Justice Select Committee inquiry on access to justice - Law Society response
We have submitted our response to the Justice Select Committee’s inquiry into access to justice.
Outline of the inquiry
This inquiry builds on previous work highlighting that the justice system in the UK remains a struggling public service.
It examines:
- how advice and legal services are adapting to secure access to justice across civil, criminal, and family law
- the impacts of the cyber-attack on the Legal Aid Agency
- how restrictions on legal aid have impacted the development and provision of legal advice, legal representation, and supplementary advice services
- the scope for future innovation in services, funding, regulation and technology to support effective access to justice in England and Wales
Our view and recommendations
We welcome the justice committees inquiry, but believe further action is required to:
- encourage and ensure accessibility of representation
- innovate to improve efficiency, and
- bring this public service onto a sustainable footing
Our views and suggested actions are summarised below.
Supplementary advice services cannot substitute early legal advice
Supplementary services are being treated as a substitute for early legal advice funded by legal aid.
This leads to greater strain and a lack of understanding about unmet legal needs.
The need for more data
There should be more precise data available to assess:
- how litigants in person impact delays in the court
- the usage of Qualified Legal Representatives, and
- the extent to which the availability of legal aid could mitigate problems
Funding for access to justice initiatives through collective action
Collective actions and dormant client accounts could supplement the funding of access to justice initiatives.
However, placing levies on the legal profession and taking interest from lawyers’ client accounts may impact the economic stability of firms for little to no gain.
Additional investment should focus on early advice and private law family legal aid
For example, £43m of targeted investment would help to achieve the Government’s wider goal of halving violence against women and girls in the next ten years.
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) should compare costs between private firms and the Public Defender Service (PDS)
Past evidence shows the PDS was far more expensive than private firms, suggesting private providers remain more cost-effective.
Streamline processes for legal aid firms
Legal aid firms face significant unpaid bureaucracy, delayed expert fee payments, and burdensome audits that compromise the efficiency of their services.
Streamlined processes and regular funding reviews are needed to keep services sustainable and prevent market exits.
Pro bono work is not a substitute for legal aid
Solicitors are proud to do their part for access to justice through pro bono work.
However, pro bono services shouldn’t be seen as a viable or appropriate substitute for a well-funded legal aid system.
Online dispute resolution (ODR) should not be the only way to address legal needs
ODR represents a possible avenue to address unmet legal need.
However, ODR should only make up one part of a well-funded justice system.
The justice system should still offer accessible legal advice and representation, funded by legal aid where appropriate.
Legal Aid Agency (LAA) cyber-attack financially impacted firms
Firms sustained significant financial pressure due to the LAA cyber-attack.
The contingency arrangements developed during this emergency represent a unique opportunity to:
- adopt a high trust model and streamline processes
- reduce costs to the LAA
- ensure fair treatment, and
- improve providers’ financial stability