• About
    • Privacy Policy
  • GSW
  • Guide To Making A Subject Access Request
  • In Dad’s Shoes
    • An Overview
    • Invitation
    • Media
    • Photos
    • Press Release
    • Soft Launch
    • Speeches
    • Summary
  • Media Coverage
  • Parliamentary Debates
  • Voice of the Child Podcasts

Researching Reform

Researching Reform

Category Archives: legal aid

How Good Is Free Family Law Advice?

03 Wednesday Apr 2019

Posted by Natasha in legal aid, Researching Reform

≈ 4 Comments

This is what we would like you to tell us.

As the legal sector sets its sights on McKenzie Friends – lawyers have renewed their calls to ban lay advisors who charge for their time – Researching Reform would like to hear from anyone who has used organisations and McKenzie Friends offering family law advice for free.

There are several organisations offering free legal advice, including family law guidance and support in the UK. The most well-known services are:

  • Citizens Advice – centres usually offer guidance on family law matters
  • Advocate – Free legal help from barristers (used to be called Bar Pro Bono Unit)
  • Public access portal – you can search for a pro bono barrister in your area and you can contact them directly too
  • Personal Support Unit – charity with around 700 volunteers offering free legal advice
  • McKenzie Friends – many lay advisors offer family law advice and court representation free of charge, or ask you just to cover the cost of their travel and lunch.

If you have used any of these organisations, lay advisors or any other services, we would love to hear from you.

What was your experience like? Did you find the support useful? Was the advice you received accurate and effective?

PB

Share this:

  • WhatsApp
  • Pocket
  • Telegram
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Legal Advice Groups Launch Event Hosted By Magic Circle Law Firm.

26 Tuesday Mar 2019

Posted by Natasha in event, legal aid, LIP Service, LIPs, Researching Reform

≈ 4 Comments

An event looking at ways in which lawyers, lay advisors, charities and academics can help improve access to justice has been launched by the Advice Service Alliance, the Access to Justice Foundation, LegalVoice and the Litigant in Person Support Strategy.

The event is being bankrolled by Magic Circle law firm Allen & Overy.

Researching Reform was very kindly sent the invite from the Access to Justice Foundation.

There are three confirmed sessions so far, which include:

  • Identifying and supporting distressed clients – a psychiatrist view
  • Driven to digital distraction – re purposing tech for good so it works for us
  • Supporting health and well-being in your organisation

Allen & Overy’s press briefing for the event offers further details:

About

This collaborative event, aimed at people working in the access to justice sector, will provide space and time to share work, experiences, problems and learning points on some of the key issues facing the sector, as identified by the sector. The conference will create a dialogue between professionals and explore the potential to develop solutions and further collaboration.

Delegates will have the opportunity to engage in and contribute to strategic developments for the sector, network with access to justice and related sectors and benefit from expertise in allied and external sectors. Our aim is for attendees to leave the event with relevant and practical information in priority areas which can support the delivery of services in their organisations.

The aims and objectives of the conference are as follows:

Aims

  • Host a collaborative event working in partnership with access to justice organisations, for people working in the access to justice sector.
  • Provide a space and time for people to share their work, experience, problems and learning and discuss issues in particular focus areas that stakeholders in the sector have identified.
  • Bring in external sector expertise to understand how other professions and sectors support similar issues in these areas.
  • Focus on solutions and invest resources to investigate the potential to further develop the solutions and collaborations identified at the event.

Objectives

Delegates who attend the event will have:

  • Useful and practical advice or specific outputs which can be implemented in their work
  • Increased understanding of what other work is going on inside the access to justice sector and where their work and experiences are shared.
  • Opportunity to network with the access to justice sector and related external sector experts.
  • Opportunity to engage in and contribute to strategic developments for the sector.

While we were reading up on the event, we came across a legal support website called Advice Now, which is run by the Access To Justice Foundation. There is a Family and Personal section which deals with Family Law issues like care proceedings. Do let us know what you think of it.

The Litigant In Person Network is also interesting. Members include the Bar Pro Bono Unit and Child Law Advice.

The conference takes place on 21 May, 2019 at Allen & Overy’s London Office.

Tickets can be booked here. The event is free however the organisers request a £20 deposit which attendees will get back upon arriving at the venue.

