Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Labour retreats on cuts to legal aid cutbacks aim to save pounds 100m

Jason Bennetto
Wednesday 04 March 1998 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

THE LORD Chancellor has retreated on plans to withdraw legal aid from almost all civil cases, but announced yesterday that most disputes involving personal injuries are to be replaced with "no win, no fee" arrangements in court.

Lord Irvine unveiled proposals to cut the pounds 1.4bn legal aid budget by pounds 100m a year. However, he has postponed a controversial plan to remove financial aid for medical negligence claims.

The initiatives are aimed at reducing the expanding legal aid bill, while giving people on modest incomes who cannot afford to pay for private action, a way of bringing cases to court.

Lawyers yesterday attacked the plans to remove legal aid from most personal injury cases - such as those arising from car accidents - arguing that solicitors may refuse to take up complex cases in the future because of fears that they could lose huge sums of money.

Under the "conditional fee" system lawyers get nothing if they lose a case, but can charge up to double the fees if they win.

In the proposals, contained in the consultation paper, "Access to Justice with Conditional Fees", the Lord Chancellor intends to replace legal aid with "no win, no fee" in a number of areas by summer. As well as car accident cases, they also include industrial injury or illness cases, arguments over wills, boundary and business disputes. But cases that can be shown to have a public interest because of the implications for other victims may still get taxpayers' support.

Conditional fees were made optional for personal injury cases in 1995. So far, the Government said, more than 34,000 cases have been brought.

In October, Lord Irvine said he wanted to "exclude most claims for money or damages from legal aid" by April, but lobbying from lawyers and consumer groups appears to have changed his mind.

The consultation document says that medical negligence cases will continue to be eligible for legal aid, at least for the next two or three years, after which the Lord Chancellor is said to want it replaced by a "no win, no fee" arrangement.

Legal aid will still be available for family and criminal cases, judicial reviews, problems involving housing, and people defending claims against them for money or damages.

Yesterday's paper said civil and family legal aid had been rising at an "unacceptable rate", tripling over seven years to pounds 671m, while the number of people helped has fallen.

The Law Society, which represents solicitors, strongly criticised the plans to replace legal aid for personal injury cases. A spokesman said: "There are many people who will fall through the net. Not all personal injury cases are straightforward and lawyers may be reluctant to take on complex ones, or where the damages claimed are very high."

The Bar Council, representing barristers, welcomed the decision to postpone the withdrawal of legal aid from many cases, but criticised ending it for personal injury cases.

"To force people who have had accidents at work, or on the road, to fund their claims by 'no win, no fee' is illogical, unfair and premature," said chairman Heather Hallett QC.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in