The campaign to force the Government to scale back its controversial legal aid reforms has been dealt a blow after the High Court rejected the first call for a judicial review over the planned changes.
The application, which was lodged by Bristol lawyer David Burrows – name partner at southwest family law practice David Burrows Solicitors – centred on the terms of the new-look unified civil legal aid contract, which came into force on 1 April this year.
The contract is a key plank of the Government’s planned overhaul of the UK’s ailing £2bn legal aid system, alongside proposals including the introduction of competitive tendering between firms and fixed-length contracts for criminal legal aid work.
Refusing the application last month, Mr Justice Gibbs said: “The claimant expresses general dissatisfaction with the unified contract being offered but he does not come close to establishing an arguable ground for judicial review of any decision made by [the Lord Chancellor or the Legal Services Commission].”
The application is the first in a string of judicial review hearings as the profession continues to oppose the plans. Actions brought by the Law Society and Thames Valley practice Dexter Montague are due to be heard together at the High Court on 26 June.
However, the decision to quosh the first application will come as a blow to campaigners.
Commenting on the decision, Law Society chief executive Des Hudson said: “David Burrows’ application for judicial review [proceedings] highlighted the huge and very real difficulties family law practitioners now face under the new unified contract and in the new legal aid environment.”
He added: “His failure to get leave does not negate the real issues that he raised – it just emphasises them and highlights the narrowness of judicial review.”
The news comes as the Law Society steps up the pressure on Whitehall, with full-page advertisements highlighting the campaign due to appear in The Times and The Guardian tomorrow (5 June).
