header-logo header-logo

10 November 2011
Issue: 7489 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Fears over Legal Aid Bill

Debate over controversial Bill labelled "an utter disgrace"

Under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill, which had its third reading in the House of Commons last week, domestic violence victims will be able to claim legal aid as long as they can prove “a high risk of violence”.

Steve Hynes, director of the Legal Action Group, said: “Part of the criteria is that they have brought legal proceedings in the last 12 months against domestic abuse.”

“This will not include an undertaking made by a party in court, and we were heartened by the arguments of Helen Grant MP, a former family lawyer, that an ‘undertaking’ [a solemn promise made to a judge] ought to be included in the definition.”

Hynes said it is “arguable” whether victims of psychological abuse will qualify for help under the Bill’s criteria.

“It is very much a one-cheer situation. There was a rebellion but not a very large rebellion. However, backbench MPs have put down a number of markers that will be taken up by the Lords in further debate.”

Speaking in the debate, justice minister Jonathan Djanogly said the government took domestic violence “extremely seriously” but that there were concerns about “unfounded allegations”.

The Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL) criticised the lack of Parliamentary time allowed to discuss “no-win, no-fee” proposals in the Bill.

Deborah Evans, APIL’s chief executive, said it was “an utter disgrace” that “only around two per cent of Parliamentary time” was devoted to proposals that would reduce the damages of injury victims.

The Bill’s first reading in the House of Lords is expected to begin on 21 November.

The Law Society and Sound Off for Justice campaign have launched a report, Missing Millions, that they claim shows the government’s figures on legal aid are flawed and that the cuts will cost more than they save.

Issue: 7489 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll