Criminal justice system ‘near collapse’, say senior judges

THE criminal justice system is heading towards the point of collapse, two senior judges have warned.

Lord Justice Singh and Justice Jay issued their warning as they ruled that the Government acted unlawfully after it failed to fully fund a legal aid shake- up.

In their judgment on the legal action brought by the Law Society, the pair said the evidence from solicitors working at grassroots was that the system was “slowly coming apart at the seams”.

“The system depends to an unacceptable degree on the goodwill and generosity of spirit of those currently working within it,” they said.

“New blood in significant quantities will not and cannot be attracted to criminal legal aid in circumstances where what is on offer elsewhere is more attractive both in terms of financial remuneration and other benefits.

“Unless there are significant injections of funding in the relatively near future, any prediction along the lines that the system will arrive in due course at a point of collapse is not overly pessimistic.”

The Law Society of England and Wales took ministers to court after they did not increase the rates criminal defence solicitors receive for legal aid work by a “bare minimum” of 15 per cent, as recommended by the 2021 review by Lord Bellamy KC.

The professional body for solicitors previously claimed the decision to instead increase the funding by nine per cent, followed by a further two per cent rise in 2024, was unlawful.

In a ruling on Wednesday, Lord Justice Singh said officials did not breach their duty to provide a criminal defence service in failing to increase the fees to the suggested 15 per cent.

However, the judge, sitting with Mr Justice Jay, said the decision to not obtain further financial evidence about the impact of increasing fees less than the recommendation was unlawful.

The court also found the Government unlawfully failed to ask whether lower fee increases “would, or might, still deliver the aims and objectives” of the independent report.

The judges said: “In our judgment, the Lord Chancellor’s reasons for not carrying out any further modelling on the basis of uplifts lower than the 15 per cent recommended... do not bear scrutiny.”