The University of Law
Introduction
Access to justice is a fundamental pillar of the rule of law, ensuring that
individuals can seek and obtain remedies through formal or informal
institutions for grievances.1 The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of
Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) significantly curtailed the scope of legal aid in
England and Wales, leading to concerns about the accessibility of legal
services for vulnerable populations.2 In this context, technology has
emerged as a potential tool to bridge the justice gap. This essay argues
that while technology alone cannot repair the damage caused by legal aid
cuts, it is an essential pillar in reshaping modern access to justice. This
critically examines the extent to which technology can improve access to
justice, considering the current state of the civil legal system, the impact
of legal aid cuts, the potential, and drawbacks of legal technology, and for
its effective implementation.
Current state
Now, over a decade since LASPO’s implementation in 2013, the civil legal
aid system in the UK remains under intense strain. While the policy aimed
to reduce expenditure, its long-term consequences have been widely
criticised as undermining core principles of access to justice.
The implementation of LASPO in 2013 led to a significant reduction in the
availability of legal aid. The Act removed legal aid for many areas of civil
law, including most private family law, housing, welfare benefits,
employment, and immigration cases.3 This has disproportionately affected
the most vulnerable in society, who are often unable to afford legal
representation.4 The Law Society has highlighted that legal aid can be the
difference between a family staying in a safe home or becoming
homeless, or between protection from domestic abuse and remaining in
an abusive relationship.5 However, technology presents an opportunity to
mitigate these access barriers by providing affordable legal information
and services online, potentially reaching those left behind by traditional
legal aid cuts.6 Yet, technology alone cannot substitute for legal aid but
can enhance public awareness and self-help capabilities.
1
Rt Hon Lord Bingham, The Rule of Law (reprint, Penguin 2011).
2
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, Part 1, Schedule 1.
3
'The LASPO Act' (The Law Society, 28 JAN 2025)
<https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/legal-aid/laspo-act> 14 May 2025.
4
'LASPO four years on: The Law Society review' (The Law Society, 29 June 2017)
<https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/research/laspo-4-years-on> 14 May 2025.
5
'The LASPO Act' (The Law Society, 28 JAN 2025)
<https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/legal-aid/laspo-act> 14 May 2025
6
‘Technology and Legal Services’ (Solicitors Regulation Authority, November 2018)
<https://www.sra.org.uk/globalassets/documents/sra/research/technology-legal-
services.pdf> 14 May 2025
Words: 1999
, The University of Law
A review by the Law Society four years after LASPO’s implementation
found that legal aid was no longer available for many who needed it, and
those eligible found it hard to access. The report also noted that wide
gaps in provision were not being addressed, and LASPO had a detrimental
impact on the state and society. Roger Smith (2016), in his update for the
Access to Justice Commission, critically examined the effects of LASPO,
highlighting how severe cuts have undermined the UK’s adversarial justice
system. He argued that the assumption of both parties having legal
representation is no longer sustainable, especially for vulnerable
individuals. While Smith’s proposed reallocation model emphasises
systemic reform, technology can serve as a tool to support these by
streamlining resources, enabling online triage systems, and helping
redistribute legal support more efficiently. It cannot replace structural
policy changes.7
Impact
The cuts to legal aid have had profound effects on access to justice. Many
individuals are now presenting themselves in court, leading to increased
pressure on the judiciary and potential miscarriages of justice.8 The
closure of law centres due to funding cuts has further limited access to
legal advice.9 The Secret Barrister highlights that these reforms have led
to a situation where justice is often only accessible to the wealthy,
undermining the principle of equality before the law.10 Although
technology offers partial solutions to some consequences of legal
withdrawal— easing court pressures and delivering basic advice—it
cannot, in its current state, replace the nuanced human advocacy often
needed in complex or sensitive cases.11
Former President of the UK Supreme Court, Lord Neuberger, has stated
that cuts to legal aid in family cases undermine human rights, as parents
must now navigate child contact disputes without legal representation
unless abuse is alleged. He critiques his policy, suggesting it
7
Roger Smith, ‘The New Access to Justice Commission: Update 5’ (Sir Henry Brooke’s
Blog, 31 March 2016) < https://sirhenrybrooke.me/2016/03/31/the-new-access-to-justice-
commission-update-5-roger-smith/> 14 May 2025
8
'Cuts in Legal Aid 'leading to miscarriages in justice' (The Guardian, 1 Dec 2014)
<https://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/dec/01/legal-aid-cuts-miscarriages-justice> 14
May 2025
9
Dominic Gilbert, 'Legal Aid Advice Network 'decimated by funding cuts' (BBC News, 10
Dec 2018) <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46357169> 14 May 2025.
10
Secret Barrister, Fake Law: The Truth About Justice in an Age of Lies (14 May 2025)
11
'Acceptability of technology in legal services' (Legal Services Board, March 2022)
<https://legalservicesboard.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Acceptability-of-
technology-in-legal-services-research-report-FINAL-March-2022.pdf> 14 May 2025.
