Doyle: Potential positive impact on access to justice

Paralegals should be given rights of audience to enable them to do more legal aid work, an academic has argued.

Adam Doyle, head of the law and criminology department at the University of East London, said “any future changes to legal aid policy should favour paralegals undertaking a larger amount of the caseload”.

Mr Doyle said the “potential positive impact” of giving paralegals rights of audience in the lower courts, “particularly for access to justice, is undeniable”.

In article for The Conversation UK website, a not-for-profit website partly funded by universities, Mr Doyle said that at a time when cuts to legal aid meant many people could no longer afford expensive legal fees, paralegals should take on more work.

He said the traditional view of a paralegal as “the unskilled version of a solicitor or barrister – doing much of the background paperwork but not representing a client by themselves or undertaking court work” was a “misconception” which “does disservice to the valuable work paralegals undertake”.

Mr Doyle said the Institute of Paralegals estimated that there were 60,000 paralegals working in law firms and growing, with the institute suggesting there may be more paralegals than solicitors working in law firms in a decade’s time.

He said much of this growth was linked to the restrictions on legal aid introduced in 2013, which in turn has led to more litigants in person slowing down the courts.

Mr Doyle said that if paralegals took on more responsibility, they would need a different type of training and universities should be more involved.

“Some universities have already begun to do this – for example, seven universities already run law programmes that enable students to graduate with a diploma from the National Association of Licensed Paralegals.”

Mr Doyle said the introduction of the Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE) in 2020 provided an opportunity to embed key areas of paralegal practice “at all levels of an undergraduate degree”, with further development of “scenario-based” learning.

“In particular, this could include developing and assessing verbal skills in a courtroom setting. Such advocacy skills in a paralegal could prove invaluable for clients who can’t afford to hire a lawyer.

“There are calls for paralegals to get their own professional qualification on top of a law degree, but this will depend on how universities and law schools adapt now to the opportunities to adapt their courses.”


    Readers Comments

  • Alastair says:

    Or…and bear with me here…increase legal aid funding so that qualified lawyers can properly represent those in need of help. Properly funding legal aid means more trainees willing to do the work meaning the system works better for all involved.

  • Mark George Q.C. says:

    In what way is it beneficial to the public to get representation by less well qualified people? I have no problem if legal execs wish to qualify as sol-advocates or come to the Bar but this article accepts the current demise of legal aid. We need legal aid to be properly available and properly funded with properly trained advocacy experts, not pushing the less well qualified forward to plug the gap.

  • Qualified Barrister with 20+ years experience says:

    Of course paralegals should have rights of audience! That is, when they’ve spent years undertaking the training needed to properly represent clients.
    Dumbing down is NOT the answer – whether in law, medicine or education etc etc.

    This is perhaps the most stupid suggestion I’ve EVER heard!

  • Sukhdev Chauhan says:

    I am a Fellow of the Institute of Paralegals with an all round legal experience at Tier4. I am also a Law Graduate with an LLB with Honours. I am currently an Immigration practitioner, Registered and Regulated by the OISC at Level 3.

    I strongly agree with the proposition to allow Rights of Audience to Paralegals at Magistrates and County Courts level t deal with matters on behalf of clients who need representation but cannot afford the high fees charged by Solicitors and subsequently Barristers at also Tribunal levels.

    Paralegals who are legally and adequately qualified with Law Degrees with or without LPC should be offered a chance to practice with rights of Audience at lower Courts.

    S. Chauhan


Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Reports

No larger firm can ignore the demands of innovation – that was the clear message from our most recent roundtable: “The law firm of the future”, sponsored by LexisNexis Enterprise Solutions. It comes in many forms, predominantly but not just technology, and is not simply a case of automating process. Expertise and process are not mutually exclusive.

Blog

8 August 2018
Stewart Brymer

PEXA: Australia’s lesson in e-conveyancing

PEXA, or Property Exchange Australia, is a national platform designed to vastly improve the experience of transacting property in Australia. In essence, it is enabling the transition from paper to digital.

Read More