ABSTRACT In February 2019, some six years after the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) removed legal aid from a wide range of civil and family matters, the Government released its Post Implementation Review of the impact of LASPO and accompanying action plan. Publication is at a time when governmental policy extolling the virtues of mediation and online dispute resolution has the potential to have a profound effect on family law process. Against this background and having regard to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the family justice system, this paper discusses the findings of the author’s qualitative study on the experiences of litigants in person in civil and family courts. It suggests a typology of litigants in person, explains how and where litigants in person in child arrangements proceedings seek advice and the significant access to justice barriers arising from the compulsory requirement to attend a MIAM before commencing proceedings and attending the fact-finding stage without representation. Ultimately, the paper offers fresh evidence of the harsh realities of litigating without representation in the family court, which despite espousing an inquisitorial process, remains adversarial in character.

中文翻译：

---

LASPO 后，诉讼当事人在私人家庭事务中遇到的有效诉诸司法的障碍

摘要 2019 年 2 月，也就是 2012 年《法律援助、判刑和惩罚罪犯法》(LASPO) 将法律援助从广泛的民事和家庭事务中删除大约六年后，政府发布了对 LASPO 影响的实施后审查，并随附行动计划。出版正值政府政策颂扬调解和在线争议解决的优点有可能对家庭法程序产生深远影响的时候。在此背景下，并考虑到 Covid-19 大流行对家庭司法系统的影响，本文讨论了作者对民事和家庭法院诉讼当事人亲身经历的定性研究的结果。它提出了诉讼当事人的类型学，解释了在儿童安排诉讼中当面的诉讼当事人如何以及在何处寻求建议，以及在开始诉讼之前必须参加 MIAM 并在没有代表的情况下参加实况调查阶段的强制性要求所产生的重大诉诸司法障碍。最终，该论文提供了新的证据，证明在家庭法庭上没有代表的诉讼是严酷的现实，尽管支持审讯程序，但仍然具有对抗性。