M v Director of Legal Aid Casework & Ors
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
- THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE COULSON
Areas of Law
- Administrative Law
- Civil Procedure
- Health Law
- Human Rights Law
2014
ADMINISTRATIVE COURT
UK
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The claimant, an Afghan national, sought judicial review after being denied civil legal aid for representation concerning the disclosure of her confidential counselling records in a rape trial of her former husband. Upon reviewing the procedural history and legal frameworks including LASPO, the court found the refusals to grant legal aid were irrational and unreasonable. The claimant's rights under Articles 6 and 8 of the ECHR to be heard regarding her confidential medical records were crucial, leading to the court quashing the initial decisions and granting permission for judicial review proceedings.
Judgment
The Hon. Mr Justice Coulson:
1. INTRODUCTION
The claimant seeks permission to bring judicial review proceedings in connection with the defendant’s decisions of 27 January and 3 February 2014 which refused her civil legal aid. She had sought funding in order to be represented at the hearing of a witness summons at Isleworth Crown Court in which the Crown Prosecution Service (“CPS”) were seeking disclosure of her confidential counselling records. Because the dispute concerned no more than £12,000 worth of legal services, and because (as set out in Section 2 ) there has been a convoluted procedural history which, up to a point, does not reflect well on either side, I was initially inclined to think that this was all an unjustified waste of public money and resources. However, on analysis, the application raises a number of potentially important points.
Having set out the history in Section 2 below, and before coming on to deal with the detail of this application for legal aid, I set out in Section 3 below the general approach of the courts to applications for disclosure of medical records. In , I set out the legal aid framework and then, in Section 4 Section 5 , the claimant’s application for legal aid and the defendant’s decisions. At Section 6 , I analyse the defendant’s application of the merits criteria and, in , I address the absence – in this case – of an exceptional case determination. Thereafter, in the second part of this Judgment at Section 7 Section 8 , I deal with the separate issue involving the guidance recently issued by the Lord Chancellor (“LC”) as to the interplay between Convention rights and the availability of civil legal aid in exceptional cases.
2. THE HISTORY
The claimant is an Afghan national who fled Afghanistan after being subjected to, or made to witness, extreme violence and abuse. She has been in the United Kingdom for about three years. She does not speak very good English. In 2012 she married a man named C. The marriage only lasted about six months but, during that time, the claimant alleged that Mr C raped her. Mr C is now facing two counts of rape and the trial is due to be heard at Isleworth Crown Court at the end of April.
The Helen Bamber Foundation (“HBF”) is a charity providing support and services to victims of torture, cruelty and human rights abuses. The claimant and her family have been provided by HBF with long term support and the claimant herself has had more than twenty counselling sessions with