A QC becomes a QC when they have superior knowledge and experience.Their opinion is not to be questioned by a lay person such as myself.

The QC opinion in the Epilim case is founded in a deep knowledge and understanding of the relevant legislation.The fact that the independent QC appointed by the Legal Services Commission to assess the Epilim case viewed itís prospects as poor (only having 25% chance of success) was an opinion made based on extensive knowledge.†† The opinion is independent and therefore free from external influences.

A QC appointed by the LSC will assess a case as Good, Borderline or Poor.This assessment is given to a panel who make a decision based on that opinion of probability of success and other documentation.What I donít understand is why for the past 5 years the assessment has been borderline and therefore Legal Aid funding granted yet this year it has become Poor.The basis of the case has not changed.

Where does that drastic difference of opinion come from?

I have trapsed up and down the country, subjected myself and my Son to intrusive examinations both physical and mental.Fortunately my son likes travelling so that aspect hasnít been too distressing but some of the appointments and tests required have been unpleasant for both of us.

The law is designed to be interpreted to suit different situations and we need our QCs to have differing opinions but in this case the vast difference in interpretation has had serious implications to the Taxpayer and the Claimants.

I would love for the judiciary to discuss the legislation and find a way for these valuable interpretations to be kept but at the same time more clarity and definitions to be included in what is one of the most important and fundamental pieces of legislation in our country.

I must say to QCs out there, and you know who you are, please start the discussions because the law as it stands at the moment isnít protecting you either.

Thank you.


Return to Main Page