The prospect for ordinary people seeking a just and legal resolution to a dispute is bleak indeed if solicitors responding to the Law Society of Scotland's questionnaire on civil legal aid cases is representative of the profession. It is in the nature of civil cases that they affect the most deeply-felt aspects of life. Divorce, custody of children, interdicts against the perpetrators of domestic violence and the pursuit of debts are the staple fare of civil law. For those involved, they are vital.

The survey found that 92% of those who offer civil legal aid could give it up within the next four years. For the great majority, this is because it is "financially unviable", but 60% are also concerned about the bureaucracy involved. In other words, to use a phrase well-honed in court: the game is not worth the candle. That is borne out by the fact that for most of those who replied, civil legal aid work is now less than 20% of their business, so little that it would not be a problem to phase it out.

One of the main causes for complaint is the system of block fees introduced in 2003, and the survey was a response to a call from the Family Law Association for a "significant increase in fees". The Law Society asked for evidence. The response from solicitors provides chapter and verse of how the system of block fees for categories of work has failed. It should at the very least have simplified the administration of the legal aid system, but the complaints about the strangling effects of the bureaucracy suggest the opposite. More seriously, it has made it difficult for people who most need legal representation to secure it, and that situation is likely to become worse.

Many solicitors who have continued to take on civil cases on legal aid have done so because they believe there is a need for it in places that would otherwise be "advice deserts". Some report acting for clients 60 miles away or turning away people who have already tried numerous other firms, and the problem is particularly acute in rural areas, where there are not enough firms offering legal aid to represent all the parties in a case.

These findings emerge in the same week as proposals to transfer the bulk of civil cases from the Court of Session to the sheriff courts as part of the ongoing review of the framework of the legal establishment by Lord Gill. With the sheriff courts already struggling to deal with the backlog of criminal cases, the prospect of an additional workload of civil cases can only mean the process will become lengthier. Gladstone's dictum that justice delayed is justice denied may not always be apposite in civil cases, but where family law is concerned, life is diminished by delay. In some cases, people may simply give up.

The block-fee system needs to be reviewed thoroughly and urgently. If a return to the previous system of itemised fees is deemed problematic, consideration should be given to providing publicly-funded solicitors to take on civil cases.