This article is from the source 'independent' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/court-of-appeal-rules-against-government-cuts-to-victims-of-domestic-violence-a6881116.html

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Court of Appeal rules Government cuts to legal aid for victims of domestic violence 'legally flawed' Court of Appeal rules Government cuts to legal aid for victims of domestic violence 'legally flawed'
(35 minutes later)
The Court of Appeal has declared that Government changes to the rules which allow victims of domestic abuse to obtain legal aid are legally flawed. The Court of Appeal has declared that Government changes to the rules which allow victims of domestic abuse to obtain legal aid are legally flawed. 
Campaigners welcomed the ruling and said it was an important recognition of "women's real life experiences of domestic violence".Campaigners welcomed the ruling and said it was an important recognition of "women's real life experiences of domestic violence".
Under the changes, verifications of domestic violence must be given within a two-year period before any application for legal aid is made. But three judges from the Court of Appeal ruled that the changes were “invalid”. The changes were made in 2013 by former lord chancellor and justice secretary Chris Grayling and were introduced as part of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (2012).
The judges also ruled that it was flawed to exclude victims who had suffered from financial abuse. One change stipulated that evidence of domestic violence had to be given within a two-year period before any application for legal aid was made, however campaigners said this meant some victims were being turned away "at the first hurdle".
It comes after women’s rights campaigners said many victims were unlawfully being excluded from obtaining funding because of the charges. This change has now been ruled as "invalid" by the three judges from the Court of Appeal.
The campaigners also argued that some victims were being forced to “face their abuser in court” without legal representation.  The judges also said that it was flawed to exclude victims who suffered from financial abuse from legal aid.
Emma Scott, the director of Rights of Women, said in a statement: "For nearly three years we know that the strict evidence requirements for legal aid have cut too many women off from the very family law remedies that could keep them and their children safe. In January 2015, Rights of Women appealed against the High Court judgement that upheld the changes as lawful. Emma Scott, the group's director, said in a statement: "For nearly three years we know that the strict evidence requirements for legal aid have cut too many women off from the very family law remedies that could keep them and their children safe.
"Today’s judgement is important recognition of women’s real life experiences of domestic violence and means that more women affected by violence will have access to advice and representation in the family courts.""Today’s judgement is important recognition of women’s real life experiences of domestic violence and means that more women affected by violence will have access to advice and representation in the family courts."
The Law Society said it welcomed the ruling. Its president, Jonathan Smithers, said the cuts had resulted in "radical consequences for access to justice with the worst impact affecting the poorest and most vulnerable sectors of society".The Law Society said it welcomed the ruling. Its president, Jonathan Smithers, said the cuts had resulted in "radical consequences for access to justice with the worst impact affecting the poorest and most vulnerable sectors of society".
“The harsh tests exclude victims from accessing legal aid for family law disputes against an abusive ex-partner or relative and are not what parliament intended. This ruling means that access to safety and justice will no longer be denied to the very people the Government expressly sought to protect with its amendments to the regulations.”“The harsh tests exclude victims from accessing legal aid for family law disputes against an abusive ex-partner or relative and are not what parliament intended. This ruling means that access to safety and justice will no longer be denied to the very people the Government expressly sought to protect with its amendments to the regulations.”
A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said the department would consider the findings from the court.A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said the department would consider the findings from the court.
“We are determined to ensure victims of domestic violence can get legal aid whenever they need it.“We are determined to ensure victims of domestic violence can get legal aid whenever they need it.
The spokesperson added: “We have made it easier for victims of domestic violence to obtain legal aid, by ensuring a broader range of evidence qualifies. This has contributed to a 19 per cent rise in the number of grants awarded.”The spokesperson added: “We have made it easier for victims of domestic violence to obtain legal aid, by ensuring a broader range of evidence qualifies. This has contributed to a 19 per cent rise in the number of grants awarded.”
Additional reporting by PAAdditional reporting by PA