For hearings in the Employment Tribunal it may be possible to obtain a pro bono barrister from one of the two organisations below, but they cannot assist all applicants:

Only discrimination cases are in scope for legal aid in employment law, which means that every other type of employment case is not covered by legal aid. Sex discrimination cases include sexual harassment claims in the Employment Tribunal.

You will need to qualify financially for legal aid. A legal aid solicitor can do the calculation with you. If you have a partner you live with, their finances will also be assessed as part of yours.

Note: legal aid in employment cases only covers advice and preparation and not representation in the Employment Tribunal. Other arrangements may be available (see section 2b below).

Many people who need employment law advice won't qualify financially for legal aid because they have been working. There are various other options:

• Home contents insurance — if you have home contents insurance in place before the legal matter arose, check if it includes legal expenses insurance covering employment law.
• Trade union membership — if you are a member you can ask the union lawyers to assess the merits of your case and if strong enough they will represent you free of charge.
• Law centres — some may represent people even if they don't qualify for legal aid. Use the AdviceLocal search engine.
• Private payment — in the Employment Tribunal each side pays their own legal costs, therefore it is not possible to fund a case on a "no win no fee" where costs are paid by the other side. If a claim is very large, occasionally a solicitor may agree to a Damages Based Agreement (DBA), but this is unusual.
• Police employees — in some cases you may have a County Court negligence claim against your employer which could potentially be done on a "no win no fee" basis.

Defamation is either libel or slander.

Libel is a statement that is written or recorded, whilst slander is a statement made verbally.

Libel can include not only something written in a letter or newspaper but also statements made on social media or online e.g. Facebook, Twitter or Instagram, or a recording. A recording of a verbal conversation preserved in a permanent form, e.g. a phone message or a voice memo on WhatsApp, could be libel because it can be accessed repeatedly, similar to a piece of writing. Pictures can also be libellous — for example a photograph of a perpetrator with a heading "rapist" could potentially provoke a defamation claim.

Slander could include speaking to friends and family, or to a perpetrator's associates or employer.

Almost all court cases on defamation involve libel, not slander.

A perpetrator who sues for defamation is alleging that untrue things have been said about him, and in court he would have to prove that:

• The survivor has reported things to other people;
• The things said identify the perpetrator;
• The things said have caused or are likely to cause serious harm to the perpetrator's reputation.

The perpetrator does not have to prove that the things said are untrue — it is up to the survivor to prove that the things she said were true (see Q27).

In order to be defamatory, the words must cause serious harm to the reputation of the person suing. Allegations of sexual offences would generally be regarded as causing serious harm, as most people regard sexual offences as repugnant. The burden is always on the person suing to prove serious harm to their reputation. The court would generally assume that an allegation of a serious sexual offence would cause serious harm to reputation, unless there was evidence to suggest no one believed the allegation or that it was only seen by a very small number of people. If the allegation was less serious — for example, unwanted touching around the waist at an office party — then the perpetrator would usually have to convince a court, with evidence, that he suffered serious harm to reputation.

If the perpetrator had already been convicted of a previous sexual offence, then he would have difficulty showing that the new allegation caused serious harm to his reputation, as his reputation was already damaged. If he had convictions for some other type of offence then damage to reputation will depend on the offences, when they took place, and other factors in the particular case.

To win a claim for malicious falsehood, a perpetrator suing would have to prove that:

• The survivor has made a false statement;
• Her words refer, directly or indirectly, to the perpetrator, or to his financial interests;
• The words are stated maliciously; and
• This has caused financial damage or was intended to.

Difference with libel / slander:

• There is no need to prove harm to reputation. The person suing must prove they have suffered financial loss, or show that the survivor intended to cause financial loss.
• The perpetrator must prove that the survivor acted maliciously, which includes a situation where she knew or should have known that the allegations were false.

This would apply if a survivor discloses details about a sexual encounter or relationship — for example a description or photographs — where the perpetrator could argue he had a reasonable expectation of privacy because of details given about a sexual matter.

A breach of privacy could be found whether the things said by the survivor are true or false. The fact that the things said are true is not a defence.

