header-logo header-logo

27 July 2012 / Dr Jon Robins
Issue: 7524 / Categories: Opinion , Legal services
printer mail-detail

What next?

Jon Robins canvasses opinion on the post-LASPO future

“I genuinely believe ‘access to justice’ is the hallmark of a civilised society.” So said justice secretary, Ken Clarke, introducing his government’s legal aid reforms that, some 18 months later, became the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO).

Such an apparently unequivocal assertion rather begs the question, what would the coalition government have done to the legal aid system if the justice secretary wasn’t quite so committed to “access to justice”? LASPO, of course, was predicated on one idea above all others: that of removing £350m from a total £2.2bn scheme.

Debating access

The idea of “access to justice” was the subject of a panel debate I chaired this month at the House of Commons. It was organised by the JusticeGap, together with Hackney Community Law Centre (HCLC) and speakers included former justice secretary Lord Willy Bach, who led the opposition to the LASPO Bill in the House of Lords; Roger Smith, NLJ columnist and director of Justice; the human rights

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll