header-logo header-logo

25 March 2016
Issue: 7692 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Trafficking victims win review

MoJ to undertake review of legal aid provision following threat of judicial review

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) is to conduct an urgent review of legal aid provision for trafficking victims seeking to bring compensation claims against the perpetrators, after the High Court granted permission for a judicial review.

Parliament included a clause in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 to ensure victims could bring compensation claims against their traffickers. The Anti-Trafficking and Labour Exploitation Unit (ATLEU) argued that the way the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) had implemented the provision meant that victims were not able to access legal advice and assistance to bring claims. Support agencies Kalayaan, Medaille Trust, Migrant Help and Hope for Justice supplied evidence showing that many victims were unable to access advice because of the limited number of providers able to deal with compensation claims, and the limited number of claims each one could handle.

Mr Justice Blake granted permission to pursue the judicial review. However, shortly before the hearing, the MoJ and LAA agreed to undertake a review by the end of June, and to implement any approved recommendations as soon as possible. Following this concession, ATLEU withdrew its claim.

The review will identify whether there are barriers to advice and assistance, the causes of these and what steps should be taken.

Shu Shin Luh, Garden Court Chambers, who acted pro bono for ATLEU, says: “If the government wants to realise its commitment under the Modern Slavery Act to provide victims of trafficking and modern slavery a right to seek reparations from their traffickers, then it must ensure that there is a system in place which gives victims effective and practical access to legal advice and assistance to realise their rights.

“This hasn’t happened to date. It is hoped that with this review the lord chancellor will now adhere to his commitments toward trafficking victims to ensure they are able exercise their right to seek reparations and hold to account those who have exploited them.”

As part of the order comprising the judicial review, the government is to pay £12,000 in costs to the Access to Justice Foundation under the scheme for pro bono costs orders.

Issue: 7692 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll