Hammersmith and Fulham Law Centre wins asylum for former child slave
17-year-old Mathias Agebto, from Ivory Coast, was sold as a slave at the age of eight. He was refused asylum last year and his lawyer gave up on his case. However, Hammersmith and Fulham Law Centre took up his cause and won him asylum in April 2010.
This is the first success from a new project at the Law Centre which fights for child asylum seekers who no other legal practice is able to help. Read coverage in the Law Gazette.
Mathias hopes to become a professional footballer. He told the Fulham and Hammersmith Chronicle: “I play for Croydon Athletic and I’m studying for a BTEC in sport. I never saw myself going to college and having a good education - I never thought this would happen.”
UK’s first Law Centre celebrates 40 years
North Kensington was the UK’s first Law Centre. There are now over 50 Law Centres in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, providing free independent legal advice and representation to disadvantaged people.
Speaking at the event, co-founder Lord Gifford praised the Law Centre for securing landmark legal safeguards for vulnerable people such as the right for tenants facing eviction to have legal representation in the county court. These safeguards have become a permanent feature of the civil and criminal justice system.
When the Law Centre was founded in 1970, there was little legal protection for poor and disadvantaged people. Commenting on the lack of available legal services for deprived areas at the time Lord Gifford said:
“What we started at North Kensington Law Centre has become part of a revolution in the way law is practised…The Law Centre is still reaching the parts that others cannot reach because of its commitment to its community.”
“North Kensington Law Centre represented the crystallisation of local initiatives by members of the community aimed at providing legal services with a social perspective which met the needs of deprived areas.”
Lord Gifford also attacked the current threats to legal aid following the reforms introduced by the Legal Services Commission and cuts in funding by central government. Commenting on the pressures of fixed fees he said:
“Access to justice must be supported by properly resourced advice services to enable the most vulnerable to enforce their rights. Access to justice is bereft of meaning without the tools to achieve it.”
The meeting also heard from founder staff member Peter Kandler who was instrumental in setting up the centre in 1970. Kandler was responsible for pioneering the right for defendants to be legally represented whilst in police custody, later incorporated into legislation through PACE 1984. Mr Kandler said:
“At a time when no funding was available for solicitors to attend suspects held in police custody, this pioneering work later became an established feature of our criminal justice system.”
North Kensington Law Centre helps almost 3,000 local people every year with problems such as housing eviction, unfair dismissal, discrimination and exclusion from school. Its services are more needed than ever - the number of homeless people needing help increased by 16 per cent last year.
ENDS
Notes to Editors:
Key contact: Sean Canning, Director, North Kensington Law Centre 0208 206 5715 or 07960 589098.
Law Centre solicitor wins legal aid Oscar
On 26 May 2010, Kathy Meade was named Social and Welfare Lawyer of the Year at the Legal Aid Lawyer of the Year Awards.
Kathy was praised for “putting a human face on the law” and for fighting both high- and low-profile cases with equal determination.
Law Centres were also nominated for two other awards - Devon Law Centre’s Jean-Benoit Louveaux for Immigration Lawyer of the Year and Cambridge House Law Centre for Legal Aid Firm/Not-for-Profit Agency of the Year.
Read more: Legal Aid Lawyer of the Year Awards
Law Centres call on the next government
Read the call here:
Screen version:
Law_Centres_Calls_-_Screen_Version.pdf
Print version:
Law_Centre_Calls_-_Print_Version.pdf
Cumbria Law Centre saves homeless trucker’s life
In 2009, Mike lost everything. The haulage company he worked for went bust and the lorry he lived in was repossessed. He was left with no home, no job and no hope. He planned to kill himself.
After ten days on the streets, he collapsed from malnutrition at Carlisle Jobcentre and was put in touch with Cumbria Law Centre. He had just 17p to his name.
The solicitor who took on his case specialises in housing law and has 17 years’ experience advising disadvantaged people. He quickly realised that although Mike was penniless, the city council were unlikely to see him as a priority for housing.
Mike needed another solution. Talking to him, the solicitor discovered that he was an ex-serviceman and could therefore ask the local branch of the Royal British Legion for help with the down payment on a flat. The solicitor also helped him apply for housing benefit and for a grant to furnish his flat. The case was paid for by legal aid.
Over the next few months, Mike started to feel much more positive. He asked if he could help out at the Law Centre and was taken on as a volunteer receptionist and handyman. He is now living in his new flat, doing a training course at college and applying for jobs.
Mike credits the Law Centre with saving his life. He told the Carlisle News and Star: “Without Cumbria Law Centre it is very likely that I would not be alive today. I had hit rock bottom and believe me, without these people, there are many of us who would be lost in the system.”
Cumbria Law Centre deals with almost 500 housing cases every year.
Hackney Law Centre helps save vulnerable pensioner from homelessness
The woman, who is illiterate and has learning difficulties, retired from her job as a cleaner in 2006 and was entitled to housing benefit to help her pay her rent. At that time she was in temporary accommodation. However, she did not receive her benefits because she had difficultly filling out the relevant forms. By the end of last year she owed £45,000 in rent and was evicted from her temporary accommodation. A decision on her original homeless application was made – and not surprisingly the Local Authority found her intentionally homeless.
The Law Centre took a number of steps to assist her. Firstly it requested a back date of her housing benefit. Secondly it made a fresh homeless application, and appealed the decision on her first homeless application. The Law Centre secured her £42,000 in backdated benefit, got the first homeless decision withdrawn and the new homeless application accepted. The client is now in supported accommodation and will be re-housed permanently.
Almost 80 per cent of asylum seekers wrongly refused legal representation at appeal
Thursday 1 April 2010: The project’s final report warns that recent reforms to legal aid have made it harder for asylum seekers to get a fair hearing. The report includes several compelling case studies in which people were only recognised as refugees after the project had secured representation for them at appeal.
In one case, a Chinese woman who had been detained and tortured for her trade union activities was refused asylum at her first appeal where she was unrepresented, but was granted a second appeal, which she won, after the project obtained legal representation for her.
Since June 2007, the project has been referred 75 asylum seekers refused Controlled Legal Representation on the grounds that their cases had insufficient merit. Devon Law Centre appealed against those refusals to an Independent Funding Adjudicator in every case. 59 of those appeals were allowed.
Jean-Benoit Louveaux, the asylum appellate lawyer who runs the project, said:
“Asylum seekers come to the UK fleeing persecution such as torture, rape, indefinite imprisonment without trial, and extra-judicial execution. It is a damning indictment of the UK that those seeking sanctuary here are then denied a fair hearing.
The project has shown that recent reforms to legal aid have made it much harder for asylum seekers with a valid claim to prove their case.
If the project’s results were repeated across the country, it would mean that asylum seekers are being wrongly refused publicly-funded legal representation for their appeals in almost four out of every five cases - and that a significant number of these people have a legitimate claim to some form of protection. It is time we acknowledge that asylum seekers do not represent a large wave of illegal immigration but a small persecuted minority which the UK government has abandoned.”
Read the report: Asylum_Appellate_Project_Final_Report.doc
Law Centres Federation welcomes new partnership for Law Centres
The project is an unprecedented partnership between Law Centres, the Ministry of Justice, City law firms and charitable trusts.
Law Centres are not-for-profit legal practices staffed by solicitors and barristers who specialise in the most vital areas of law for poor and disadvantaged people. The pilot commences at South West London Law Centres, investing in infrastructure and testing new ways of working which will aid all Law Centres.
Michael Ashe, Chief Executive, South West London Law Centres, said:
“Law Centres provide a unique service to poor and disadvantaged people – and we are delighted that the Ministry of Justice, City law firms and charitable trusts are today investing in that service. Our teams of expert lawyers are committed to helping people turn their lives around whether they are stopping a family from being evicted from their home or making sure an elderly person gets the care they need.”
Julie Bishop, Director, Law Centres Federation, said:
“This is an unprecedented partnership which will have real benefits for Law Centres’ clients as they struggle to cope with the impact of the recession - and will also give the government real value for money. We know that every eviction avoided by Law Centres saves the taxpayer an estimated £34,000. However, all too often Law Centres are hampered by lack of investment in their infrastructure. We hope this ground-breaking partnership will have ground-breaking results.”
Last year, the South West London Law Centres helped over 25,000 people. This included 2,000 people through their County Court Duty Scheme which assists people at risk of losing their home. One young man who benefitted from the Scheme was an 18-year-old facing imminent homelessness. The duty solicitor was able to stop his landlord from taking further steps to evict him and help to arrange for him to be re-housed. He is now getting on with his life.
The Ministry of Justice, Allen & Overy, The Baring Foundation and The London Legal Support Trust, together with LCF, have played a key role in driving the project forward. South West London Law Centres and LCF are grateful to the law firms and charitable trusts who have provided practical assistance and funding.
ENDS
Notes to Editors:
For more information, please contact Law Centres Federation on: 020 7842 0720.
Families reunited after Kingston and Richmond Law Centre’s Supreme Court win
Kingston and Richmond Law Centre has contributed to a Supreme Court victory which will have far-reaching effects for people settled in the UK who hope to bring dependent family members from overseas to live with them. Previously, the Home Office told people that they had to prove they could support their spouse, child, parent or grandparent without any help from relatives or friends. However, on 16 December 2009 the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that support provided by others (third party support) could also be counted. Kingston and Richmond Law Centre (part of South West London Law Centres) represents a Sri Lankan man who hopes to join his son in the UK.
His case - and those of four others - have now been sent back to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal so that the long-term viability of the third party support can be assessed in each case. If it is accepted that the third party has made a genuine commitment to support these people, they should be allowed to join their relatives in the UK.
Read the judgement:
Supreme Court Judgement
LCF and other organisations call for Justice to be put centre stage in the General Election Campaign
The coalition is made up of the Law Centres Federation along with AdviceUK, the Bar Council, the Institute of Legal Executives, JUSTICE, the Legal Action Group, the Legal Aid Practitioners’ Group and Liberty.
Publishing a Manifesto for Justice (see below), the groups – which represent consumers, lawyers and justice campaigns - call for three principles of justice to be upheld by all those involved in the political debate. They are:
• Good governance and the rule of law
• Respect for human rights and civil liberties, and
• Access to justice
The initiative is being launched in Parliament tonight at a cross-party event supported by the Conservative Shadow Justice Minister, Henry Bellingham MP, Lord Brennan QC, the Labour Chairman of the All Party Group for Legal and Constitutional Affairs, and Lord Thomas of Gresford QC, the Liberal Democrat Frontbench Justice Spokesperson.
The Manifesto is being published when the justice system is under intense pressure from the squeeze on government spending, public concern over crime and problems in access to civil and family justice.
With a General Election only months away, the coalition has set out its concerns about the future of the justice system, and calls for a range of measures designed to strengthen justice and the rule of law, including:
* more courage in the debate over the need to reduce reliance on custodial sentences
* less legislation and more practical action to tackle crime
* improved access to justice, especially in family and social welfare law; and
* increased effort to convey the importance of respect for fundamental human rights
Commenting on the publication of the Manifesto for Justice, Roger Smith, Director of JUSTICE, said:
“A robust justice system is an essential part of a good society. While we have much to be thankful for in this country – jury trial, the presumption of innocence and an independent judiciary - we must not be complacent. The Manifesto puts in writing what many feel needs to be preserved and enhanced within our judicial and legal system. It also makes practical proposals for reform, which we commend to those of all parties.”
Carol Storer, Director of the Legal Aid Practitioners’ Group, said:
“The LAPG is delighted to be part of the Manifesto for Justice. The justice system is a vital part of today’s society, and we should not forget that it is designed to protect the weak and vulnerable when they need it most. Continued and ill-thought-through cuts to the legal aid budget will affect those least able to cope, and will only exacerbate the difficulty of obtaining face to face advice in those parts of the country which already have limited provision. Every member of society has the right to timely legal advice and representation, and we call on politicians of all backgrounds to support the aims and concerns set out in the Manifesto.”
Nick Green QC, Chairman-Elect of the Bar, said:
“The Manifesto is testament to the depth of feeling and commitment displayed by consumers, campaigners and all those working within the legal system. Publicly funded lawyers work incredibly long hours, often for modest remuneration, doing all they can to represent their clients, often in the face of huge systemic difficulties. The Manifesto for Justice considers the problems which the justice system must address if it is properly to meet the needs of society and protect the most vulnerable; a document which combines the experience and insight of eight such organisations deserves attention from politicians on all sides.”
Manifesto for Justice: A Manifesto for Justice.pdf
Devon Law Centre awarded the Law Centres Innovation Award 2009 for the Asylum Appellate Project
The Asylum Appellate Project is funded by the Lankelly Chase Foundation and the A B Charitable Trust, and has been running since June 2007. Over the past two years, it has found that around 80 per cent of asylum seekers are being wrongly denied publicly-funded legal representation (legal aid).
In one case, a woman was forced to flee China because of her trade union activities which had seen her detained and tortured in a forced labour camp for over two years. She was initially refused asylum by the Home Office and then refused legal aid by her solicitors to appeal this decision. Appearing unrepresented at the tribunal hearing, her asylum appeal was turned down. After the Project assisted her to get legal representation to challenge the tribunal’s determination, she was granted asylum.
Devon Law Centre is now hoping to secure funds to continue its work as well as to expand the project to other areas of the UK. For further information please contact Jean-Benoit Louveaux, Devon Law Centre’s Asylum Appellate Lawyer, on 01752 519 794 or at .
The Law Centre has been seeing success on other fronts as well.
It had helped bring a judicial review on behalf of the family of an autistic schoolboy whose housing, care and welfare needs were recognised by Plymouth City Council but were not catered for. The High Court found in the family’s favour but the Council appealed this ruling. Recently the Appeal Court upheld the High Court’s ruling in the family’s favour, and upheld a £50,000 costs order. Lord Justice Wall also criticised the Council for the spending public money on mounting ‘academic’ defences instead of providing adequate care for local residents.
Court of Appeal upholds landmark disability access case
20 Nov 2009: The Court of Appeal today upheld the rights of an 18-year-old wheelchair user to have access to in-branch banking services in the case of David Allen v the Royal Bank of Scotland.
The Royal Bank of Scotland had - until now – refused to carry out work to make access possible for wheelchair users like David Allen at their branch at Church St, Sheffield.
In dismissing the bank’s appeal, the Court of Appeal upheld the order of His Honour Judge Dowse on 16th January 2009 at Sheffield County Court, where he ruled that the bank had breached the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. The judge granted an injunction against the bank, requiring them to carry out the necessary work to allow access for wheelchair users. He rejected an argument that David could and should use internet banking instead, ruling that it was not the same service.
This was the first time a court had granted an injunction under the Disability Discrimination Act requiring building works.
Speaking after today’s judgement, David said,
“I’m glad the bank finally had to apologise in court and acknowledge they treated me badly.”
“But I am still very disappointed that RBS (who I have banked with since I was 10 when I was still able to walk) would not willingly comply with the Disability Discrimination Law and provide wheelchair access which not only I, but many of their other customers with disabilities need.”
“They just failed to understand anything about the need for privacy and dignity.”
Sheffield Law Centre helped David take his case successfully to Sheffield County Court to prove that the bank could reasonably have provided access.
In the Court of Appeal, Lord Justice Wall said,
“The Claimant wanted to use counter facilities which the Bank offered as part of its services at its main branch in Sheffield. The claimant could not access those facilities, and in my judgment a duty on the part of the Bank plainly arose.”
The judgement of the Court of Appeal stresses that service providers must provide a service as close as possible to what the general public gets. The bank had argued that disabled people did not actually need to get into its branches. In his judgement, Lord Justice Dyson pointed out that customers have the choice of face-to-face banking – otherwise the bank would not maintain it 2300 branches. He said:
“The public at large have physical access to banks in order to make use of traditional counter banking services and the Bank’s non-disabled customers have physical access to all of its branches, including the main branch. The judge was entitled to conclude that the provision of the alternative methods of making those banking services available that were relied on by the Bank were not a reasonable alternative”
Douglas Johnson of Sheffield Law Centre helped David bring the case. David was represented in the court by Catherine Casserley and Robin Allen QC. The case was supported by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. The Commission produces a statutory Code of Practice to provide guidance to service providers. The Court of Appeal noted that courts must take this Code into account when looking at access cases under the Disability Discrimination Act.
Describing why he had to take action, David said,
“I only wanted them to comply with the law and provide access so I could get into my bank like my friends.”
Ceri Allen, David’s mother, had to bring the case on his behalf because he was under 18 when it started. In response to the court judgement, she said,
“This is just such good news for disabled people.”
“RBS claim to take disability issues seriously. They actually told the court that David received better treatment than other customers because they allowed David to carry out banking transactions in the street.”
“It is surprising how many people assume that all big businesses have automatically complied with the Disability Discrimination Law. The everyday reality for wheelchair users is that level access or lifts are still all too often not available.”
“The only reason we brought the claim was because they thought they could ignore us. Then they tried to bully us. Big organisations think they can buy their way out instead of answering complaints of discrimination. They never seemed to understand that we weren’t after money. It was simply an issue about access to the bank. They’ll never get it right until they actually listen to people with disabilities.
Douglas Johnson of Sheffield Law Centre represented David. He said,
“This judgement sets out a very clear and simple formula for courts to follow in future cases. It will make it easier and simpler for courts to deal with complaints of discrimination from disabled people in the future.”
“I found it hard to believe the bank actually argued that David was getting a better service by doing his banking in the street and I was disappointed that the bank refused to accept the judgement of His Honour Judge Dowse. The bank has avoided creating access for as long as it can so I am very pleased we have a clear message from the Court of Appeal.”
“This judgement should encourage the bank to review its national access programme. It must talk to people about their everyday needs. The real access issue is about people and attitudes, not ramps and steps. This ruling should start to bring real benefits to disabled and non-disabled customers.”
NOTES TO EDITORS
Press contact:
Douglas Johnson in Sheffield 0114 273 1501;
1. The Court of Appeal dismissed the bank’s appeal and ordered the bank to install wheelchair access to the branch and pay an additional £3000 for the delay.
2. David Allen has banked at the Church St, Sheffield branch of RBS since he was at primary school. Now he uses a wheelchair, he cannot get into the branch at all. As a result, he had to do his banking on the street, despite the Disability Discrimination Act requiring the bank to take reasonable adjustments to their branch. He found this degrading and humiliating.
3. The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 prohibits discrimination related to a disability in the fields of employment, education, goods facilities and services (GFS) and public authority functions. Part 3 of the Act also requires service providers to make “reasonable adjustments” to their services so as to provide as close a service as possible to that provided to other members of the public. Service providers may have to make adjustments to their policies or practices, as well as to any physical barriers on their premises.
4. Disabled people who have been discriminated against unlawfully can bring a complaint in their local county court. Where discrimination has occurred, county courts have the power to award compensation for “injury to feelings” – this is to cover humiliation, embarrassment, inconvenience and stress, even where there has been no financial loss. The Employment Tribunal hears complaints of disability discrimination in the employment field.
5. Employment tribunals receive 5,500 complaints of disability discrimination a year. By contrast, very few complaints have ever been brought in the county courts. In the years 1996 to 2004, research indicates that fewer than 100 cases in total had ever been brought to a court.
6. The Royal Bank of Scotland Group (which includes the NatWest) currently has about 2276 branches in the UK. The bank’s pre-tax profits for 2006-07 were £9,414 million. The RBS handles 14,000 accounts at its church St, Sheffield branch.
7. An estimated 20% of the population have a disability (within the definition in the Disability Discrimination Act). Only about 4% of disabled people use wheelchairs.
8. His Honour Judge Dowse gave judgement in favour of David Allen on 16th January 2009. He gave a declaration that RBS had discriminated against David Allen contrary to s.19(1)(b) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 – the “reasonable adjustment” duty. He also ordered the bank to install a platform lift, as detailed in an expert report before the court, no later than 30 September 2009 and awarded damages for injury to feelings of £6,500, plus interest. The cost of the works was estimated at £200,000. This is the first known case where a court has granted a mandatory injunction under the DDA requiring building work to address physical features.
9. “Injury to feelings” is the legal term for the frustration, insult, inconvenience, embarrassment, stigma, etc of suffering unjustified discrimination.
10. Sheffield Law Centre is an independent registered charity and provides specialist legal advice in housing, employment, immigration and asylum and discrimination law. There are 56 law centres altogether in the UK, supported by the Law Centres Federation.
Sheffield Law Centre is at Waverley House, 10 Joiner Street, Sheffield S3 8GW.
Public advice line: 0114 273 1888
For further information on this press release, please contact Douglas Johnson at Sheffield Law Centre.
E-mail ,
Tel: 0114 273 1501
Fax 0114 279 7778.
Website: http://www.slc.org.uk
18-year-old disabled man takes on Royal Bank of Scotland in landmark appeal case
RBS is appealing against a landmark ruling in January which ordered it to install wheelchair access at the man’s local branch in Sheffield under the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). The January 2009 ruling was the first time a court had ever ordered building work as a “reasonable adjustment” under the DDA. The cost of the necessary work was estimated at £200,000.
The man, David Allen, is a student at Sheffield Hallam University. He originally brought a complaint under the DDA because he was unable to get into his local RBS branch in Sheffield in his wheelchair and was forced to do his banking in the street outside. The bank claimed at the January trial that this meant that David was “treated better than any other person”.
Ruling on the case in Sheffield County Court in January, His Honour Judge Dowse said that David “attended his own branch of the Bank where there was wheelchair accessibility signage. That was wrong and was later removed. The website said that there was wheelchair access. That was wrong. He was then told that he could use the staff entrance. That was wrong also. He was engaged in a private conversation about the opening of a savings account on the street in full public view… The suggestion by the Bank that David has received better treatment than others by the opening of the savings account in the street completely ignores any question of privacy for customer service to which David is entitled.”
David said:
“Despite everything, I still cannot get into my bank. It is clear that RBS won’t provide disabled access until they are forced to by the courts.”
David’s mother, Ceri Allen, who had to start the legal case as David was under 18 at the time of the first hearing, said:
“RBS claims to take disability issues seriously. In January, they told the court that David received better treatment than other customers because they allowed him to carry out banking transactions in the street. They are a multinational company, yet the privacy and dignity of disabled people has not even been considered. The only reason we brought the claim was because they thought they could ignore us.”
Douglas Johnson of Sheffield Law Centre, and Catherine Casserley and Robin Allen QC of Cloisters chambers, are representing David. Sheffield Law Centre provides free, expert legal advice and representation to poor and disadvantaged people. The case is supported by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
Douglas Johnson, Discrimination Caseworker, Sheffield Law Centre, said:
“It’s wrong that large banks pay huge bonuses when people like David literally can’t get their foot in the door. It’s also wrong that they get away with it because of the difficulties disabled people face in navigating the legal system. If the Allens had not had the faith and perseverance to see this case through, the services of Sheffield Law Centre and the backing of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, they simply could not afford to ask for justice.”
For more information, please contact:
Clare Rudebeck, Communications Officer, Law Centres Federation
Mobile: 07775 931 265
Email:
NOTES TO EDITORS
1. Judgement on the case is expected to be reserved until a later date.
2. The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 prohibits discrimination related to a disability in the fields of employment, education, goods facilities and services (GFS) and public authority functions. Part 3 of the Act also requires service providers to make “reasonable adjustments” to their services so as to provide as close a service as possible to that provided to other members of the public. Service providers may have to make adjustments to their policies or practices, as well as to any physical barriers on their premises.
3. His Honour Judge Dowse gave judgement in favour of David Allen on 16 January 2009 in Sheffield County Court. He gave a declaration that RBS had discriminated against David Allen contrary to s.19(1)(b) of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 – the “reasonable adjustment” duty. He also ordered the bank to install a platform lift, as detailed in an expert’s report before the court, and awarded damages for injury to feelings of £6,500, plus interest. This was the first known case where a court has granted a mandatory injunction under the DDA requiring building work to address physical features.
4. Sheffield Law Centre is a registered charity and provides specialist legal advice in housing, employment, immigration and asylum and discrimination law. Public advice line: 0114 273 1888. There are 56 Law Centres in the UK, supported by the Law Centres Federation.
LCF Conference and AGM 2009 Update
Annual General Meeting information:
Introductory letter from Julie Bishop, LCF Director:
AGM_2009_Mailout_-_Julie_Cover_Letter.doc
AGM agenda with nominee details, motions and membership applications:
AGM_Details_October_2009.doc
LCF’s annual audited accounts:
LCF_Audited_Accounts_2008-9.pdf
* * *
The conference brochure, page by page, including a booking form and a nomination form for the Law Centres award:
The conference brochure Programme:
LCF launches joint campaign for access to justice for young people
Over one million children and young people annually are not getting the legal advice they need, warns a campaign launched today by four leading advice charities.
As a result, children and young people are being denied their rights to liberty, security, shelter and education, warns the JustRights campaign, which brings together Children’s Rights Alliance for England, Howard League for Penal Reform, Law Centres Federation and Youth Access.
The campaign estimates that the cost to the taxpayer of failing to get legal advice to children and young people is at least £1 billion annually, as under-25 year-olds end up homeless, destitute, wrongly imprisoned, or worse.
JustRights is campaigning for fair access to legal services for children and young people. It is calling on the government to:
• Recognise the unique legal advice crisis facing children and young people in the UK.
• Develop a cross-departmental strategy to ensure ready access to high quality independent legal advice and representation for all children and young people whenever they need it.
• Invest in age-appropriate legal advice services.
To mark the launch of the campaign, Youth Access is issuing a report, which sets out comprehensive evidence of the scandalous failure to meet the advice needs of young people on social welfare issues. The report, Young People’s Access to Advice – The Evidence, finds that:
• Contrary to popular belief, most young people neither know their rights nor understand ‘the system’.
• Each year, at least one million young people with complex social welfare problems such as debt, homelessness, education and employment get no advice at all.
• Hundreds of thousands of young people try, but fail to obtain advice because there is no service able to help them.
• Only one in seven of those young people who manage to get advice do so from a recognised legal advice professional.
Katy Swaine, Legal Director of the Children’s Rights Alliance for England, said:
“This is a prime example of age discrimination in the UK. We know that it is children and young people in the most vulnerable situations, including those in custody and those living in the care system, for whom it is often hardest to access independent expert advice.”
Julie Bishop, Director of the Law Centres Federation, said:
“Every day, Law Centres see young people whose lives are hanging in the balance. Often, they are facing homelessness, or are being denied an education. The legal advice we give them has a huge impact, helping them to get their lives back on track. All young people should get that chance.”
Barbara Rayment, Director of Youth Access, said:
“Children and young people are in a uniquely dangerous situation – they are the least likely age group to get good legal advice, and yet they often need it the most. Today, children and young people in the UK are living on the streets and experiencing serious financial problems because there is no one to defend their rights,”
ENDS
For more information and to interview young people facing these problems, please contact:
Clare Rudebeck, Communications Officer, Law Centres Federation
Mobile: 07775 931 265
Email:
Notes to editors:
About the key statistics:
The estimate of over one million children and young people annually not getting the legal advice they need is based on analysis of data from the 2006-08 Civil and Social Justice Survey (CSJS), has been checked by the Legal Services Research Centre and only relates to 16-24 year-olds’ civil justice problems, so under-estimates the true scale of the legal advice crisis facing children and young people. The estimate that this costs the taxpayer £1 billion is based on Ministry of Justice data on the cost of civil justice problems. Contact for further details.
About JustRights
JustRights, the campaign for fair access to legal services for children and young people, will be launched at an event on 26 October being hosted in central London by Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer. Speakers will include Shami Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty. Guests will include young people whose lives have been transformed by the receipt of good legal advice.
