This website uses cookies

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. By using our website, you agree to our Privacy Policy

Sign Up for our Free Newsletter
Solictors Journal logoSolictors Journal logo
Jean-Yves Gilg

Editor, Solicitors Journal

Lawyers respond to Lord Chancellor's 'One Nation' justice policy

News
Share:
Lawyers respond to Lord Chancellor's 'One Nation' justice policy

By

Plugging the legal aid gap with pro bono is unsustainable as a long-term solution

An attention-catching speech by the new Lord Chancellor has failed to elicit celebratory cheers from the legal profession.

Michael Gove's first public speech outlined his proposals for reform of the justice system, including a review of the court estate, the introduction of new technology solutions, and a call for more pro bono services from lawyers.

Jo Edwards, chair of family law organisation Resolution, said she welcomed any move that improves the experience of people accessing the courts.

'We're also pleased there's an acknowledgement that the court system is not working as it should all of the time and that civil justice is beset by delays and inefficiencies, which reflects what our members have said to us about their clients' experience,' she added.

'Cuts to legal aid have left many people with little or no access to justice, and many domestic abuse victims and other vulnerable people struggle to get the legal help they need to face the courts.'

Edwards said that she also agreed with the Lord Chancellor that justice should not be the sole preserve of the wealthy.

'I hope this statement signals a change of direction from the new government, as removing legal aid has exacerbated the 'justice gap' in this country significantly over the past few years,' she added.

'Pro bono legal services are plugging many gaps at the moment, but expecting the legal profession to deliver free services as a matter of course, as Mr Gove has suggested, is unsustainable as a long term solution.'

Meanwhile, Jeremy Robson, a senior lecturer of Nottingham Law School at Nottingham Trent University, said that Gove's speech offered a glimmer of hope for legal aid lawyers that they may face some respite to the government's 'ruthless cuts'.

'There is an indication as well that more is going to be expected from those who have prospered in commercial practice,' he added. 'The details on how this will be achieved are scant and the Lord Chancellor must appreciate that each area of law requires its own skill set and expertise and any involvement of those high earners must be approached with view to ensuring the public receive proper representation.'

Commenting on Gove's plans to introduce new technology solutions to the court system, Edwards remarked: 'While the introduction of telephone and video hearings and online dispute resolution could potentially alleviate some of the issues in the family courts, we'd also sound a note of caution when talking about the use of technology in civil justice.

'The most recent experience of a government online legal aid administration system that's been beset by delays and the need for improvements suggest that any online solutions would need to be very carefully thought out, implemented and properly resourced. People feel the impact of family court proceedings for the rest of their lives - their matters deserve proper attention and consideration.'

If the Lord Chancellor wants his proposals to succeed, said Robson, then he will need the support and the trust of the legal profession, which can only be won through dialogue and a commitment to investment in both resources and staff.