Disclosing private information means disclosing private details about someone. Therefore, if a survivor simply says that the perpetrator has raped her, without giving any details whatsoever, this is unlikely to amount to a breach of privacy due to the lack of any details. Courts have held that a "bare fact" does not disclose any private information. (However, the perpetrator may still threaten defamation proceedings by arguing the allegation is untrue, so there is a risk of a defamation claim even if he could not succeed in a claim for misuse of private information.)

In a misuse of private information claim the court must balance the perpetrator's right to privacy and the survivor's right to freedom of speech. If a survivor can show that she disclosed the information for a good reason, then a court may put her right to speak out above the perpetrator's right to privacy. Examples of a good reason could be to warn another woman about the perpetrator, or to explain why the survivor won't do something such as work in a shared office with the perpetrator.

In a libel case, compensation can be paid for damage to reputation, and also other types of losses such as financial losses which result from the defamation — for example the person who is suing has lost business opportunities — or for psychiatric impact such as a diagnosed depression or an anxiety disorder that resulted from the defamation.

A slander case can usually only be brought where financial loss has been caused, unless the allegation is of a serious criminal offence (an offence that is punishable by imprisonment). If the allegation is of a sexual assault then compensation can be claimed for damage to reputation, as well as for financial losses, if there are any.

In a malicious falsehood claim the compensation is to make up for the financial losses.

• No one can sue a person for reporting a crime to the police — doing this does not put a survivor at any risk of a defamation claim.
• Once a survivor has reported a crime, she has a lifelong right to anonymity so should be careful that by speaking out she does not lose that right — it may be better to speak out anonymously.
• If the survivor considers the perpetrator to be a danger to other women, she should make sure that she says whatever is the minimum necessary to protect other women. That is speech that should be protected as being in the public interest. For instance, if she knows the perpetrator is grooming young women at a youth group, speaking to the organiser to warn them of the risk is likely to be protected as being in the public interest. Making a public statement online that the man is a risk is more difficult to defend.
• If the survivor wants to speak to friends on social media, she should be careful about privacy settings and make sure that she tells people in confidence and limited to a few trusted people. It is safer to tell them verbally in person.
• If the survivor makes a public statement that does not name the perpetrator and does not identify who he is to anyone — including people who know him and her — then it will be difficult for the perpetrator to sue for defamation (see Q14).
• If the survivor wants to make a public statement that she is a survivor of a sexual offence but does not identify the perpetrator publicly, she should be careful that she does not identify them accidentally (e.g. "I was raped by my partner last Christmas" — some would know who the perpetrator was).
• If the survivor wants to identify the perpetrator publicly and speak about her experiences, she can minimise the risk of being sued by taking legal advice and/or making sure that she is able to prove what she says is true, or that it could be defended in court on one of the other legal grounds for defending a case (see Q28 — e.g. that it is privileged or her 'honest opinion', or a statement in the public interest). These are complex so she should discuss them with a specialist defamation lawyer before she goes public (contact Centre for Women's Justice for help).
• The survivor should consider whether the information she is publishing may be protected by law as being private, such as photos or details about sexual activity — this could be a breach of privacy of the perpetrator regardless of the fact that what she is saying is true.

A survivor will need to consider carefully whether to reveal her identity if she speaks out. If she has reported sexual assault or rape to the police, she will have a lifelong right to anonymity automatically, and it would be a criminal offence for anyone to reveal her identity without her consent.

Despite anonymity being automatic, in any kind of civil case she should apply to the Court for an anonymity order to ensure her identity is not revealed through the court proceedings. This would apply, for example, if she is being sued for libel or if she is bringing a civil case for sexual assault against the perpetrator. If she has an anonymity order in place, it would be a contempt of court to breach that order.

By contrast, when a survivor is a victim in a criminal case she does not need to take any further steps to safeguard her anonymity. Her name will be stated in the courtroom, but it cannot be published by anyone who observes the trial (such as newspapers).

If she discloses her identity — for example in a media interview, either deliberately or accidentally — she loses that right to anonymity for all future time. It can also be difficult to later claim anonymity if the criminal case goes ahead.

If she has not reported to the police she does not have this anonymity, but she should bear in mind that she may want to report in future — so if she discloses her identity now she could lose her right to anonymity in future.

She cannot be sued for anything that she has said in private to the police when reporting a crime, or to another professional for a court case. However, if she tells other people about the details that she has reported to the police then the perpetrator could try to sue her for that.

