Pro bono at the crossroads
Few stakeholders have come out in favour of making pro bono mandatory for all lawyers, but there is growing interest in two models
Demand for pro bono services is booming. This would be good news if pro bono was a privatised industry sector relying on clients with the means to pay for services. As it happens, the recession and the legal aid cuts are posing the greatest challenges yet to the sector.
Toynbee Hall, which celebrated the 115th anniversary of its free legal advice centre last week, expects the number of clients to reach 4,000 this year. The hall is bracing itself for a 12.5 per cent rise to 4,500 in 2014. LawWorks' latest annual survey does not include a specific forecast but they too expect demand - and supply - to grow in the next three years as the cuts start to bite.
Funding for pro bono services has traditionally come from three main sources: law firms, legal aid contracts, and local authority grants. The Access to Justice Foundation, which collects sums awarded under pro bono costs orders, has started providing a further income stream. But like lottery funding, these are one-off grants for specific projects.
Already the not-for-profit advice sector is taking major steps to rethink the way it operates. Since April, law centres have been able to charge for services. It's a bitter pill, but they are gradually overcoming philosophical objections that go to the heart of their constitutions. Many, from Islington Law Centre to Castle Parks, have started, and Toynbee Hall is considering charging for immigration advice. For these organisations, the main concern if they go down this route is that some clients may just get cut off altogether.
Recruiting more volunteers could certainly help, but any organisation needs cash to pay for running costs. Toynbee Hall's approach addresses this challenge by usually only taking on volunteers if their firms are prepared to give financial support too.
Other options being considered include making pro bono compulsory, either across the sector or in certain circumstances. Few stakeholders have come out in favour of making pro bono mandatory for all lawyers, but there is growing interest in two models. Australian firms bidding for government contracts must commit to delivering a minimum of pro bono work, and in the US, there are "aspirational targets" for larger firms. In Britain, it is these larger firms that have been the focus of attention from law centres, but increasingly it is mid-size firms that the sector is trying to engage.
The main question for organisations delivering pro bono services, according to LawWorks chief executive Rebecca Hilsenrath, is how to secure engagement from both individuals and from their firms.
In small firms, the two are usually the same; in large firms, there is a disconnect between the decision-makers and those delivering the service. Mid-size firms are - unsurprisingly - somewhere in between. There are a lot of them around the country, and most are probably already 'giving back' in one way or another. They could make a real difference to pro bono, but somehow they are not engaging. That is the sector's biggest challenge.
Jean-Yves Gilg is editor of Solicitors Journal // jean-yves.gilg@solicitorsjournal.co.uk