A recent call urges legal regulators to protect unrepresented litigants, especially vulnerable women, from unethical practices.
- Olive Craig highlights instances where lawyers exploit their position against litigants in person (LiPs).
- Issues include inappropriate litigation tactics and misrepresentation in court orders.
- Unregulated experts presenting biased assessments have increased concerns.
- Regulators are encouraged to hold lawyers accountable for ethical misconduct.
In a compelling appeal, a charity has underscored the urgent necessity for legal regulators to ensure lawyers do not exploit vulnerable litigants in person (LiPs). Olive Craig, a senior legal officer with Rights of Women, expressed particular concern for women involved in such situations. Craig, who represents a charity offering free legal advice to victims of violence and abuse, highlighted that lawyers often invoke their instructions as a shield, failing to recognise limitations on such justifications. This was notably addressed to the Legal Services Board, eliciting a serious discussion on the professional ethics and conduct of lawyers.
Craig described several instances of unethical behaviour. This involved using aggressive litigation tactics, such as applying for court orders without merit, and employing unregulated psychologists as joint experts while obscuring this from the courts. One highlighted scenario involved a lawyer seeking a residence transfer for a child on behalf of an absentee father, purely as a tactical maneuver rather than a genuine pursuit. Craig criticised the reliance on unregulated experts for evaluating vulnerable families, stressing the inherent unfairness to unrepresented litigants unable to mount effective legal arguments.
Adding to these examples, Craig noted the disparity in legal power, where only solicitors and barristers can directly communicate with judges and draft court orders. This often results in orders being strategically misrepresented, which unrepresented parties fail to understand until much later, causing significant disadvantage. Craig emphasised the problematic nature of courts being overwhelmed by staff shortages and delays, which hinders their ability to address these issues effectively.
Craig’s testimony to the Legal Services Board was described as “powerful” by Chair Alan Kershaw. This testimony encouraged a commitment to reinforcing regulation to support ethical decision-making, ensuring any gaps in the regulatory framework are promptly addressed. The call to action is clear: regulators need to assertively undertake measures to prevent lawyers from exploiting vulnerable litigants.
Regulatory bodies are urged to take decisive action against unethical legal practices impacting vulnerable litigants to ensure justice and ethical integrity are upheld.
