header-logo header-logo

04 January 2017
Issue: 7728 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Students to help litigants in person

Pilot scheme run by universities to go live in Bristol

A pilot scheme to pair law students with litigants in person (LiPs), devised by a working group led by District Judge Cope and Judge Wildblood, is due to go live in Bristol on 16 January.

The scheme, which may be rolled out nationally if the pilot is successful, will be run by three local universities and assisted by the Bristol branch of the Personal Support Unit, a charity that offers practical and emotional but not legal help to people who cannot afford a lawyer.

Students from each of the universities will guide LiPs through the court process in family and civil cases. The student will, for example, show the litigant the court room and where each person will sit.

Robin Denford, Advocate, Bristol City Council, who is a member of the working group, said the group has prepared a script that students can use as a basis for guidance. The script will explain how to order and present documents so as to avoid duplication and irrelevancy, what to include in witness statements, and what the judge’s directions in court actually mean. The students will also outline the process of a hearing—when to speak, what to say and the importance of listening to the witnesses, opposing side and judge, and of focusing on issues identified by the judge.

The universities have also produced a booklet explaining common technical terms such as “party” and “witness statement”, the court process and the roles of everyone from the judge to the usher.

The working group is now considering how the role of students could be further expanded. Future projects could include telephone hearings and LiPs who have partial representation under an “unbundled” service, where the lawyer provides legal assistance on some areas only and the client handles the rest.

Issue: 7728 / 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
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
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
back-to-top-scroll