*/
Concerns over the impact of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) 2012 on access to justice have been confirmed in the preliminary results of a Bar Council survey.
Increases in court delays were reported by 80% of family practitioner respondents and 64% of civil practitioners. A significant rise in the number of litigants-in-person was noted by 88% (family) and 70% (civil).
The online survey, launched in April and part of a wider research project in association with Professor Graham Cookson from the University of Surrey, was completed by 716 respondents (90% of whom were barristers). Sixty-one per cent reported an increase in the number of lay clients experiencing difficulties accessing legal advice and representation and 60% reported an increase in the number of lay clients requesting free advice and representation.
The survey also addressed the impact on a barrister’s practice. A decrease in case work was reported by 72% of family practitioners; 60% of those involved in civil legal aid; and by 45% in civil litigation. Declining fee income was reported by 69% in family legal aid work; 62% in civil legal aid work; and 53% involved in civil litigation.
Funding arrangements were highlighted, with 27% of barrister respondents reporting a general increase in interest in fixed fees, deferred payment, pro bono assessment of risk, litigation funding and damages-based agreements. Issues with the transition to post-Jackson conditional fee agreements were reported by 42% of civil litigators.
While the majority had no immediate plans to leave the Bar, a significant minority were considering a move to judicial or other positions before 2015. Many indicated that the effects of LASPO had caused them to think about the viability of their career. Bar Chairman Nicholas Lavender QC called for a “comprehensive post-implementation review”, pledging that the Bar Council would work with policy makers to mitigate the harmful effects. “The results will help to guide the formulation of policy and provide some strong messages to government, as we approach the general election,” he said.
Meanwhile, an analysis of recently published Legal Aid Agency (LAA) data showed a 61% drop in payments to barristers by the LAA for family law proceedings, which fell from £38m in 2012/13 to £15m in 2013/14. LawyerSupportedMediation.com (LSM), which analysed the figures, also calculated that the Ministry of Justice is on course to reduce its spend on solicitors’ fees by over £100m compared to 2012/13.
LSM founder Marc Lopatin said: “How impacted barristers respond will go some way to defining how family law services will evolve. To survive, barristers may have little choice but to start competing with solicitors for divorcing clients. If they do, this will break the historic referral bond between the two professions and create the colourful spectacle of fixed-fee barristers being hired by clients with the express purpose of keeping them both out of court.”
A freedom of information request submitted by LSM revealed that the withdrawal of legal aid for most family disputes resulted in mediation numbers plummeting by almost 40% in 2013/14 – the first full year of government cuts. The number of parents heading to court without a lawyer had increased by over 19,000.
The online survey, launched in April and part of a wider research project in association with Professor Graham Cookson from the University of Surrey, was completed by 716 respondents (90% of whom were barristers). Sixty-one per cent reported an increase in the number of lay clients experiencing difficulties accessing legal advice and representation and 60% reported an increase in the number of lay clients requesting free advice and representation.
The survey also addressed the impact on a barrister’s practice. A decrease in case work was reported by 72% of family practitioners; 60% of those involved in civil legal aid; and by 45% in civil litigation. Declining fee income was reported by 69% in family legal aid work; 62% in civil legal aid work; and 53% involved in civil litigation.
Funding arrangements were highlighted, with 27% of barrister respondents reporting a general increase in interest in fixed fees, deferred payment, pro bono assessment of risk, litigation funding and damages-based agreements. Issues with the transition to post-Jackson conditional fee agreements were reported by 42% of civil litigators.
While the majority had no immediate plans to leave the Bar, a significant minority were considering a move to judicial or other positions before 2015. Many indicated that the effects of LASPO had caused them to think about the viability of their career. Bar Chairman Nicholas Lavender QC called for a “comprehensive post-implementation review”, pledging that the Bar Council would work with policy makers to mitigate the harmful effects. “The results will help to guide the formulation of policy and provide some strong messages to government, as we approach the general election,” he said.
Meanwhile, an analysis of recently published Legal Aid Agency (LAA) data showed a 61% drop in payments to barristers by the LAA for family law proceedings, which fell from £38m in 2012/13 to £15m in 2013/14. LawyerSupportedMediation.com (LSM), which analysed the figures, also calculated that the Ministry of Justice is on course to reduce its spend on solicitors’ fees by over £100m compared to 2012/13.
LSM founder Marc Lopatin said: “How impacted barristers respond will go some way to defining how family law services will evolve. To survive, barristers may have little choice but to start competing with solicitors for divorcing clients. If they do, this will break the historic referral bond between the two professions and create the colourful spectacle of fixed-fee barristers being hired by clients with the express purpose of keeping them both out of court.”
A freedom of information request submitted by LSM revealed that the withdrawal of legal aid for most family disputes resulted in mediation numbers plummeting by almost 40% in 2013/14 – the first full year of government cuts. The number of parents heading to court without a lawyer had increased by over 19,000.
Concerns over the impact of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) 2012 on access to justice have been confirmed in the preliminary results of a Bar Council survey.
Increases in court delays were reported by 80% of family practitioner respondents and 64% of civil practitioners. A significant rise in the number of litigants-in-person was noted by 88% (family) and 70% (civil).
Chair of the Bar finds common ground on legal services between our two jurisdictions, plus an update on jury trials
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
An interview with Rob Wagg, CEO of New Park Court Chambers
There is no typical day in the life as a Supreme Court judicial assistant, says Josephine Gillingwater, and that’s what makes the role so enjoyably diverse
With at least 31 reports of AI hallucinations in UK legal cases – over 800 worldwide – and judges using AI to assist in judicial decision-making, the risks and benefits are impossible to ignore. Matthew Lee examines how different jurisdictions are responding
What has changed, and why? Paul Secher unpacks the new standards aligning the recruiting, training and appraising of judges – the first major change to the system for ten years
The deprivation of liberty is the most significant power the state can exercise. Drawing on frontline experience, Chris Henley KC explains why replacing trial by jury with judge-only trials risks undermining justice
Baffled by the government’s proposed s 41 reforms and by the Law Commission’s preferred model, Laura Hoyano looks at what won’t work, and what will
