header-logo header-logo

Legal ombudsman

14 February 2014
Issue: 7594 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

R (on the application of Crawford) v The Legal Ombudsman [2014] EWHC 182 (Admin), [2014] All ER (D) 43 (Feb)

The Legal Ombudsman scheme was created by Pt 6 of the Legal Services Act 2007. Section 122 required the Chief Ombudsman to be a lay person, but permitted assistant ombudsmen with power to determine complaints to be legally qualified. Section 113(1) indicated that the purpose of the scheme was to enable complaints to “be resolved quickly and with minimum formality by an independent person”. Section 137(1) provided that a complaint was to be determined “by reference to what is, in the opinion of the ombudsman making the determination, fair and reasonable in all the circumstances of the case”. There were two important aspects of the scheme revealed by those and other provisions. First, it was intended to resolve complaints swiftly and informally. In order to achieve that, the Ombudsman would often have to do the best he could on limited material and without hearing detailed evidence. To assist in those objectives, he could rely on evidence which

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

Slater Heelis—Chester office

Slater Heelis—Chester office

North West presence strengthened with Chester office launch

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Firm grows commercial disputes expertise with partner promotion

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

NEWS
The House of Lords has set up a select committee to examine assisted dying, which will delay the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
back-to-top-scroll