Skip to main content
EnglandLegal StudiesSyllabus dot point

How do people pay for legal advice and representation, and how effectively does the system provide access to justice?

Access to justice and the funding of legal services: legal aid (civil and criminal) and its restriction under LASPO 2012, private funding, conditional fee agreements, and advice agencies.

An OCR A-Level Law guide to access to justice and the funding of legal services. Explains civil and criminal legal aid and its restriction under LASPO 2012, private funding and conditional fee agreements, and advice agencies, with worked exam answers and the AO3 evaluation the paper rewards.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.815 min answer

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Jump to a section
  1. What this dot point is asking
  2. The answer
  3. Examples in context
  4. Try this

What this dot point is asking

OCR Component 1 Section A requires you to know how people pay for legal advice and representation and how well the system delivers access to justice, the principle that everyone should be able to use the law regardless of means. The skill is to describe the funding routes for AO1 and to evaluate how effectively justice is accessible for AO3.

The answer

Public funding: legal aid

Legal aid is state funding for legal advice and representation for those who cannot afford it, administered by the Legal Aid Agency.

  • Civil legal aid is subject to a means test (the applicant's income and capital) and a merits test (the case must have a reasonable chance of success and be worth funding). Its scope was sharply restricted by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO), which removed most family, housing, debt, employment and welfare benefit matters from scope, leaving funding mainly for cases involving liberty, homelessness, domestic abuse and child protection.
  • Criminal legal aid covers free advice and assistance at the police station for anyone detained, and representation in court subject to an interests of justice test (for example the risk of imprisonment or complexity) and a means test.

Private funding

Those who do not qualify for legal aid must fund themselves:

  • Paying privately, by the hour, by a fixed fee, or through legal expenses insurance (often part of a household or motor policy).
  • Conditional fee agreements (CFAs), the "no win, no fee" model, under which the lawyer charges nothing if the case is lost and a normal fee plus an agreed success fee (uplift) if it is won. CFAs dominate personal injury litigation. The client may also need after-the-event insurance to cover the other side's costs if they lose.

Advice agencies and other help

A network of free and low-cost help exists outside the funded system: Citizens Advice, law centres, trade unions (for members), charities, pro bono schemes run by lawyers, and university legal clinics. The small claims track and ADR also reduce the need for paid representation for everyday disputes.

Evaluating access to justice

Examples in context

A strong evaluation contrasts the relative protection of criminal defendants with the post-LASPO gaps in civil funding.

Try this

Q1. Describe how conditional fee agreements work and the types of case in which they are commonly used. [10 marks]

  • What the marker wants. Precise AO1: no win, no fee; nothing payable if the case is lost; base fee plus a success fee if won; after-the-event insurance for the other side's costs; common in personal injury. Note that lawyers tend to take strong, high-value claims.

Q2. Discuss the extent to which the restriction of legal aid by LASPO 2012 has damaged access to justice. [20 marks]

  • Cue. An AO3 evaluation: weigh the removal of most civil matters from scope (advice deserts, litigants in person) against the survival of criminal legal aid and the growth of CFAs, ADR and advice agencies, and judge how far access has narrowed.

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of OCR exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

OCR H418/01 2020 (Section A style)15 marksDescribe the ways in which a person involved in a legal dispute can fund legal advice and representation. [a medium-tariff Section A question; true tariff varies between 10 and 15 on the real paper]
Show worked answer →

A Section A knowledge question, mainly AO1, rewarding accurate description with examples. Cover the main funding routes.

Public funding. Legal aid, administered by the Legal Aid Agency, covers some civil cases (subject to a means and merits test and the scope cut by LASPO 2012) and criminal cases (advice at the police station, and representation subject to the interests of justice and means tests).

Private funding. Paying privately by the hour, fixed fee or through legal expenses insurance. A conditional fee agreement (no win, no fee) lets a lawyer take no fee if the case is lost and an uplift (success fee) if it is won, common in personal injury.

Other help. Free advice from Citizens Advice, law centres, trade unions, pro bono schemes and university legal clinics.

Top answers name LASPO 2012 and conditional fee agreements precisely and give the means and merits tests.

OCR H418/01 2022 (Section B essay)20 marksDiscuss the extent to which the current system provides effective access to justice. [Section B extended-response evaluation, AO3]
Show worked answer →

An AO3 evaluation essay marked by levels of response. The top level weighs the funding routes against the cost of justice and reaches a judgement.

Strengths. Criminal legal aid still protects defendants at the police station and in serious cases; conditional fee agreements open personal injury litigation without upfront cost; advice agencies, pro bono and the small claims track widen access; ADR and online services reduce cost.

Weaknesses. LASPO 2012 cut civil legal aid sharply (removing most family, housing, debt and welfare matters from scope), creating advice deserts and a rise in litigants in person; means tests exclude many on modest incomes; the cost and complexity of law still deter ordinary people; conditional fee agreements favour strong, high-value claims.

Judgement. Conclude that access to justice has narrowed since LASPO 2012 and depends heavily on the area of law and ability to pay, so the system is only partially effective and reform of civil legal aid is needed. The top level judges rather than lists.

Related dot points

Sources & how we know this