Sentences with phrase «cost as access to justice»

Others would suggest that the government must bear the cost as access to justice is a societal responsibility akin to healthcare and that without broad and effective access to justice, our democratic system can not function effectively.

Not exact matches

Yet energy justice — defined here as meeting one's needs for the services that energy provides at reasonable cost, with fair and equitable access, and without disproportionate economic and environmental burdens — can mitigate the problems and pressures in other areas, especially when efficiency and solar energy are developed so as to create local jobs.

As for environmental justice, Democrats «will work to expand access to cost - saving renewable energy by low - income households, create good - paying jobs in communities that have struggled with energy poverty, and oppose efforts by utilities to limit consumer choice or slow clean energy deployment.»

The fear is that digital access to justice tools will be seen as a cost effective «upgrade» to traditional access to justice initiatives, and investment that in the new technology could come at too high a price for people without the skills or equipment needed to navigate online tools.

Many pushers of ABS have spent a mindboggling amount of time fussing about how to bring down the cost of wills as if that is a major barrier to access to justice.

The news will come as a relief to many lawyers, who feared fixed costs for all cases up to # 250,000 — as previously suggested by Jackson LJ — would make many cases commercially unviable, curbing access to justice for many people with valid claims.

(2) the population's views and desires as to this evolution in the use of the legal profession's monopoly over the provision of legal services to impose a «cutting costs by cutting competence» limitation upon people's ability to access justice;

It knows as both the legal aid funder of clinical negligence litigation and as the defendant compensator (as it is in the vast majority of clinical negligence cases) that access to justice is extremely costly to it in costs and damages, and that by attacking access to justice its outlay in both regards will be reduced substantially.

As just a brief sampling, in «The Cost of Law: Promoting Access to Justice through the (Un) Corporate Practice of Law» [2] and «Life in the Law - Thick World: The Legal Resource Landscape for Ordinary Americans» [3](with Jaime Heine), Hadfield uses empirical evidence to demonstrate that there can never be enough pro bono (free) legal work or enough money for legal aid that could even come close to satisfying the huge unmet need for legal services in the US.

This is why the European Union has adopted its regulation (EU) no 524/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009 / 22 / EC (Regulation on consumer ODR, and why mandatory ODR, no matter how it could be perceived by detractors, needs to be looked at seriously as a way of giving access to justice to those who, for now, can't turn to the courts since the costs associated with the legal process are simply prohibitive...

It may limit access to justice because of the costs and delays associated with its processing, but, as any security expert will tell you, the best way to guarantee that information is protected is to not have it.

That advertising can contribute to access to justice as well by «empowering people to understand what services are available, what they are, where they can go, who they can talk to, and what they can cost,» as Osgoode law professor Trevor Farrow says.

All of these obstructions were cited as larger access to justice impediments than cost.

So, even if we define access to justice so narrowly as to only include ability to hire an attorney, the cost of an attorney isn't even a factor in the majority of cases.

Lord Jackson is best known for his «Jackson Reforms,» which eliminated excess legal costs, and helped further access to justice through the promotion of tools such as Litigation Finance....

As well, in recent years considerable popular and legal media attention has focused on the lack of access to justice and the high cost of legal representation, often making connections to concerns about the adequacy of available legal aid.

The cost - effectiveness of cloud technology (aka «virtual law office» or VLO) that enables lawyers to deliver online legal services has been touted as one of best methods to address access to justice challenges, increasing as a result of a prolonged economic downturn.

She pointed to the enormous public costs associated with a lack of access to justice and suggested more efforts be made to calculate those costs and use that information as a tool to convince governments to increase their investments in access to justice as a cost - avoidance strategy.

The mission of my firm was to increase access to justice with a low - cost, pay - as - you - go model.

One of the justifications for a local final appellate court was that it would enhance access to justice as litigants would not have to bear the costs of travel to the United Kingdom.

I realize that cost is often a major impediment to access to justice, hence I accept legal aid clients and Cba referrals as well as offer unbundled services, all on a case by case basis.

Unbundled legal services, also called limited - scope representation, has gained traction in recent years as a way to increase access to justice and reduce the cost of legal services.

Without malice, too many of them (there are several heartwarming exceptions) see ABS as a way of being seen to be doing «something» about access to justice but without having to tamper with the real barrier and, well, if the low - cost small firm solicitors are badly harmed, well, they didn't really mean to do it and it wasn't their fault, and, well, that's progress isn't it?

The Chief Justice of British Columbia, Lance S.G. Finch, addressed a meeting of the B.C. Branch of the Canadian Bar Association recently on the subject of access to justice, singling out the high cost of legal services as a prominent, if not new, obstacle to thaJustice of British Columbia, Lance S.G. Finch, addressed a meeting of the B.C. Branch of the Canadian Bar Association recently on the subject of access to justice, singling out the high cost of legal services as a prominent, if not new, obstacle to thajustice, singling out the high cost of legal services as a prominent, if not new, obstacle to that goal.

1) While litigation costs are often prohibitive and an obvious issue in access to justice, litigation often arises only as a result of failure to obtain (sufficient) legal advise in the first case.

repeatedly used as an example of a barrier to access to justice when the litigator saying it has nothing at all to say about the ruinously high cost of litigation, to have the Law Society spend all this time and effort on ABS while spending comparatively little time on investigating how to realistically reduce the cost of litigation.

Several years ago Justice Osborne mentioned the «proliferation» of «hired gun» experts in the driving up costs in the Ontario personal injury system as one of many troublesome access to justice Justice Osborne mentioned the «proliferation» of «hired gun» experts in the driving up costs in the Ontario personal injury system as one of many troublesome access to justice justice issues.

The Jackson reforms of English commercial litigation came into force on 1 April 2013, and as part of that wholesale review of the funding of litigation in England and Wales, there has been widespread recognition that litigation funding promotes access to justice by enabling litigants to manage their exposure to costs.

While the Statutory Accident Benefit regime may give a right to an accident victim to challenge the wrongful denial of a benefit, where the cost of pursuing such a remedy is prohibitive, this raises significant issues as to access to justice that have yet to be addressed.

As a passionate advocate for access to justice, Nicole has led several local and national research projects that examine the cost, affordability and the effectiveness of the civil justice system in Canada.

The legislative authority enabling a court to award costs in criminal proceedings is primarily contained in Part II of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 (sections 16 to 19B), the Access to Justice Act (in relation to funded clients) and in regulations that have since been made pursuant to these statutes, including the Costs in Criminal Cases (General) Regulations 1986, as amecosts in criminal proceedings is primarily contained in Part II of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 (sections 16 to 19B), the Access to Justice Act (in relation to funded clients) and in regulations that have since been made pursuant to these statutes, including the Costs in Criminal Cases (General) Regulations 1986, as ameCosts in Criminal Cases (General) Regulations 1986, as amended.

The Jackson Reforms are now three years old and the unease within the profession as to their impact upon access to justice and the spiraling cost of litigation remains acute.

She adds that if local authorities consider compromises instead of issuing court proceedings as a way of avoiding increased costs, «vulnerable children will be put at risk and denied access to justice».

As a result, reducing the costs awarded to plaintiffs in the name of access to justice misses the mark — the risk borne by the plaintiff is thereby increased, fewer actions will be commenced, and access to justice will be denied.

See the Canadian Forum on Civil Justice and their Access to Justice Blog and Cost of Justice project, for example, as well as the work of the National Self - Represented Litigants Project (NSRLP).

Further, poverty can also undermine access to the justice system, as people living in poverty can not afford the attendant costs.

Others still championed LSPs as important for meeting the access to justice gap, but argued against their regulation by state courts on the grounds either it is unnecessary (they are already regulated by consumer protection laws), that it would unnecessarily increase costs, or that regulation would only enable the state bars and courts to exercise their «protectionist instincts» (see this response, this response and this response).

The Court of Appeal held that «notwithstanding the absence of reprehensible conduct... special costs are awarded as an instrument of policy to encourage access to justice» (Victoria (City) at para 182).

The inability of the vast majority of individuals and small businesses to secure legal representation due to lack of access and high cost is an acute problem often referred to as «the access to justice crisis.»

In my view, while this case does not deal substantively with the issue as to whether the requirement that one pay the costs of the transcription of the proceedings below results in a barrier to access to justice, it raises tangentially the question as to whether access to justice has become an illusory concept for most Canadians.

[98] Some respondents championed LSPs as important for meeting the access to justice gap, but argued against their regulation by state courts on the grounds either it is unnecessary (they are already regulated by consumer protection laws), that it would unnecessarily increase costs, or that regulation would only enable the state bars and courts to exercise their «protectionist instincts.»

I've greatly appreciated and learned much from many of her articles, such as «The Cost of Law: Promoting Access to Justice through the (Un) Corporate Practice of Law,» «Life in the Law - Thick World: The Legal Resource Landscape for Ordinary Americans» (with Jaime Heine), and «Legal Barriers to Innovation: The Growing Economic Cost of Professional Control Over Corporate Legal Markets.»

The first meeting of the Parties to the Aarhus Convention (Lucca, Italy 21 - 23 October 2002) decided to establish a Task Force on Access to Justice to support the implementation of the third pillar of the Convention by inter alia, examining good practices, sharing experience with implementation of particular paragraphs of article 9 of the Convention and assessing the impact of certain barriers in access to justice such as costs and dAccess to Justice to support the implementation of the third pillar of the Convention by inter alia, examining good practices, sharing experience with implementation of particular paragraphs of article 9 of the Convention and assessing the impact of certain barriers in access to justice such as costs and Justice to support the implementation of the third pillar of the Convention by inter alia, examining good practices, sharing experience with implementation of particular paragraphs of article 9 of the Convention and assessing the impact of certain barriers in access to justice such as costs and daccess to justice such as costs and justice such as costs and delays.

For plaintiffs, class actions are seen as a tool to increase access to justice, as the costs of litigation are shared among a larger group, and the downside risk is limited as costs in unsuccessful cases are often underwritten by the plaintiffs» law firm or a third party fund.

Since the Supreme Court of Canada's landmark decision in Hryniak v Mauldin, 2014 SCC 7, summary judgment has been lauded as an effective tool to enhance access to justice and achieve cost - effective results for litigants.

While costs are in the discretion of the court, the Ontario Court of Appeal had previously confirmed that costs must be reasonable in the circumstances as the principle of indemnity must be balanced with the fundamental objective of access to justice:

Personally, I see this as an access to justice issue: the increases in upkeep costs of these publications (100 % to 200 % and more over the past four years is not unusual) eventually get passed on to lawyers» clients, who already struggle with the cost of legal representation.

Shifting the government's priorities to access to justice only seems possible as a costs - savings exercise.

However, as a practical step in improving access to justice, this decision will result in more people — in particular, women, disabled people, First Nations people and immigrants, who are less likely be able to afford hearing fees — gaining access to the justice system without having to compromise their everyday cost of living.

Highlights include a review of the new changes to the Tariff coming into effect this month and broader issues such as the theoretical underpinnings of cost awards and access to justice concerns.