Eval of access to justice

• Limited access to justice

  The extensive cuts to the legal aid budget over recent years affect those most in need. This is particularly hitting those in need of assistance at the Mags court where it's almost impossible to satisfy the legal aid tests. Means testing eligibility levels are now so low that very few people now qualify for financial assistance
• Merits tests?


  Causing problems like the 'interests in justice' test. Funding for civil cases has been cut to the point where very few cases are eligible for funding
• What is there a huge rise in?

  Litigants (representing themselves). Private funding allows a person to pick and choose the best lawyer, but it is very expensive
• Problems with the many places you can go for legal advice?

  The cuts to legal aid are making outside agencies become overwhelmed with cases. This means it's difficult to be seen.
• Conditional fee agreements problems?

  They've been a lifeline to many and have allowed people to bring matters to court without the worry of being financially ruined if they lose. The success fee cap means that C, if they win, will receive a large quantity of their compensation. However there are hidden costs involved. Solicitors will only take on cases that have a high chance of winning
• Eval of civil?


  Legal aid isn't available for cases like personal injury, nuisance etc. therefore it's genuinely the case that only the wealthy have 'access to justice'. There are many advice agencies and charities that can help with legal advice, but not when it comes to representation
• Eval of criminal?


  Criminal legal aid budget has been slashed in recent years dropping from £1.2 billion in 2007 to £879 million in 2018. This means more people are unrepresented, which leads to delays in court as people have to defend themselves, and leads to more convictions- false economy? Fewer solicitors want to work in criminal law because of the underfunding, exacerbating the problem even furthre