About the Children’s Rights Alliance for England (CRAE)
CRAE is a coalition of over 270 voluntary and statutory organisations committed to the full implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. CRAE protects the human rights of children by lobbying those holding power, by bringing or supporting test cases, by using national, regional and international human rights mechanisms, by supporting children’s self advocacy and by giving advice to children. Find out more at: http://www.crae.org.uk
About The Howard League for Penal Reform
The Howard League for Penal Reform provides a unique legal service for children and young people in custody. We recognise children and young adults are a distinct group who are less likely to seek advice and often unaware that the law can work for them. Our casework evidences the need to have specialist advisors who have a holistic approach to the legal needs of children and young people. For further information go to: http://www.howardleague.org
About Law Centres Federation
The Law Centres Federation is the membership organisation for a national network of Law Centres which provide free civil legal advice and representation to the most disadvantaged members of British society. Law Centres have pioneered young people’s civil legal advice services, supporting approximately 7,000 young people over the last three years in London alone. For further information, go to: http://www.lawcentres.org.uk
About Youth Access
Youth Access is the national membership association for a network of over 200 youth information, advice, counselling and support services across the UK dealing with over one million enquiries a year on issues as diverse as sexual health, mental health, relationships, homelessness, benefits and debt. For further information, go to: http://www.youthaccess.org.uk. Youth Access has published a number of reports recently on young people’s advice needs, all of which are available to download for free from http://www.youthaccess.org.uk/publications
LCF statement on Ministry of Justice legal aid consultation
The Law Centres Federation welcomes Lord Bach’s announcement today of continued support for social welfare law. The announcement comes in the midst of economic recession, with a 27 per cent increase in bankruptcies in the last quarter and a continuing rise in demand for legal assistance to deal with the loss of jobs and homes.
Law Centres have been providing expert legal services directly to people affected by job loss and threatened by homelessness in their communities for the last 40 years. The need for tailored services is now greater than ever. Today’s announcement goes some way to support the continuation of these services in a time of crisis.
For MoJ’s announcement: News Release
LCF statement on the closure of Cambridge and Huntingdon Law Centres
The Law Centres Federation (LCF), which represents the 56 Law Centres in England and Wales, is very concerned about the impact that the loss of these Law Centres will have on local people, particularly at a time of economic recession.
For this reason, LCF and a neighbouring Law Centre have offered their assistance to the liquidator to ensure that vulnerable local people continue to get the legal help they need.
ENDS
Notes to Editors:
For more information, please call LCF’s Communications Officer, Clare Rudebeck, on 0207 428 4417 or 07775 931 265.
The Law Centres Federation is an independent charity which represents the 56 Law Centres in England and Wales.
Law Centres are not-for-profit legal practices, which give free legal advice and representation to disadvantaged people in the UK.
Cambridge and Huntingdon Law Centres joined the Law Centres Federation in November 2006.
Legal advice changes lives - Law Centres broadcast the proof on YouTube
The videos were shown to an invited audience of Ministers and MPs at the House of Lords on 14th July at an event hosted by the Legal Aid Minister, Lord Bach.
Watch the videos on YouTube now:
Maureen’s Story. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vS3YskpCF_I
Maureen was inspired to become a lawyer after Brent Community Law Centre helped her to make her estate safe to live in.
Sandra and Robert’s Story. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZqCxgXMtr_I
Sandra and Robert got married and settled in the UK with the help of Chesterfield Law Centre.
Law Centres are not-for-profit legal practices, which give free legal advice and representation to disadvantaged people in the UK. There are 58 Law Centres in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
ENDS
For more information, and to speak to the people featured in the videos, please contact:
Clare Rudebeck, Communications Officer, Law Centres Federation:
Direct line: 0207 428 4417. Mobile: 07775 931 265
Email:
Please feel free to embed Maureen’s Story and Sandra and Robert’s Story into online articles.
LCF endorses report on Asylum Support Tribunals
The Law Centres Federation has endorsed a Citizen’s Advice Report on Asylum Support Tribunals and the case for public funding of this work. Concluding that the Tribunal’s users are especially vulnerable and disadvantaged, relative to other tribunal users, this briefing repeats previous calls for publicly-funded legal representation before the Tribunal.
The briefing also suggests that the annual up-front cost of providing such representation – of the order of £300,000 – could be met entirely from the savings that would flow from an evidently much needed improvement in the quality of the UK Border Agency’s initial decision-making on asylum support.
The briefing paper: Supporting_Justice_Briefing_Paper.pdf
LCF welcomes Ministry of Justice study of legal advice at local level
The Law Centres Federation today responds to the publication of the Ministry of Justice Study of Legal Advice at Local Level, by calling on the government to urgently implement the report’s recommendations to address the impact of the reforms to legal aid so that real solutions can be provided to people in need.
The Law Centres Federation warmly welcomes the report, and extends its thanks to Lord Bach for leading the process to examine the challenges which recent reforms pose to the legal aid sector.
The Federation echoes the report’s concern that legal services must be tailored to the needs of a diverse client-base, and that one-size does not and can not fit all client needs.
Julie Bishop, Director of the Law Centres Federation, said:
“We have appreciated Lord Bach’s spirit of co-operation and his commitment to begin to address the impact which legal aid reforms are having on the ability of vulnerable people to get the help they need. We see this report as a first step. It has identified urgent problems with the funding and adequate provision of legal services. These must be addressed.”
As the UK’s oldest provider of free legal services, Law Centres are supporting some of the country’s most marginalised and vulnerable people in their efforts to keep their jobs and their homes in the recession.
New technology is wrong way to reach recession-hit young people
Report puts forward blueprint for legal advice services for teenagers and young adults
Twittering and telephone services are not the way to reach young people in desperate need of advice about homelessness, unemployment and debt, according to a report published today by Youth Access and the Law Centres Federation. Recession-hit young people prefer to get advice about their problems from a face-to-face service targeted specifically at them.
As youth unemployment soars and young people’s need for advice on homelessness, benefits and debt reaches unprecedented levels, policies which direct resources to generic advice providers, telephone advice and internet-based services are likely to leave many young people without the help and support they need to overcome their problems.
Young people are more likely to have civil legal problems than the rest of the population, says the report, Rights Within Reach. However, many don’t get the help they need. Every year, an estimated 200,000 young people try but fail to get legal advice with severe consequences for those individuals and for society as a whole.
The report, based on research with advice agencies and young people, puts forward a blueprint for effective legal advice services for young people. Its key findings include:
- Young people primarily want and need advice face-to-face, rather than by mobile or online.
- A strong one to one relationship between adviser and young person is vital to improving the young person’s chances in the long-term.
- Advice should be provided in a place where young people already go for help such as youth drop-in centres, rather than legal centres.
Legal advice can change young people’s lives, as Keiley, a young woman helped by an outreach legal advice service for young people, testifies:
“Within five years of being kicked out of home, I graduated with a law degree; this would have never been possible were it not for the advice, representation and guidance from my legal adviser who got me housed and then kept in touch.”
The report’s other findings include:
- Young people’s participation in the planning of advice services appears to improve their accessibility and impact.
- Advisers need to have both the ability to engage young people and sound legal knowledge of young people’s rights and entitlements.
- Services work best where youth agency staff offer holistic advice and support to young people, with legal advisers concentrating on legal remedies.
Julie Bishop, Director of the Law Centres Federation, says:
“Legal advice can change young people’s lives, but only if it is delivered in the right way. Twittering and telephone services don’t provide real solutions. This report shows how to provide an effective and affordable service to help young people cope with the recession.”
Barbara Rayment, Director of Youth Access, says:
“Young people both need and benefit from legal advice far more than the general adult population, yet they are considerably less likely to successfully obtain it. In this recession, where young people are hit hardest of all, the message is clear that young people need specialist targeted services to help them tackle their problems.”
ENDS
Notes to Editors:
1. For more information, a copy of the report, case studies and access to interviewees, please call:
Mandy Wilkins, Young People’s Project Manager, Law Centres Federation
020 7428 4419 / 07974 227332
Steve Lee, Policy Officer, Youth Access
020 8772 9900 / 07966 739308
2. The full report, Rights Within Reach: Developing effective legal advice outreach services for young people, is also at: Young Peoples Project.
3. Youth Access is the national membership organisation for a network of 200 youth information, advice and counselling services, which deal with over 1 million enquiries a year on issues as diverse as sexual health, mental health, relationships, homelessness, benefits and debt.
Further information: Youth Access
4. Law Centres Federation is one of the largest providers of specialist legal advice and representation in the UK. It is the national membership organisation for a network of 55 Law Centres which provide free independent legal advice and representation to the most disadvantaged members of society.
5. Note on figures:
• Estimate of 200,000 young people annually trying but failing to get legal advice calculated by Youth Access using data from the 2004 Civil and Social Justice Survey and checked by the Legal Services Research Centre.
LCF welcomes two new members of staff
We are pleased to announce the arrival of two new staff members at the LCF.
Jane Backhurst is the new Policy and Campaigns Director.
Jane worked with the EU’s Vice-President for External Relations, followed by ECHO (the EU’s relief agency) during the Bosnian war, and then became the EC Country Coordinator for the Baltic States. She has worked on assignments with communities and NGOs in over 30 countries across Africa, the Middle East and the Balkans, many affected by conflict. She has built strategies and processes across humanitarian organisations to respond to violations in International Humanitarian Law and child rights.
Jane established World Vision’s office in Brussels and subsequently became its Director. In that capacity, she also developed programmes and advocacy and campaigns coordination across members in Europe. She created and led 7 European NGO coalitions around child protection, civil-military coordination, HIV and AIDS and conflict prevention.
Jane co-founded the European Peacebuilding Liaison Office. She has served as a Board member of VOICE, the European network of 90 leading humanitarian NGOs, for two terms. She also served 6 years on the Policy Forum Steering Group of CONCORD (the European Confederation of 1600 Development NGOs).
Clare Rudebeck is our new Communications Officer, co-ordinating our profile-building and branding work.
Clare has over five years’ media experience both as a journalist and a public relations officer. She started her career at The Independent newspaper, where she worked as a features journalist for three years. She then moved to Oxfam, where she led the organisation’s international media work on arms control and African crises.
LCF calls on City lawyers to continue their support during the recession
The Law Centres Federation (LCF) has today, 25th February, appealed to major City firms to maintain their Corporate Social Responsibility and Pro Bono programmes despite the need to cut costs during the current recession.
“We know it is hard to ask firms to maintain a non profit element when people are being made redundant “ said Julie Bishop, director of LCF “but the need for companies to support their communities during the hard times ahead will be even greater.
“Large firms in particular have responded magnificently to need in the past few years, developing full CSR and pro bono departments. It would be tragic if that progress were to be lost at the very time it is most needed.
“The work of Law Centres is extended and enhanced through the partnership of pro bono programmes. We really hope our partners will be able to continue to go the extra mile and maintain their commitment to the community.”
High Court orders Home Secretary to reverse ‘unlawful’ deportation of gay asylum seeker
‘Mr X’ was represented by the Refugee Legal Centre before Sir George Newman, who examined the events that led to the deportation. Mr X’s mobile phone was taken away from him and he was denied all outside contact. He was then bundled into a van, believing he was about to be interviewed by a Border Agency officer. In fact, has was taken directly to a plane at Gatwick airport where, upon resisting, he was beaten up, bound and hurried out of the UK. In their submission, representatives of the Home Office admitted that this chain of events was illegal.
In an extraordinary move, Sir George ordered the Home Secretary to reverse Mr X’s removal. He said, “Justice requires he should, if possible, be brought back so he can make his claim as effectively as he can. Without hesitation, I exercise my discretion to grant the claimant a mandatory order that the Secretary of State should use her best endeavours to secure his return to the UK.”
However, judicial reviews such as this are currently under threat as the Home Office has mooted its intention to scrap them.
Commenting on the ruling, Ursula O’Hare, assistant director of Law Centre (NI), said,
“This shocking case demonstrates the need for full access to legal advice and judicial review for those seeking sanctuary in the UK. Through our work with asylum seekers we know the strain the process places upon them. We welcome the decision of the Judge in this case and support the call to ensure that those facing removal from the UK have full access to the judicial review process. Only by doing so can we be sure that individuals who have come to the UK seeking sanctuary are not placed in further harm and that this sort of situation can be avoided in the future.”
The Independent’s coverage of the story
Borders and Immigration briefing (February 2009) by the policy unit at Law Centre (NI)
LCF responds to LSC consultation
The Law Centres Federation submitted a detailed response to the LSC’s consultation on the Civil Bid Round for 2010 contracts this month.
The LCF held consultation meetings with Law Centres prior to making the submission. The main comments cover:
* The timing of the consultation and the introduction of the new scheme
* The proposals around the grouping of areas of social welfare law
* The introduction of a new discrimination\equality category of law
* The inclusion of social outcomes in the procurement process
* The humanisation of service delivery
LCF Response: LCF_Response_to_LSC_Consultation_on_Civil_Bid_Rounds_2010_Jan09.pdf
Response Cover: LSC_Cover_Page.pdf
The submission referred to two current studies: the study of legal advice at local level being carried out by the Ministry of Justice and research by CoSA, the Council on Social Action. CoSA was set up by the Prime Minister and is looking at ways to ‘humanise’ public services and how to generate transformative outcomes.
Legal victory for Sheffield wheelchair user against RBS
David Allen, now studying for his A-levels, learned an important lesson about life in the course of his dealings with the Royal Bank of Scotland. Despite promising wheelchair accessibility signs in and around his high street bank branch, David could not get in to use its services. This led to some embarrassing situations, which included David needing to meet a bank clerk on the street outside the branch and to discuss his account with him in public. On another occasion, RBS have even suggested that David transfer his account to a wheelchair accessible branch some ten miles away. He decided to challenge these inconsiderate arrangements in court.