LIPImage

Share this:

  • WhatsApp
  • Pocket
  • Telegram
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Government To Extend Legal Aid For Parents Challenging Adoption Orders

12 Tuesday Feb 2019

Posted by Natasha in Family Law, forced adoption, legal aid, Researching Reform

≈ 14 Comments

The government has promised to extend legal aid support to anyone with parental responsibility for a child who wants to challenge applications for placement or adoption orders.

The government will also extend eligibility for non‑means tested legal aid for parents or anyone with parental responsibility who would like to oppose applications for placement orders or adoption orders in public family law proceedings. The Ministry of Justice will bring these policies in line with care and other orders classified under “Special Children Act 1989 cases”. Special Children Act cases include care orders, supervision orders, child assessment orders and emergency protection orders.

The Ministry of Justice will also bring forward proposals to provide a less draconian merits test, which will be equivalent to the merits test currently applicable in “Special Children Act 1989 cases”.

At the same time, the government has promised to increase the scope of legal aid to include Special Guardianship Orders in private family law cases and support for separated migrant children in immigration cases.

As well as a review into legal aid for placement and adoption orders, the government has confirmed that it will increase support for people accessing the justice system as litigants in person.

The review is part of a Legal Support Action Plan, the details of which were published 7 February on the government’s official website. The plan has been designed to help improve access to legal advice and support.

You can read the press release here, which has links to various documents including the action plan.

MKAP

 

Share this:

  • WhatsApp
  • Pocket
  • Telegram
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

MPs Criticise Government Policy On Legal Aid.

02 Friday Nov 2018

Posted by Natasha in legal aid, Researching Reform

≈ 5 Comments

Members of parliament have criticised the government over its provision of legal aid for family cases, in a debate held yesterday in the House of Commons. The discussion, which focused on the future of legal aid for both civil and criminal cases, looked at the impact of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO), on access to justice.

The government had hoped that its removal of legal aid for private family cases would lead to an increase in the number of families using mediation to resolve issues, and unblock the family courts, however this has not been the case. Labour MP, Teresa Pearce, who took part in the debate on Thursday, told the Health and Social Care Committee that research had shown a 56% drop in people accessing mediation services since the policy change.

Andrew Slaughter MP, (Lab), who also attended the debate, was scathing about the effects of LASPO on legal aid, calling out the Ministry of Justice for failing to deliver on its promise to offer new avenues for people to access legal services. Slaughter told the Committee that what the government had done instead, was to destroy the principle that people had a right to advice and representation. Slaughter also told the Committee that the new measures had had a disproportionate impact on women, and victims of domestic violence, with a significant number of those affected unable to protect themselves as they could not apply for legal aid.

Justice Committee Chair, Bob Neil MP (Con), talked about the idea of moving away from the Family Court’s adversarial system towards a more collaborative model. As a member of the current government, he was keen to defend the government’s policy on mediation, and told the Commons that there might be room for increasing funding within the early stages of legal advice for family cases, with a view to encouraging mediation.

Karen Buck MP (Lab), and Chair for the APPG on Legal Aid, called on the government to restore legal aid in full for family cases, warning that access to justice had already been seriously compromised:

“Access to justice is as fundamental to the functioning of a good society as services such as health and education, which we more often invoke when we talk about public services. Access to justice is now being deeply and dangerously undermined. We need not just warm words, but urgent and immediate action.”

Shadow Minister for Justice, Gloria De Piero (Lab) told the Committee that if Labour were elected, the party would restore all funding for early legal advice, including early advice within the family courts. Gloria did not outline how this would be done, and whether the measure had been budgeted for by the Labour party.

Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice, Lucy Frazer (Con), told MPs that she had outlined the process in place for the government’s review of LASPO at a meeting for the APPG on Legal Aid last week. Lucy confirmed that the evidence gathering process was underway for the review, and that officials would be meeting the Family Justice Council to discuss its concerns and recommendations, and would also hold a second meeting with the Civil Justice Council to explore the Council’s recommendations too.

You can read a transcript of the debate here. 

