Rebooting the cab rank rule as a limited universal service obligation

IF 1.4 Q1 LAW Legal Ethics Pub Date : 2017-03-24 DOI:10.1080/1460728x.2017.1292623
Andrew Higgins
{"title":"Rebooting the cab rank rule as a limited universal service obligation","authors":"Andrew Higgins","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2017.1292623","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article critically examines the value and scope of the cab rank rule in England and Australia. Despite the laudable non-discrimination principle underpinning it, the cab rank rule is subject to so many exceptions it is debatable whether the rule has any effect, positive or negative, on access to justice. On the other hand, when the rule is followed, it has the potential to unnecessarily distort the legal services market. Despite legitimate questions about its continued relevance, the paper argues that the rationale for the cab rank rule remains critically important in an age where most people are unable to afford private legal representation and are ineligible for public legal assistance. The cab rank rule could play a greater role in delivering access to justice for all, by ‘rebooting’ it as a limited universal service obligation to provide legal representation for all who genuinely need it but cannot obtain it privately. In practice this would involve the creation of a compartmentalised public cab rank in which all practising lawyers dedicate a small percentage of their billable hours to representing eligible clients for a regulated fee.","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":"20 1","pages":"201 - 223"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2017.1292623","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legal Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2017.1292623","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT This article critically examines the value and scope of the cab rank rule in England and Australia. Despite the laudable non-discrimination principle underpinning it, the cab rank rule is subject to so many exceptions it is debatable whether the rule has any effect, positive or negative, on access to justice. On the other hand, when the rule is followed, it has the potential to unnecessarily distort the legal services market. Despite legitimate questions about its continued relevance, the paper argues that the rationale for the cab rank rule remains critically important in an age where most people are unable to afford private legal representation and are ineligible for public legal assistance. The cab rank rule could play a greater role in delivering access to justice for all, by ‘rebooting’ it as a limited universal service obligation to provide legal representation for all who genuinely need it but cannot obtain it privately. In practice this would involve the creation of a compartmentalised public cab rank in which all practising lawyers dedicate a small percentage of their billable hours to representing eligible clients for a regulated fee.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
重新启动出租车等级规则作为一项有限的普遍服务义务
本文批判性地考察了英国和澳大利亚出租车等级规则的价值和范围。尽管值得称赞的非歧视原则支撑着出租车排位规则,但它受到如此多的例外情况的制约,以至于该规则对诉诸司法是否有任何影响(无论是积极的还是消极的)是值得商榷的。另一方面,当规则被遵守时,它有可能不必要地扭曲法律服务市场。尽管对其持续相关性存在合理的质疑,但该论文认为,在大多数人负担不起私人法律代理,也没有资格获得公共法律援助的时代,出租车等级规则的基本原理仍然至关重要。出租车等级规则可以发挥更大的作用,通过“重启”它作为一项有限的普遍服务义务,为所有真正需要但无法私下获得法律代理的人提供法律代理。在实践中,这将涉及建立一个分隔的公共出租车排名,所有执业律师将其收费时间的一小部分用于代表符合条件的客户,收取规定的费用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
期刊最新文献
Between Continuity and Change in the Italian Legal Profession – Boutique Law Firms as the Last Bastion of Professionalism Liberal egalitarianism and critical legal studies: articles of conciliation Consequentialism and problem of role morality in legal ethics Should judges be temperate in their speech? Loyalty to client, conviction, or constitution? The moral responsibility of public professionals under illiberal state pressures
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1