Category International

New OECD Report Provides Guidance on Measuring and Improving Access to Justice in Courts

ajrn1 Leave a comment

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) published a new policy paper aimed at helping countries adopt the OECD’s Recommendation on Access to Justice and People-Centred Justice Systems. “Measuring and Improving Access to Justice in Courts: Learning from the United Kingdom’s Experience” outlines a replicable model for developing an evidence-based approach for defining, measuring, improving, and monitoring access to justice in court services.

The report presents details on the following seven pillars for advancing these access-to-justice objectives:

  • Review the organisational foundations of access to justice before engaging in work to measure and improve access to justice
  • Adopt a clear definition of access to justice, in consultation with justice stakeholders
  • Measure access to justice in ways that align with the organizational definition and data strategy.
  • Understand existing barriers and challenges and their underlying causes
  • Identify and adopt targeted improvements for court services
  • Monitor the changes and data; ensure there is a plan for tracking progress
  • Identify and address evidence gaps

The OECD report on “Measuring and Improving Access to Justice in Courts: Learning from the United Kingdom’s Experience” is available online here: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/governance/measuring-and-improving-access-to-justice-in-court-services_a8226ccc-en.

Information in this post was gleaned from the OECD Measuring and Improving Access to Justice in Courts report.

Updated Canadian Indicator Framework for UN SDGs Includes Civil Court Case Completion Time

ajrn1 Leave a comment

Statistics Canada has released information about the updated Canadian Indicator Framework (CIF) for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The UN SDGs represent a global effort to advance economic and social development across 17 goals. The CIF for the UN SDGs was created to address and better assess Canada’s progress towards national SDG priorities. Every indicator in the CIF includes the most recent data available. Canada carries out a review of the CIF every three years. This year’s review resulted in several changes in the framework, including the addition of 20 indicators deemed important to address measurement gaps.

Notable for the justice community, an indicator on civil court case completion time (the time elapsed from the initiation of a civil court case to its first disposition) was added under Goal 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

A Statisics Canada news release indicates the following:

“In 2022/2023, 46.7% of total civil cases were completed within three months, up from 46.1% in 2021/2022.

Family cases, such as divorce, child custody, property division and adoption, have maintained a higher proportion of swift resolutions compared with general civil cases, which may involve disputes, such as contracts, bankruptcy and other claims involving money.

In 2022/2023, 57.7% of family cases were resolved within three months in 2022/2023, compared with just under 40% of general civil cases being resolved within the same period.”

Information and data for Indicator 16.4.4: Civil court case completion time is available here: https://sdgcif-data-canada-oddcic-donnee.github.io/16-4-1/.

Information for this post was gleaned from a Statistics Canada news release. To read the release, visit: https://www.statcan.gc.ca/o1/en/plus/7064-peek-updated-canadian-indicator-framework.

U.S. Institute Publishes Report on Regulatory Reforms to Address Legal Services Gaps

ajrn1 Leave a comment

A new report by the the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (IAALS) presents recommendations for the use of legal regulation innovation as a way to address the urgent legal services gap across much of America. The report outlines a series of objectives and findings from discussions with leaders from states considering or implementing regulatory innovation.

The report presents 12 recommendations reflecting stakeholder contributions, program and structure requirements, messaging, and research & data. The following are some of the recommendations included in the report:

  • Include ethics attorneys who are open to considering regulatory innovation in regulatory initiatives
  • Include at least one, but ideally as many as possible, representatives from the state’s supreme court on any regulatory innovation task force
  • Engage community-based organizations and the public from the outset
  • Focus initial efforts on education about the problem and why change is needed
  • Regulators should collect more data
  • Regulators and other leaders should consider how changes to other rules of professional conduct could increase access to affordable legal help

Unlocking Legal Regulation: Lessons Learned and Recommendations for Launching and Sustaining Regulatory Reform by Jessica Bednarz is available online here: https://iaals.du.edu/sites/default/files/documents/publications/ulr_lessons_learned.pdf.

New UK-Based Report Examines Economic Value of Free Legal Advice

ajrn1 Leave a comment

A report commissioned by the UK-based Access to Justice Foundation and the Bar Council of England and Wales presents new insights on the economic value of the free advice sector in the United Kingdom. The new report recognizes impacts of inflation, rising energy and food prices, and the cost-of-living crisis on the need for legal advice.

