Report comment

I find two things fascinating about this case, both of which should be (but are not currently) the subject of reform:

1. Why are NINE lawyers involved in this matter? (Deirdre-Fottrell, Cayoun, Rebecca Stevens, the Official Solicitor, Morgan, Sprinz, Goodman Ray, Griffiths and Moradifar)
Surely an easier way of cutting costs would be to figure out how to sensibly handle this matter with three (parents, child, LA), rather than nine.
2. Adverse costs orders are scaring off potential sources of pro-bono help. It is absolutely ridiculous that when the state brings proceedings against a private individual, there is a risk of that individual suffering an adverse costs order if they are not successful in defending their own interests.

You don't need to reinstate full legal aid to solve this problem, you just need to reform a sick system that is expected to pay nine lawyers and actively dissuades volunteers from giving free legal advice.