Thus spake Collins J in IS v The Director of Legal Aid Casework & Anor [2015] EWHC 1965 (Admin) (15 July 2015).
So, it’s back to the drawing board for the Lord Chancellor, who has been frenetically drafting both revised regulations in respect of s10 LASPO exceptional legal aid and his grounds of appeal from Collins J’s decision that such revision was necessary, so he can get back to dipping his toes in the paddling pool (or whatever it is that parliamentarians do in the summer hols). The immediate redrafting of the regulations does not give an impression of supreme confidence in the merits of the appeal, but no doubt this is simply ministerial prudence, although possibly the Lord Chancellor was only able to secure public funding for the appeal through the issue of the regulations… ;-P
The upshot is that, for the time being at least, the Lord Chancellor has loosened the overtight belt so we can breathe – at least until the appeal is heard the merits test has been relaxed. See here on the Legal Aid Handbook site.
Woot woot!
And watch this space…
Well as anybody in the Family Courts knows, any savings from legal aid are more than offset by the extra time cases run with LiPs. Pay a 200 quid application fee and get the attention of a High Court judge for 18 months. Bargain
The statistics say otherwise, it’s cases where solicitors/barristers are involved that take more of the courts time and resources and last longer, not those where LiPs are involved.
And as a LiP how would you get the attention of a High Court Judge for 18 months pray tell? You’d need to get your case into the High Court to start with.
No LiP can ever out-cost a publicly funded Mother who doesn’t know the difference between fact and anxiety induced solicitor supported unsubstantiated opinion who thinks their tale of woe will serve them a better outcome. Lets not forget who the law serves. The law serves everyone, not just ‘the vulnerable’, those who can afford it or those that make a living from it. Often a LiP is using the Court to uphold the law because it is a last or only option without falling foul of the law in frustration – probably deliberately frustrated too, to gain the desired effect of making the LiP the baddie (Hammerton vs. Hammerton 2007)…and if a LiP has caught the attention of a high court judge for 18 months. There’s probably a good reason for a LiP to do so!
Here’s a thought, if the judges are so worried about litigants not getting justice because of a lack of legal aid, how about we tax them to pay for the legal aid?
Judicial salaries and fees: 2014 to 2015
District Judge £115,489
Circuit Judge £130,875
President of the Family Division £211,015
I doubt they’ll miss it all that much, and it is in a good cause.
Not sure why judges should be targeted to pay over and above the rest of the public since they already do this stuff day in day out (likewise for lawyers who also do so, often for free).
And of course the figures you give, whilst they are nice salaries to have, are gross of 40% tax and NI, and often a lawyer experiences a drop in income when leaving the bar and becoming a judge (for the more senior positions at any rate).