The main objectives of this research include:

  • Provide current estimates of the direct economic benefits of the free legal advice sector to government finances.
  • Examine the possible impacts of free legal advice on reducing costs and backlogs in the court and tribunal service.
  • Weigh the possible need for free legal advice in the longer term.

Key findings include:

  • The provision of free specialist legal advice saves the Treasury approximately £9,100 per case.
  • For every £1 spent on free specialist legal advice and its outcomes in 2023, there was a saving to government of £2.71.
  • Advice provision helps to ease pressure on courts and tribunals through improved efficiency and fewer litigants in person.
  • Despite the positive impact on government finances and positive knock-on impacts, advice providers say the free legal advice sector is at a ‘breaking point’, with funding failing to meet current demand or expected future demand.

The Value of Justice for All: Evaluating the Case for Funding the Free Specialist Legal Advice Sector report was prepared by Pragmatix Advisory. The August 2024 Value of Justice for All report is available online here: https://atjf.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/The-value-of-justice-for-all-a-report-for-the-Access-to-Justice-Foundation-and-the-Bar-Council-from-Pragmatix-Advisory.pdf.

U.S. Survey Highlights Misconceptions about Access to Civil Justice

ajrn1 Leave a comment

Recently published findings from an online survey in the U.S. reveal that more than half of adults mistakenly believe they are entitled to legal representation for civil legal matters if they cannot afford representation. Among adults ages 18-34, the figure is higher with approximately two thirds of adults in this age range believing they are entitled to legal representation for civil legal matters. The survey also indicates that approximately 59% of people who experienced a civil legal matter within the past three years did not seek help from a lawyer.

The online survey was carried out from July 11 to July 15 with 2,096 adult (18+) respondents in the U.S. The survey was commissioned by the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) and conducted by The Harris Poll. To learn more about the survey, visit: https://www.lsc.gov/press-release/more-half-americans-mistakenly-think-they-have-right-attorney-all-civil-cases.

UK Report Makes Case for Immigration Legal Aid Data

ajrn1 Leave a comment

Immigration Legal Aid and Value for Money: Identifying Missing Data is a newly published briefing paper examining areas where more data is needed and the types of data that are needed to understand value for money in the current immigration legal aid model. An objective of the Legal Aid, Sentencing, and Punishment of Offenders Act of 2012 (LASPO) was to reduce the costs of civil legal aid. Research suggests there is insufficient quantitative data and insufficient good quality data being collected by the government to determine the costs and benefits generated by LASPO and—specific to this research—the impacts of the reduced scope of immigration legal aid under LASPO.

The briefing paper proposes several hypotheses, including:

  • Difficulties that appellants face accessing legal representation increases costs for HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS)
  • Immigration legal aid helps people to resolve their immigration issues more quickly, which has potential direct cost benefits for health services as well as wider social benefits
  • Costs to local authorities where immigration legal aid is not available exceed the savings made by cuts to the budget for immigration legal aid

In addition, the briefing paper identifies specific types of data that are not currently being published and presents recommendations on who could collect these data.

Immigration Legal Aid and Value for Money: Identifying Missing Data is written by Siân Pearce, Dr Emma Marshall and Dr Samuel Engle. This briefing paper is supported by the University of Exeter, Migrants Organise and the Public Law Project.

The full briefing paper is available in English here: https://publiclawproject.org.uk/content/uploads/2024/07/2024HASS018-Briefing-paper-AW.pdf.

U.S.-Based Justice For All Initiative Launches New Guidance Materials and Diagnostic Tool

ajrn1 Leave a comment

Launched in 2016 by civil justice leaders, experts, and funders, the national, collaborative Justice for All (JFA) initiative provides “materials and tools to assist states in moving toward the vision of justice for all.” The JFA’s comprehensive set of materials and tools can be adapted to a U.S. state’s current environment and needs.

The JFA recently announced the release of new guidance materials, which build on its initial work across 15 participating states/territories and seek to streamline future efforts to support strategic planning across states.

A new JFA diagnostic tool provides users with a customized report with recommendations based on user responses about their current activities.

To learn more about the JFA initiative, visit: https://www.ncsc.org/jfa.

To learn more about the new guidance materials, visit: https://www.ncsc.org/jfa/guidance-and-tools/guidance-materials.

To learn more about the new diagnostic tool, visit: https://www.ncsc.org/jfa/guidance-and-tools/diagnostic-tool.

