header-logo header-logo

14 February 2014
Issue: 7594 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Legal ombudsman

R (on the application of Crawford) v The Legal Ombudsman [2014] EWHC 182 (Admin), [2014] All ER (D) 43 (Feb)

The Legal Ombudsman scheme was created by Pt 6 of the Legal Services Act 2007. Section 122 required the Chief Ombudsman to be a lay person, but permitted assistant ombudsmen with power to determine complaints to be legally qualified. Section 113(1) indicated that the purpose of the scheme was to enable complaints to “be resolved quickly and with minimum formality by an independent person”. Section 137(1) provided that a complaint was to be determined “by reference to what is, in the opinion of the ombudsman making the determination, fair and reasonable in all the circumstances of the case”. There were two important aspects of the scheme revealed by those and other provisions. First, it was intended to resolve complaints swiftly and informally. In order to achieve that, the Ombudsman would often have to do the best he could on limited material and without hearing detailed evidence. To assist in those objectives, he could rely on evidence which would not be admissible in court, and could draw adverse

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll