Civil legal aid faces further big cuts

Justice secretary Chris Grayling unveiled the government's plans for price-competitive tendering in criminal legal aid this morning, while demanding further big cuts in civil legal aid.

Criminal clients could lose the ability to choose a solicitor in most cases, while firms which win contracts after price-competitive tendering face fee cuts of at least 17.5 per cent.

While Crown Court advocacy would be excluded from tendering, fees would be cut, in very high cost cases by as much as 30 per cent.

In a further move, any defendant with a disposable income of 37,500 or more would no longer be eligible for legal aid in the Crown Court, subject to a hardship review.

Civil legal aid lawyers face having to apply a twelve-month residency test to all applicants, a stricter merits test, and a further fee cut of 10 per cent in public family law cases. Meanwhile experts' fees for all civil and criminal work would be cut by 20 per cent.

The merits test would be tightened to remove the category of 'borderline cases' and legal aid would only be paid for permission applications for judicial review which were granted.

"We consider that it is appropriate for all of the financial risk of the permission application to rest with the provider, as the provider is in the best position to know the strength of their client's case and the likelihood of it being granted permission," the consultation paper said.

Further restrictions would be imposed on legal aid for prisoners, as previously trailed.

The price-competitive tendering process would begin in October this year, with contracts awarded in June 2014.

The MoJ said it estimated that combined savings from 'Transforming Legal Aid', the consultation paper launched today, would be 220m by 2018-19.

In his foreword to the consultation paper, Grayling said: "Access to justice should not be determined by your ability to pay, and I am clear that legal aid is the hallmark of a fair, open justice system.

"Unfortunately, over the past decade, the system has lost much of its credibility with the public.

"Taxpayers' money has been used to pay for frivolous claims, to foot the legal bills of wealthy criminals, and to cover cases which run on and on racking up large fees for a small number of lawyers, far in excess of what senior public servants are paid."

Richard Miller, head of legal aid at the Law Society, said: "We will examine the detail of the government’s proposals very carefully, but our interpretation is that LASPO, for all its faults, commits to providing clients with a choice of solicitor.

"Client choice is widely regarded as an important driver of quality in the justice system. It is very concerning, and revealing, that the government appear prepared to sacrifice this vital principle."