LA No

Share this:

  • WhatsApp
  • Pocket
  • Telegram
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Government To Debate Legal Aid

30 Tuesday Oct 2018

Posted by Natasha in legal aid, Researching Reform

≈ 3 Comments

Politicians will discuss the future of legal aid, in a debate to be held at Westminster on Thursday, 1st November. The general debate was approved by the Backbench Business Committee and will be hosted by Andy Slaughter MP and Alistair Carmichael MP.

Legal aid cuts have been an ongoing source of concern for the family justice system, which saw a drastic reduction in the availability of the support service after the introduction of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO). The legislation made it increasingly difficult for families to access legal support, which led to The Public Law Project mounting a legal challenge over its restrictions to legal aid for domestic abuse survivors. The government was eventually forced to back down on several clauses within LASPO, and extend the list of documents victims of domestic violence had to produce in order to qualify for legal aid.

In 2017, the Ministry of Justice also scrapped the five year time limit for producing evidence of domestic violence, and in October of this year, a judicial review ordered the government to amend the Civil Legal Aid (Procedure) Regulations 2012, so that legal aid certificates could be backdated. The change allowed lawyers to continue representing clients while waiting for legal aid certificates to be processed.

This week’s debate will be held in the Grand Committee Room at Westminster Hall. Further details should be released within the next 48 hours, so we will update you as soon as we have them. Members of the public are able to attend this event, but for those who can’t attend, the debate can be watched live on Parliament TV.  A complete transcript will also be available three hours after the debate on Commons Hansard.

ImageVaultHandler.aspx (2)

 

 

Share this:

  • WhatsApp
  • Pocket
  • Telegram
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Legal Aid Certificates To Be Backdated

08 Monday Oct 2018

Posted by Natasha in legal aid, Researching Reform

≈ 1 Comment

Welcome to another week.

The government has agreed to amend the law so that legal aid certificates can be backdated to the date when the application for legal aid was made.

The decision comes after a successful judicial review into the Legal Aid Agency’s refusal to backdate legal aid certificates. The current system means that lawyers often have to carry out work before the Legal Aid Agency has granted a certificate, in  order to secure clients’ access to justice.

The government will amend the Civil Legal Aid (Procedure) Regulations 2012 to allow legal aid certificates to be backdated to the date of application for legal aid.

legal aid

 

 

 

Share this:

  • WhatsApp
  • Pocket
  • Telegram
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Emergency Protection Orders And Who Can Apply For Them (Yes, You Can).

13 Wednesday Sep 2017

Posted by Natasha in Family Law, legal aid, Researching Reform

≈ 14 Comments

Far too often the law is used as a way to make the playing field uneven for parties who are either financially disadvantaged or who have limited knowledge of family court process so when we get the chance to even out that playing field, we do.

The latest item we have been asked to write about is the Emergency Protection Order (EPO), and whether parents can apply for one.

The very short answer is, yes.

The law is very clear. Under S.44 of The Children Act 1989, ANY PERSON who believes that a child is at risk can apply for an EPO. 

An Emergency Protection Order is usually applied for when there are reasonable grounds to believe that there may be an  immediate risk of significant harm to a child.

If you are a parent who believes their child is at risk of imminent harm whilst in the care of a local authority, carer or parent, you can apply for an EPO.

Whilst it is incredibly difficult to find publicly available case law to highlight this practice, Researching Reform knows of at least one parent who has successfully used an EPO to remove their child from imminent harm and secured residency after doing so.

We also found this very helpful slide show which explains The Children Act 1989 very nicely, and offers some key points which are incredibly useful which includes information about Emergency Protection Orders. The slide was prepared by Nathan Loynes, programme manager for Child and Family Studies at the University Of Leeds. 

Nathan has produced a series of slide shows (124 of them) which have been prepared for students at the university, but they also work as an excellent resource for families going through child protection proceedings. The slide shows touch upon a range of topics, and highlight how the system works. Presentations which caught our eye include:

  • Parental Capacity To Change
  • Significant Harm and;
  • Professional Integrity

As for EPOs, The Children Act gives parents the power to protect their children through them, as long as the danger is imminent. In fact, the Act makes provision for any person to apply, which includes parents and family members, first, with local authorities and ‘authorised persons’ listed after.

So, don’t be shy. The law is there to help you, don’t be afraid to use it.

A very big thank you to Jane Doe.