New U.S. Report Examines How to Make ODR More Accessible to Self-Represented Litigants

ajrn1 Leave a comment

A new U.S.-based study looks at barriers to online dispute resolution (ODR) use for parties with low literacy, and potential strategies to better inform self-represented litigants about ODR. Insights were gathered through focus groups held in geographically and demographically diverse areas in the US.

Among participants in the focus groups:

  • Many were not previously aware ODR.
  • A majority were keen to use ODR as an alternative to going to court, indicating its promising potential.
  • Participants expressed concerns about negotiating through text, citing issues with misunderstandings, uncivil behaviour, information security, and legitimacy.
  • Additional concerns were raised around a lack of internet/technology access and digital literacy.
  • Many participants expressed a desire for a moderator or facilitator to oversee their communications with the opposing party, particularly to help manage emotional reactions such as feelings of being overwhelmed or intimidated.
  • Participants valued plain language with simple definitions of legal terms, step-by-step instructions, bullet point formatting, and visual aids like images and instructional videos.

Making ODR More Accessible to Self-Represented Parties: Focus Group Perspectives by Rachel Feinstein and Jennifer Shack can be downloaded here: https://odr.aboutrsi.org/.

New Legal Needs Survey Report Published in the UK

ajrn1 Leave a comment

The Law Society of England and Wales, working in conjunction with the Legal Services Board and YouGov, carried out a survey in 2023 aimed at gathering information on people’s legal problem experiences, their understanding of the law, how problems intersect with other aspects of their lives and the impacts, and what people need from legal professionals and the justice system. More than 12,000 people across England and Wales participated in the survey.

Survey results were published in April 2024. Key findings include:

  • Two thirds of adults in England and Wales experienced a legal problem in the four-year reference period of the survey. This represents a 2-percent increase from the 2019 legal needs survey.
  • The most common legal problem types experienced are: employment, finance, welfare and benefits problems.
  • When considering external factors (Brexit, the COVID-19 pandemic, and inflation), 12% of people said that their legal issue was caused by COVID-19; 15% felt that their issue was caused by increases in inflation/ the cost of living, and 26% said that their issue was made worse by the cost of living.
  • A majority of people who experienced a legal problem received some help for their problem, though fewer people reported receiving help in the 2023 survey than the 2019 survey (62% vs 66%).
  • 52% of people indicated that they received help from a professional; 11% of people received help from a non-professional. Young adults are more likely to get help.

The Legal Needs of Individuals in England and Wales: Summary Report 2024 can be downloaded here: https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/research/find-out-what-your-clients-need-with-the-results-of-our-legal-needs-survey.

For a news article discussing findings from the survey, see: https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/yougov-legal-needs-survey-suggests-solicitors-losing-market-share/5119414.article.

International Access to Justice Conference – Call for Proposals

ajrn1 Leave a comment

Osgoode Hall Law School of York University is pleased to announce that the 2024 International Access to Justice Forum (IA2J Forum) will take place at Osgoode Professional Development, in downtown Toronto, Canada, from October 23-25, 2024.

For those interested in presenting at the conference, the submission portal (https://machformext.osgoode.yorku.ca/machform/view.php?id=365881) is now open for proposals. Please note that all presenters must plan to attend the conference in person.

We invite presentations from scholars; researchers; legal practitioners; court, tribunal, and dispute resolution staff; and other legal service providers from around the world on a range of topics relating to access to civil justice. Topics of particular interest include the following:

New data or empirical analysis regarding the prevalence of civil legal problems, perceptions or understandings of legal matters, or behavior taken in response to justiciable events;
Legal professional regulatory reform, alternative legal service providers, and innovative legal service partnerships;
The role of legal technology in enhancing access to justice;
Access to justice in the face of climate change, global conflict, and economic change;
Interventions and approaches to enhance equality in access to civil justice for underserved groups;
Research regarding the outcomes and impacts of legal services, or the return on investment regarding the delivery of legal services; and
The place of access to justice in legal education.

Those interested in presenting should submit a brief abstract (no more than 3,000 characters) that clearly identifies the proposed topic and summarizes key findings or lessons. Submissions will be reviewed on a rolling basis.

Deadline for Submissions: May 31, 2024 (11:59 pm ET)

Conference Co-Chairs:
Dean Trevor Farrow, Professor Suzanne Chiodo, and Professor Patricia McMahon,
Osgoode Hall Law School, York University.

Questions may be directed to:
Erika Robinson (erobinson@osgoode.yorku.ca), Research Events & Communications Coordinator, Osgoode Hall Law School, York University.