*/
GOVERNMENT Ministers have acknowledged that controversial plans to impose fixed fees for legal representation for vulnerable families and children cannot proceed without “further analysis”. Justice Minister Lord Bach has told Parliament that further analysis would be required before it could publish final fee schemes for family legal aid and that more work would be undertaken over the summer to allow for the introduction of the new scheme in April 2010. Recent research by economic consultants Oxera and a report from the House of Commons Justice Committee have provided a stinging critique of the Legal Services Commission’s (‘LSC’) approach to reforming family legal aid, in particular, highlighting the fact that the proposals have been made on “incomplete data, [and] a superficial understanding of the supply of legal services in this area”. The Justice Committee condemned the LSC not only for its “flawed, weak and inflexible” approach but also for its “conclusions first, evidence after” approach to policy-making.
Commenting today, Lucy Theis QC, Chairman of Family Law Bar Association, said:
‘What is so concerning about these proposals is the lack of reliable evidence to support them, in particular regarding their impact on effective access to justice to the most vulnerable families and children. It is a matter of great concern that an increasing number of independent reports make clear that the LSC’s family legal aid plans would hit the most vulnerable hardest, and that they lack any robust evidential base.
Today’s announcement concedes the need for complexity to be recognized in any revised fee structure. While making clear that the Government seems set on continuing to pursue its plans this is the first recognition that there is still some way to go before there is a properly graduated fee scheme that protects the interest of the vulnerable children and families, retains expertise within this important area and has the confidence and support of the practitioner groups.’
Commenting today, Lucy Theis QC, Chairman of Family Law Bar Association, said:
‘What is so concerning about these proposals is the lack of reliable evidence to support them, in particular regarding their impact on effective access to justice to the most vulnerable families and children. It is a matter of great concern that an increasing number of independent reports make clear that the LSC’s family legal aid plans would hit the most vulnerable hardest, and that they lack any robust evidential base.
Today’s announcement concedes the need for complexity to be recognized in any revised fee structure. While making clear that the Government seems set on continuing to pursue its plans this is the first recognition that there is still some way to go before there is a properly graduated fee scheme that protects the interest of the vulnerable children and families, retains expertise within this important area and has the confidence and support of the practitioner groups.’
GOVERNMENT Ministers have acknowledged that controversial plans to impose fixed fees for legal representation for vulnerable families and children cannot proceed without “further analysis”. Justice Minister Lord Bach has told Parliament that further analysis would be required before it could publish final fee schemes for family legal aid and that more work would be undertaken over the summer to allow for the introduction of the new scheme in April 2010. Recent research by economic consultants Oxera and a report from the House of Commons Justice Committee have provided a stinging critique of the Legal Services Commission’s (‘LSC’) approach to reforming family legal aid, in particular, highlighting the fact that the proposals have been made on “incomplete data, [and] a superficial understanding of the supply of legal services in this area”. The Justice Committee condemned the LSC not only for its “flawed, weak and inflexible” approach but also for its “conclusions first, evidence after” approach to policy-making.
Update from the Chair of the Bar
By Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group
Modernising communication and collaboration at a leading Chancery set. A Zexi case study
How to build profile without compromising professional duties. By Naumaan Farooq, Co-Founder of Inked PR
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the role of cut-off levels, and the wider range of factors that must be considered when interpreting results for family court proceedings
Endometriosis Awareness North, a charity raising awareness of endometriosis and supporting those affected across the North of England, has received a £500 boost from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
A decade of reviews and research has disrupted accepted thinking in the search for causality. Suicides following abuse have overtaken domestic homicides. Is the law keeping up? Professor Susan Edwards KC (Hon) examines recent cases and the obstacles to successful prosecution
The case against judge-only justice – and why efficiency is not enough. By Professor Leslie Thomas KC
Heritage as an anchor and a compass, finding our common humanity and embracing the power of the outsider – Melina Antoniadis’s lessons learnt
Seeing the full picture – Baljit Ubhey OBE outlines the CPS action plan to tackle violence against women and girls, offering insights directly relevant to courtroom practice
Lauren Fullerton examines the how, what and why of setting up a second chambers base
