header-logo header-logo

Legal aid contracts delayed

14 August 2009
Issue: 7382 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Family
printer mail-detail

The tendering date for civil and criminal legal aid contracts has been pushed back six months to October 2010 to give the Legal Services Commission (LSC) time to finalise arrangements.

Richard Miller, Law Society head of legal aid says: “While it is disappointing for those family practitioners who were anxious to secure harmonised advocacy rates at the earliest possible opportunity, it has become clear that the LSC was unable to finish redrafting the contracts, resolve the issue of selection criteria for allocating contracts, or to finalise the tendering requirements.”

Issue: 7382 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Family
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

London promotion underscores firm’s investment in white collar and investigations

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Private client team strengthened by partner appointment

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

Kate Gaskell, CEO of Flex Legal, reflects on chasing her childhood dreams underscores the importance of welcoming those from all backgrounds into the profession

NEWS
Overcrowded prisons, mental health hospitals and immigration centres are failing to meet international and domestic human rights standards, the National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) has warned
Two speedier and more streamlined qualification routes have been launched for probate and conveyancing professionals
Workplace stress was a contributing factor in almost one in eight cases before the employment tribunal last year, indicating its endemic grip on the UK workplace
In Ward v Rai, the High Court reaffirmed that imprecise points of dispute can and will be struck out. Writing in NLJ this week, Amy Dunkley of Bolt Burdon Kemp reports on the decision and its implications for practitioners
Could the Supreme Court’s ruling in R v Hayes; R v Palombo unintentionally unsettle future complex fraud trials? Maia Cohen-Lask of Corker Binning explores the question in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll