Radical changes to the functions and scope of frontline regulators – including the creation of a single regulator – could help tackle the access to justice crisis in England and Wales, researchers have found.
An academic report published by the Legal Services Consumer Panel today notes that 3.6m adults are unable to access a lawyer to resolve disputes. While government funding remains critical, the report states that this is unlikely to improve significantly. Instead, frontline regulators such as the Solicitors Regulation Authority need to demonstrate creativity and collaboration to remove barriers.
The report’s authors, from Nottingham Law School, recommend:
- A revised code of conduct to place greater emphasis on the access to justice
- Support for tailored and strategic public legal education
- Regulation of all paralegals to expand the pool of trusted advisers
- A single regulator for all legal services
- Frontline regulators to take a role in generating income from the profession to fund access to justice.
The report acknowledges that several of the 17 total recommendations will be longer-term projects and will require primary legislation. But the authors say the time for superficial fixes to address unmet need has passed.
Dr Liz Curran, associate professor at Nottingham Law school, said: ‘Maintaining the status quo is not an option, as both statistical and qualitative data highlight the real harm caused by inaction.
‘A creative, problem-solving, and evidence-based approach is crucial. This research report demonstrates what can be achieved and how.’
The report calls on the regulated professions to ‘play their part’ in addressing inequality in the legal system, pointing out that the wealthiest law firms rely on the justice system and thus have a vested interest in ensuring the public system is viable. The report also argues that many of the corporations and government departments that retain large law firms for contentious legal work use more of the resources of the courts.
As so-called repeat players in the court system, they absorb more of the resources in comparison to those who are most likely to have limited access to justice, creating a two-tiered system of justice.
It is suggested that frontline regulators could do more to provide information about how much pro bono work is being done, by whom, and how much is saved to the public purse. The report also raises the issue of a potential contribution to the justice sector by the biggest firms, adding: ‘A universal levy might be argued as damaging existing access to justice providers. However, there may be an argument for levying top-tier law firms.’
Mandatory regulation of paralegals, the report states, could enhance the reputation and quality assurance of these workers, although it would require changes to the Legal Services Act. Currently, paralegals who work for a solicitors’ firm must follow SRA rules but they may work on their own or in unregulated organisations run only by non-qualified staff.
The Legal Services Board, the oversight regulator which collaborated on the report, has said it will carefully consider the recommendations.
