Search Results

This chapter describes Progressive Era debates within the legal profession over proposals to establish a “public defender” in the criminal courts—a public official who would represent criminal defendants and counterbalance the public prosecutor. It describes different versions of the public defender idea, as developed by California lawyer Clara Foltz, New York lawyer Mayer Goldman, and the prominent Massachusetts lawyer Reginald Heber Smith, author of Justice and the Poor. Leaders of the bar, often affiliated with corporate law firms, expressed concerns that the public defender represented a step towards socialization of the legal profession. Instead, they preferred to handle indigent defense and other forms of legal aid through private charity. In 1917, New York lawyers rejected proposals for a government-controlled public defender and instead established a criminal branch of the Legal Aid Society.

In 1948, T. H. Marshall argued that the acceptance of state funding for legal services was a necessary condition for the full and equal exercise of civil rights which legitimises Britain’s democratic form of government. The pressing need for help with divorce following the social stress of World War II provided the stimulus for a new system of access to justice not only in family matters but also in a far wider range of civil disputes. Family justice was to underpin a wider movement towards social equality and individual well-being, because the divorce lawyers played a key part in the setting-up of the Legal Aid Scheme, a publicly funded legal service. The story of access to justice in family matters over the last fifty years can well be told as a tale of containing public expenditure in the face of rising demand. A combination of administrative procedures has been adopted to deal with child support and encouragement to try alternative dispute resolution on divorce for those seeking access to family justice.

The right to legal representation is a fundamental right, and arrangements for funding this are crucial to ensuring access to justice for those accused of criminal offences. Criminal legal aid has long been regarded as an entitlement for most citizens, particularly the most economically vulnerable. However, criminal legal aid has been cast in a different light in recent years, viewed not through the lens of welfarism but subjected to neo-liberal values such as cost neutrality, marketisation and managerialism. This was particularly evident in the ‘Transforming Legal Aid’ consultation of 2013, which resurrected the idea of competitive tendering for provision of criminal legal aid services. Although not pursued in full, subsequent changes – including cuts of 8.75% to fees for legal aid lawyers – appear to have significantly affected the scope of criminal legal aid. The number of providers of such services has consistently declined over the past decade and firms have frequently reported significant financial pressure. Arguably, these reforms – justified in neo-liberal terms – have affected access to justice and by extension the quality of justice offered by the Criminal Justice System, CJS. This chapter will examine the market-driven reform of criminal legal aid in recent years, and consider two apparent examples of impact: evidence of an increasing number of litigants-in-person in criminal cases; and the outsourcing of police station work to independent ‘agents’. The chapter will also question some of the apparent contradictions in neo-liberal reform of criminal legal aid, such as the deliberate policy of reducing the size of the provider market; and the ‘false economies’ created by the pursuit of efficiency and economy: goals which are underpinned and enforced by the Criminal Procedure Rules.

Chesterfield Smith’s ideals lived beyond his years. This chapter describes people, such as Martha Barnett and Alex Sink, and organizations inspired by or dedicated to Smith and his ideals. Legal Aid organizations named buildings after him; an informal “Chesterfield Smith Society” meets regularly to discuss issues and projects of interest; and Smith’s twin instructions to all he knew, to “Be Somebody” and to “Do Good,” have influenced many.

This chapter discusses Jewish barristers from 1945 to 1990. Partly because the provisions of the Legal Aid and Advice Act 1949 were starting to take effect, and partly because of the post-war upsurge in crime, there was a marked expansion in work for barristers in the late 1950s at much higher rates of pay than in the pre-war period. They were also helped by the multiplication of retail chains of shops in the clothing and electrical goods sectors, together with the establishment of large property companies, which in turn fostered a number of influential Jewish commercial law practices. Whereas the emergence of Jewish solicitors specializing in criminal law assisted the careers of some of those practising at the criminal Bar, the West End and City Jewish law practices with large numbers of business clients permitted the entry of barristers from families of east European immigrants into the commercial Bar and generated an appreciable volume of civil litigation. Accordingly, the increase in the number of Jewish solicitors' practices after the Second World War levelled the playing field for barristers from similar backgrounds, although these firms continued to instruct counsel from every creed and every ethnic group.

This Chapter deals with two ancillary financial matters which are of relevance to criminal proceedings: public funding and costs. Public funding is now governed principally by the relevant provisions of the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) and the statutory instruments made under it, in particular the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013/435, although reference will be made to earlier enactments. Costs in criminal proceedings are governed by the Practice Direction: Costs in Criminal Proceedings [2015] EWCA Crim 1568.

Finland formed part of Sweden until 1809. In that year Sweden surrendered its eastern part to Tsarist Russia as a consequence of an unsuccessful war in 1808. In relation to Russia, Finland became an autonomous Grand-Duchy. The autonomy covered, among other things, matters in the sphere of general legislation. Accordingly, the Swedish Civil Code of 1734 remained in force in Finland after 1809 until it was slowly and gradually replaced by Finnish legislation. Finland became independent in 1917 during the aftermath of the Russian Revolution.