Ninety QCs call for withdrawal of planned limits to legal aid for judicial review

Some 90 Queen’s Counsel have signed a letter calling on the Government to withdraw its “unjust” proposals to limit legal aid for judicial review.

The letter, published in the Daily Telegraph, said that access to judicial review was essential to the rule of law.

It read: “We are senior counsel who specialise in judicial review. We act for and against public bodies. We are gravely concerned that practical access to judicial review is now under threat.”

The letter pointed out that the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 already severely limited legal aid for judicial review.

It added: “The government acknowledges that the scope for further savings is very small. Nevertheless, only eight days after LASPO came into force, the Ministry of Justice published proposals which would further remove legal aid for judicial review.”

The silks identified the following proposals in particular:

  • refusing any legal aid to those who did not meet a residence test;
  • refusing to pay lawyers “in some cases for work reasonably and necessarily carried out”;
  • removing legal aid for complaints of mistreatment in prison;
  • preventing small specialist public law firms from offering prison law advice;
  • removing funding for test cases (whose prospects are by definition uncertain); and
  • cutting rates for legal advice and representation still further.

The MoJ claimed in April that legal aid was being used to fund "a significant number of weak cases" and suggested that the reforms would save £220m by 2018/19.

But the letter in the Daily Telegraph argued: “The cumulative effect of these proposals will seriously undermine the rule of law, and Britain’s global reputation for justice.

“They are likely to drive conscientious and dedicated specialist public law practitioners and firms out of business. They will leave many of society’s most vulnerable people without access to any specialist legal advice and representation. In practice, these changes will immunise Government and other public authorities from effective legal challenge.”

The QCs added that people whose lives were affected by the unlawful action of public bodies would have no option but to try to represent themselves.

“Effective representation will be one-sided: the Government will continue to pay for, and be represented by specialist lawyers,” the letter added.

“At the same time, the Ministry of Justice is proposing changes to criminal legal aid which will deny choice and effective representation to those accused of crimes, leading to a rapid and probably irreversible fall in standards of representation. We urge the Government to withdraw these unjust proposals.”

The list of signatories includes a number of high-profile silks who are well known for acting for local authorities and other public bodies. They include Andrew Arden QC, Richard Clayton QC, Nigel Giffin QC, and James Goudie QC.