THE LAW IS YOURS

Share this:

  • WhatsApp
  • Pocket
  • Telegram
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Interesting Private Members’ Bills In The House Of Lords

05 Wednesday Jul 2017

Posted by Natasha in child welfare, legal aid, Researching Reform

≈ 8 Comments

Private Members Bills, which allow MPs and Lords to propose new legislation very rarely become law, however they are interesting clues about  current thought inside government.

Two Bills caught our attention.

The first Bill, The Home Education (Duty of Local Authorities) Bill, proposed by Labour Peer Lord Soley, asks for measures that would allow home schooled children to be monitored by local authorities so that they could assess their educational, physical and emotional development. The measures would be inserted into the Education Act 1996, the go-to piece of legislation on education provision.

Home schooling is a growing trend in the UK.  It makes sense that home schooling should be addressed in this Act, as all other forms of education are detailed there, however this Bill concerns us a great deal. Local authorities already have powers to investigate home schooled children. Many parents also choose home schooling for their children because they wish to be free from the limited curriculum currently doing the rounds in our generic school system. This Bill could have a profound effect on that freedom.

The Bill sets out a list of requirements on parents who elect to educate their children at home. They include an annual review by social workers on each home schooled child, which includes not only an educational assessment, but emotional and physical assessments as well. In order to do this, social workers would be allowed to visit the child’s home, see their work, and interview parents as well as any children involved. This could lead to social workers querying the content and style in which parents are choosing to educate their children, without having proper training in this area, and profoundly distorting the potential benefits of this kind of schooling.  

Researching Reform has also assisted on cases where home schooled children were being targeted by at least one local authority through the production of policy documents which invited social workers to treat home schooling as a form of neglect and gave them permission to remove home schooled children from their families and place them in care.

It’s also likely that the requirements in the Bill would place an enormous amount of strain on already stretched local authorities, and would lead to a clumsy doubling up of services, especially as many home schooled children will be attending doctor’s surgeries for vaccinations or medical conditions where GPs would already be assessing their welfare, for example.

The Bill had its first reading on 27 June. The next reading has yet to be announced.

The second Bill we spotted aims to do something really rather wonderful. The Refugees (Family Reunion) Bill, sponsored by Lib Dem peer Baroness Hamwee, aims to reunite refugee families and provide them with legal aid where needed. The Bill would do this by:

“[Making] provision for leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom to be granted to the family members of refugees and to refugees who are family members of British citizens and settled persons, to provide for legal aid to be made available for refugee family reunion cases.”

You can read the clauses of this Bill here. 

The first reading of this Bill was also on the 27 June. A date for the second reading hasn’t yet been set.

portcullis3

 

 

 

Share this:

  • WhatsApp
  • Pocket
  • Telegram
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Domestic Violence Evidence Requirements Under Review – Have Your Say

17 Friday Jun 2016

Posted by Natasha in legal aid, Researching Reform

≈ 5 Comments

When the government announced that victims of domestic violence would need to provide courts with certain types of evidence  before being able to apply for legal aid, there was understandable concern and criticism towards the move.

Domestic violence as a phenomenon is largely invisible because many victims are too frightened to seek the medical or emotional help they need, which makes gathering evidence often impossible. Concerns deepened when it became apparent that the restrictions on legal aid access were placing even more women and children in danger. 

The result was a challenge by Rights of Women and The Public Law Project in 2014, which accused the government of restricting access to justice by forcing victims to produce specific documents showing harm. Regulation 33, which sets out the kinds of evidence victims of domestic violence have to produce in order to get legal aid, was shutting out people in need.

Then, in February 2016, the Court of Appeal ruled that Regulation 33 was unlawful.

As a result the government is now carrying out a review of the current evidence requirements for domestic violence in private family law cases and they would like to hear your thoughts.

The survey is open to everyone, and closes on Friday 1st July, 2016. Please take the time to fill it out and pass it on to anyone else you feel might like to contribute, if you can, from victims of domestic violence, to charities, lawyers, judges and anyone else interested in legal aid and Access To Justice matters.

