Family lawyers may withdraw their legal aid services before the end of the month if the Department of Justice does not engage urgently over pay and civil legal aid reform. Any such withdrawal could affect litigants relying on legal aid lawyers to represent them in new family law cases concerning child maintenance, custody, guardianship and domestic violence.The dispute is separate to the one involving solicitors protesting against criminal legal aid reforms.A group representing lawyers on the family law legal aid private practitioners panel has written to Minister for Justice Jim O’Callaghan, urging engagement over pay and family legal aid reform in line with recommendations made in reports last year of the civil legal aid reform group.It is understood that unless there is a “meaningful” response, the lawyers are prepared not to take on any new cases but will honour existing legal aid assignments.[ Legal aid dispute may spread from criminal courts to family and domestic violence cases ]Any such withdrawal of services would mean the Legal Aid Board, already overwhelmed by demand for other civil legal aid services, would have to assign lawyers from other work to the family courts, including for emergency domestic violence applications.Family lawyers say they have had no pay increase over 20 years. They say the private practitioner legal aid flat fee, ranging from €339 for a single application, such as for child maintenance or access, up to €508 for applications for several orders, including domestic violence, does not allow for adjournments or reflect the work and number of appearances involved. After a meeting during the week in the family District Courts complex in Dolphin House, Dublin, the lawyers agreed to write to the minister demanding “meaningful” engagement. That letter, sent on Thursday, is believed to seek such engagement on pay and legal aid reform by the end of next week, failing which the lawyers say they may cease to take on new family legal aid work.The dispute is separate from the withdrawal of services by criminal defence lawyers over a new flat-fee model for criminal legal aid work in the District Courts. That dispute looks set to escalate with a two-day action next week aimed at achieving a near-total shutdown of criminal courts across the country.Criminal defence solicitors began withdrawing their services last month over the new fees payment model proposed by the Department of Justice and operational since July 1st. It introduced one flat fee of €520 per case, irrespective of the number of court appearances, replacing the previous model of €239.38 for a first appearance and €59.86 for each subsequent appearance. O’Callaghan has said the old payment model was vulnerable to abuse and the new model was aimed at improving efficiency. It was devised following an internal review by the department that noted spending on criminal legal aid had almost doubled from €19 million in 2015 to €37 million in 2024, despite a fall in the volume of cases. The Law Society has described the review as “flawed”, said the new fee model was “unworkable” and has sought “meaningful” engagement with the department on pay and reform. On Friday, O’Callaghan, when asked if the departure of around 180 solicitors from the criminal legal aid panel represented a big problem, said he did not believe so. He said there were about 850 solicitors on the panel and “a lot of claims activity” in respect of new criminal legal aid certificates that have come into effect since July 1st.The number of case adjournments and “the multiple certificates that are being issued in respect of one person being brought before court” were issues that he “just couldn’t hide away from”, he said.On Friday, Tony Ferry, of Ferrys Solicitors, said solicitors in Dublin “remain resolute” in opposition to the new legal aid regime and he understood the situation was similar in Cork and the west. While some solicitors never joined the protest, the largest providers of criminal legal aid were “committed” to it, he said. “The minister and his department have consistently tried to undermine and dismiss the level of protest and the extent of solicitor involvement in this dispute,” Ferry said.