If the perpetrator has been arrested and is under investigation by the police, then the survivor could be at risk of committing a criminal offence if she says something which runs a serious risk of prejudicing a future trial. For example, if she were to say publicly to a large number of social media followers that she is glad he has been arrested, that he has already been convicted of sexual assault and violent offences on numerous occasions, and that she hopes he will be again — this could be a contempt of court because the jury in the criminal trial should not be told about previous convictions (unless the judge decides they can be).

Generally, if a criminal investigation or prosecution is underway it is best to wait for it to be over before speaking out publicly.

In theory the perpetrator could threaten to or try to sue her. If she knows the perpetrator and what sort of person he is she can assess the likelihood of this.

If she goes ahead she should try to prepare the statement carefully and to make the allegations in a way which could be defended as a public interest statement. It is best to get legal advice and help with this. She needs to be able to show that she made the statement because she believed that it was in the public interest to make the statement, and that her belief was reasonable. For example, if the perpetrator was a well-known TV personality with access to children, she could consider making a complaint to the relevant production company or his employer rather than publicising the allegation generally. If it is important to make the allegations publicly, she should be careful to say no more than is strictly necessary.

If she wants to speak out it is best to seek advice from a lawyer beforehand about any statement she intends to make. She should try to gather evidence to support her. She can contact Centre for Women's Justice to see if we can arrange pro bono advice, or she can pay a lawyer.

The perpetrator could try to sue for misuse of private information. He would have to show that he had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the information. For example, if the survivor disclosed publicly photographs, texts or details of sexual activity, he could threaten or bring a privacy claim. A privacy claim by him will fail if she can show that the statement is exposing wrongdoing or is in the public interest for another reason (e.g. protecting the public).

It has also been known for perpetrators to try to bring a private prosecution for perverting the course of justice, and a civil claim for malicious prosecution against a person who has reported them for a criminal offence. This is very rare and it would be difficult for a perpetrator to find a lawyer to take on such a case. Any such case would be based on the same argument that the rape allegation was malicious, so fighting it would involve the same evidence as in a libel case, though the legal points would be different. Again, it would be very important to try to get legal advice from a specialist lawyer if such a case is brought by a perpetrator.

A perpetrator can bring a defamation case after someone has spoken out, but they cannot usually seek an injunction (court order) in advance to stop a survivor from speaking out (assuming they knew she was planning to do so).

However, they might try to bring a privacy claim to stop a survivor from speaking out, as injunctions can be ordered to prevent a privacy breach. An injunction is a court order to stop a person making something public, where it is known in advance that they are going to do this and what they are going to disclose.

Libel or slander can take place whenever words are written or spoken to any third person who is not the perpetrator — this can be to only one, or several other people; it does not need to be to a large number of people or to be available in public. Therefore, a message on a social media platform that is only accessible by one other person can be a libel, although it is unlikely to cause 'serious harm' which is needed for a legal claim to be successful.

If the perpetrator is not identifiable then he cannot sue for defamation. However, even if he is not named, he might still be identifiable to friends or family or anyone else who knows him — as in the example "I was raped by my partner last Christmas", where some would know who the perpetrator was. In contrast, if a survivor spoke about an incident during a one-night-stand and had previously had a number of one-night-stands, then the perpetrator would not be identifiable unless some detail were given that would identify him.

The question is whether at least one person would reasonably understand the words to refer to the person who is suing. Note that disclosure to only one person is unlikely to cause 'serious harm', though one person identifying the perpetrator could lead to the identity being shared more widely.

If the words are published or repeated by someone else, both the original survivor who made the allegations and the newspaper or other third party who repeats them can be sued for defamation. Usually people who sue for libel choose to sue the newspaper or TV company rather than the person who originally made the allegation, because a company will have more money to pay compensation and legal costs if they win. But sometimes they will choose to attack the survivor — so unless the survivor is totally anonymous and her identity protected by the newspaper as a confidential source, she could be sued as well or instead.

Her situation is the same as in Q7. If she names the perpetrator, or identifies him in some other way, he could potentially try to sue her for defamation.

The fact that the police have investigated and decided not to charge him does not make a difference to the issues in a defamation case. There will always remain a risk of being sued if she makes any statement on allegations that have not been proven in court.

She will still keep her right to anonymity even if the police do not charge, so she should think carefully about whether she wants to lose that right by speaking out in her own name.

If she feels that she wants to continue to seek justice against the perpetrator she could consider a civil claim for sexual assault against him (see Q39 and Q40). If she does decide to speak out she should consider the points in Q7 and get legal advice to try to protect herself as much as possible (see Q47 on how to contact Centre for Women's Justice).

All the same considerations apply as in Q7. Defamation claims are rare so she should not let this stop her from speaking out, but she should be aware of the possible risks if the perpetrator is identifiable from what she says in the interview. If he is not identifiable in any way this would prevent a successful defamation claim. A newspaper or broadcaster will have their own legal advice and take steps to avoid defamation claims.

If he is identifiable, a perpetrator could in theory sue both her and the newspaper / broadcaster, or either of them, though in practice defamation claims are often brought against the media and not the person who made the allegations, because the media have money to pay compensation and legal costs.

If she has reported the abuse to the police she will be entitled to anonymity. If she has not reported abuse to the police she can still ask the journalist for anonymity. Although there would be no court order, journalists have obligations to protect sources. If they were to reveal her identity against her wishes, she could potentially sue the publisher for misuse of private information.

A commercial publisher will seek advice from their own lawyers before any allegations are published and may contact the perpetrator and give him a right of reply. The safest time to publish is after a finding by a court that the perpetrator is guilty, when the survivor will be protected from defamation claims.

If the criminal process is still underway — after she has reported to the police, but before the case comes to trial — she should be very careful and it would be better not to take part in any interviews, as this could be a contempt of court (see Q9).

This is sometimes called a "cease and desist letter". She should try to get some urgent legal advice (see Q32 and Q33 about how to pay for and find a lawyer). You can also contact the Centre for Women's Justice to try to get help with finding a lawyer (see Q47).

The solicitor acting for the perpetrator should not start a case in court against the survivor without first complying with court rules called the "pre-action protocol". This means that the solicitor must first send her a "letter of claim" telling her what the perpetrator is accusing her of, why they say it is unlawful, and what the perpetrator is asking her to do. Under the rules of the protocol she should usually reply within 14 days. The survivor should not feel pressurised to reply immediately or within a shorter time than 14 days. She can reply to tell them that she has received the letter and is seeking legal advice and will respond after that.

It is very important not to ignore the letter as that could prompt the perpetrator to start a court case against her. It is better to respond even just to confirm she has received it and then try to get legal advice as soon as she can.

The survivor should never feel under pressure to back down and just agree to what the perpetrator and his solicitors are demanding. If the letter is written in an aggressive way she should try not to feel intimidated — the solicitors are simply trying to frighten her and this does not necessarily mean that the perpetrator has a strong case.

Just because the perpetrator has a solicitor who is able to write a letter does not mean that the solicitors would take a case to court. If the survivor does not have money to pay legal costs it is actually very unlikely that the solicitors would represent the perpetrator in a court case unless he is very wealthy. Therefore the letter could be a bluff and does not necessarily mean that there will be a court case brought against her.

No, a perpetrator does not need a lawyer in order to sue for defamation, but he should comply with the pre-action protocol steps before he begins a case in court (although in practice many do not). This means writing a letter to the survivor to set out what he considers to be defamatory and what he wants to be done to avoid a court application. If he pursues a case without legal representation, especially if he does not follow the court rules correctly, his chances of success are far weaker.

A person who sues for defamation will generally only be able to get a lawyer to represent him if he either pays privately (and defamation claims are particularly expensive) or if he can find a lawyer to take the case on "no win no fee". A lawyer is only likely to do that if, firstly, they believe there are good prospects of winning the case, and secondly if the survivor is wealthy enough to pay compensation and legal costs if she loses.

However, a perpetrator may continue to bring a court case against a survivor without legal representation. Therefore if she receives a solicitor's letter threatening to take her to court for defamation and she does not have much income or property, the likelihood of a case actually being pursued against her depends on whether the perpetrator is likely to go to court on his own without a lawyer.

No, but it is important to try to get independent legal advice from a defamation specialist if she can. Most lawyers will not have experience in this area of law so she should try to get advice from a specialist. You can contact Centre for Women's Justice to see if we can find a defamation lawyer on our panel to give her some limited advice free of charge.

However, if the case proceeds to court, in order to have legal representation she will need to either pay privately (which can be very expensive) or try to find a solicitor to act on "no win no fee". This is unlikely unless her opponent is wealthy and can pay her lawyers' costs if she wins. In some cases it may be possible to get legal aid. See Q32 on how to pay for a lawyer.

She cannot be sued for reporting a rape to the police — that is considered a privileged act (see Q9), so she would have a complete defence and he would lose his case if he took her to court. This also applies to other professionals involved in a legal case. If she has also told other people about the allegation that she reported to the police, who are not police or other professionals involved in a legal case, this protection does not apply.

Any libel case will need to be issued in court within the legal time limit, which is one year from the date that the statement or words were published, written or spoken. The one-year period ends the day before the same date the following year — so if the statement was made on 1 December 2020 the final date for issuing a case in court would be 30 November 2021.

Although the time limit is a year, if a perpetrator delays for several months before taking any legal action, the survivor could argue that he is not really upset about the allegations and did not suffer serious harm, as he did not take prompt steps to vindicate his reputation. However, so long as the perpetrator issues a claim in court within the one-year deadline, he is entitled to pursue a claim — though his claim will be weaker if he has delayed.

If the statement or words are repeated — for example in more than one publication, or shared on social media multiple times — the time limit still runs from the date of the first time the statement or words were shared, published or spoken.

If a perpetrator issues a case against a survivor in court after the one-year time limit has passed, the court can dismiss the case on the basis that he has missed the time limit, without considering the actual issues in the case. She should seek legal advice about this. A person could make an application to allow a claim even though it was started after the time limit — especially if he did not know about the defamatory statement until later — but this is at the Court's discretion and is not automatic.

No. If she ignores the time limit to respond with a defence she risks the Court finding that the perpetrator has won the claim without her being able to defend it. Even if she applies to have that situation reversed, she would have to pay his legal costs. It is very important not to ignore any formal document from the Court, or a document called a Claim Form or Particulars of Claim.

Yes — she has to comply with any Court Orders and there can be serious consequences if she does not. She needs to be prepared to disclose any documents in her control — e.g. text messages, WhatsApp messages, letters etc — especially if they undermine her case or support his case. It can be a criminal offence to delete unhelpful material so she should be very careful to preserve electronic materials and other documents in case she has to disclose them later.

A person who sues for defamation must set out the 'defamatory meaning' of the words. If there is a dispute, the Court will decide the single natural and ordinary meaning that an ordinary reasonable person — who does not have any unique background knowledge — would understand from the words.

The words could also have an 'innuendo meaning', which is a meaning that is defamatory if the person reading or receiving the information has some background knowledge. For example, a statement that Mr X was a regular visitor to a particular address would only be defamatory to those readers who knew it was a drug dealer's house.

A survivor can win a case brought against her for libel or slander if she can prove that the allegations are "substantially true". This means that the core or 'sting' of what is said is true, but it does not mean that all the details of the allegation have to be proved to be true. Therefore, even if there are some details that are unclear or not accepted by the court, if overall she can prove that she has been abused by the perpetrator as she claims then he will lose his case.

In court in a libel case, the survivor would have to prove that the allegations are true, rather than the perpetrator having to prove that they are false. Defamation is a civil case, not a criminal case, so she has to prove that her account is true 'on the balance of probabilities' (i.e. more likely than not). She does not have to prove her account to the higher standard of 'beyond reasonable doubt' as in a criminal prosecution. Nevertheless, the more serious the allegations, the higher the standard of truth — where very serious allegations such as rape are made, the survivor would be required to prove these allegations convincingly.

If the perpetrator has been convicted of the incidents that the survivor is speaking out about, then he cannot succeed in a libel case because the truth has already been proved in the criminal court. If a civil court has made a finding that the perpetrator committed the abuse alleged against him, then the court in a defamation case will not find a different outcome on the same facts as a previous court.

In addition to proving the truth of what she has said, the other main defences available are 'honest opinion', 'publication on a matter of public interest' and 'privilege', which can be 'absolute privilege' or 'qualified privilege'.

