header-logo header-logo

18 November 2010
Issue: 7442 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail

MoJ cuts hammer civil legal aid

MoJ cuts hammer civil legal aid

The axe fell across civil and family legal aid this week as the Ministry of Justice announced its cuts.

Public funding is to be withdrawn from private and family law cases, such as divorce and child contact, and from debt, education, employment, housing, clinical negligence, immigration and welfare benefits.

However, funding will remain in place “where people’s life or liberty is at stake, or where they are at risk of serious physical harm, or immediate loss of their home”.

Consequently, legal aid is retained for asylum cases, for debt and housing matters where someone’s home is at immediate risk, and for mental health cases. It remains for judicial reviews, for some cases involving discrimination, and for legal assistance to bereaved families in inquests. In family law, it remains for cases involving domestic violence or forced marriage, mediation for family disputes, and for cases where children are being taken into care. Fees paid in civil and family cases will be reduced by ten per cent.

The consultation, Proposals for the Reform of Legal Aid in England and Wales, ends on Valentine’s Day.

It is estimated that the cuts will save £350m by 2014-2015. The Ministry of Justice is committed to cutting £2bn from its overall spend by that session.
Law Society Chief Executive Desmond Hudson said: “Legal aid clients are some of the most vulnerable in society and good legal representation where required is essential if they are to obtain justice.”

Steve Hynes, director, Legal Action Group, said: “It is worse than we expected. The cuts have fallen disproportionately on civil legal aid, and mean half a million people will have nowhere to go for advice at a time when the not-for-profit sector is also experiencing cuts.”

The proposals raised some interesting questions, he said. “Would you get advice on housing benefit—is that housing law? It seems fundamentally unjust that at a time when they are introducing a ceiling of £400, and when landlords are going to evict people who can’t pay their rent that people will lose access to free legal advice. 36,000 housing cases will be taken from scope.”

David Greene, partner, Edwin Coe LLP, said: “To some degree the consultation period and the following political discourse next Spring may set lawyers against politicians. The politicians will mix the huge policy issues here with an attack on lawyers accused of seeking to line their own pockets. Any slated attack on lawyers and their income gains political purchase but the profession will highlight the real attack on the ability of the most vulnerable to gain access to justice.”

 

Issue: 7442 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

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