In a significant legal development, the High Court has ruled that the former Justice Secretary - Dominic Raab - broke the law in the way he increased defence solicitors' pay, determining that his actions were irrational.
The decision, a partial victory for the legal profession, follows a challenge by the Law Society, arguing that Raab had unlawfully ignored an expert recommendation. This ruling not only places pressure on Raab's successor - Alex Chalk - to reconsider legal aid rates but also highlights the broader implications for the criminal justice system.
The dispute revolves around the government's pay settlement of 11% for solicitors in 2022, falling short of an independent recommendation for at least a 15% increase. The Law Society, representing solicitors in England and Wales, argued that Raab acted irrationally and failed in his legal duty to ensure a proper investigation of all evidence.
In a detailed judgment, Lord Justice Singh and Mr Justice Jay declared Raab's actions irrational. They criticised his failure to assess whether providing solicitors less pay would still meet the objectives of the independent review. The judges also emphasized the value of evidence from defence solicitors, describing it as an "impressive body of evidence" from dedicated professionals working under challenging circumstances.
Legal Aid is crucial for providing legal representation to suspects and defendants who cannot afford it themselves. The system helps save court time and ensures that individuals who should plead guilty to a crime do so. The Law Society has highlighted the impact of long-frozen legal aid rates, leading to the departure of 1,400 duty solicitors since 2017 and creating "deserts" in some regions.
While the judgment does not formally reverse the 11% pay settlement, it urges a reconsideration of legal aid fees for criminal defence solicitors. Nick Emmerson - President of the Law Society - called on the government to act, stating that immediate action is necessary to prevent an exodus of duty solicitors, which could have potentially dangerous consequences for society.
The Ministry of Justice has stated that it will carefully consider the judgment. However, they emphasized that the claimants were successful on specific narrow grounds and the majority of their arguments were rejected by the court.
In January 2023, the Law Society sent a pre-action letter to the UK government, challenging its decision-making as unlawful and irrational. President Lubna Shuja argued that the decisions were inconsistent with the constitutional right of access to justice. The society has invited the government to agree to mediation and warned that it might consider issuing a judicial review seeking an order to quash the decisions.