Words: 1999
Introduction
Access to justice is a fundamental pillar of the rule of law, ensuring that
individuals can seek and obtain remedies through formal or informal
institutions for grievances.1 The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of
Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) significantly curtailed the scope of legal aid in
England and Wales, leading to concerns about the accessibility of legal
services for vulnerable populations.2 In this context, technology has
emerged as a potential tool to bridge the justice gap. This essay argues
that while technology alone cannot repair the damage caused by legal aid
cuts, it is an essential pillar in reshaping modern access to justice. This
critically examines the extent to which technology can improve access to
justice, considering the current state of the civil legal system, the impact
of legal aid cuts, the potential, and drawbacks of legal technology, and for
its effective implementation.
Current state
Now, over a decade since LASPO’s implementation in 2013, the civil legal
aid system in the UK remains under intense strain. While the policy aimed
to reduce expenditure, its long-term consequences have been widely
criticised as undermining core principles of access to justice.
The implementation of LASPO in 2013 led to a significant reduction in the
availability of legal aid. The Act removed legal aid for many areas of civil
law, including most private family law, housing, welfare benefits,
employment, and immigration cases.3 This has disproportionately affected
the most vulnerable in society, who are often unable to afford legal
representation.4 The Law Society has highlighted that legal aid can be the
difference between a family staying in a safe home or becoming
homeless, or between protection from domestic abuse and remaining in
an abusive relationship.5 However, technology presents an opportunity to
mitigate these access barriers by providing affordable legal information
and services online, potentially reaching those left behind by traditional
legal aid cuts.6 Yet, technology alone cannot substitute for legal aid but
can enhance public awareness and self-help capabilities.
1
Rt Hon Lord Bingham, The Rule of Law (reprint, Penguin 2011).
2
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, Part 1, Schedule 1.
3
'The LASPO Act' (The Law Society, 28 JAN 2025)
<https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/legal-aid/laspo-act> 14 May 2025.
4
'LASPO four years on: The Law Society review' (The Law Society, 29 June 2017)
<https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/research/laspo-4-years-on> 14 May 2025.
5
'The LASPO Act' (The Law Society, 28 JAN 2025)
<https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/legal-aid/laspo-act> 14 May 2025
6
‘Technology and Legal Services’ (Solicitors Regulation Authority, November 2018)
<https://www.sra.org.uk/globalassets/documents/sra/research/technology-legal-
services.pdf> 14 May 2025
Words: 1999
, The University of Law
A review by the Law Society four years after LASPO’s implementation
found that legal aid was no longer available for many who needed it, and
those eligible found it hard to access. The report also noted that wide
gaps in provision were not being addressed, and LASPO had a detrimental
impact on the state and society. Roger Smith (2016), in his update for the
Access to Justice Commission, critically examined the effects of LASPO,
highlighting how severe cuts have undermined the UK’s adversarial justice
system. He argued that the assumption of both parties having legal
representation is no longer sustainable, especially for vulnerable
individuals. While Smith’s proposed reallocation model emphasises
systemic reform, technology can serve as a tool to support these by
streamlining resources, enabling online triage systems, and helping
redistribute legal support more efficiently. It cannot replace structural
policy changes.7
Impact
The cuts to legal aid have had profound effects on access to justice. Many
individuals are now presenting themselves in court, leading to increased
pressure on the judiciary and potential miscarriages of justice.8 The
closure of law centres due to funding cuts has further limited access to
legal advice.9 The Secret Barrister highlights that these reforms have led
to a situation where justice is often only accessible to the wealthy,
undermining the principle of equality before the law.10 Although
technology offers partial solutions to some consequences of legal
withdrawal— easing court pressures and delivering basic advice—it
cannot, in its current state, replace the nuanced human advocacy often
needed in complex or sensitive cases.11
Former President of the UK Supreme Court, Lord Neuberger, has stated
that cuts to legal aid in family cases undermine human rights, as parents
must now navigate child contact disputes without legal representation
unless abuse is alleged. He critiques his policy, suggesting it
7
Roger Smith, ‘The New Access to Justice Commission: Update 5’ (Sir Henry Brooke’s
Blog, 31 March 2016) < https://sirhenrybrooke.me/2016/03/31/the-new-access-to-justice-
commission-update-5-roger-smith/> 14 May 2025
8
'Cuts in Legal Aid 'leading to miscarriages in justice' (The Guardian, 1 Dec 2014)
<https://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/dec/01/legal-aid-cuts-miscarriages-justice> 14
May 2025
9
Dominic Gilbert, 'Legal Aid Advice Network 'decimated by funding cuts' (BBC News, 10
Dec 2018) <https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46357169> 14 May 2025.
10
Secret Barrister, Fake Law: The Truth About Justice in an Age of Lies (14 May 2025)
11
'Acceptability of technology in legal services' (Legal Services Board, March 2022)
<https://legalservicesboard.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Acceptability-of-
technology-in-legal-services-research-report-FINAL-March-2022.pdf> 14 May 2025.
Words: 1999