As David is still a minor, his mother Ceri had to bring the case on his behalf. She turned to Douglas Johnson of the Sheffield Law Centre who, together with Catherine Casserley of Cloisters Chambers, represented the Allens in court, with the support of the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
On Friday, 16 January 2009, Judge Dowse of Sheffield County Court found in favour of the Allens, and his ruling is doubly significant. Firstly, he awarded £6,500 in compensation to the Allens, the highest sum awarded in the UK for a non-employment disability discrimination case. Moreover, Judge Dowse granted an injunction which required RBS to build a lift in the branch by the end of September. This addition, estimated to cost around £200,000, was deemed by the court to be a ‘reasonable adjustment’ which is expected of service providers under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.
Full judgment: CCJ_Allen_v_RBS.doc
Comments from Douglas Johnson and Ceri and David Allen: Sheffiled_LC_Press_Release_Allen_v_RBS.doc
Comment on the ruling in Guardian.co.uk: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/16/disability-equality
BBC Look North coverage: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7834641.stm
Law Centre (NI) launches Anti-Trafficking resource
‘Trafficking by its nature is an underground activity. Our own work shows that it is becoming more prevalent in Northern Ireland. Trafficking is a modern day slave trade with people forced into slave labour and sexual exploitation,’ said Law Centre (NI) director Les Allamby.
Anna Morvern, immigration adviser at the Law Centre, added: ‘My colleagues and I have represented immigrant victims of trafficking in Northern Ireland in recent years. They often feel trapped, powerless and afraid. They are often frightened because they have been forced to work illegally. Some have arrived with the promise of work only to find themselves forced into prostitution. Violence or threats of violence may have been used against them or their family members at home. We want them to know that help and protection are available. We can offer advice and assistance to help people escape from exploitation, as we have set out in this leaflet.’
Although there are no clear figures available for Northern Ireland, it is known that, every year, 4,000 people, including children, are brought into the UK for sexual and labour exploitation. They come from many countries including Albania, Brazil, China, Ghana, Nigeria, Thailand, the Ukraine and Vietnam. The National University of Ireland found that the probable minimum number of women trafficked for sexual exploitation in the Republic between 2000 and 2006 was 76.
The leaflet, entitled ‘Exploited’, is translated into Albanian, Brazilian Portuguese, Czech, French, Lithuanian, Malaysian, Mandarin, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian and Thai. In the hope that the document will reach those who need it most, the Law Centre will distribute it widely through its networks and contacts with community groups, migrant worker organisations, ethnic minority groups, health and social services, police and other statutory bodies.
For more information on the leaflet and on related training and PLE work, please contact Law Centre (NI).
The Future for Law Centres
Access to justice is not a commodity – it’s a constitutional, democratic, human right. No one chooses to be poor, live in a squalid tenancy or be discriminated against. The reality is Law Centres are providing accountable, public services, in their communities.
Copy of speech: The_Future_for_Law_Centres_in_Scotland.doc
£billions up for grabs as financial woes pile on the pressure
The coalition, an alliance of six organisations including Citizens Advice, Law Centres Federation and Age Concern and funded by the Big Lottery Fund, is today launching Advice Week (6th to12th October) to highlight different ways people can access free and impartial advice on a range of issues including legal matters, debt, benefits, housing and employment.
While eight out of 10 people are more worried about their finances than this time last year, the coalition found that those who felt that they had the greatest need for advice, were those who had the lowest awareness that free advice was available. This was also the group on the lowest incomes, despite up to £9.9 billion in means tested benefits going unclaimed last year.
John Fitzpatrick, Chair of Law Centres Federation, said: “Law Centres are experts at helping people in a financial crisis with their housing problems, threatened repossession, managing debt, and ensuring they receive what they are entitled to. Law Centres across the country will be using Advice Week to let people know there is legal assistance available and that they can get free help.”
Employment advisers underfunded and overwhelmed by cases of mistreatment at work, says TUC
Employment advisers receive daily reports of mistreatment from workers across low paid and female dominated sectors of the economy – such as care, catering and cleaning – but often feel they do not have the necessary resources to challenge this exploitation.
Researchers from the Centre for Employment Studies Research at Bristol Business School, commissioned by the TUC’s Commission on Vulnerable Employment, interviewed employment advisers from Citizens Advice (CABx) and the Law Centres Federation across the UK. The research highlights the extent of the problems that vulnerable workers face:
• 79 per cent of advisers receive reports of unfair dismissal weekly or more frequently;
• 67 per cent of advisers receive reports of problems with pay weekly or more frequently;
• 60 per cent deal with problems with working time/contractual rights weekly or more frequently.
These problems are concentrated in low paid sectors where most jobs are held by women. Advisers told the researchers that workers experiencing problems were most likely to work in private care homes, hotels and restaurants, hairdressing and beauty, wholesale and retail, or for cleaning companies.
With respect to problems with pay:
• 86 per cent of advisers had supported workers from private care homes;
• 79 per cent had supported workers employed by cleaning companies; and
• 72 per cent had supported workers employed in hotels and restaurants.
For each of the main problems that workers experienced, more than 50 per cent of advisers said that they often came across employers who were ‘repeat offenders’.
The research shows that a large number of workplace grievances are experienced by workers on permanent contracts, but also demonstrates that agency workers were disproportionately likely to experience workplace problems – 62 per cent of CABx and 81 per cent of Law Centres saw temps on a frequent basis.
The majority of respondents also felt their organisation needed more funding and resources necessary to meet demand for advice; 70 per cent of CAB and 80 per cent of Law Centre advisers felt they had too few advisers to deal with the number of enquiries they received about mistreatment at work. Advisers also reported spending more and more time fund seeking so time available for advocacy work was decreasing.
TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber said: “The study gives us a picture of vulnerable work through the lens of the two national agencies which provide free employment-rights advice and support to those without union representation. It is not a pretty picture.
“The TUC’s Commission on Vulnerable Employment was shocked at the extent of abuses of employment rights reported by colleagues at Citizens Advice and the Law Centres. It is unacceptable that these practices exist today, and equally unfair that when they do, services to help vulnerable workers are left over-stretched and under-funded.
“Ministers have recently accepted the need for an information and awareness campaign for workers and employers on basic rights at work – which the TUC welcomes. However, sustainable funding is also needed for independent employment rights advice, so that when workers experience problems they can access support. Government, trade unions and employers need to work together to make sure this happens.
“The Government is also committed to enabling enforcement agencies such as the Health and Safety Executive and the minimum wage enforcement unit of HMRC to work more closely together and to better co-ordinate their work. However, these positive developments also need to be accompanied by more resources – agencies need the capacity to take proactive work that prevents mistreatment at work from happening in the first place. Extending the Gangmasters Licensing Authority (GLA) to other low-paid sectors characterised by temporary work would also make a huge impact.”
The research also revealed:
• Only one in three CABx have a specialist volunteer employment rights adviser;
• No Law Centres employed more than two full-time paid employment specialists.
Around two-thirds of advisers from both CABx and Law Centres felt they had too little legal experience to assist migrant workers, and almost three-quarters of CABx and 61 per cent of Law Centres also felt they had too few resources to provide advice and support to workers who do not have English as their first language.
The research is available at: CoVE Research
TUC Press Release: CoVE_TUC_23.08_.08_.doc
Parish Council discriminated against wheelchair user
A major rebuilding project at South Normanton community centre should have led to good access for all. However, many members of the Parish Council were not consulted on the project, which was largely in the hands of the Chairman, Terry Cook and parish clerk, Norman Taylor.
Unfortunately, the chosen design of the main entrance doors meant that wheelchair users could not get in without assistance. When Mrs Upton, a Parish councillor herself, could not get in to the centre one wet and windy January day, she took her concerns to the Parish Council. However, the Chairman, Mr Terry Cook, ignored her complaints. Only when legal action had been started were suitable new doors installed.
The Parish Council and Community Centre Association still refused to acknowledge the fact of discrimination or to apologise. However, at the hearing at Sheffield county court before District Judge Hill, their barrister accepted that they had discriminated against Mrs Upton. The court ordered them to pay Mrs Upton £3000 in compensation, plus costs.
After the hearing, Mrs Upton said:
“I didn’t want this to go to court. The Parish Council could have sorted this out so easily if Terry Cook, the Chairman, had only listened to people. But he didn’t, so I was left with no other option. I had a meeting with him to avoid this, at which we were insulted and threatened.”
“This has had a big effect on my social life. I am glad it’s over and done with and now all parties can accept the decision and move on.”
As a result of the case, the community centre has improved access doors, which should benefit other disabled people as well as pram users.
Douglas Johnson, of Sheffield Law Centre, helped Mrs Upton bring the complaint to court for a ruling. He said,
“The court process isn’t ideal for settling problems like this but sometimes it is the only way to tackle discrimination. Thanks to Mrs Upton’s sense of responsibility, the community of South Normanton now has better access to the Community Centre.”
Court of Appeal victory for tolerated trespassers
Thousands of secure tenants who have had possession orders made against them by the courts remain in occupation of their dwellings. Social landlords are often slow to evict them, and can continue to obtain ‘rent’ from them as tolerated trespassers for as long as they are in occupation. But what happens when they leave? Merton Borough Council argued, and convinced the Croydon County Court, that tolerated trespassers should remain liable to pay their ‘rent’ until such time as they formally notify the landlord that they have left – whether or not they have actually departed.
The issue came before the Court of Appeal (Arden, Wall and Wilson LJJ) on 16th June 2008 in the case of Jones v London Borough of Merton [2008] EWCA Civ 660. Mr Jones was represented by the Hammersmith and Fulham Community Law Centre.
Until 11th February 2005 Mr Jones was the secure tenant of a Merton Borough Council flat. From that date on he became a tolerated trespasser, because although Croydon County Court had made a possession order against him for rent arrears he stayed on in the flat and the Council did not move to evict him. However, in June 2005 masked men broke into his flat and shot Mr Jones in the leg. Unsurprisingly, he never returned to the flat. Merton conceded that by 3rd October 2005 it knew that Mr Jones was no longer in occupation. In November 2005 a friend took the last of Mr Jones’ belongings – a bed, television, computer and stereo – from the flat.
In May 2006 Merton again issued possession proceedings against Mr Jones, and the case was eventually heard in December 2006 in Croydon County Court. Merton claimed that even though Mr Jones was no longer in possession he had originally stayed on as a tolerated trespasser after 11th February 2005 and so was liable for ‘rent’, or mesne profits, for his occupation up until 25th September 2006 – because he had not formally notified Merton until then that he was no longer in occupation and Merton had not accepted any surrender of the flat from him. The County Court judge found in favour of the Council’s arguments and ordered Mr Jones to pay £3,200 to Merton.
At the Law Centre in Hammersmith, case worker Beverley Brown and then solicitor Jenny Hunt handled the case for Mr Jones. They instructed Robert Latham of Doughty Street Chambers to appear for Mr Jones in the Court of Appeal. The Court allowed Mr Jones’ appeal on the grounds that the County Court judge was wrong to consider that the same principles by which a tenant effected the surrender of his tenancy also governed the circumstances in which a tolerated trespasser secured discharge of his obligation to pay mesne profits to his former landlord. The Court rejected Merton’s argument that a tolerated trespasser should be made to pay mesne profits until he had not only given up possession but had also given notification of that to the Council. The Appeal Court ordered Mr Jones to pay Merton £343 for the period up until 15th November 2005 when his final belongings were removed.
Lord Justice Wilson noted that The Housing Law Practitioners Association estimates that there are as many as 750,000 tolerated trespassers in public sector housing in England and Wales, and added ‘indeed a recent survey suggests that in inner London between 10% and 20% of occupants of local authority housing are tolerated trespassers rather than tenants.’
The Housing and Regeneration Act 2008, when it comes in to force, will effectively abolish the ‘tolerated trespasser’. In future a secure tenancy (or an assured tenancy) will continue until a warrant for possession has been executed. In the meantime, thanks to Mr Jones and the Hammersmith and Fulham Community Law Centre hundreds of thousands of tolerated trespassers will be in a much less vulnerable position.
Cedric Stewart v ICTS (UK) Ltd
On 22 March 2007, Mr Stewart issued proceedings in the Bristol County court against ICTS (UK) Ltd, an airport security firm. He alleged that he had been discriminated against on racial grounds by staff employed by ICTS (UK) Ltd when he queued with his companion to go through passport control at Bristol Airport on 22nd September 2006 in order to travel to Newark New Jersey. He described in the claim how he and his companion had been singled out from the passport control queue and subjected to more detailed questioning beyond the routine security questions and had his hand luggage bag emptied out and searched and was required to remove his shoes .
Mr Stewart had felt humiliated in front of his fellow passengers. As a former airport passenger agent he was aware of the correct procedures and these in his view had not been followed. He concluded that he and his friend had been treated less favourably on racial grounds than other passengers because of their colour and their national and ethnic origin.
In their defence, ICTS (UK) Ltd stated that they had carried out a full internal investigation and denied that there was discrimination. They also stated that they were following procedures laid down by Transportation Security Administration a US Government Agency.
ICTS (UK) Ltd were required by the court to provide copies of the internal investigation and the trial of the claim was fixed for 9th November 2007. ICTS(UK) Ltd argued that to properly present its case it had to rely on sensitive security information and that it was going to rely on section 41 of the Race Relations Act . So that trial did not take place on 9th November.
A new trial date was arranged for January 25th but hearing was adjourned to allow ICTS (UK) Ltd to put its detailed arguments in writing about why it could not produce in open court evidence upon which it was seeking to rely.
The Defendant argued that they would rely on s42 of the Race Relations Act 1976 if the case against them was proven at trial. This is a provision of the RRA that states that an act done for the purpose of safeguarding national security shall not be rendered unlawful if the doing of the act was justified by that purpose..i.e. national security. ICTS was saying that the security procedures required by the statutory legislation relating to Aviation Security required the company to act as it did.
