“A denial of justice”: Lady Hale speaks out on legal aid cuts
How can there be a real possibility of going to court to settle matters fairly, if legal aid is not available to the one who cannot afford a lawyer?
This was the question posed by Lady Hale, the Deputy President of the Supreme Court, when she addressed a Young Legal Aid Lawyers event in London this week. The Supreme Court’s only female judge, Lady Hale is accustomed to standing out from the crowd and she certainly isn’t afraid to speak her mind: she has previously spoken out about her dismay that so many judges belong to the all-male Garrick Club, and on more than one occasion has been the sole dissenter when Supreme Court decisions have been made.
Now Lady Hale has spoken out about the effect of legal aid cuts upon justice, with particular reference to family law. The Supreme Court press office has been at pains to point out that the views expressed are Lady Hale’s own, and do not necessarily reflect the position of the UK Supreme Court. As you have probably guessed, she hasn’t minced her words. In truth, it is a brilliant speech.
You can read Lady Hale’s address in its entirety here, but I would like to draw your attention to the following extract, which covers cuts to legal aid, the decline of mediation and the difficult choices faced by up-and-coming legal aid lawyers:
The idea [of legal aid] was that those who could not afford it would still have access to lawyers. Now all of that has been brought to a shuddering halt by LASPO. The Act itself has taken many important areas of work completely out of scope. Of course I feel particularly concerned about the impact of removing legal aid from most private family law cases and relegating them to mediation.
Most family judges are great believers in mediation – they know that with suitable help the parties should be able to reach a better result than they can do. As President of National Family Mediation, I share their views. But that only works if both parties are willing to engage in mediation. And why would the stronger or richer party engage in mediation if there is not the real possibility of going to court to settle matters fairly if the mediation fails? And how can there be a real possibility of going to court to settle matters fairly if legal aid is not available to the one who cannot afford a lawyer?
The judges are worried at two prospects. The first is that people with good cases will not pursue them in court, which will be a denial of justice. The second is that people with bad or good cases will pursue them in person, which will be time consuming and inefficient. But the real problem is the case where one party can afford legal representation and the other cannot. There is a weaker and poorer party and a richer and stronger party in most family cases. Denying the weaker and poorer party a level playing field is a denial of justice.
But of course this so-called reform has done more than save money on lawyers. At present it is also saving money on mediators. Referrals have dropped dramatically. This is not surprising. Not only does the stronger party have little incentive to mediate; the lawyers were the primary source of referrals to mediation. Now that people can no longer get legal aid, they no longer have to go for an explanation of mediation as a pre-condition of getting it for family proceedings. The obligation to attend a MIAM is not coming into force until next year. NFM services are wondering whether they can hang on until then. I would like to think that the government regards this as an own goal.
The message is that legal aid lawyers and mediators must work together for the benefit of separating families – for lawyers to reassure the public that some money is still available for them to support people going to mediation, and that it is available for the mediation, so they do not need to go straight to court, and for mediators to adapt their practices so that the memoranda of understanding they produce are easier for lawyers to assess.
Thirdly of course there have also been severe cutbacks in the remuneration available for legal aid lawyers. I hear stories every day of very able practitioners who are having to leave because they cannot make ends meet. Some of these are the very diverse and socially mobile young lawyers whom we want to attract into the profession. But the combination of a high cost education and a low-paid career is going to be more and more of a deterrent.
Earlier today, Lady Hale’s speech came to mind as I passed the Liberal Democrat head office by St. James’s Park (left). As you can see, I bumped into a crowd of protestors from the Justice Alliance, which is dedicated to the preservation of legal aid as we know it. The protestors were standing there in the cold to hand a open letter to Nick Clegg, and the letter was accepted by Simon Hughes MP in Mr Clegg’s absence. Will the Liberal Democrat leader even see and read it? I don’t know. I admired the crowd’s cheer and energy, but as I stood and watched, I recalled the somewhat despondent final words of Lady Hale’s address:
I wish I could see a way ahead in these difficult days. I understand how difficult it is for the government to bring expenditure on legal services under control without taking drastic steps like these. I salute the courage and determination of the young legal aid lawyers who are bent on continuing to provide a service to the poorest and most disadvantaged in our society and also on promoting a more diverse and socially mobile legal profession. Good luck to you!
Right now I think the great judges Lord Bingham, Lord Devlin and Lord Denning must be turning in their graves. Our uncodified constitution is separated into three branches: the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. The judiciary is the most important check on the over exercise of power by the other two. Its independence should be sacrosanct. However the Government’s cuts to legal aid funding mean that people are finding it more difficult to access the courts. As a result, the power of the judiciary to check and to balance is being made to dwindle. While our constitutional safeguards and rights are being eroded, people here are being encouraged by the Government and by certain sections of the media to believe that lawyers, courts and law itself is bad and unnecessary.
Perhaps the only answer is for the judiciary to stand up and speak out, just as Lady Hale has done this week, and to keep speaking out in unison. Perhaps at this late stage, the judges are the only people who can stop what is happening.
Lady Hale image credit: University of Salford Press Office.
Share this post
Get free family law updates
Marilyn Stowe’s new book: expert advice on all aspects of divorce, just 99p!
Divorce & Splitting Up by Marilyn Stowe is the essential how-to book for anyone who is getting divorced or splitting up from a partner. Read more >>
"A must buy that really opens your eyes to what is involved if you are considering or going through a divorce." - Amanda Brown
"This will answer your questions in a way that non-lawyers can understand." - Miss P.
"Don't get divorced without it. I read this book despite being divorced for more than 10 years. I wish I'd had this book to hand at the time. Great examples, simple to read and understand." - Jamie
"This really has helped me to see that there is light at the end of the tunnel and I will come out of it a stronger person." - J
Marilyn Stowe on SKY News & ITV This Morning
- Andrew on English family law à la française by guest blogger Melanie Bataillard-Samuel
- Marilyn Stowe on Financial Dispute Resolution – look out for these stumbling blocks
- John on Financial Dispute Resolution – look out for these stumbling blocks
- JamesB on English family law à la française by guest blogger Melanie Bataillard-Samuel
- Andrew on Family courts may struggle to find expert witnesses following fee cut, social worker claims
Subscribe & Follow
In the Media
Marilyn Stowe is the senior partner in Stowe Family Law, which has offices in Yorkshire, Cheshire and London. With more than 30 years’ experience handling divorce cases and family law proceedings she is regarded as one of the most formidable and sought after divorce lawyers in the UK. In 2012, Marilyn became one of the first solicitors to qualify as a family law arbitrator.
All persons mentioned in the scenarios are fictitious: details have been deliberately changed in order to protect identities and other confidential circumstances of my clients. All advice and information on this blog including posts written by guest authors, is given only as a general guide to the operation of the law on the date of publication. Readers must place no reliance whatsoever on the content of this blog and must always obtain their own legal advice. Marilyn Stowe, Stowe Family Law LLP and guest authors accept no liability whatsoever arising as a result of reliance upon its content.
Contact Stowe Family Law
These downloads accompany Marilyn Stowe's latest book: Divorce & Splitting Up: Advice From a Top Divorce Lawyer. After opening, right click to save to your computer.
For more free downloads, visit the Downloads section.