Committee publication · Engagement document · 14 April 2026

Access to Justice engagement event, Monday 9 March 2026: Summary Note - Survivors of Domestic and Sexual Abuse

From: Justice Committee

Inquiry: Access to Justice

Summary

This engagement summary captures discussions from the Justice Committee's 9 March 2026 access to justice inquiry with survivors of domestic and sexual abuse, practitioners, and specialists. Participants identified systemic barriers to justice: insufficient legal aid and early advice, self-representation disadvantages, perpetrators' abuse of court procedures, poor police and court experiences, and immigration-related eligibility gaps. Survivors described civil litigation as financially unviable and courts as retraumatising.

Key findings

  • Legal aid capacity is insufficient, with particular gaps for migrant survivors whose eligibility varies by immigration status; despite family law legal aid intentions, many abuse survivors remain ineligible for trauma-informed support.
  • Survivors acting as litigants in person face structural inequality of arms: unaffordable after-the-event insurance, prohibitive litigation costs, and law firms' settlement pressure based on costs risk rather than claim merits effectively shut many out of civil justice.
  • Perpetrators strategically abuse court procedures—including limitation period arguments, Part 36 settlement offers, and SLAPP-style tactics—to suppress disclosure, prolong proceedings, and maintain control; serious allegations often only emerge after the perpetrator's death.
  • Police and court systems lack trauma-informed practice and feedback mechanisms; trafficking is frequently misidentified as immigration-related rather than safeguarding; MVDAC routes are restricted to limited categories of women.
  • Participants called for expanded legal aid, pooled litigation insurance solutions, statutory costs protections in sexual abuse cases, system-wide trauma-informed training, and immigration reforms allowing safe reporting without enforcement risk.

Tone

Critical

Topics

access-to-justicelegal-aiddomestic-abusesexual-abuseimmigration-status

Key actors

Justice Committee, Baroness Smith, Prime Minister, Health and Safety Executive, UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI), National Referral Mechanism

Notable line

For many survivors the civil justice system is simply not viable or even accessible.

Key Quotes

Legal aid and early legal advice capacity were described as insufficient, with pronounced gaps for migrant survivors whose entitlements and routes to support vary by immigration status
Engagement event participants (survivors and practitioners) · On barriers to accessing legal support
Survivors acting as litigants in person (LiPs) face multiple disadvantages: courts are not designed for non ‑ lawyers; judges may default to engaging more with represented parties …
Engagement event participants · On self-representation inequality
The combination of prohibitive costs risks, limited availability of litigation funding or insurance and the strategic use of legal mechanisms including Part 36 offers and aggressive interlocutory tactics creates a system in which pursuing a claim can carry intolerable financial and personal risk.
Engagement event participants · On structural barriers in civil litigation
Part 36 settlement offers were cited as a significant deterrent in sexual ‑ abuse related claims: where a survivor fails to beat a defendant's offer by even a minimal amount, the resulting adverse costs risk discourages litigation and can lead to minimised disclosure.
Engagement event participants · On perpetrators' procedural abuse tactics
… trafficking is frequently misunderstood as an immigration-related issue, with the consequence that British victims, whether trafficked within the UK or overseas, are often not recognised as victims of trafficking at all.
Engagement event participants · On police and institutional misidentification
Court processes were described as retraumatising and difficult to navigate. Survivors reported not feeling heard, struggling to challenge orders, and encountering an absence of system ‑ wide, trauma ‑ informed practice.
Engagement event participants · On court system experiences
View original document →

Source · parliament.uk record ↗