Log in
This case-study is based on research conducted by Professor Francis at Keele University which provides insights into three crucial aspects of social mobility and access to the legal professions: legal executives, part-time law students, and legal work experience. This work has made a significant contribution to practitioner debate, practitioner practice and policy change. Key impacts of this research have been the promotion of debates within the legal profession around diversity which has led both to a much wider professional and government awareness of these issues in the UK, and the development of policies and schemes to address such issues.
The impact of a research programme into quality assessment measures for publicly funded legal services has been the establishment of a peer review programme for all civil and criminal lawyers operating in Scotland, England and Wales. This programme has ensured that the quality of service provided by legal aid lawyers in Scotland is consistently high, with only 10% of providers failing routine reviews. Moreover, the errors that do emerge are primarily administrative failings rather than poor legal advice. The Scottish model has been the basis for pilot projects in the Netherlands, Finland and Moldova, and has been drawn on for a peer review programme for all Dutch notaries.
This research has made a sustained and continuing impact on the development and application of the substantive criminal law, including mens rea and general defences, and especially in the areas of complicity and homicide, in terms of
i) development of the law by the appellate courts;
ii) application of the law by practitioners; and
iii) government policy as to the reform of the law of murder and complicity.
By exploring the social and economic effects of cuts in funding for legal aid, this research directly influenced legislation aimed at preserving legal aid for welfare benefit appeals. This was a major victory for campaigners who cited the research to lobby against cuts proposed by the 2011 Legal Aid Bill. The research informed a proposed House of Lords amendment to the Bill. Although the amendment was turned back by the House of Commons, welfare benefit appeals on points of law were discussed during the second reading and retained within the scope of legal aid funding.
Professor Faundez's research has set out how legal reform projects should be designed and implemented in order to be successful in the context of existing local conditions and to ensure access to justice for indigenous peoples and other vulnerable groups. His work as policy advisor both to development agencies (the World Bank, the UK's Department for International Development (DFID), and the Inter-American Development Bank) and to Non- Governmental Organisations (NGOs) (Amnesty International, the World Justice Project) has helped these organisations broaden their approach to the design, implementation and evaluation of legal reform projects. The range of his publications - from academic articles to specially commissioned reports - has ensured a fruitful dialogue with practitioners in the field of law and governance.
Much has been written about mental condition defences such as insanity and diminished responsibility together with the cognate doctrine of unfitness to plead. However, most of this work has been doctrinal rather than empirical. This case study has developed a sustained and continuing understanding of how certain mental condition defences operate in practice, primarily through empirical analysis. R.D. Mackay's empirical studies of both the insanity defence and unfitness to plead and his studies of diminished responsibility, provocation and infanticide have been used by and have influenced law reform bodies, legislators, policy development and legal analysis.
In 2010 the Ministry of Justice formally accepted recommendations by the Law Commission to introduce a new non-statutory rule of disclosure for trustee exemption clauses in England and Wales. Newcastle research had a direct impact upon the development of the law on trustee exemption clauses. In 2002 Dunn successfully tendered to undertake research on trustee exemption clauses in England and Wales on behalf of the Law Commission. Dunn's research was published by the Law Commission as a separate and distinct chapter of its consultation paper on trustee exemption clauses. The research (alongside consultation responses) influenced the Law Commission's recommendation that a non-statutory rule of disclosure be introduced into the law of England and Wales. This recommendation was accepted by the Government in 2010 and has been implemented by the trust industry.
Research undertaken by Barlow at Exeter into cohabitation, marriage and the law has shaped, informed and influenced long-running public and policy debates in Britain over the need to reform aspects of family (property) law, in light of widespread public confusion and on-going societal shifts. The research findings on attitudes to cohabitation and marriage, community of property and pre-nuptial agreements and the law, each cited in public consultation papers and reports advocating reform, have influenced the Law Commission and judiciary in the UK and informed German policymakers. The cohabitation research in particular has-
Research carried out by the University of Reading's Dr Samia Bano (Lecturer 2005-2013) explored the experiences of Muslim women who engage with the law, and particularly their engagement with Shariah law. This research had an impact on the decisions and understandings of government policymakers via a subsequent investigation and written report commissioned by and produced for the UK Ministry of Justice (MoJ). This project looked particularly at the realities of the use of Shariah Councils in England and Wales to handle family-related disputes, and provided hitherto unavailable insights into a relatively unknown area of practice, enabling policymakers and other stakeholders to engage with this issue in a more informed manner.