Another classic instance which highlights the danger of of state-sanctioned meddling. Imagine what could go wrong by over-zealously and prematurely jumping to conclusions when simple common sense and fairness mean both parties should have an equal say and equal access to Court from which the Judge can make up his own mind in due course.
I am struggling to think of a piece of legislation that has had as many successful challenges to the legality of Regulations issued under it as the much-beloved LASPO (Legal Aid, Sentencing and Prosecution of Offencers Act 2012)
The particular Regulations here are Regulation 33 of the Civil Legal Aid (Procedure) Regulations 2012
LASPO sets out that being a victim of domestic violence can be a reason for the provision of free legal representation. The sense of this is that where someone has been the victim of domestic violence, it would be abusive and damaging for the State to make them face the perpetrator in Court without a lawyer to represent them. [Note that this provision still only applies within financial limits – below a specified income and capital the State should pay for that, above that and the individual would have to pay for it themselves, regardless of whether…
View original post 1,327 more words