March 2017 / John Ford
Issue: 7736 / Categories: Opinion , Legal aid focus , Legal services
printer mail-detail
nlj_7736_ford

The administrative & legal failings of the Legal Aid Agency need urgent examination, says John Ford

For over 30 years I have run a small and effective legal aid practice in North London focusing on working for people who depend on legal aid for advice and representation in public law disputes, including education and community care. We survive by doing high quality judicial review (JR) and other work, for which we are rewarded appropriately by awards of costs from defendants who have let our clients down.

Most of our work is completed before the high cost case limit is reached, but over the years we have been unable to cope with the inadequate rates of pay and increasingly difficult stance taken by the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) in the assessment of legal aid and payment of our costs.

A third incarnation

The LAA is the third corporate incarnation of the publicly funded legal service in the last 30 years. Many of us remember the days when legal

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

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
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
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
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
Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre makes the case for ‘General Practice Pro Bono’—using core legal skills to deliver life-changing support, without the need for niche expertise—in this week's NLJ
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
back-to-top-scroll