header-logo header-logo

23 November 2011
Issue: 7491 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Firms lose out in family bid

Family lawyers group Resolution has criticised the Legal Services Commission (LSC) bidding process after one in 10 family law legal aid firms lost its contract.

In September firms bid for new contracts to run family and family and housing legal aid services, due to start early in 2012. Every law firm that applied had heard back by the beginning of this week.

According to initial LSC analysis, 92% of applicants have been awarded a contract.

David Emmerson, chairman of Resolution’s legal aid committee, says: “It is a considerable surprise that so many applicants for the tender failed in what was a non-competitive bid.

“There were none of the quality criteria and panel membership issues that distinguished firms in the failed 2010 tender. It is understood that almost all failures relate to technical issues, but it would be terrible to lose fundamentally good firms from public service on the basis of simple errors.”

Emmerson queries the number of questions within the bid process which “appeared unneccessary” and hopes that issues can be resolved through the appeals process. The eTendering portal by which firms applied for the legal aid contract was “an unneccessarily frustrating hurdle”, he adds. He expressed sympathy for those who work in and rely upon those organisations that failed in the bid.

 

Issue: 7491 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll