Much of the income of City law firms comes directly from the public purse at many times legal aid rates. How can this be justified?
The recent Supreme Court decision on employment tribunal fees is a victory for our constitution. This is the rule of law, in action.
Online courts may replace justice, empathy and judgment with compromise and efficiency.
While commercial law firms continue to declare annual profits amounting to hundreds of millions, cuts to legal aid mean many people are suffering. Why not redress this imbalance?
As the UK media react in anger against the High Court’s involvement in Brexit, America prepares to wave goodbye to the broadly liberal politics upheld in the US Supreme Court.
Should members of the public make up the access to justice deficit?
The past 13 years have seen successive calls for former UK premier Tony Blair to be prosecuted for his part in the Iraq war. Has the Chilcot Report strengthened the potential legal case against him?
Will the Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War lead to prosecutions?
A levy of 10% on legal earnings above £150,000 would provide a major boost for access to justice. And Mr Gove may be interested.
HIstory tells us that the prime minister's stated aim of ending discrimination is meaningless without the legislation and infrastructure to enforce it.
Mr Gove must restore legal aid as a vital element in a fair justice system.
If elements of the British state were involved they must be held accountable. David Cameron has only shirked his responsibilities.
