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

Fieldfisher—Will Sharp

Fieldfisher—Will Sharp

Fieldfisher boosts structured finance practice with appointment of Will Sharp

gunnercooke—Thomas Bjorn & Peter Rudd-Clarke

gunnercooke—Thomas Bjorn & Peter Rudd-Clarke

gunnercooke grows its life sciences team with new partner hires

Leonard Curtis Legal—Mark Maguire & Kane Jones

Leonard Curtis Legal—Mark Maguire & Kane Jones

Leonard Curtis Legal expands corporate team with twonew appointments

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll