Post by jman on Sept 5, 2011 18:47:15 GMT 1
Lord Jackson has made a speech making it clear that his report had stressed the importance of not cutting legal aid when bringing in the other changes he had recommended. Article in Solicitor's Journal below
"Jackson LJ calls on MPs not to scrap legal aid for medical negligence
5 September 2011
Lord Justice Jackson has called on MPs not to scrap legal aid, particularly for medical negligence cases. His intervention this afternoon comes the day before a Commons committee considers amendments to the legal aid bill.
The lord justice said the solution in the bill, where recoverability of ATE premiums in conditional fee cases is retained for medical negligence cases only, was “the most expensive and inefficient mechanism which it is possible to devise in order to achieve the policy objective”.
In a speech to the Cambridge Law Faculty, Jackson LJ said: “The extent of public funding which can be devoted to legal aid is of course a matter for parliament, not for the judiciary, to decide.
“Nevertheless, in order to dispel the confusion which has arisen, let me make it plain that the cutbacks in legal aid are contrary to the recommendations in my report.”
Jackson said he made no recommendation in his final report for the expansion or restoration of legal aid.
“I do, however, stress the vital necessity of making no further cutbacks in legal aid availability or eligibility. The legal aid system plays a crucial role in promoting access to justice at proportionate costs in key areas. ................."
Rest at link below
www.solicitorsjournal.com/story.asp?sectioncode=2&storycode=18874&c=1&eclipse_action=getsession
"Jackson LJ calls on MPs not to scrap legal aid for medical negligence
5 September 2011
Lord Justice Jackson has called on MPs not to scrap legal aid, particularly for medical negligence cases. His intervention this afternoon comes the day before a Commons committee considers amendments to the legal aid bill.
The lord justice said the solution in the bill, where recoverability of ATE premiums in conditional fee cases is retained for medical negligence cases only, was “the most expensive and inefficient mechanism which it is possible to devise in order to achieve the policy objective”.
In a speech to the Cambridge Law Faculty, Jackson LJ said: “The extent of public funding which can be devoted to legal aid is of course a matter for parliament, not for the judiciary, to decide.
“Nevertheless, in order to dispel the confusion which has arisen, let me make it plain that the cutbacks in legal aid are contrary to the recommendations in my report.”
Jackson said he made no recommendation in his final report for the expansion or restoration of legal aid.
“I do, however, stress the vital necessity of making no further cutbacks in legal aid availability or eligibility. The legal aid system plays a crucial role in promoting access to justice at proportionate costs in key areas. ................."
Rest at link below
www.solicitorsjournal.com/story.asp?sectioncode=2&storycode=18874&c=1&eclipse_action=getsession