A pre trial review was fixed before His Honour Judge Lambert on 23rd July 2008 for an hour in open court at the County Court’s Guildhall in Bristol. The purpose of this hearing was primarily to consider the applications made by ICTS for public interest immunity in relation to documentation – the company was arguing that the security protocols upon which their searches were based were protected by public interest immunity. It was also to consider their application to specifically include reference to ss41 and 42 of the RRA in their defence.
At this hearing Paul Hunter represented ICTS (UK) Ltd and Mr Stewart had the pro bono services of Anne Karithi, a pupil barrister of Garden Court Chambers in London and attendance by the Law Centre to assist.The judge pointed out that the Defendant, ICTS (UK) Ltd was a private corporation. It had not provided any statement from a government minister or an agent of state to confirm that there were security issues. He noted that they had not amended the Defence as the court had asked them to fully explain their defence on grounds of national security.
He said that ICTS (UK) Ltd was using a wholly disproportionate amount of court time with the issues they were raising. The judge invited the parties to discuss whether the case could be settled without further need for hearing.
After negotiation at court, the parties reached agreement .That agreement was encapsulated in a consent order which was approved by His Honour Judge Lambert. The order required ICTS (UK) Ltd to pay £4120 to Mr Stewart by 6th August in settlement of his claim for compensation for racial discrimination. There was no order for costs. The Defendant company through its legal officer Mr Paul Hunter gave an agreed undertaking (a promise to the court) to destroy all the materials relating to the incident on 22nd September 2006 and to confirm by letter that this had been done.
The Law Centre is pleased that Mr Stewart by his own determination and persistence achieved a satisfactory financial settlement after a number of lengthy pre-trial hearings. Claimants in discrimination cases often face an uphill task to enforce their rights.
R (Faarah) v Southwark London Borough Council
Sedley LJ concluded :
“..All the members of this court would wish to express their appreciation of the skilful professional service which Ms Faarah has had from the Southwark Law Centre. As the history set out by Lord Justice Toulson shows, the Law Centre, by careful and well-informed correspondence, was able to locate and challenge the precise error of public administration which this appeal has confirmed. It is of importance to the administration of justice, as well as to many individuals, that there should continue to be Law Centres like Southwark’s which are able to offer professional help of high calibre to the neediest people.”
These comments come at a time when the provision of good quality legal advice to those who cannot afford to pay for it ( like Ms Faarah ) continues to be under threat. The Legal Services Commission focus on “outputs” rather than outcomes favours those providing high volume rather than high quality services.
In Ms Faarah’s case, the Administrative Court had given judgment in March but the local authority had failed to act to adjust her priority. She was only rehoused after the Law Centre issued a second application for judicial review when (very unusually) thirty four bedroom properties became available for allocation and it was apparent that Ms Faarah should have been offered one of them, but would not be.
Ms Faarah’s case illustrates the importance of the provision of high quality legal advice: there is a key difference between the approach of a qualified and experienced housing lawyer faced with a client who wishes to be rehoused, and the adviser lacking appropriate expertise. The one is able to identify and pursue a legal challenge, the other may only be able to write a letter saying “please rehouse this client because her housing circumstances are poor.”
Law Centres are uniquely placed to gather and use information and expertise about local authority policies and procedures.
The trend towards low cost high volume advice which may not be provided locally ( for example , by the use of telephone advice lines where the adviser may be at the other end of the country) may mean that in the future the actions of local authorities are more likely to go unchecked.
Rebekah Carrier, Solicitor
Southwark Law Centre 11th August 2008
Avon and Bristol wins case to provide wheelchair access
Tavistock resident, Marjorie Corner has settled her claim against Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust for failing to provide wheelchair accessible toilets in a ward, and is now campaigning to ensure the Trust carry out vital improvements promised in all their hospitals.
As someone who has Multiple Sclerosis Mrs Corner needed to have a toilet accessible to wheelchair users during her stay at Derriford Hospital in March 2007 but, on her ward there were none.
She said: “As someone who had been admitted for a complete bowl evacuation prior to a colonoscopy, this proved to have a hugely detrimental effect on the standard of care I received.
“It was ghastly, they did not have a suitable commode so I was left in my bed. This wasn’t the nursing staff’s fault but it literally resulted in my lying in my own waste for three days.”
Mrs Corner spent many months writing to the Chief Executive to discuss the situation.
She said: “I spoke to the Disability Rights Commission who offered conciliation to the hospital but received no response and they advised me to take court action.
“The more I discovered about the hospital’s practices the more appalled I became. It soon became clear that all but one of the wards had no disabled toilet facilities.
“I did not pursue the case for myself but because I was disgusted with the lack of basic facilities available, the basic human rights for disabled people, abandoned by the area hospital.
“I found the Avon and Bristol Law Centre online, contacted them by phone and from then on things started to happen.
“The ABLC was absolutely crucial in this outcome. There has been a lot of correspondence, it has all been very positive. Nothing else was going to make the hospital do anything.”
On July 11th 2008 District Judge Daniel at Bristol County Court, Greyfriars, approved an order agreed between the parties. The Trust agreed to apologise and pay Mrs Corner damages in settlement for her claim for discrimination and breach of human rights.
The Trust has also agreed to ensure that the current refurbishment programme will provide a wheelchair accessible toilet on each inpatient ward in line with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.
Mrs Corner said: “Our main hurdle is still to clear as the hospital has not yet committed to speeding up the improvements of their toilet facilities but with the help of the Avon and Bristol Law Centre we shall carry on. This is for every disabled person in the east of Cornwall and nearly half of Devon.”
Of Mrs Corner’s case, a spokesperson for the Avon and Bristol Law Centre said: “I am glad that the Trust has recognised they needed to settle this case but I am still concerned. What I hope is that they implement the changes they have agreed to make as quickly as possible to ensure that there are accessible toilets on every ward”.
“If a disabled person considers that they have experienced disability discrimination, then should seek further advice about challenging that discrimination. There is a helpline that provides advice about all strands of discrimination open every day at the Equality and Human Rights Commission ”
Further details of the case can be obtained by contacting Mrs Corner and
Press Release: Avon_and_Bristol_1st_August_.doc
Update:
The trust is currently undertaking a full refurbishment programme. The hospital’s planning department is undertaking a survey of all toilets to identify which need improvement. A hospital representative said, “A number of ward areas have already been upgraded and now have facilities for patients with a disability. This work will continue on other ward areas over the coming months and will be completed in the near future.”
Coventry Law Centre wins compensation claim
On 31st July, the Coventry Telegaph reported that a woman whose Coventry-based child nursery has gone into voluntary liquidation was facing a £6,340 compensation claim by a sacked nurse.
A Birmingham employment tribunal decided Amanda Faulknall, who ran Magic Roundabout Nursery in Brandon Road, Coventry, should compensate Natalie Fletcher, of Binley, Coventry.
Ms Faulknall of Ferndale Road, Hinckley, did not attend the tribunal hearing, which decided that Miss Fletcher had been unfairly dismissed and was entitled to unpaid wages and holiday pay.
Miss Fletcher, who was represented by Elaine Hill of Coventry Law Centre, had been employed by a previous management at the nursery. When Ms Faulknall took over Miss Fletcher complained she was sacked without reason.
Her job was later advertised but the business had since gone into voluntary liquidation it was said.
Miss Faulknall was accused of dismissing Miss Fletcher without carrying out the correct disciplinary and dismissal procedure under the Employment Rights Act.
Tribunal chairman Mr David Dimbylow said the £6,340 award included a 50 per cent “penalty’’ uplift for the Employment Rights Act breach. He said Ms Faulknall was responsible for the award but he could not guarantee Miss Fletcher getting her money. Tribunals can make awards but do not have the power to enforce payment, it was said.
A tribunal spokesman said Miss Fletcher could claim the £6,340 in county court, using the tribunal judgment as a backing.
Coventry_Law_Centre_31.07_.08_.doc
Access to the Courts
Ludgershall resident, Mrs Donna Pearce has succeeded in her fight to make the magistrates court in Salisbury take account of disabled people’s access needs.
Mrs Pearce today announced the following information to the media:
Mrs Donna Pearce, a wheelchair user from Ludgershall, brought a claim for disability discrimination against Her Majesty’s Court Services in the County Court after experiencing problems in accessing both services and courtroom in the Magistrate’s Court, The Guildhall, Market Square, Salisbury, Wiltshire in Summer 2006.
After a considerable time, her case was settled, and compensation was given to Mrs Pearce by HMCS, along with all legal representational expenses to her solicitor and barrister.
The settlement was approved by the court on 13th June 2008.
The magistrate’s court agreed to alter the information it gave out on its summonses, and agreed, if anyone wishing to visit any hearing to contact them and an alternative court will be used.
Mrs Pearce says, “Everyone told me I was mad to take on Her Majesty’s Court Services but I had to, and I’m glad I did. So if this gives anyone out there some courage to stand up for their rights, then my (nearly) 2 years of taking this case on, was well worth it.
“I wish to thank everybody for their support and especially thank my solicitor and barrister who were great.”
Discrimination Caseworker, Angela Truell of the Avon and Bristol Law Centre said, “We are pleased for Mrs Pearce that this case was successfully concluded. Access to the courts for all disabled people is essential.”
Avon_and_Bristol_July_2008.doc
Call for a ‘Distinctive Approach’ to Northern Ireland Asylum Policy
After conducting the most extensive review of asylum policy in the UK the Independent Asylum Commission will return to Belfast on Wednesday 23rd July to present the recommendations from its Saving Sanctuary, Safe Return and Deserving Dignity reports and urge that Northern Ireland take a ‘distinct approach’ to the treatment of those who seek sanctuary here.
The Commission has made over 180 recommendations to restore public support for sanctuary, and improve the way we decide who needs sanctuary, how we treat people while they are here, and what happens when a person is refused sanctuary. The Commission has called for an asylum system that makes better decisions and treats people with greater humanity and dignity.
The Commission, which sought evidence from individuals and organisations from across the UK (including three former Home Secretaries) also held a hearing in Belfast in November 2007. It is now publishing its findings and presenting its recommendations to ministers across the UK, including from the Northern Ireland Executive. Earlier this month the Commission secured agreement from the Scottish Government and Welsh Assembly Government to look at how some of the recommendations could be implemented in Scotland and Wales.
The Commission’s reports include a number of recommendations that are particularly pertinent to the asylum system in Northern Ireland. These include applying asylum policy in a sensitive and sensible manner, ensuring better access to information and services for asylum seekers, and providing alternatives to the current removal of asylum seekers to detention centres in Scotland and England prior to removal which the Commission views as unacceptable.
Ifath Nawaz, President of the Association of Muslim Lawyers and co-chair of the Independent Asylum Commission speaking ahead of her visit to Belfast said:
“Our Commission has made many recommendations to improve the treatment of people who come to the UK seeking sanctuary. The devolution of power to Wales and Scotland has seen the new governments there using devolution as an opportunity to show real political leadership in relation to asylum policy. We would like to see a similar distinctive approach adopted by Ministers in Northern Ireland,”.
The Commissioners are also expected to raise issues unique to Northern Ireland such as the consequences of border crossing to the Republic of Ireland and the closure of the local enquiry office.
Ifath Nawaz said:
“There are many reasons why asylum seekers may not immediately present their claim on entering a country and this is accepted by the Government and the courts - for example, in cases where there is evidence of trauma associated with torture or sexual violence. Denying access to information and access to services by closing the only enquiry office on cost grounds, means that those seeking sanctuary are put into a much more vulnerable situation.”
Les Allamby, Director of the Northern Ireland Law Centre, said:
“We are delighted to host the launch of the report. The Northern Ireland Executive and MLAs have been broadly supportive of better treatment of asylum seekers. Nonetheless, more needs to be done. The IAC has rightly shone a light on a number of important issues including the need for local facilities for reception, the need to use detention sparingly, the importance of access to local information and advice and more emphasis on care and services than the current UK Border Agency’s concentration on detention and enforcement”.
CONTACT:
Jonathan Cox, Independent Asylum Commission Co-ordinator, 07919 484066, or Hratche Koundarjian, Managing Director, Principle, 07905 911 039, .
Bury Law Centre wins national award
Bury Law Centre was given the award on 19th June at the Inner Temple in London for ‘Best Contribution by a Regional Law Firm or Organisation’ at the LawWorks National Pro Bono Awards.
The Judges said:
“Bury Law Centre has worked tirelessly to bring a range of pro bono legal services to an area which despite sharing many of the social needs of Manchester, has historically not been able to match the facilities enjoyed by its neighbour.
“A small and extremely committed team of lawyers has provided a wide range of legal services which has been enthusiastically appreciated by the public it supports.”
The award was collected by Michael McGhie, one of the nine pro bono lawyers involved, who attended the prestigious ceremony in London last month.
Development worker David Wildman said: “We are delighted to have received this recognition which highlights the valuable contribution made by all our lawyers – for free and in their own time.
“To date, they’ve seen 235 people and given 130 hours of free advice, worth around £23,600. From feedback received, the service is well regarded by clients and advice agencies and is filling a genuine gap in provision in the borough.”
Notes
The LawWorks Pro Bono Awards celebrate the best legal pro bono activities undertaken by organisations and individuals and the positive impact it had on those helped.
The independent judges - Sir Henry Brooke, Edward Fennell and Andrew Holroyd - selected the winners for the first four awards from 50 or so nominations.
DWP discriminates against blind woman
Angela Sharrock is registered blind. In 2006, the DWP received an anonymous complaint about her and spent several months investigating her, both with secret surveillance and with taped interviews. Her income support entitlement was stopped in February 2007. With advice and representation from Manor Rights and Advice Service in Sheffield, she took her case to an independent appeal tribunal, which ruled against the DWP. However, the DWP repeatedly failed to put its letters and legal documents into an accessible format that she could read, despite admissions at Sheffield county court that it was able to do so. This was in breach of the duty under the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 to make reasonable adjustments to its usual services by providing an auxiliary service.
