Post by jman on Mar 28, 2011 13:17:53 GMT 1
Article from Trust Law in which City Law firms explain how cutting legal aid will restricted the pro bono work they do
"Legal aid cuts will hit pro bono, say law firms
25 Mar 2011 17:16
Source: trustlaw // Tosin Sulaiman
LONDON (TrustLaw) - The UK government’s proposed reforms to the legal aid system could severely restrict the provision of pro bono services to vulnerable members of the public, law firms have warned.
Under the plans to cut the 2.1 billion pound legal aid scheme, civil cases in areas such as medical malpractice, family law and employment will no longer qualify for funding. The proposed cuts, which are the most severe since the scheme was established in 1949, are designed to reduce the legal aid bill by 350 million pounds within four years. But opponents say they will deny millions of people access to justice.
Although the government has suggested that pro bono could help to fill the gap created by the cuts, law firms and groups campaigning against the proposed reforms, say this is unrealistic. They argue that the ability of pro bono lawyers to provide advice in areas of social welfare law, such as housing, employment and debt, will instead diminish because many of the voluntary organisations they work with will be forced to close. The organisations include law centres and Citizens Advice Bureaux (CABs) who will lose 77 per cent of their legal aid income, according to the Law Centres Federation.
“If these cuts go ahead as proposed all of the law centres are going to be under threat. There will be very few that would survive,” Paul Yates, head of London pro bono at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, told TrustLaw. “What the commercial firms do in these areas of social welfare law is almost inevitably done in partnership with law centres. If the vast majority are forced to close, it’s hard for me to see how we can do much of what we’re already doing, let alone trying to do more to fill the gap.”
Paul Newdick, the chairman of LawWorks, a national pro bono charity, said: “Pro bono doesn’t work in a vacuum. Remove law centres and CABs from the equation (and) lawyers are not going to on their own volition come up with a platform from which free legal advice will be given. It just won’t happen.”
LawWorks has around 100 free legal advice clinics across the UK which are staffed by volunteer lawyers and take place in law centres and CABs, often outside normal working hours. Newdick said lawyers often needed encouragement to volunteer at the clinics, especially as there were more glamorous pro bono opportunities available.
“You’ve got to make it an attractive proposition,” he said. “Part of that is making it easy to do. You see very exciting project for young lawyers, more human rights-based, things which appeal to them more, possibly, than giving advice to individuals in disadvantaged areas of cities. Our fear is that lawyers who want to do something good will turn their attention to other things perhaps a bit more glamorous.”
The justice secretary Ken Clarke announced the reforms in November, saying the UK’s legal aid system was one of the most expensive in the world. He said the proposals aimed to prevent costly and often unnecessary litigation at taxpayers’ expense.
If the reforms go ahead, cases which will be removed from the scope of legal aid include housing, immigration, debt and welfare benefits, except where a person’s life is in danger or they risk losing their freedom or their home. Private family law cases will also be denied legal aid funding, unless domestic violence is involved.
The Law Society has described the plans as “ill-conceived and unfair” and has called on the government to reconsider. Lawyers are also concerned by suggestions in the consultation document that the voluntary sector and pro bono could be alternative sources of help and advice. They point out that law firms which do pro bono would not have the expertise to represent legal aid clients on their own.
“If you’re a legal aid lawyer on the high street you’re going to be presented with problems of housing, unemployment, immigration, sometimes family problems, social welfare problems, which would never come across the desk of a city lawyer,” said Sir Geoffrey Bindman, founder of Bindmans law firm.
Roger Leese, Clifford Chance’s pro bono partner, said when the firm sends lawyers to volunteer at pro bono clinics it runs courses in the relevant areas of law to ensure they have the expertise.
“When you’re dealing with specialist areas such as family and benefits that’s not the sort of stuff the firms which are able to provide significant pro bono commitments have any real specialty in,” he said.
Leese added that the organisations Clifford Chance works with are already struggling financially and making staff redundant. He said the firm has been getting emails from its partners asking for cash and, like other firms, it has written cheques to law centres.
“It’s not very easy for law firms like ourselves to deliver pro bono advice to the financially disadvantaged on our own,” he said. “We can’t fill the funding gap of the loss of millions of pounds…If we have not got partners in the NGO sector to work with then we’re stuck.”
The Ministry of Justice said in a statement that the government was carefully considering the responses to its consultation, which ended in February."
www.trust.org/trustlaw/news/legal-aid-cuts-will-hit-pro-bono-say-law-firms
"Legal aid cuts will hit pro bono, say law firms
25 Mar 2011 17:16
Source: trustlaw // Tosin Sulaiman
LONDON (TrustLaw) - The UK government’s proposed reforms to the legal aid system could severely restrict the provision of pro bono services to vulnerable members of the public, law firms have warned.
Under the plans to cut the 2.1 billion pound legal aid scheme, civil cases in areas such as medical malpractice, family law and employment will no longer qualify for funding. The proposed cuts, which are the most severe since the scheme was established in 1949, are designed to reduce the legal aid bill by 350 million pounds within four years. But opponents say they will deny millions of people access to justice.
Although the government has suggested that pro bono could help to fill the gap created by the cuts, law firms and groups campaigning against the proposed reforms, say this is unrealistic. They argue that the ability of pro bono lawyers to provide advice in areas of social welfare law, such as housing, employment and debt, will instead diminish because many of the voluntary organisations they work with will be forced to close. The organisations include law centres and Citizens Advice Bureaux (CABs) who will lose 77 per cent of their legal aid income, according to the Law Centres Federation.
“If these cuts go ahead as proposed all of the law centres are going to be under threat. There will be very few that would survive,” Paul Yates, head of London pro bono at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, told TrustLaw. “What the commercial firms do in these areas of social welfare law is almost inevitably done in partnership with law centres. If the vast majority are forced to close, it’s hard for me to see how we can do much of what we’re already doing, let alone trying to do more to fill the gap.”
Paul Newdick, the chairman of LawWorks, a national pro bono charity, said: “Pro bono doesn’t work in a vacuum. Remove law centres and CABs from the equation (and) lawyers are not going to on their own volition come up with a platform from which free legal advice will be given. It just won’t happen.”
LawWorks has around 100 free legal advice clinics across the UK which are staffed by volunteer lawyers and take place in law centres and CABs, often outside normal working hours. Newdick said lawyers often needed encouragement to volunteer at the clinics, especially as there were more glamorous pro bono opportunities available.
“You’ve got to make it an attractive proposition,” he said. “Part of that is making it easy to do. You see very exciting project for young lawyers, more human rights-based, things which appeal to them more, possibly, than giving advice to individuals in disadvantaged areas of cities. Our fear is that lawyers who want to do something good will turn their attention to other things perhaps a bit more glamorous.”
The justice secretary Ken Clarke announced the reforms in November, saying the UK’s legal aid system was one of the most expensive in the world. He said the proposals aimed to prevent costly and often unnecessary litigation at taxpayers’ expense.
If the reforms go ahead, cases which will be removed from the scope of legal aid include housing, immigration, debt and welfare benefits, except where a person’s life is in danger or they risk losing their freedom or their home. Private family law cases will also be denied legal aid funding, unless domestic violence is involved.
The Law Society has described the plans as “ill-conceived and unfair” and has called on the government to reconsider. Lawyers are also concerned by suggestions in the consultation document that the voluntary sector and pro bono could be alternative sources of help and advice. They point out that law firms which do pro bono would not have the expertise to represent legal aid clients on their own.
“If you’re a legal aid lawyer on the high street you’re going to be presented with problems of housing, unemployment, immigration, sometimes family problems, social welfare problems, which would never come across the desk of a city lawyer,” said Sir Geoffrey Bindman, founder of Bindmans law firm.
Roger Leese, Clifford Chance’s pro bono partner, said when the firm sends lawyers to volunteer at pro bono clinics it runs courses in the relevant areas of law to ensure they have the expertise.
“When you’re dealing with specialist areas such as family and benefits that’s not the sort of stuff the firms which are able to provide significant pro bono commitments have any real specialty in,” he said.
Leese added that the organisations Clifford Chance works with are already struggling financially and making staff redundant. He said the firm has been getting emails from its partners asking for cash and, like other firms, it has written cheques to law centres.
“It’s not very easy for law firms like ourselves to deliver pro bono advice to the financially disadvantaged on our own,” he said. “We can’t fill the funding gap of the loss of millions of pounds…If we have not got partners in the NGO sector to work with then we’re stuck.”
The Ministry of Justice said in a statement that the government was carefully considering the responses to its consultation, which ended in February."
www.trust.org/trustlaw/news/legal-aid-cuts-will-hit-pro-bono-say-law-firms