The UK's Judicial Executive Board has made a written submission to MPs implying that recent legal aid cuts have been counter-productive.
The Board's submission was sent to the Commons justice select committee, which is looking into the effect of changes introduced by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LAPSO) Act 2012.
The submission states that “the apparent saving of cost by a reduction in the legal aid budget needs to be viewed in context: often it simply leads to increased cost elsewhere in the court system as, for example, anecdotally, cases take longer.”
The submission also notes that there has been an increase in unrepresented individuals ‘litigants in person’ appearing in court. The judges noted that “in the courts, since LASPO came into force, there has been a large increase in the number of cases where one or both parties do not have legal representation – most prominently in private law family litigation. Where legal aid has been removed and individuals have become self-represented, the adverse impact upon courts’ administration and efficiency has therefore been considerable ... Very occasionally there are significant outbreaks of violence [between lay litigants]. The smaller courts (typically the county courts) are not equipped to deal with such incidents. There is the potential for significant harm to judges, court staff and members of the public alike."
The submission concludes that more cases are being full contested that would otherwise had not been brought “requiring significantly more judicial involvement and causing consequential delays across the civil, family and tribunals justice systems."
Click here to read an article about the submission in the Guardian.
PILA Bulletin readers may recall that lawyers in the UK recently staged a full-day walkout over legal aid cuts in England and Wales. Click here to read the relevant article.