At Sheffield County Court, District Judge Mort said that other members of the public “would get letters and would be able to read those letters and act on them and decide whether or not they needed advice.” Relying on the statutory Code of Practice, he said that, “the aim of the duty to make reasonable adjustments is to provide access as close as possible to the way in which access is normally offered to the public at large.”
He found that the DWP’s failure to comply with its own practices caused Miss Sharrock inconvenience, effort, discomfort, anxiety and loss of dignity. However, he found that her upset was “partially due” to the DWP’s treatment of her in the taped interviews. As these occurred before the relevant sections of the law came into force on 4th December 2006, he could not take them into account in awarding compensation.
After the hearing, Angela Sharrock said,
“I have always been as independent as I can. I feel ashamed when I have to ask for help. Doing something simple like putting my letters in a large print size would make it much easier for me to keep my independence.”
Douglas Johnson, who represented Miss Sharrock, said:
“The court was limited to the complaint only about the DWP’s correspondence. However, Miss Sharrock had earlier complaints about the handling of the anonymous complaint about her. She found the investigator to be abusive and to have made inappropriate comments about her disability. These matters were not taken to court because the relevant legal provision came into force on 4th December 2006, which was after the investigation had taken place. The DWP will have to ensure it complies with these provisions of the DDA in future.”
Referring to the fact that the DWP is the Government Department responsible for the Disability Discrimination Act, Christopher Cole, Chair of Sheffield Law Centre, said,
“It is astonishing that the government department responsible for introducing the DDA should fail so comprehensively to apply the DDA. Providing access to people with disabilities takes many different forms and this case shows that government departments cannot ignore people’s rights and hinder access to justice.”
Sheffield_Discrimination_Case_15.07.08.pdf
Warnings over repossession advice
Faith Reynolds for Transact said: “Many of the homeowners facing difficulties are on relatively low incomes but not entitled to legal aid - the experience of Transact members shows that these people desperately need more help to protect their homes in court and they need it now.”
Most homeowners are not entitled to legal aid, and Law Centres and advice agencies that offer pro-bono (free) legal representation are being over-run with requests for help.
In London, debt advice partnership Capitalise has seen a 90% increase in possession hearings in the first three months of this year – Capitalise represented 146 clients at possession hearings between January and March, compared to only 77 during the same period in 2007.
Transact_Repossessions_8.6.08.doc
Press_Association_Repossessions_8.6.08.doc
Hard Work, Hidden Lives
On 4th June, the report and its findings were presented to the Prime Minister. He said that the government was ‘giving positive consideration to its recommendations and was strongly committed to working with the TUC, employers and others to tackle the issues highlighted’.
The report found that ignorance of rights at work and a lack of access to employment rights advice, made worse by recent changes in the funding regime, were key problems for the two million vulnerable workers in the UK. ‘Vulnerable workers have great difficulty in getting the specialist support they need - even if they are persistent, they will in many areas only get advice about their basic rights but not the ongoing support they need to enforce them. Many areas of the country are employment rights advice deserts.
‘Vulnerable workers prefer face-to-face advice, and are less confident about telephone advice and information, finding it harder and more time-consuming to resolve problems in this way. But those who could provide this advice - particularly solicitors, voluntary advice providers and union groups - are often without the resources to meet demand.’
Legal aid reform has made it harder for some employment advisers to access funding, and has led to a reduction in the number of solicitors taking on employment advice work. Between 2001 and 2006 there was a 46 per cent drop in the number of employment law providers undertaking legal aid work, and since 1997 there has been a real terms drop in civil legal aid spend of around 24 per cent.
The Commission recommends:
• A continuous national social marketing campaign to increase awareness of employment rights across the workforce, but particularly among vulnerable workers.
• Training in employment rights for public sector staff who come into contact with vulnerable workers.
• A statutory duty on local authorities to provide sustainable funding for employment rights advice services, accompanied by an increase in central Government funding for employment rights provision.
• Commitments from unions and employers to fund employment advice and community groups working with vulnerable workers.
• An urgent review of the impact that legal aid reform has had on the availability of employment advice for vulnerable workers.
• A new Fair Employment Commission, involving employers, unions and civil society groups to co-ordinate the work of enforcement agencies, monitor awareness of employment rights and make recommendations to Government.
The Commission also calls for more resources for enforcement agencies, far more co-ordination of their work - part of the brief of a new Fair Employment Commission - and for a range of relatively straightforward money based rights to be enforced by an agency such as the minimum wage enforcement unit of HMRC, rather than require individuals to take tribunal cases.
TUC General Secretary and Commission Chair Brendan Barber said, ‘It’s a national disgrace that in 2008 Britain still has two million vulnerable workers. What makes their position worse is that many do not know when their employer breaks the law, and can’t find anyone to advise or represent them even if they do seek advice. That is why we are calling for more funding for advice agencies, joined-up work from enforcement agencies with wider remits and for loopholes in employment law, particularly the abuse of employment status by employers who refuse to provide contracts of employment, to be closed.’
John Fitzpatrick, Chair of the Law Centres Federation, said: ‘The Law Centres Federation welcomed the findings of the Commission on Vulnerable Employment’s report. The findings highlight the increasing difficulty for vulnerable people with complex personal needs to get the specialist help they need for their legal problems.
‘The findings also indicate that workers are being denied their rights because legal aid is not always available and there are insufficient providers of employment advice to meet a growing need. As well as unfair dismissals, pay, and contractual rights, discrimination is an increasingly common complaint with few advisors able to assist. New publicity on rights under all the strands of discrimination, is increasing the demand for assistance in this area. The research indicates that unless action is taken, new rights will never be realised, and the system will fail to meet the needs of those most vulnerable and excluded in society.
‘Law Centres have the expertise to provide these services and a proven record in effective delivery to vulnerable and disadvantaged people. The findings show that the legal aid reforms are, in effect, limiting the ability of Law Centres to provide the best service to those most in need.’
London Legal Support Trust Walk
The walk raised a record £310,000. Bob Nightingale who organised the walk said:
“It was brilliant, we raised £100,000 more than the year before. Having doubled the number of walkers every year for four years, I think it’s becoming something of an institution. People know that the voluntary legal sector is dying and the commercial legal profession is turning to help.”
Thirteen London Law Centres joined the walk alongside workers from the Law Centres Federation. South West London Law Centre alone raised £10,000.
Following the walk, a ceremony at The Law Society saw the Trust present cheques to the Mary Ward Legal Centre (£27,000), which provides free advice on debt law, and the Islington Law Centre (£25,000), which provides advice on housing, education employment and consumer law, to combat the “immediate danger” of closure that both centres face.
The Trust was also given a boost by the announcement that Weil Gotshal & Manches will be joining a scheme that raises money from the interest accrued by pooling the firms’ client accounts.
Previously Allen & Overy was the only firm to take part in the idea, raising £75,000 a year through the scheme.
“The need is immense – the gap between what legal aid achieves and what is needed is huge, so regular money is important. But the walk was a brilliant demonstration of support by the commercial sector,” Nightingale said.
Elsewhere, the legal teams at Vodafone and the Surrey Law Society held their own walks, turning the sponsored walk into a national event.
The Trust will allocate the remaining funds raises in coming months.
London_Legal_Support_Trust_May_Walk_2008.doc
Rights of Fixed-Term Workers
Tony Meenan, a Clinical Network Manager, had a two year contract with the Trust. He was barred from applying for another position with the Trust because he was not a permanent employee.
Because of the Review of Public Administration, the Trust had to reduce the number of people it employs. It was trying to minimise compulsory redundancies among its permanent employees. In this context, the Trust argued that a temporary bar on fixed-term employees applying for permanent posts was justified.
The Industrial Tribunal disagreed and found that the discrimination was not justified.
Caroline Maguire, Tony Meenan’s solicitor at the Law Centre, warns that this type of discrimination may be happening in other organisations and not only those affected by the Review of Public Administration.
“The Law Centre welcomes this decision. To date, there have been few instances where employees have successfully been able to show discrimination arising from their fixed-term status” said Ms Maguire.
“There may be circumstances when an employer can justify treating a fixed-term employee less favourably than a permanent one. However, an employer who discriminates against its fixed-term employees on the assumption that its permanent employees are entitled to more favourable treatment runs a real risk of breaking the law.’’
She added: “We hope that this case will encourage other fixed-term employees who feel they have suffered discrimination to seek advice.”
Access to Environmental Justice
Writing in the Times on 20th May, ex-Law Centre practitioner, Steve Cragg said,
‘The report proposes several ways to address the prohibitive cost of legal action in relation to environmental cases in England and Wales. They include a more generous use of costs protection, which can cap, in advance, the liability for costs. The report recognises that the legal aid scheme now refers to the convention but recommends more creative use of the scheme, in tandem with environmental NGOs.
‘But in reality, access to environmental justice often does not fit easily with legal aid’s focus on individual rights. Small charities, such as the Environmental Law Foundation try to match individuals with lawyers prepared to act on a pro bono basis, but ensuring such organisations have proper funding must be a further aim for government in this largely neglected but increasingly important area of law.’
Stephen Cragg is a barrister specialising in public law at Doughty Street Chambers. Stephen was previously employed at Hackney Community Law Centre.
John Dunkley from EarthRights and ex LCF and Law Centre worker said,
‘May 2008, might prove to be just as much a landmark month for environmental law as May 68 was for Parisian radicals, albeit rather more sedately, and with the existentialism of Sartre and de Beauvoir replaced by the wig and gown of a High Court judge.
‘In a Report published this month, a working party chaired by the Hon Mr Justice Sullivan has declared that changes must be implemented in the court rules on costs that effectively prevent individuals and groups from bringing legal challenges to environmental decisions, if the UK is not to breach the Aarhus Convention.
‘The Aarhus Convention entered into force on 2001 and was the culmination of international negotiations on securing access to justice for individuals and groups seeking to protect the environment. It closed a decade which saw the passing of much promising legislation and the establishment of projects such as the Environmental Law Foundation and the LCF’s own environment project.
‘However, time and again communities have found their way to court barred not by the fees of their own lawyers, many of whom have been willing to act pro bono, but by the risk of having to pay tens even hundreds of thousands of pounds towards their opponents’ legal costs.’
‘Government must make Legal Action affordable in Environmental Cases’ Press Release on the Report
Access_to_Justice_Report_-_Press_Release.doc
‘Danger of high legal bills must be reduced, warns judge’
Observer article by Caroline Davies : The_Observer_25.05.08.doc
Record £5,000 awarded for disability discrimination
Mr Langdon, who uses a wheelchair, attended a family celebration at Sutton Park Golf Club in Hull. Unfortunately for him and his family, their evening was spoilt by the limited access to the club and in particular to the toilets. This resulted in extreme humiliation and embarrassment for them.
With the help of Hull’s Choices & Rights Disability Coalition, Mr Langdon approached the proprietor, Mr Webster. He refused to respond to any phone calls or letters.
Sheffield Law Centre assisted Mr Langdon to enforce his complaint in Hull county court. At the hearing on 26th March 2008, District Judge Weston found that Mr Webster had failed to acknowledge not just the humiliation and inconvenience caused to Mr Langdon but also his complaints of discrimination. He ordered Mr Webster to pay £5000 compensation, plus court costs, within 21 days.
Sheffield_Law_Centre_Disability_Discrimination_April_2008.doc
South West London Law Centres - Legal Aid reforms forces closure
Michael Ashe, CEO of South West London Law Centres said:
‘The work we do is not glamorous, but it is vital. There are desperate people queuing outside our doors for hours each night in the depths of winter to see volunteer advisers because their low-wage jobs mean they are not eligible for Legal Aid. We cannot even invite them to wait inside out of the cold because we cannot afford proper premises and we cannot afford to pay a receptionist. We stay at work in the evenings and come in at weekends because we cannot balance the books any other way, and because there is always another vulnerable person denied their rights who we cannot let down. Like doctors, nurses and teachers, we just want to be allowed to do our job, and do it well’.
Further Information
Michael Ashe, Chief Executive, South West London Law Centres: 020 8772 7051 or
South_West_London_Law_Centres_Press_Release_260208.doc
Protecting Fundamental Rights - Telling it as it is…
LCF Press Release:
Protecting_Fundamental_Rights.doc
New Director for LCF - Julie Bishop
Immigration: Law Centres Protecting Fundamental Rights Conference
Legal Aid is a cornerstone of Fundamental Rights, and these linked issues will be explored by a panel of distinguished speakers led by Lord Bach, Ministry of Justice Whip, joined by James Welch, Legal Director of Liberty, Andrew Holroyd OBE, President of the Law Society, and Paul Newell, Head of Civil Policy Development at the Legal Services Commission.
On Saturday, Joanna Owen of the Legal Office, Enforcement Team at the Equality and Human Rights Commission will lead discussion on ‘Equality issues and how we can work together in future’.
LCF_Annual_Conference_2007.doc
WASP Project National Conference
The conference focuses on the WASP research project which is a groundbreaking study conducted by South Manchester Law Centre in partnership with Manchester Metropolitan University. It is a trans-national research project covering England and Wales and four regions in Pakistan. Speakers: Hina Jilani, Pragna Patel, Melanie Plimmer and Alison Stanley.
Conference fee £117.50 inc for voluntary, not-for-profit and charitable organisations
£235 inc for private practitioners, statutory bodies and public organisations and individuals.
Flyer: South_Manchester_Conference_12.07.doc
Attorney General to open new Law Centre offices
A debate on the future of legal aid services in Lambeth will follow in the evening at their 26th Annual General Meeting. Law Centre staff and management committee will celebrate with the Attorney General, the the opening of their new offices at Unit 4, Co-op Centre. 11 Mowll Street, London SW9 6BG.