We’ve added some useful links below:

  • Law Gazette Article About The Review
  • The Survey
  • Domestic Violence Evidence Requirements – Update, April 2016 (In Response To the Rights Of Women case)
  • What The Update Means And How It Changes The Current Requirements
  • Legal Aid For Family Law Matters 
  • Current Accepted Forms Of Evidence If You Have Been A Victim Of Domestic Violence
  • Legal Aid If Your Child Is At Risk Of Abuse

MOJ LA Review.png

 

Share this:

  • WhatsApp
  • Pocket
  • Telegram
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Judges Defeat Government Plans To Restrict Legal Aid Access Further

19 Tuesday Apr 2016

Posted by Natasha in legal aid, Researching Reform

≈ 3 Comments

Setting aside for a moment the fact that Legal Aid is hardly accessible these days, to anyone, it’s been a good day in court for the support service, as judges overturned a government plan to restrict access to it further by imposing a residency test on people in need of legal support.

The residency test would have prevented people from accessing legal aid if they had not lived in the UK continuously for 12 months and could have affected newly arrived migrants and their children. The test, backed by Justice Secretary Michael Gove, was summarily thrown out in a unanimous Supreme Court ruling and unusually, the ruling itself was delivered only minutes after recess yesterday.

The Supreme Court took the view that the government would be acting ‘ultra vires’, or beyond its own powers if it decided to proceed with the residence test. However, the government could push ahead and try to enforce the policy by presenting a Bill to parliament with the measures, in full.

So, whilst the battle to save what’s left of legal aid is not over, the ruling represents an important stand against the erosion of civil justice and human rights in the UK.

Watch this space.

Gove

 

 

Share this:

  • WhatsApp
  • Pocket
  • Telegram
  • Share on Tumblr
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...
← Older posts

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 8,452 other subscribers

Contact Researching Reform

Huff Post Contributer

For Litigants in Person

Child Welfare Debates

January 2023
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031  
« Dec    

Children In The Vine : Stories From The Family Justice System

Categories

  • Adoption
  • All Party Parliamentary Group on Family Law and The Court of Protection
  • Articles
  • Big Data
  • Bills
  • Case Study
  • child abuse
  • child abuse inquiry
  • child welfare
  • Children
  • Children In The Vine
  • Circumcision
  • Civil Partnerships
  • Consultation
  • Conversations With…
  • Corporal Punishment
  • CSA
  • CSE
  • Data Pack
  • Domestic Violence
  • Encyclopaedia on Family and The Law
  • event
  • Family Law
  • Family Law Cases
  • FGM
  • FOI
  • forced adoption
  • Foster Care
  • Fudge of the Week
  • Fultemian Project
  • Huffington Post
  • Human Rights
  • IGM
  • Inquiry
  • Interesting Things
  • Interview
  • Judge of the Week
  • Judges
  • judicial bias
  • Law to lust for
  • legal aid
  • LexisNexis Family Law
  • LIP Service
  • LIPs
  • Marriage
  • McKenzie Friends
  • MGM
  • News
  • Notes
  • petition
  • Picture of the Month
  • Podcast
  • Question It
  • Random Review
  • Real Live Interviews
  • Research
  • Researching Reform
  • social services
  • social work
  • Spotlight
  • Stats
  • Terrorism
  • The Buzz
  • The Times
  • Troubled Families Programme
  • Twitter Conversations
  • Update
  • Voice of the Child
  • Voice of the Child Podcast
  • Westminster Debate
  • Who's Who Cabinet Ministers
  • Your Story

Recommended

  • Blawg Review
  • BlogCatalog
  • DaddyNatal
  • DadsHouse
  • Divorce Survivor
  • Enough Abuse UK
  • Family Law Week
  • Family Lore
  • Flawbord
  • GeekLawyer's Blog
  • Head of Legal
  • Just for Kids Law
  • Kensington Mums
  • Law Diva
  • Legal Aid Barristers
  • Lib Dem Lords
  • Lords of The Blog
  • Overlawyered
  • PAIN
  • Paul Bernal's Blog
  • Public Law Guide
  • Pupillage Blog
  • Real Lawyers Have Blogs
  • Story of Mum
  • Sue Atkins, BBC Parenting Coach
  • The Barrister Blog
  • The Magistrate's Blog
  • The Not So Big Society
  • Tracey McMahon
  • UK Freedom of Information Blog
  • WardBlawg

Archives

  • Follow Following
    • Researching Reform
    • Join 813 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Researching Reform
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: