header-logo header-logo

22 June 2011
Issue: 7471 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Clarke unveils Legal Aid Bill

Justice Secretary introduces the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill

Legal aid will continue to be available to victims of psychological as well as physical domestic abuse, and for matters concerning children with special educational needs.

Justice Secretary Ken Clarke announced the concessions in Parliament this week as he introduced the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill.

Clarke said he would retain the £100,000 equity disregard for homeowners, and that he had dropped a proposal to charge £100 where legal aid recipients had more than £1,000 in savings.

As revealed in the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) green paper last November, the bill removes legal aid from most family law matters, education law, housing (except where there is a threat of homelessness), personal injury, clinical negligence, employment, immigration (except for detention cases) and social welfare law.

The Legal Services Commission will be abolished, and its administrative duties passed to the holder of a new civil service role, the director of legal aid casework.

Justice minister Jonathan Djanogly said: “These reforms will ensure that we have a legal aid system which is targeted at those who need it most, in the most serious cases, as well as providing value for money to the taxpayer.”

The Bill also implements Lord Justice Jackson’s proposals on civil litigation costs.

However, legal aid lawyers accused the government of failing to listen to the public’s concerns. Legal aid practitioners group (LAPG) co-chair Jenny Beck said: "We are appalled that the government has not modified its response despite 5,000 responses to the consultation.

“The government has not listened. The proposals unravel the legal aid system. There will be very little access to justice for the poor. Once the organisations that perform this service are gone, they will never be replaced.”

Steve Hynes, director of the Legal Action Group (LAG), said legal advice agencies across the country faced potential closure due to funding cuts, and that both Birmingham and Ealing Borough faced cuts of more than £1m.

He said LAG had been “working behind the scenes” to try to secure a joint review between sector providers and the government on welfare law and alternative means of funding, but the government had not yet agreed. He speculated that Clarke may announce this next week to coincide with the second reading of the Bill.

Issue: 7471 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll