This essay will be to discuss reforms in legal aid in the United Kingdom which has affected many people accessing justice due to lack of money to take their cases to civil and criminal courts as a result of cuts in legal aid. Legal aid helps individuals meet the costs of representation in a tribunal or court, family mediation, and legal advice.
Legal aid was introduced to enable the principles and implementation of the right to fair trial and the right to be considered equal before the law. Some people believe that the reforms in legal aid are driven by financial concerns rather than the need for ensuring access to justice for all has been discussed by considering the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 and Access to Justice Act 1999.
After enforcement of the Human Rights Act 1998, if an individual is not able to afford the cost of representing his/her case in the court of law, this could lead to undermining of his/her right to a fair trial under HRA 1998’s Article 6. Anyone arrested by police is entitled to free legal advice, if they are to go to court for a civil case, there are criteria to determine whether they will qualify for legal aid.
Their savings and spouse’s income would be assessed, currently if an individual’s income exceeds £2,435 excluding taxes, or if he/she has available savings of more than £8,000, then such a person is not deemed eligible.
Until 1900 several poor people who could not afford to hire a lawyer to represent them in court cases were given donations which sometimes weakened the rule of law. A unified legal aid system was introduced to provide legal advice during and after the 2nd World war. The new system recognises that equal access and representation before the law are at the heart of a just society. Legal aid provision significantly increased over the next few decades.
Criminal Legal Aid
Actions on the criminal legal aid were delayed in the 60s while in 1984 the Police and Criminal Evidence Act was enacted to establish a recommended police liability plan and extended for employment and housing through legal centres. However, because the legal aid system grows exponentially, the controversies around it have increasingly been dependent on its value as it is used only for those with lower incomes. In 1999 when the Access to Justice Act (AJA) was passed it brought reforms to redesign the entire financing system and to regulate legal aid. The bill created the Commission for Legal Services, which gives the right to a person to change legal services. In 2006, a new ministerial mandate was established to allow legal aid in which a person is entitled to funds in all civil and criminal cases unless explicitly excluded. Irrespective of the efforts, the reforms are not sufficient to control the legal aid’s cost. Reducing legal aid remains a challenge and a matter of debate requiring a political reform.
In the first 60 years of providing legal aid in the United Kingdom from 1949 to 2009, 83% of the public said they knew little or nothing about the plan. In 2013, another bill was passed on the further reduction of legal aid after The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 which aimed to reduce the annual bill for legal aid to £2 billion in England and Wales at the price of £ 350 million per year.
The status of judicial assistance has changed in all civil cases, except for the Access to Justice Act 1999 on the provision of legal aid, to exclude legal funding for family and private law as well as the law of torts. Currently, the area of family matters is considered a realm where the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 has been completely ruled out. Other issues, such as debt, housing, and social security, as well as immigration, can only be considered if certain criteria are achieved.
With the adoption of the Access to Justice Act 1999, the government has undergone some important reforms in the state-funded legal services’ provision, with the intention to bring about improvements in the availability and the quality of legal services and also controlling the budget. The major change made under the Access to Justice Act 1999 was the completion of a demand-driven system in civil matters and the establishment of a fixed budget every year.
Furthermore, the amount set aside for civil cases was limited to the amount remaining after the budgetary expenses of the Legal aid fund for criminals. In 1999, the Legal Services Commission (LSC) was established and in April 2001 it replaced the Legal Aid Committee. Currently, LSC’s budget is around £2 billion to establish standards and availability of legal services. To obtain a quality mark, the legal service provider must meet established quality standards.
Community Legal Service Partnerships
The LSC establishes links with other sponsors of legal services such as local councils to help finance local consultancy centres to create a network of legal service providers. The LSC establishes the CLSP in each agency, including the local government and other legal service sponsors to coordinate legal planning and funding. In the past, in civil matters, the legal aid was provided on the application’s basis. Currently, there is a fund fixed for the public legal service that includes a fixed amount of funds every year as part of a regular set of public spending plans.
According to AJA 1999, the LSC is responsible for achieving the best quality per price ratio, which is a combination of price and quality. Under the AJA 1999, only lawyers or consultants who have a contract with the LSC can provide advice or representatives sponsored by the LSC. Regarding professional law, such as clinical negligence, mental health, immigration, and family law, only professional companies can do this work. It is stated by the government that such cases are not adequate for justifying the public funding, and might be appropriate for the Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA).
In McDonald’s Corporation v Steel & Morris, linked with the Steel & Morris v United Kingdom, the defendant published a six-page brochure “What’s wrong with McDonald’s?” Based on this brochure. McDonald’s has filed a lawsuit against slander. The defendant sought legal aid but was denied legal aid because there was no legal aid available for defamation. The defendant should have represented himself, and McDonald’s was the principal lawyer, junior attorney and at least one lawyer in the whole case. The case was quite difficult, both in substance and in law as it lasted 313 days and included 40,000 pages of documentary evidence and 130 witnesses who provided oral evidence. The European Court of Human Rights believes that the refusal to provide legal aid makes it impossible for the defendant to effectively represent his/her case in the court doesn’t provide access to equal justice, which is unacceptable to McDonald. Therefore, it was stated that Article 6 has been violated.
In civil matters, contrary to the legal aid, criminal protection provided which is state-funded, would continue to be driven by demand. Without a budget, all cases that respect the rights of justice must comply with the rules and an economic review will also receive funds. It is stated by the government that private and public lawyers’ mixed system would provide taxpayers with the best economic benefits in criminal defence work. As a result, clients who are sent to private lawyers and public defenders can receive funds for criminal defence.
Analysis of Legal Aid by Lord Carter
In July 2005, Lord Falconer, Minister of Constitutional Affairs, appointed Lord Carter Coles to conduct the largest independent review reforms about obtaining legal aid for 50 years. The task was to achieve good value for money, control excessive spending on legal aid and ensure the justice of civil and criminal justice systems. Since January 2008, the service lawyers have been paid a fixed fee and there has been a change in service lawyers at police stations, with a limited selection of criminal protection services, the choice of customer representatives have been limited. Any individual who has been arrested and detained for the non-criminal offence can be paid privately, choose his/her lawyer and must be satisfied with the telephone consultation call centre.
Civil Legal Aid
Since the enforcement of the Legal Services Act 2007, the Carter report suggested a replacement of hourly rates for fixed and multilevel rates.
The reforms mean that small businesses must adapt to the proposed changes through mergers or expansions and it is expected that up to 800 companies would disappear from the criminal defence market because they would no longer be profitable. Companies would be encouraged to integrate so that an adequate amount of work could be done. The report foresees that there would be smaller, but more efficient and better quality suppliers that would benefit from a higher workload and lower costs.
Some people blame the proposed reforms to push small businesses into bankruptcy, especially minority companies. It is believed that if legislation is implemented without these important assurances, it could be impossible for vulnerable groups to obtain free, independent and high-quality advice. Justice for All means that the Ministry of Justice’s proposal for alternative legal aid funds was not adequate for the most vulnerable groups and could not be received or provided.
The judge also criticized that the government’s proposal to cut legal aid budget could block thousands of people who represent themselves. A judicial committee led by Judge Igor, the head of the judiciary, warned that a significant increase in the number of trials would delay the system and could be more expensive. The judges said the government’s £350 million budget reduction plan would eliminate legal funding for the entire legal field, including divorce, social security, debt and housing, and lead to an inevitable budget decline quality of justice in England and Wales.
Lord Neuberger the President of the Supreme Court, warned in his speech on the 5th of March 2013 that reducing legal aid in civil matters would limit access to justice. Which could make people take the laws into their own hands as they feel that they cannot access justice. Since early 1970s, many published studies have raised questions about how lawyers can actually meet the needs of the entire community if services that could solve all problems under the law are provided. However, it is also noted that lawyers are often used by limited social groups for limited services.
In 2002, a study conducted by the LSC research department showed that many people are not taking any action to resolve their legal problems due to a lack of understanding of how to do it, especially those term illness or disability, vulnerable groups who are more likely to face legal problems. The study also showed that many people did not seek legal aid from lawyers or counselling centres, but they resorted to social workers, health workers, social care services and religious organizations, even though there are only 5,000 companies providing state-funded legal services. Some fear that few areas might be financed by state legal service providers, which poses a threat to the overall justice system.
Since 2007, per capita funding for legal aid services has been decreasing. Therefore, the pressure on the Community Legal Centre (CLC) was increased due to demand for services and profit, and the increasing allocation of funds. In 2012, the federal government promised to inject funds to increase the volume of legal aid services, launch pilot exploration programs and increase advertising programs to meet new demands, while others prefer to expand existing services. However, in December 2013, the Federal government announced that it would not comply with the financing agreement after July 1, 2015. Therefore, it is expected that the implementation of the CLC would no longer be applicable. In addition, the department should further reduce the CLC. CLC expects the Federal government to provide 25% of the funds. As the expected reduction in details is still uncertain, the CLC department is not able to predict how much their budgets would be reduced. This causes significant difficulties in budgeting and the prediction of the affected CLC. Therefore, the CLC is forced to reduce the number of employees to reload existing funds to maintain operations in progress.
It is needed that a new narrative should be developed related to the law. Legal advice is not necessary and cuts in legal aid are unavoidable, and they reiterated that public understanding and argumentation about the fundamental importance of due process must be challenged. The way people should use and understand the law is to ensure that any change in the funding of priorities, services, and programs is a necessary condition to fundamentally avoid the legal value of the redesign.
Scientists, doctors, and activists must continue to work together to restore the commitment to legal value, to understand the importance of access and understanding of law and legal quality. The first copy in the name of the lack of funds sent to numerous customers does not know their right of appeal. Obdurate lack of funds in the program to request permission for filing an appeal increase complexity for those who can determine their grounds for appeal. In other words, it can be stated that the appeal process is quite difficult in such a situation. It is worth noting that the legal profession cannot prevent a collective action in civil courts from aiding a legal boycott.
Criminal lawyers using collective bargaining have effectively forced the government to withdraw some of the most controversial aspects of the proposed reform of criminal assistance such as competitive bidding prices. Civilian doctors cannot use this option. The lack of public awareness on civil legal advice and on the value of representation also contributes to popular practices to work together for creating a civilian database and a powerful legal opinion to fight government advocates and raise public awareness.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it can be ascertained that the UK legal aid system is analysed after the continuous budget cuts. Representatives of legal associations that support and promote lawyers require them the for publicizing their exclusive role in protecting the rule of law, guaranteeing that justice is provided equally to all, providing legal advice, and communicating their issues in the briefing of general election each year. The reduction of legal aid gradually deteriorates the opportunities for the common people in England and Wales to access justice, weakening their ability to exercise their rights.
Reflection
Reason for choosing the topic?
This topic was chosen so as to evaluate the recent legal aid reforms in the UK legal system. An understanding whether the reform is triggered by financial concern or the intention to promote justice to the citizens of the UK was made in order to establish the discussion on Access to Justice Act 1999 in connection with Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, by exploring the legal aid criteria, which is making it more difficult and expensive for those that are seeking their rights in court as the citizens and the legal practitioners as rule-abiding citizen. This has also made it impossible for asylum seekers that may be in a situation of life or death and are not able to get the best legal aid to avoid the court rules or potential sanctions. Hence, this was the main concern of selecting to evaluate the reforms.
How you went about your research?
Research and paraphrasing skills were used to complete this work. Internet searches of different websites, books, Journals were consulted to understand the acts passed by the UK government in relation to the recent reforms. The research was conducted with the help of lectures and guidance of a mentor, who developed the research skills.
What did you understand about it?
An understanding of the term legal aid as being the financial support given to a citizen from the public funds, to help them pay for any legal help they need. The research further enriched previous knowledge about recent reforms and relevant laws associated with legal aid and also that any legal advice, court cases, tribunals and family mediations are involved in such financial legal aid provision. There are certain qualifying areas that must be fulfilled by an individual in order to gain the right of these public funds for utilising legal services. Certain individuals are selected to obtain a claim of these legal aid services once they have proved their need is greater.
What has been learnt?
A lot has been taking into consideration through this essay by research. Legal aid was introduced in the United Kingdom in 1949 and in 2006 the practice of lawyers was based on paid services until 2012 when restrictions on legal aid (provided an estimated fund of £450 million) were shown to be a barrier for people seeking justice.
Further budget cuts in the framework of legal aid schemes were made in 2005/2006 when the sentencing and punishment order was introduced. Reforms were implemented in practice, this allowed taxpayers to better protect their legal rights and provide legal aid in cases of paramount importance, including risks to life, homelessness or taking away children.
Which book did you use, journal, website Westlaw, ebook, BOLD or lecture slide
A list of bibliography at the end of the essay, provides complete details of the sources, which have helped to complete this work.
Bibliography
Primary Resources
Access to Justice Act 1999
Human Rights Act 1998
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012
Legal Services Act 2007
McDonald’s Corporation v Steel & Morris [1997] EWHC QB 366
Steel & Morris v United Kingdom [2005] EMLR 314
Secondary Resources
Allbon, Emily, Sanmeet Kaur Dua, Catherine Elliott, and Frances Quinn. Elliott and Quinnʹs English Legal System. 17th Edition. Pearson Education Limited, 2018.
Huxley-Binns, Rebecca, and Jacqueline Martin. Unlocking the English legal system. Routledge, 2014.
Malleson, Kate. The Legal System (Butterworths Core Text series). Oxford University Press, 2005.
Murch, Mervyn. The role of the family court system of England and Wales in child-related parental disputes: Towards a new concept of the family justice process. In How Couple Relationships Shape our World, pp. 91-128. Routledge, 2018.
Partington, Martin. Introduction to the English legal system 2016-2017. Oxford University Press, 2016.
Slapper, Gary and David Kelly. The English Legal System: 2014-2015. 15th Edition. Routledge-Cavendish, 2014.
Journal Articles
Aulakh, Sundeep, and Joan Loughrey. Regulating Law Firms from the Inside: The Role of Compliance Officers for Legal Practice in England and Wales. (2018). Journal of Law and Societyf 45, no. 2, 254-281.
Jones, David Lloyd. Brexit and the future of English law. (2018). Victoria U. Wellington L. Rev. 49, 1.
Richardson, Kayliegh, and Ana Speed. Restrictions on Legal Aid in Family Law Cases in England and Wales: Creating a Necessary Barrier to Public Funding or Simply Increasing the Burden on the Family Court. (2018). Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law.
Waters, Ben, and Jeanette Ashton. A study into situated learning through community legal companionship. (2018). Int’l J. Clinical Legal Educ. 25, 4.
6.1.2019