Categories
Family Law Law

Litigants in Person

Ministry of Injustice - Law and Justice

Litigants in person (LIP) in England and Wales are individuals who are representing themselves in a legal proceeding, without the assistance of a lawyer or other legal professional. Litigants in person can participate in any type of legal case, including civil cases, criminal cases, and family law cases.

Litigants in Person may request the assistance of a McKenzie friend during a court hearing.

The use of litigants in person has become increasingly common in recent years, due in part to cuts in legal aid and the rising cost of legal representation. While litigants in person have the right to represent themselves in court, they often lack the legal knowledge and expertise of trained lawyers, which can make the legal process more difficult for them.

The court system in England and Wales has attempted to make the legal process more accessible to litigants in person, by providing information and guidance through court staff, online resources, and simplified court procedures. However, litigants in person should be aware that the legal system can be complex and challenging to navigate without legal representation.

In England and Wales, judges are expected to treat litigants in person with respect and fairness, while also upholding the principles of justice and the rule of law. The treatment of litigants in person should be guided by the following principles:

Equality

Litigants in person should be treated equally to those who have legal representation. Judges should not assume that a litigant in person is less able to present their case effectively or that their case is less important.

Impartiality

Judges should remain impartial and objective in their dealings with litigants in person, regardless of the litigant’s background, education or personal circumstances.

Assistance

Judges may offer assistance to litigants in person where appropriate, such as explaining court procedures or summarizing legal arguments. However, judges must be careful not to give legal advice, as this is the role of a lawyer.

Communication

Judges should ensure that they communicate clearly and effectively with litigants in person, avoiding legal jargon or technical language where possible. Judges should also be patient and courteous, particularly where the litigant in person is unrepresented and may be nervous or anxious.

Procedural fairness

Judges should ensure that the litigant in person is given a fair opportunity to present their case and that the legal process is conducted fairly, with due regard for the principles of natural justice.

In summary, while judges are not expected to provide legal advice or act as an advocate for litigants in person, they are expected to treat them with respect and fairness, and to ensure that the legal process is conducted fairly and impartially.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

[post_title] was last updated on the 23rd June 2026

By Dom Watts

Dom Watts founded the Ministry of Injustice in July 2021. Dom is an IT Professional with 30+ years experience in Tier 1 Banking, Government, Defence, Healthcare and Global Blue Chips. Dom has no legal training and is not a lawyer but has previously consulted for a Magic Circle Law Firm. You can find Dom on X or Google.

Dom Watts publishes the Ministry of Injustice as a citizen journalist. The journalism exemption is detailed in the Data protection and journalism code of practice published by the ICO and Section 124 of the Data Protection Act 2018.

Section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of truth. Section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of honest opinion. Section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of public interest. Section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the single publication rule.

Section 4a of The Limitation Act 1980 defines the time limit for actions for defamation or malicious falsehood as one year from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives the right to freedom of expression. "This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."

"Free speech encompasses the right to offend, and indeed to abuse another." - Para 43 Scottow v CPS [2020] EWHC 3421 (Admin)

"Free speech is a fundamental common law right" - Para 21 R v Shayler [2002] UKHL 11 [2003] 1 AC 247 per Lord Bingham and Para 42 Phillips -v- Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs [2024] EWHC 32 (Admin)

Dom is a member of The Free Speech Union

“A key issue here is the need to distinguish between conduct which, however objectionable, does not justify invoking the criminal law and conduct which crosses the line and results in criminal liability" - Para 31 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

“Harassment is generally understood to involve improper oppressive and unreasonable conduct that is targeted at an individual and calculated to produce alarm and distress” - Para 38 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

"The behaviour said to amount to harassment must reach a level of seriousness passing beyond irritations, annoyances....The gravity of the misconduct must be of an order which would sustain criminal liability" - Paras [40-44] Hayden v Dickenson [2020] EWHC 3291 (QB)

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything"

In 2002 Dom Watts was an unlikely consumer champion. The dad of three from Croydon took on the power and might of Kodak – and won...Dom on BBC Working Lunch

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent