Report comment

If the judiciary at every level, first instance and appellate, had said after LASPO that the right to test the evidence against you by cross-examination is fundamental and that if you are refused legal aid you have the right to cross-examine in person, and that if that is painful, too bad, by now we would have had something like what they have in the criminal courts where the court appoints a lawyer to cross-examine in d.v. allegations where the Defendant is unrepresented; and the appalling breach or Article 6 which now stains our jurisprudence would have been reversed.

But they bottled it.