WJEC A-Level Law 603-1978-1
Law Making in Wales and the UK
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent
The Civil Courts and Dispute Resolution
The Criminal Process and the Criminal Courts
Legal Personnel and the Judiciary
Access to Justice and Funding
Tort: Rules and Theory
Tort: Negligence
Tort: Occupiers' Liability
Tort: Remedies
Human Rights: Rules and TheoryHuman rights
Human Rights: Key Convention ProvisionsHuman rights
Human Rights: RestrictionsHuman rights
Human Rights: EnforcementHuman rights
Human Rights: Protection and ReformHuman rights
Contract: Rules and TheoryContract
Contract: FormationContract
Contract: TermsContract
Contract: Misrepresentation and DuressContract
Contract: DischargeContract
Contract: RemediesContract
Criminal Law: Rules and TheoryCriminal
Criminal Law: General Elements of LiabilityCriminal
Criminal Law: Offences Against the PersonCriminal
Criminal Law: Property OffencesCriminal
Criminal Law: DefencesCriminal
Criminal Law: Preliminary OffencesCriminal
Access to Justice and Funding
Evaluating access to justice after the 2012 reforms
- 3 things to know
- AS Unit 1
Overview
Recall questions on legal aid spending after 2013, litigants in person and the false economy argument, the 2019 review, the UNISON ruling, and the Commission on Justice in Wales.
What you need to know
Answer each one before you reveal it.
Why is a rise in litigants in person described as a false economy?
Give two arguments in defence of the 2012 reforms.
Questions from this subtopic
Each one with the model answer underneath.
- 1
State the aims of the 2012 legal aid reforms.
Model answer
The stated aims were to reduce the overall cost of legal aid, to target funding on the cases of highest priority, to discourage unnecessary litigation, and to deliver better value for the taxpayer.
- 2
What happened to legal aid spending and case volumes after 2013?
Model answer
Spending fell substantially, and the number of cases funded fell by a much larger proportion still, with advice on social welfare law collapsing almost entirely.
- 3
What effect did the reforms have on the number of unrepresented parties?
Model answer
The number of litigants in person rose sharply, especially in family cases, where both parties are now frequently unrepresented.
- 4
Why is a rise in litigants in person described as a false economy?
Model answer
Hearings take longer, cases are less well presented, more are adjourned and judges must do work the parties' lawyers would have done, so savings on legal aid are partly cancelled out by costs elsewhere.
- 5
Give two arguments in defence of the 2012 reforms.
Model answer
Public money is finite and had to be concentrated where liberty, safety or the family home is at stake, and moving private family disputes towards mediation is better for the families concerned as well as cheaper.
- 6
What did the government's review of the reforms conclude in 2019?
Model answer
It accepted that some intended effects had not been achieved, that early advice had been lost and that people had been unable to obtain help, and it announced further work and pilot schemes rather than reversing the changes.
Other ways to work this
The same content, four other ways.
What is inside Levo
Six ways to work the same material.
Every question in Access to Justice and Funding, on a schedule.
Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.
Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.