Bridging the justice gap

Access to justice is not a privilege, it is a core element of any fair and democratic society. Yet in England and Wales today, the legal assistance framework is broken. It is a system teetering on the edge, failing many of the people it was designed to protect.

Recent data from the Legal Services Board and the Law Society’s 2024 Individual Legal Needs Survey paints a stark picture: 32 percent of those with legal needs are left unsupported, their issues unmet and unresolved. More worryingly, almost nine in ten believe that ‘law is a game in which the skilful and resourceful are more likely to get what they want’. This perception, grounded in real-world experience, threatens to undermine public confidence and trust in the law and underpins a lack of access to justice.

The most affected are often the most vulnerable, such as people with disabilities, mental illness, those experiencing domestic abuse, or poverty. For them, legal issues don’t exist in isolation. They cascade, escalate, and intertwine with other challenges, amplifying hardship and distress. Research confirms that these individuals typically have lower legal capability. They may not recognise their problems as legal in nature or may encounter countless barriers when they try to seek help. Too often, their stories go unheard.

Let us imagine the case of ‘Prudence’ – typical of this client group. Once a successful professional, Prudence now faces overwhelming life challenges. Battling illness while caring for a disabled child, abandoned by her partner, she lost her job and is now in debt and at risk of eviction. Despite her strength and resilience, the system has failed her. She must navigate a fragmented landscape, repeatedly telling her story to disconnected services that cannot provide the integrated support she needs. Her plight reflects a broader pattern, one of systemic failure and increasing despair.

This is not simply a case of inadequate individual effort or lack of initiative. Rather, the structures in place actively obstruct access to justice. Trusted intermediaries, those community workers or professionals most likely to be approached first, often lack the training to identify legal issues, leaving problems undetected and unresolved. Even when help is sought, services are overstretched, narrowly focused, or simply unavailable.

Meanwhile, powerful institutions, government departments, and large corporations routinely access top-tier legal support, reinforcing a two-tier justice system. Austerity measures, most notably the 2013 implementation of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO), have decimated legal aid. This has contributed to a retreat of legal service providers for commercial reasons, and further entrenched inequality.

But there is hope. We are not without solutions. Models from jurisdictions like Australia and Canada provide compelling examples of reform. One such approach is the ‘mixed model’ of legal service delivery. These publicly funded and salaried legal professionals - distinct from short-term government contracts or grants - offer holistic support including legal education, advocacy, case work, early intervention, and policy reform. Crucially, these services often act as ‘one-stop shops’ often with strong partnerships with health and social services, reducing the burden on clients and helping resolve interconnected legal problems efficiently and compassionately.

Such models also foster collaboration between the public and private sectors, raise quality standards, and allow for systemic insights drawn from frontline experiences to inform broader reform. These initiatives are evidence-based, people-centred, and cost-effective, providing a compelling counter-narrative to the assumption that systemic change must be prohibitively expensive or complex.

On 1 April, the Legal Services Consumer Panel launched the report Regulatory Leadership on Access to Justice, which I co-authored alongside Professor Jane Ching and Professor Jane Jarman from Nottingham Law School. It highlights further practical, research-backed approaches including health justice partnerships, secondary consultations, expanded paralegal regulation, and stronger continuing professional development requirements for legal professionals around access to justice and ethics. These steps are not only achievable, but necessary.

The UK needs a shift in mindset, from “why not” to “can do.” It is time to set aside political turf wars, listen to the evidence, and embrace solutions that already exist and have been proven to work. While increased funding would certainly help, this must go hand in hand with structural reform, evaluation, and a genuine commitment to collaboration across government, regulators, and the legal profession.

Prudence, and many like her, cannot wait for theoretical debates or more reviews. They need action. Earlier, integrated intervention reduces strain on the courts, improves health outcomes, and strengthens communities. We have talked about the problems long enough. Now is the time to implement what works. Let us place the person at the centre and restore justice to its rightful place, not as a luxury, but as a right.