Press Release: Lambeth_Law_Centre_AGM_02.10.07.doc
Contact: Patrick Marples 020 7840 2006 or email:
Possession Prevention Project April 2004 - April 2007
The Possession Prevention Project was a innovative three year project based in the London Borough of Southwark. Southwark Law Centre and Blackfriars Advice Centre worked in partnerhsip to reduce evictions by combining outreach, training and policy initiatives which focused on possession prevention. The report provides an overview of the Project, analysing its effectiveness and how the methodology can be best utilised and built upon in the future as a model of good practice.
Possession_Prevention_Project_July_2007.pdf
Law Awards of Scotland 2007
Goven_Law_Centre_wins_awards_in_Law_Awards_of_Scotland_2007.doc
Article in the Herald on 17th September http://www.theherald.co.uk/business/news/display.var.1692161.0.0.php
Not for Profit legal advice gets a boost in Advice Week
Not_for_Profit_legal_advice_gets_a_boost_in_Advice_Week.doc
To find out more about advicePRO, visit http://www.advicepro.org.uk
Rights in Progress - Third edition
Law_Centre_(NI)_Rights_in_progress_2007.pdf
Gordon Brown celebrates Law Centre hero
GORDON_BROWN_CELEBRATES_STREETWISE_COMMUNITY_LAW_CENTRE.doc
Migrant workers are underpaid and at risk
Carlisle_Law_Centre_Migrant_workers_are_underpaid_and_at_risk.doc
http://www.communitylaw.org.uk/campaigns
Legal Services Commission unlawfully deny access to justice
Southwark_Law_Centre_-_Eligibility_Ruling_20th_July_2007.doc
The case was reported in The Times on 20th August 2007
Net_rent_payable_not_the_same_as_rent_paid.doc
Hammersmith Council sued over Law Centre cuts
Hammersmith__Fuham_Press_Release_13th_July_2007.doc
Developing Capable Citizens: The Role of Public Legal Education
Developing_Capable_Citizens_LCF_response.doc
Extract from the Report of Southwark Preventing Possessions Project: Extract_from_PLEAS_Report_on_Southwark_Preventing_Possessions_Project_July_2007.doc
Turn Back Jack !
Law Centres including North Kensington, Southwark, Greenwich, Bury and Warrington, have invited members of the public as well as MPs and local councillors to their open days. Turn_Back_Jack_13th_July_2007.doc
Also see Press Releases
‘Sponsoring Dependency or Investing in Social Capital’
Hammersmith’s Council’s recommendations for voluntary sector funding for 2007-09 were published on 2nd April. On 16th April at a Council meeting the council decided to cut a cut of nearly £160,000 in the Law Centres funding - a cut of over 60%. These cuts will make it even harder for vulnerable local residents to obtain legal advice and ensure their rights and entitlements. The cut could mean an end to vital local legal services the Law Centre has provided for over 27 years.
A public meeting is being held on 18th June at the Irish Centre in West London at 7.30. The meeting, ‘Sponsoring Dependency or Investing in Social Capital?’ is in defence of legal advice and community services in Hammersmith and Fulham. Hammersmith_Law_Centre_Public_Meeting_18th_June.doc
Everyone welcome.
Private tenants and leaseholders – including many Council tenants, and those who need advice about security of tenure, disrepair, lease conditions, service charges and management issues – no-one to advise them or represent them at the new Residential Property Service Tribunal. Local residents who become homeless – including young people leaving troubled homes or women fleeing domestic violence – no one to take these emergency cases. Local residents facing discrimination at work or unfair dismissal – no one to represent them in the Employment Tribunal. Local residents facing problems with British citizenship, right to work, family reunion, getting status documents out of the Home Office – no immigration and nationality advice. Nowhere for local community organisations to send their clients. Nowhere for Council social workers and housing officers to send the people they don’t know how to help and will inevitably lead to local residents losing their homes, their jobs, their access to benefits and other rights and services to which they are entitled.
Hammersmith_Tories_slash_funding_to_Law_Centre_03.04.07e.doc
Please sign Petition in support of Hammersmith and Fulham Law Centre
Donations: Payable to: Hammersmith & Fulham Voluntary Sector funding Campaign, PO Box 60801, London W6 6DR
Contac for the Campaign: ; http://hammersmithlaw.wordpress.com/
Pride not Prejudice
‘Pride not prejudice’ focuses on discrimination and harassment at work on the grounds of sexual orientation. It explains the Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) regulations which were introduced in December 2003 and describes how they protect people in the workplace. It also provides information on the options available to deal with discrimination and harassment.
- Watch the DVD on our website
At the Launch of the DVD on 18 January 2007, Ben Summerskill, Commissioner of the Commission for Equality and Human Rights and Chief Executive of Stonewall, stated:
“This compelling DVD will help many lesbian, gay and bisexual people give meaning to their new rights at work. It uses the experience and views of real people to help others develop the skills, confidence and knowledge necessary to take action if faced with discrimination at work.”
The Law Centres Federation produced ‘Pride not prejudice’ in partnership with Southwark Law Centre, and Southwark LGBT Network. Members of the community in Southwark contributed significantly to the planning and production of the DVD.
‘Pride not prejudice’ is suitable for use in a wide range of different settings:
- By individuals to gain a better understanding of their rights
- By Law Centres and advice organisations to train community-based advisers, community groups and employers
- By employers to raise awareness of diversity issues among their employees and to gain a better understanding of their own responsibilities as employers
- By law students and lawyers to gain a better understanding of the legislation.
Free copies of the DVD are currently available - please contact Noeleen Adams on 020 7255 9593,
Justice Access Denied
On 15th May, to mark Access to Justice Alliance’s Week of Action, Law Centres joined other members of the Alliance outside County Courts in London to protest about government’s proposed reforms to civil Legal Aid. Courts including Croydon, Wandsworth, Kingston and Central London were picketed by lawyers and clients concerned that the introduction of fixed fees and competitive tendering will mean fewer people will be given legal advice.
The protesters waved placards with the ‘No Entry’ sign logo and shouted the slogan “Justice Access Denied”. Tomorrow Law Centres will be protesting in Manchester outside the Immigration Tribunal and on Monday next week a protest will be held in Sheffield.
Earlier this month the Constitutional Affairs Committee published a damming report on the reforms saying that they were being “introduced too quickly, in too rigid a way and with insufficient evidence”.
“Everyone agrees that the legal aid budget is under pressure due mainly to high cost criminal and public law family cases. It is not a solution though, to introduce fixed fees and competitive tendering to the already cash strapped system. It is the most vulnerable clients that will suffer if the Government does not think again,”
said Steve Hynes Director of LCF.
Press contact Steve Hynes - 020 8387 8570
For further information go to: Access to Justice Alliance website.
Law Centres welcome Constitutional Affairs Committee findings
See: Press Releases
A copy of the report can be found here: Final_Report.pdf
New Law Centres for Cambridgeshire
The advice centres in Cambridge and Huntingdon (formerly CIAC and HIAC) were recently admitted to membership of the Law Centres Federation. “We are now able to operate the two centres together as the first law centre for Cambridgeshire. There is only one other law centre in the whole of the Eastern Region. We now employ fully qualified solicitors as well as the highly experienced specialist advice staff. The Law Centre status will allow us to offer an even better service to our clients; allowing us to provide full legal aid for all eligible clients in Housing, Welfare Benefits, Immigration, Employment and Debt.”
Keith Bennett, Chief Executive of AFL said, “There are virtually no solicitors left in Cambridgeshire providing legal aid services in Housing, Welfare Benefits, Immigration, Employment and Debt. We have developed Cambridgeshire Law Centres to fill this gap.”
See Press Release: Huntingdon_launch_April_07.doc
LSC announces the first CLAC based in Gateshead
Gateshead_Community_Legal_Advice_Centre_opens_in_April.doc
LCF Director attended the official launch which took place on 24th May 2007. LSC Press Release: LSC_Press_Release_CLAC_24th_May_07.doc
Stockport Law Centre will fight to stay open
Stockport_Law_Centre_will_fight_to_stay_open.doc
Law Centres calls on Government for a new funding settlement
Many Law Centres fear that the Government’s fixed fee system, which is due to be introduced on 1st October will lead to cuts of up to 20% in services as well as a reduction in specialist case work.
There are sixty Law Centres across the country. They receive around 50% of their funding from the legal aid system, around 40% from local Government with a further 10% from other sources. Law Centres mainly specialise in housing, employment, immigration, discrimination, benefits and public law.
“Fixed fees are dumbing down legal services. Yes, some people will have access to justice – about 30 minutes worth of justice. If fixed fees are introduced as proposed there will be an irresistible pressure to push more simple cases through the legal aid system at the expense of the type of complex cases all legal aid lawyers try to take up and that Law Centres specialise in. These plans are an affront to the rule of law. So far as Law Centres are concerned they spell the death of a wonderful, creative, innovative, campaigning, accountable, independent, committed legal service as it is forcibly transformed into a more conventional provider.’ says John Fitzpatrick, Chair of LCF.
At the meeting Law Centres agreed to campaign at both national and local levels for a new funding settlement for Law Centres. The campaign will include demonstrations and media work to highlight the plight of clients who would be hit by the funding cuts. In addition to campaigning activity the meeting also called on Law Centres to draw up contingency plans for refusing to co-operate with the LSC after 1st October 2007 unless satisfactory progress can be made on Law Centre funding.
“This is not about turning our backs on those who need our services; it is about saying that those people above all deserve our commitment to the fight for the services that they need,” says Fitzpatrick.
Go to Press Releases for a copy
Press contact – LCF Director, Steve Hynes - 020 7255 9592
Law Centres join AJA Campaign ‘Justice - Access Denied’
The Alliance plan a week of action starting week beginning 14th May. Alison Hannah, Chair of AJA said, “The purpose of the week of action is to raise public awareness of the potential impact the Government’s reforms will have on access to justice. Everyone concerned about these services should support the campaign and contact AJA members to take part.”
Justice_-_Access_Denied_Campaign_Launch_March_2007.doc
Trafficking victim granted asylum
Trafficking_-_Hammersmith__Fulham_Law_Centre_-_The_Times_13.02.07.doc
Legal aid changes threaten future of local legal advice services
Among the main changes are plans to introduce a national system of funding for legal advice services based on flat fees regardless of the length or complexity of cases. The proposals follow publication of a report, Legal Aid Reform – the way ahead’ in November 2006 following a review of legal aid last year. The recommended reforms aim to change public funding of legal aid, with bigger firms (including Law Centres and advice agencies) doing more work at less cost.
The Action Day is part of a campaign by the Law Centre to highlight the threats to advice services posed by these changes. This includes a petition currently being collected from local residents and members of the public opposing the changes.
North Kensington Law Centre provides specialist legal advice and casework services for local residents and people working in the area. Its work covers education, employment, housing, immigration and welfare benefits.
Law Centre director, Sean Canning said:
“We see over 7,000 callers a year. Most of the people coming to us are from marginalised and excluded communities including black and minority backgrounds, homeless people and those with severe mental health problems. Should these proposals go ahead they will have a disastrous impact on the most vulnerable members of our community”.
The proposals mean that an advisor doing a housing case in London will be paid the same rate as someone in Cardiff or Newcastle. This fails to take account of the complexities of casework involving vulnerable clients and those whose first language is not English. The proposals also ignore the higher costs of delivering legal advice services in London and fundamentally threaten the future viability of many providers in the voluntary sector.
Local MP Karen Buck says:
“The proposed changes to the funding of legal advice services threaten to undermine the viability of vital services in my constituency. They will lead to reduced access to advice which will disproportionately impact on the most vulnerable members of our community”
Members of the public are asked to visit the Law Centre stall at 74 Golborne Road on Friday 9 February between 12-4pm and sign the petition.
Notes for editors
1. North Kensington Law Centre was established in 1970 as the first Law Centre nationally in the United Kingdom.
We are a community-based legal service which provides free legal advice and representation for the most
vulnerable members of our community. We provide legal advice in education, employment, housing, asylum
and immigration and welfare benefits.
2. The Law Centre is funded mainly by the Legal services Commission (LSC) to provide legal help and assistance
under the ‘legal help’ scheme.
3. In July 2006 the government published the Carter Review into the future funding of legal aid.
Its main recommendations were as follows:
• Payment of legal help work to be based on flat and graduated fees for all areas of social welfare law (housing,
education, employment, asylum and immigration and welfare benefits). Restructuring of the legal services market
through a Preferred Supplier Scheme. The aim is that larger providers will deliver a higher volume of casework at
lower costs per case.
• Abolition of funding for advice work (Level 1) for not for profit (NFP) organisations.
• Introduction of competitive tendering for procurement of legal services from 2009-10.
• Alignment of the systems of payment for not for profit organisations and private practice.
4. Following consultation which closed in October 2006 the LSC has published its response on 28 November in
Legal Aid: the Way Ahead. Its main proposals are:
• Fixed fees deferred until October 2007.
• National fees not Regional fees.
• Exceptional cases over the threshold has been reduced to 3 times the fixed fee and new set of fees published.
• Removal of Level 1 advices from the scheme.
5. Further information is available on our website at http://www.nklc.co.uk
If you want to pursue a story concerning the impact of these proposals on individuals and families then please contact Sean Canning on 0208 206 5715 or Karen Buck on 0208 968 7888.
‘Equality through Justice’ Campaign
There are laws in place to protect workers from discrimination and harassment on the grounds of their race, gender, disability, sexual orientation, religion or belief or age.
This campaign is particularly focused on the newer strands of employment equality legislation; sexual orientation and religion or belief where legislation has existed since December 2003 and the newest area of age, where regulations were introduced in October 2006. So far there have been relatively few cases brought on the grounds of sexual orientation or religion and belief, even though the legislation is now three years old.
During the ‘Equality through Justice’ Campaign Law Centres around the country will be providing free training to raise awareness of rights that protect people who are discriminated against in the workplace. Equality_through_Justice_Press_release.pdf
Information about all activities Equality_through_Justice_Campaign_Activities.pdf
Please see SORBAEE Project under Law Centre Projects for examples of Law Centre employment discrimination cases.
Press Release from Hammersmith & Fulham Law Centre
The Court of Appeal confirmed the High Court decision and clarified the legal position on what should count as a fresh application for asylum.
Press_release_from_Hammersmith__Fulham_Law_Centre.pdf
News and Press
The latest news from Law Centres is published here.
In the News and Press section
Rights Within Reach
Rights Within Reach: Developing effective legal advice outreach services for young people,
Side By Side and Implications for Public Services
Report from the Council on Social Action (CoSA) making recommendations to government on the humanisation of public services.
Side_by_Side_COSA_Nov_08.pdf
Website: Council on Social Action
Social Outcomes in Procurement
The Office of Government Commernce has published a series of papers on public procrement policies. The LCF referred to:
‘Buy and Make a Difference - How to address social issues in Public Procurement’
Social_Issues_in_Public_Procurement_June_08.pdf
OGC website: Office of Government Commerce
Govanhill Law Centre launched on 19th November 2008
Plans for a Law Centre in Cameroon
Case Studies
The report contains extensive qualitative evidence from employment rights advisers. For example:
“Some of these employers are repeat offenders yes, particularly the domestic employers. We have some dreadful ones. That’s the other problem, they then close the company down, go into insolvency and start up again in the same place with a different company name. That’s a big problem” (Law Centre Adviser, London)
“They go to work for some cleaning company or something like that, they have a complicated rota and they just don’t get paid, and the employer pays them a bit but not everything, the employer then gets rid of them, they’re £400-£500 to the bad, the Tribunal claims are massively complicated, therefore, there’s a limit to what we can do…” (Law Centre Adviser, Inner London)
“The pay issue is one which applies particularly in the small industries, again it’s the local food industry, the migrant workers, the agricultural workers, hairdressing is a particularly bad example. There, they pay on the national minimum wage and quite often below it. I am constantly surprised at the number of time I have to make a national minimum wage application, usually in conjunction with something else” (CAB Adviser, South East)
“I have, for example, a number of complaints from pubs where they employ cleaners and barmaids and barmen that they do not give any official letter to, they don’t give them hours of work, they don’t give them terms and conditions of employment. Obviously a problem arises and it tends to be a case of: ‘Get out, I can’t be doing with you. Go.’ “ (CAB Adviser, East Midlands)
“I have had it a few times recently, where nurses and care workers have been brought over from various countries, they need to be in employment for 12 months before they have any rights and during that 12 month period are being treated appallingly, because, if they complain about the treatment then they will lose their job and therefore their right to say, because they’re not going to work for 12 months. So they tend to put up with a lot more than they should do. They are trapped, if they complain they are out and then they haven’t got the 12 months and they are out of the country, it seems to happen a lot in the care home industry” (CAB Adviser, North)
Notes
There are 53 Law Centres providing employment advice nationally and 144 Citizens Advice Bureaux. The research sample comprised 54 CABx respondents and 32 Law Centre advisers; 44 per cent of employment rights advisers working for these organisations nationally.
The research was undertaken by: Pollert A, Danford A, Tailby S, Wilton N and Warren S (2008) Survey of Employment Rights Advisers From Citizens Advice Bureaux and Law Centres. Bristol: Centre for Employment Studies Research, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England.
The Law Centre Federation brings together 64 Law Centres across the UK, 29 (45 per cent) of which are in London, and likewise provides free legal advice, including employment law advice. Law Centres, while engaging some volunteer workers, generally employ paid legal professionals to provide free
employment advice. Further information at: Law Centres
Citizens Advice is a generalist, volunteer-led service providing free advice on a range of issues, including employment problems, across England, Wales and Northern Ireland. CABx provide general employment advice through general advisors, and some bureaux provide more specialised advice through ‘employment specialists’. These may be paid, but the majority are volunteers and have been trained in employment law matters by the CAB. Further details at Citizens Advice Bureaux
The Law
The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 prohibits discrimination on grounds of disability. It applies to the fields of employment, education, goods and services. Part 3 of the Act requires service providers to make “reasonable adjustments” to their services so as to provide as close a service as possible to that provided to other members of the public. Service providers may make adjustments to their policies or practices, as well as to any physical barriers on their premises. Disabled people who have been discriminated against unlawfully can bring a complaint in their local county court. Where discrimination has occurred, county courts have the power to award compensation for “injury to feelings” – this is to cover humiliation, embarrassment, inconvenience and stress, even where there has been no financial loss.
Sheffield Law Centre
Sheffield Law Centre is a registered charity and provides specialist legal advice in social welfare law. The disability rights post is funded by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. There are 60 law centres altogether in the UK, supported by the Law Centres Federation.
Contacts
For further information, please contact Douglas Johnson, Disability Rights Worker at Sheffield Law Centre, Waverley House, 10 Joiner Street, Sheffield S3 8GW. Tel 0114 273 1501, fax 0114 279 7778 or e-mail
Race Relations Act S41(1)
s41 (1) Race Relations exempts from that Act’s prohibitions on race discrimination any discriminatory act on grounds of colour or nationality done
a) In pursuance of any enactment or Order in Council or
b) In pursuance of any instrument made under any enactment by a Minister of the Crown or
c) In order to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by a Minister of the Crown (whether before or after the passing of this Act) by virtue of any enactment.
Race Relations Act S41(2)
S41(2) Race Relations Act 1976 exempts discrimination on the basis of nationality , place of ordinary residence and length of residence in any particular place where that discrimination is
a) In pursuance of any enactment or Order in Council or
b) In pursuance of any instrument made under any enactment by a Minister of the Crown or
c) In order to comply with any requirement imposed by a Minister of the Crown
d) In pursuance of any arrangements made by or with the approval of or for the time being approved by a Minister of the Crown)
Advice on Race Discrimination in the South West
The Law Centre has an advice line for people seeking advice about discrimination in relation to goods and services and housing which is open on a Tuesday morning between 10 am and 12 noon telephone 0117 9167704 and an employment and discrimination helpline that is open between 10am and 12 noon on a Wednesday telephone 0117 9167727. These help lines are available to anyone in the South West.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission has a helpline that is open daily that can assist complainants with advice on discrimination in all areas of law .The main number for the helpline of the EHRC is 0845 604 6610.
Notes
The Avon and Bristol Law Centre is based at 2 Moon Street, Stokes Croft, Bristol, BS2 8QE, tel: 0117 9248662, email:
The ABLC is part of the Law Centres Federation and specialises in housing, employment, discrimination, immigration, asylum and welfare benefits law.
The ABLC provide discrimination advice about goods and services and run a helpline on a Tuesday between 10am-12noon: 01179167704.to give advice about goods and services and discrimination.
Mrs Corner was helped through the ABLC via the Disability Rights Project. The project lasted from June 2006 until March 2008. Since the project started in June 2006 the ABLC has dealt with several hundred queries and cases.
These include access to hotels, pubs, clubs and shops, access to further education, access to buses and trains and the provision of information in accessible formats.
The ABLC have also raised awareness through talks and training including providing speakers for AGMs including Somerset, South Gloucestershire, Bristol and North Somerset.
The Discrimination Caseworker post is funded by Equality and Human Rights Commission.
More information about the ABLC can be found on our website:
http://www.avonandbristollawcentre.org.uk
Notes
The Avon and Bristol Law Centre is based at 2 Moon Street, Stokes Croft, Bristol, BS2 8QE, tel: 0117 9248662, email:
The ABLC is part of the Law Centres Federation and specialises in housing, employment, disability discrimination, immigration, asylum and welfare benefits law.
Mrs Pearce was helped through the ABLC via the Disability Rights Project. Since the project started in June 2006 the ABLC has dealt with more than 160 queries and cases. These include access to hotels, pubs, clubs and shops, access to further education, access to buses and trains and the provision of information in accessible formats. The ABLC have also raised awareness through talks and training including providing speakers for AGMs including Somerset, South Gloucestershire, Bristol and North Somerset. We have also undertaken half day courses for agencies in Bristol, North Somerset and Wiltshire.
More information about the ABLC can be found on our website: http://www.avonandbristollawcentre.org.uk/
Michael McGhie accepts Bury Law Centre's national pro bono award 19th June 2008
Disability Discrimination Act 1995
The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 prohibits discrimination on grounds of disability. It applies to the fields of employment, education, goods and services and public authority functions. Part 3 of the Act requires service providers to make “reasonable adjustments” to their services so as to provide as close a service as possible to that provided to other members of the public. Service providers may make adjustments to their policies or practices, as well as to any physical barriers on their premises.
Department for Work and Pensions (DWP)
The DWP, as a public body, is also subject to the “disability equality duty” to:
· Promote equality of opportunity between disabled persons and other persons
· Eliminate unlawful discrimination.
· Promote positive attitudes towards disabled persons
· Take steps to take account of disabled persons’ disabilities, even where that involves treating disabled persons more favourably than other persons.
Disabled people who have been discriminated against unlawfully can bring a complaint in their local county court. Where discrimination has occurred, county courts have the power to award compensation for “injury to feelings” – this is to cover humiliation, embarrassment, inconvenience and stress, even where there has been no financial loss.
Sheffield Law Centre
Sheffield Law Centre is a registered charity and provides specialist legal advice in social welfare law. The equality rights post is funded by the Equality and Human Rights Commission. There are 60 Law Centres altogether in the UK, supported by the Law Centres Federation.
Angela Sharrock was represented by Douglas Johnson of Sheffield Law Centre in her claim for disability discrimination and by Stella Blizzard of Manor Rights and Advice Service for her income support appeal.
For further information, please contact Douglas Johnson, Disability Rights Worker at Sheffield Law Centre, Waverley House, 10 Joiner Street, Sheffield S3 8GW. Tel 0114 273 1501, fax 0114 279 7778 or e-mail
Harehills and Chapeltown Law Centre
‘Someone who gets advice at the door of the court, or no advice at all, is far more likely to see a possession order granted, which takes them a step closer to losing their home,” he says. “If we have time to go through the paper work and gather evidence in advance, we can argue for a realistic repayment schedule, an adjournment of the possession order or even get the case dismissed. But if you go before a judge without someone to speak to you, you are far less likely to bet the best outcome.’
James Williams, Housing Solicitor
Isle of Wight Law Centre
‘When you’re in front of a judge who’s making huge decisions about your life and up against the lender’s barrister who knows all the legal language you feel like a ten year old. I’d no idea you could do things like ask for the interest on a debt to be suspended or make an offer of a minimum payment. I’m sure I’d be homeless now if I hadn’t had the Law Centre to speak for me.’
Steve Lewis, Law Centre client
Transact
Transact is a free independent membership organisation that offers networking opportunities, information about financial inclusion via its website and training to its 1250
member organisations who include advice agencies, credit unions, housing associations, banks and financial service providers. http://www.transact.org.uk
Transact is a Toynbee Hall project. Toynbee Hall produces practical innovative programmes to meet the needs of people in East London, improve conditions and enable communities to fulfil their potential. http://www.toynbeehall.org.uk
Hard Work, Hidden Lives
Hard Work, Hidden Lives
Full Report: Hard_Work,_Hidden_Lives_Full_Report.pdf
Summary: Hard_Work,_Hidden_Lives_07.08.pdf
TUC Press Release: TUC_Press_Release_04.06.08.doc
Access to Employment Advice
Chapter Two: Increasing Awareness and Advice: Chapter_2_Awareness_and_Advice.doc
Legal Aid: The_impact_of_legal_aid_reform.doc
Recommendations: Recommendations_for_Advice.doc
Islington Law Centre receiving their cheque
LCF Team join the Walk
Tony Meenan
Photo by Maurice Thompson
Ensuring Access to Environmental Justice
The report was launched in May by a Working Group chaired by the Hon. Mr Justice Sullivan, ‘Ensuring Access to Justice in England and Wales’. It concludes that the Government must make legal action more affordable in environmental cases if it is to comply with an International Convention on citizens’ environmental rights.
The remit of the Working Group was to examine whether current law and practice prevents concerned individuals and groups from achieving access to justice in environmental matters and to make recommendations where such barriers exist. The report concludes that for the significant majority of the public and NGOs, the current costs rules – and particularly the uncertainties and potential exposure to costs of the other parties involved should an application fail – are not consistent with the requirements of the Aarhus Convention.
Access_to_Environmental_Justice.pdf
Comments
‘Ensuring Access to Justice in England and Wales’ Article in The Times by Steve Cragg: The_Times_20.05.08.doc
Steve now at Doughty Street Chambers was previously employed at Hackney Community Law Centre.
Article by John Dunkley in LCF’s May Newsletter: EarthRights_Comments_May.doc
John led an LCF Environmental Law Project at the LCF in the 1990’s and is now a partner at EarthRights
Case Study
Case Study Information
Case_Study_Information.doc
Notes
1. South West London Law Centres is a charity and company limited by guarantee. We have an independent trustee board drawn from the local community in the six boroughs in which we work – Wandsworth, Merton, Kingston, Richmond, Croydon and Sutton. For further information see: http://www.swllc.org.uk/SWLLC07.pdf
Example Case study
Ms B is 17. She fled from her father’s domestic violence with her mother and sister. When they came to us they were sleeping in a car. We contacted the local authority, which agreed to house Ms B’s mother and sister, but not her. Given her situation we had no choice but to issue emergency proceedings to enforce Ms B’s rights. The local authority agreed to house her. We went on to help Ms B with her benefit entitlements so she no longer had to rely on charity from her friends.
This is a typical case: the law is clear in this area, Ms B was a vulnerable minor, yet until we issued a legal challenge the local authority was under no pressure to meet its duties to her.
Protest outside Hammersmith and Fulham Town Hall 16th April 2007
To support the Law Centre: Just Giving
Central London County Court
Croydon County Court
Kingston County Court
Opening of Huntingdon Law Centre
Opening of Cambridge Law Centre
