Judge criticises aspects of new legal aid scheme as 'grossly unfair' and 'demonstrably illogical'

A JUDGE HAS criticised aspects of the legal aid fee scheme as “grossly unfair” and “demonstrably illogical”. 

Judge Mary Rose Gearty issued the judgment on Tuesday afternoon and said the new system for criminal legal aid fees is beyond the powers of the 1962 Criminal Justice Act which “requires that the State provide a logical system”.

The 1962 act provides that free legal aid may be granted, in certain circumstances, for the defence of persons of insufficient means in criminal proceedings.

She said it was “grossly unfair” that payment of fees “will be at some uncertain future date in every case, some fees will be long-delayed, and some will never become payable”.

Advertisement

She also said it was “demonstrably illogical” that charges are grouped according to when they are listed.

Criminal aid solicitor Quinn tbrought the case to the High Court over their ongoing dispute with justice minister Jim O’Callaghan.

The row between solicitors and O’Callaghan has been ongoing since the introduction of changes to the criminal legal aid fees model on 1 July. O’Callaghan claims these were made in an effort to curb what he described as “abuses” of the old scheme.

Where a solicitor used to receive €240 for a first appearance with a legal aid client and €60 for each appearance thereafter, they now receive a flat €520 fee when a case concludes with up to five court appearances.

Solicitors have said the new system is unworkable and have withdrawn their services. They are seeking a second payment if a case lasts beyond 10 court appearances, as well as multiple payments of €520 where a client has multiple charges levelled against them by the state.

Judge Gearty said today that the scheme is lawful because it is up to the solicitor “to decide to set an omnibus fee, rather than a rate or scale of fees, per case” and solicitors “can set a rate or a fixed fee for a number of cases, as long as the Scheme introduced is not manifestly arbitrary, demonstrably illogical or grossly unfair”.