Report comment

Utterly ludicrous. Those who are less affluent already have to deal with the rather protracted and prolix system of law (including the costs). The administration of justice is critical to our system but has, unfortunately, demised somewhat. Politicians are looking at litigation and wondering how much money can be made. Why not focus on the bigger picture: how can litigants navigate a system of law which is just, affordable and accessible? Of course, any law student will be able to acknowledge the applicable provision of the Magna Carta - (40) to no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice. A right which has, sadly been forgotten. The system is now conditioned upon a fiscal policy which has, without doubt, been troubling for some.

There is much disquiet from litigants as to the current state of affairs. Many whom I have spoken to fear the justice system and the costs involved. Hardly a situation which invokes a fair and accessible system is it? How far is this going to go? Having pro bono solicitors’ to cover for the MOJ’s cuts in legal aid is not the expedient approach to undertake.

Previously, a fee to issue a £190,000 legal claim was originally £1,315. From 9 March 2015 this fee is now £9,500, which represents a rise of over 622 per cent. Ridiculous. Mr Barnett makes a good point that under section 92(3) of the Courts Act 2003 the Lord Chancellor is to “have regard to the principle that access to the courts must not be denied”. How do these further increases not contravene those provisions? It is indisputable that access will be severely restricted.

Mr Dawjee makes a salient point – treating the court system as a business is not going to advantage society or be proactive to the realm of litigation. For litigants in persons this is disadvantageous. The bottom line is: it is going to cause further challenges to litigants’ and cause many to be circumscribed of justice.