Duncan Lewis

Dalston Office


Duncan Lewis

Harrow Office


Duncan Lewis

Shepherds Bush Office


Duncan Lewis

Tooting Office


Duncan Lewis

Lewisham Office


FeedWind

Duncan Lewis

Job Vacancies

Solicitors, Caseworkers, Trainee Solicitors

 

 

If you have used our service, we would like you to spend a few moments to comment upon the service you have received from our lawyers at Duncan Lewis. Please do not include any personal and confidential information about your case. Please however comment upon the service received from the solicitor(s) who assisted you and whether you were satisfied with the service that was provided to you at Duncan Lewis. Do also mention the department and name of the solicitor(s) who advised and assisted you. Any suggestions for improvement of our service will also be helpful. Thank you for your time.


 

 

 

Governments generally appear unable to resist tampering with the justice system. The introduction of a unified tribunal system through the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (TCEA) which, broadly speaking gathered together a large number of tribunals and appeal processes under one roof, and then formulated common rules to govern them, has at least the surface virtue of simplifying and codifying the law. The various tribunals were gathered together in six 'chambers' *1 of the First-tier Tribunal ('FTT') which have their own specific rules and judges at the first tier stage. The new system continues to add to its responsibilities; it has recently subsumed the former Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (now the Immigration and Asylum Chamber) and a Lands Chamber has taken over the functions of the former Lands Tribunal The FTT has an overarching appeal body – the Upper Tribunal ('UT'), which is also intended to have certain of the High Court's powers of judicial review. This Upper Tribunal was designated a 'superior court of record' and besides its own appointed judiciary has (in England and Wales) Lords Justices, High Court Justices, circuit judges and district judges as ex officio members. This new structure raised the question – to what extent does judicial review lie against the UT?

The Divisional Court, and now the Court of Appeal have considered this question in the case of Cart *2. Both have concluded that judicial review does not generally lie, and have restricted recourse to the High Court to cases where either the UT acts beyond its jurisdiction, by for example hearing a case it had no power to entertain, or there has been a gross and flagrant denial of justice. A 'denial of justice' in this sense does not mean a decision that is wrong in law, but rather an extreme example of disruption of the judicial process itself, such as for example a hearing conducted by a judge with a pecuniary interest in the outcome. It is clear that the Courts expect few, if any, challenges to be declared admissible, and that decisions of the UT will be the final word other than where there is an onward right of appeal to the Court of Appeal.

These issues are of immense constitutional importance. Not only do they deal with the future functioning of the new tribunal system, but they also consider whether and to what extent parliament can trammel the powers of the High Court. It may be recalled that the attempt to exclude judicial review from immigration tribunal cases caused an uproar in 2004 – on that occasion the government backed down. In relation to this latest attempt the Divisional Court and the Court of appeal were in agreement that (a) the mere designation of a body as a 'superior court of record' does not immunise it from judicial review and that (b) the clearest of words were required to oust the jurisdiction of the High Court.

Although the Court of Appeal and the Divisional Court agreed on these issues, they differed over the reasoning for their findings. Although, the Court of Appeal's decision is obviously is very important, it is unlikely to be the last word in this matter for very long.

Where next? 'Finality is a good thing, but justice is a better.' *3

Admittedly, it is hard to imagine an objection in principle to the suggestion that where the UT has heard a case that lay outside its jurisdiction the resultant proceedings could be quashed. As pointed out by Laws J, that is to give effect to the will of parliament. However, previous experience suggests that this is a very hard line to hold, and greybeards are surely happily dusting off copies of the pre-Anisminic *4 authorities on the distinction between errors within jurisdiction and those without.

Secondly, the Court of Appeal themselves accepted that their reasoning may not apply in the field of asylum law, where lives may be at stake. No one wants to see the death or torture of an asylum claimant as a result of a decision known to be wrong, even if that would entail a judicial review of the Upper Tribunal. On the other hand there is little doubt that one of the primary motivations for attempting to make the Upper Tribunal free from judicial review was an effort to reduce the admittedly heavy burden of immigration claims upon the High Court. It seems inevitable that these two competing pressures will require a judgment to strike the balance between them in the Supreme Court.

Further, the revised system of tribunals have been set up on a UK wide basis, and the same issues arose in Scotland in Eba [2010] CSOH 45. The Scottish courts have thus far decided the issues on a different basis from either the Divisional Court or the Court of Appeal (though reaching essentially the same conclusion), however the results of a final appeal to the Inner House of Session are not yet known. Nonetheless, it appears clear that if the Inner House now agrees with the Court of Appeal in Cart then under the Scottish system there would be a further appeal to the Supreme Court as of right, whereas if they disagreed with the Court of Appeal the Supreme Court would be virtually bound to step in to resolve the tension of differing interpretations of the role and ambit of the Upper Tribunal, north and south of the border.

Footnotes

*1. for example the Health, Education and Social Welfare Chamber now carries out functions previously met by thirteen pervious tribunals

*2. in the High Court The Queen on the Application of Cart (1st Claimant), U (2nd C) and XC (3rd C) v The Upper Tribunal (1st Defendant) and Special Immigration Appeals Commission (2nd D) and Secretary of State for Justice (1st Interested Party), The Secretary of State for the Home Department (2nd IP), The Public Law Project (3rd IP) and Child maintenance and Enforcement Commission (Interveners) [2009] EWHC 3052 and in the Court of Appeal The Queen on the Application of Cart (Appellant) v The Upper Tribunal (D) and Secretary of State for Justice (IP), Child maintenance and Enforcement Commission (2nd IP), Mrs Wendy Cart (3rd IP) and The Public Law Project (Interveners) [2010] EWCA Civ 859

*3. Ras Behari Lal v King-Emperor (1933) 60 IA 354, per Lord Atkin at 361, quoted at para 43 of the Court of Appeal judgment in Cart.

*4. [1969] 2 AC 147

 

 

 

The Government believes strongly that those convicted of crime should make a contribution to some or all of their publicly-funded defence costs. By ensuring that finite legal aid resources are better targeted at those individuals who most need them, means testing will help to put the legal aid budget on a more sustainable footing.

Every defendant who appears for trial at the Crown Court will be granted a representation order provided they have submitted a completed application form *1. This raises the question of a solicitor's duty towards a defendant's partner. Their income and assets form part of the assessment. To date, this has not been a significant issue as means testing in the magistrates courts simply determined whether they were eligible or not. It was a "yes / no" test and not a partial test. But in the new system (Statutory Instrument No. 142, The Criminal Defence Service (Contribution Orders) (Amendment) Regulations 2010, Commencement - 1 January 2010 – this has been run as a pilot scheme but since 28 June 10 is of general application), capital is up for grabs, including shared capital.

As part of the application process, defendants will be asked to provide information about their income and capital assets, in a number of circumstances they will also be required to provide supporting evidence. On assessment of a defendant's disposable income, a test which aggregates his *2 means with his partner's, the eligibility test will determine whether a defendant falls into one of four categories:

Entitled to free legal representation;
Exempt from the payment of an income-based contribution (as the joint disposable income is in less than £3,398 pcm); but liable for all or part of his legal aid costs following a conviction based on having capital or equity in excess of £30,000.
Required only to pay a capped income-based contribution on a monthly basis
Required to pay a capped income-based contribution and liable for the remainder of his legal aid costs following conviction because of the high value of their capital assets, including equity, in excess of £30,000.
Capital and equity contributions will only be taken from that portion which is above the £30,000 threshold and includes equity in property. It should also be noted that there are circumstances in which a convicted person can be required to contribute to the costs of his prosecution.

A dilemma for defence solicitors arises. You need the partner (note: there is no requirement that the partners are married or in a formal civil partnership) to sign the CDS14 & CDS15 forms (the relevant applications for legal aid in criminal cases). You have to get her signature and submit the forms and evidence within 14 days of committal / transfer. But whilst her signature will assist you in obtaining legal aid (and it will assist your client also), there is a realistic possibility that she is signing away the capital in her property.....and significant sums are at stake.

As an example *3, a defendant's long-term partner could have been working all her life and had no involvement in her partner punching someone on a night out and killing them instantly. They have a shared house with £130,000 equity. That means that up to £100,000 of the equity in the house can be used to settle the bill. In a murder case where the defendant is convicted, there is a very good chance that most of that equity would have to be used to pay the bill.

Footnotes



*1. At the Magistrates Court there is an additional test that it is in the interests of justice to make a representation order

*2. In this article, for the sake of simplicity, defendants are male and their partners female

*3. (This example is taken from a website for criminal solicitors where they discuss practical issues in their cases)

 

 

 

With increase in number of divorce cases, issues related to family law, crime, debt, landlord-tenant disputes, and many others in the UK, the services of legal lawyers are in great demand. A large number of people, who don’t have adequate legal knowledge and time to handle the legal issue themselves, avail the services of the lawyers.

If you wish to benefit from this current market trend, you may take up a career in law and assure yourself of a secure and promising future. However, to be a lawyer, you must have the intellectual ability to understand the complexities of legal cases and you should have the willingness to work with and for the people who are going through bad phase in their life like divorce, accident, criminal accusations, and so on.

Apart from these, it is very important to have strong commitment and dedication to your profession. You need to go through rigorous trainings in order to be a part of the challenging legal world.

For legal trainings, you may consider the training contract offered by Duncan Lewis & CO; a UK based solicitors firm of repute. Duncan Lewis offers formal legal training to new legal professionals and helps them evolve in to a quality solicitor. It also offers legal trainings for existing lawyers who wish to enhance their career with the latest trainings.

Duncan Lewis offers two-year full-time training contracts, with trainees working full-time after satisfactory completion of the Legal Practice Course (LPC). You may visit their website to know in detail about the terms and conditions for applying for legal contract and procedures and methods for legal training adopted by Duncan Lewis.

If you have already completed your Legal Practice Course or, you are working as a lawyer and are looking for a good job opportunity, you may check out career options at Duncan Lewis. Duncan Lewis is inviting applications from novice and experienced candidates in both legal and non-legal capacities.

For recruitment and career, please email your details and CV to recruitment@duncanlewis.com, or call up to speak with the Recruitment Coordinator.

Those looking for legal advice and services for issues related to child support, family law, crime, debt, immigration, housing, and others may also talk to Duncan Lewis solicitors for quick and efficient legal advice and services at highly competitive prices.

 

 

 

We are one of London’s fastest growing firms of solicitors, with offices in Dalston and Harrow-on-the-Hill. We deal in a wide range of legal services that caters for clients on a Public Funding or Private Fee basis. Duncan Lewis & Co is privileged to have several franchises from the Legal Services Commission.

Duncan Lewis look to recruit dedicated and talented employees in both legal and non-legal capacities, and we are always interested to receive applications from quality candidates, whether experienced or novice. If you can demonstrate a strong commitment to the areas of law provided by the firm, and you are keen to build a career with us, please email your details and CV to recruitment@duncanlewis.com, or telephone and ask to speak with the Recruitment Coordinator.

 

 

 

Are you a novice legal professional who has completed his Legal Practice Course and has undergone adequate legal trainings and is now looking for a good job opportunity? Or, are you an experienced legal lawyer who is looking forward to career advancement? Whether you have yet to begin your career or wish to take it to the zenith of success, here is wonderful news for you.

Duncan Lewis-one of the most successful law firms in the UK is inviting applications from novice and experienced candidates.

For the uninitiated, Duncan Lewis is a solicitor’s firm that deals in a wide range of legal services and caters to clients on a Public Funding and Private Fee basis. It offers the best legal advice and services for matters related to child care and support, family law, debt, immigration, community care, housing, litigation, crime, social welfare, mental health, and much more.

Duncan Lewis has some of the most qualified and talented legal lawyers in the UK that are esteemed highly by individual clients and businesses all across the UK. This is not all. Duncan Lewis has several offices in London such as Dalston, Clapham Junction, Romford, Shepherds Bush, Harrow, New Cross, and Bedford and is privileged to have several franchises from the Legal Services Commission.

Duncan Lewis is recruiting dedicated and talented employees in both legal and non-legal capacities, whether amateur or experienced. If you think you deserve to be a part of this great legal firm and you can demonstrate a strong commitment to the areas of law provided by the firm, please email your details and CV to recruitment@duncanlewis.com, or call up to speak with the Recruitment Coordinator. Duncan Lewis would love to accept you as a part of its organisation.

If you wish to know in detail about Duncan Lewis, legal services offered by their solicitors, or to find out the career options at Duncan Lewis, you may also visit their website at www.duncanlewisvacancies.co.uk

Those looking for legal advice and services for issues related to child support, family law, crime, debt, immigration, housing, and others may also visit the website. Duncan Lewis offers quick and efficient legal advice and services at highly competitive prices.