header-logo header-logo

19 March 2015
Issue: 7645 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Profession
printer mail-detail

A manifesto for legal aid

Legal aid lawyers have launched a Manifesto for Legal Aid, calling on the government to “immediately review” the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (Laspo).

The document, launched this week, urges a broad raft of changes that could be implemented “swiftly” and without “significant additional expenditure”. They include: considering where children and other vulnerable groups are disadvantaged by Laspo, and amending appropriately; reversing changes to judicial review; developing a new process for exceptional funding; and abolishing the mandatory telephone gateway as the only route to accessing certain civil legal aid services.

The Legal Aid Practitioners Group is also calling for a halt on moves to reintroduce the “residence test”, and wants a new discretion to grant legal aid to ineligible people where there would be an overall saving to the taxpayer. The Manifesto launch follows a devastating Justice Select Committee report last week into the impact of the Laspo reforms, which concluded that the Ministry of Justice has failed to demonstrate value for money for taxpayers.

It found that the Laspo reforms created knock-on costs for other parts of government, failed to target legal aid at those who need it most and did not discourage unnecessary litigation. The report found the number of people receiving advice often fell far short of government predictions, for example, there was an 85% shortfall in the number of debt advice cases. It also noted “surprising” cases where exceptional funding was not granted, for example, “an illiterate woman with learning, hearing and speech difficulties” facing a child contact application.

Only 16 grants had been made by July 2014. The report concludes the scheme “is not acting as a safety net” and called for more highly trained staff to act as gatekeepers.

It further calls on the government to uphold the rule of law and to heed the warnings of key stakeholders in the justice system (including the judiciary) as to the knock-on effect of the denial of justice on society generally and the reputation of the justice system.

Issue: 7645 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Chief information officer appointment strengthens technology leadership

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Firm strengthens Wilmslow team with two solicitor appointments

DWF—Ian Plumley

DWF—Ian Plumley

Londoninsurance and reinsurance practice announces partner appointment

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll