'More nuclear' judicial review of legal aid tender a 'complete mess'

The judicial review into the Legal Aid Agency's (LAA) 'flawed' legal aid tender has been described as 'an absolute mess' by a leading criminal practitioner.

The High Court has granted the Fair Crime Contracts Alliance permission for a judicial review of the government's controversial tender procurement process for new criminal legal aid contracts.

The recently formed organisation, which represents a number of law firms that unsuccessfully bid for contracts earlier this year, must provide £40,000 in security for costs while the Lord Chancellor is expected to apply for additional costs after 11 January 2016.

A second claimant, the London Borough of Newham, was found not have sufficient standing to bring proceedings.

Mr Justice Stuart-Smith said that despite the High Court already dealing with 115 challenges from 69 of the 85 procurement areas, the remedy sought in the proceedings before him was 'wider' and 'more nuclear'.

11 KBW's Jason Coppel QC, representing the alliance, told the court that one of three whistleblowers had been threatened with litigation should they come forward.

Dismissing his comments, Sarah Hannaford QC of Keating Chambers, acting for the Lord Chancellor, said 'we can all throw allegations around'.

Jonathan Black, past president of the London Criminal Courts Solicitors Association (LCCSA) and partner at BSB Solicitors, told SJ that the 'entire situation is an absolute mess'.

'These contracts were originally scheduled to come in in October 2015. As a result of a successful judicial review in 2014, the timetable slipped. As a result of the unsuccessful judicial review, the timetable continued as it was,' he commented.

'The LAA took no heed of the warnings from the judicial review, albeit that it was unsuccessful. There is uncertainty as to where the profession will be in the next few months. We now have the High Court acknowledging the state of this process and sending a clear message that there have been serious concerns over the mess this has caused.'

Of the possible remedies being sought Black said: 'Some will seek a re-evaluation of the marks. It's an opportunity to review the provision of criminal defence service and start the criminal defence services with a blank canvass, which has been offered for many months.'

The Law Society has already called for an independent review of the procurement process as the following the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) postponing their implementation in November.

The society had urged the MoJ to launch a review as 'a matter of the upmost urgency' given the 'crippling uncertainty' and 'on-going and significant delays'.

A LAA spokesman said: 'The LAA will robustly defend any legal challenges including this judicial review. Our first priority is to ensure criminal legal aid remains available to those who need it.'

Matthew Rogers is an editorial assistant at Solicitors Journal matthew.rogers@solicitorsjournal.co.uk | @sportslawmatt