Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
In April 2013 a new Act came into force, passing largely under the radar of the general public but raising much concern from those in the legal sector and prompting some lawyers to engage in public protest. The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) brought some of the largest changes our legal system has ever seen. These included a 30% cut to fees paid to barristers for complex, high costs cases and changes in which cases now qualify for legal aid.
With the government removing funding from entire areas of civil law, the following cases no longer qualify for legal aid:
- Private family law, such as divorce and custody battles
- Personal injury claims and some medical negligence claims
- Some employment and education law
- Immigration where the person is not detained
- Some debt, housing and benefit issues
Just over a year later and the repercussions of those changes are making headlines.
A fraud trial at Southwark Crown Court was recently halted by the judge after the defendants claimed they could not get adequate representation because of cuts to legal aid. They approached 70 barrister chambers for representation and all declined, apart from one who then went on to withdraw the following day.
So is it fair that so many barristers in England and Wales are refusing to take on very high-cost cases (VHCCs) in light of the 30% fee cuts from the government? The popular public take to this situation appears to prompt the questions "Surely barristers are rich enough and can afford to take a cut?".
Whilst there have been lawyers who have earned up to £100,000 in legal aid fees, the Criminal Bar Association (CBA) said many junior barristers faced rates as low as £20 a day, once the hours of preparation, time in court and chambers' fees were factored in, as well as receiving no holiday pay, no pension provision and no sickness or maternity benefits.
The CBA's Nigel Lithman QC said: "If these cuts are not addressed, then the British justice system, which is held in such high esteem around the world, will cease to exist as we know it and the British public can no longer expect true justice to be delivered."
He went on to say that the effect of payment cuts to solicitors would mean "one third of them will go out of business and people coming from university will simply choose not to go into the criminal justice system because they won't be able to afford to".
Critics of the government's cuts claim they’ll lead to complex cases becoming reliant on less experienced lawyers. The President of the London Criminal Courts Solicitors Association (LCCSA), Nicola Hill echoed these fears when she said the cuts would result in the sacking of experienced solicitors in order to replace them with “unqualified and cheap" ones.
She added: "It's the ordinary people, those we don't hear about, who don't make the headlines, who will have to accept third-rate advice."
In the Southwark Crown Court fraud case it was feared the defendants would have to defend themselves (known as Litigants or Litigation in Person, LiP). Prosecutors agreed this would have been a breach of their human rights with presiding Judge Anthony Leonard saying, there was no realistic prospect of the defendants getting a fair trial.
Worryingly however, figures show that more and more cases are heading down this route.
Cafcass released figures which show before the legal aid cuts came in last April, some 82% of cases began with one party (60%) or both parties (22%) legally represented. However by December 2013 only 4% of cases started with both parties represented by a solicitor.
It’ll be interesting to see the statistics of how successful those representing themselves are, though I think we can take an educated guess. Solicitors train for years before taking the reins in a court room and despite what films and TV dramas may have us believe, representing yourself in court is not easy.
Measures are being taken to help those who endeavor to take cases on themselves; the Bar Council has released a guide for LiP which includes instructions on how not to talk like a TV lawyer (apparently, Judges hate that!). Weighing in at 70 pages and counting, it's not short - but it’s also no replacement for years of legal training.
With cuts to barristers fees potentially resulting in less experienced representation in court, and certain areas no longer qualifying for legal aid, it's feared that England’s 800-year-old tradition of fair and open access to justice for all, may be coming to an end.
In our next blog, in the light of recent changes to the law affecting personal injury cases including LASPO and the Jackson refrorms,we'll look at the public perception of no win no fee personal injury solicitors, and ask What Would the World Be Like Without Personal Injury Lawyers?
Thankfully, for the moment at least, they are still around and able to offer no win no fee claim agreements. So, if you've been involved in an accident and believe you have a personal injury claim, complete the online claim form or call us on 0800 756 7774.
One of our trained consultants will contact you, ask you a few simple questions and then ask a solicitor who specialises in handling cases involving your particular type of personal injury, to contact you.
Image: AP Photo/Alastair Grant
http://info.mayiclaim.co.uk/personal_injury_compensation_claim_news/bid/344910/As-Legal-Aid-Changes-Bite-Has-Our-Access-to-Justice-Been-Restricted Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
Image may be NSFW.Clik here to view.