Privilege is a defence that applies in certain situations where the law recognises that people need to be able to speak freely. Absolute privilege applies to statements made to the police, or in a document prepared purely for legal proceedings — so she could not be sued for defamation for what she has reported to the police, or if she is asked to give a witness statement in any legal case. Qualified privilege provides some protection for a person who makes a statement, but not if the statement was made maliciously. An example is giving a job reference, or replying to an attack on your own reputation.

Public interest — if the survivor can show that she made the allegations because she reasonably believed it was in the public interest to publicise the behaviour of the perpetrator (for example, to protect other women), that would give her a public interest defence. As allegations of sexual assault/rape are serious and damaging, she would need to think carefully about how to set up this defence and demonstrate why she believed it was reasonable to publish the allegations.

Honest opinion — this applies where the words published are clearly an opinion/view/conjecture, and the basis for making the allegation is true and can be understood by the readers. For example, if she had received inappropriate text messages from someone in a position of responsibility, she could refer to those and then give her opinion of the perpetrator. It is advisable to get legal advice from a defamation lawyer before relying on this defence, as it is complex legally.

It is important to obtain legal advice at the earliest opportunity if she is threatened with defamation proceedings to help identify which defence(s) are relevant to her claim.

Yes, it is often a good idea, when defending against the libel case, to also sue him back for sexual assault as part of the same case. This is called a counter-claim. The things that have to be proved for both matters are the same. See the questions below about bringing a civil claim against a perpetrator. This is a personal injury claim for assault and it would be helpful to have advice from a personal injury lawyer.

Civil cases can take several years from beginning to end — around two to three years on average. There are likely to be short hearings in court as the case goes along, before the final trial. Libel claims are now heard by a judge (they used to be before a jury before 2013).

If a survivor has reported the sexual assault to the police, she is entitled to lifelong anonymity. She can also apply for an anonymity order if a case is issued in a civil court, whether she reported to the police or not. If she is entitled to anonymity her name and identifying details will not be reported but the press can be present in the Court and report the trial generally.

At trial, the perpetrator will give evidence first as he is bringing the case against the survivor. She or her barrister will cross-examine him. A civil case does not have the same restrictions as in a criminal case about raising allegations of other offences committed by the perpetrator — if she knows of other relevant allegations against him she can put those to him in court.

After the perpetrator and any of his witnesses have given their evidence, the survivor will go in the witness box to give evidence about what happened. She will then be cross-examined by the opponent's barrister.

If the perpetrator is doing the case on his own without a lawyer, he would normally be able to cross-examine witnesses himself. A survivor who wants to prevent this has to apply to the court. She can request a "ground rules hearing" where the judge would consider whether there should be a special arrangement to prevent the perpetrator from directly cross-examining a survivor. There is no automatic prohibition — in each case the judge has to consider the rights of both parties.

In a defamation case, if the main dispute is whether the statement/s the survivor made were true, the judge will decide whether she was telling the truth or not. The judge has to decide whether her words were 'substantially true' — the core or 'sting' of what is said is true, though not necessarily every detail.

If a survivor loses a defamation case she will be ordered to pay compensation to the perpetrator. The amount will depend on the impact of his loss of reputation and any financial losses he has suffered. The amount of compensation can be very large and she would likely be required to pay aggravated damages, which increases it even more. She would also be ordered to pay his legal costs. If she simply does not have the money to pay then he won't be able to get any money from her, but she will have the court order hanging over her.

In addition, if he wins the perpetrator may get an order that the survivor must delete defamatory statements (e.g. if she put them online) and forbidding her from repeating them in future.

If the survivor wins the case, the perpetrator does not have to pay her anything except her legal costs.

This section is about paying for a lawyer in a defamation or malicious falsehood case. See Q42 about paying for a lawyer to sue a perpetrator for a sexual assault, where the rules are different.

In a defamation case the person who loses the legal case pays the winner's legal costs, so a survivor has to think about how she could pay her own lawyer, and also how she could pay the other side's lawyer if she loses. There are various options:

a. Legal aid
There is usually no legal aid available for a defamation or malicious falsehood claim. It may be possible to apply for "exceptional funding" under the legal aid scheme where legal aid would be necessary to ensure access to justice as required by the European Convention on Human Rights. Exceptional funding is more likely to be granted where the person would find it particularly difficult to represent themselves — for example because of a learning disability, mental health difficulties, limited English or literacy. Anyone who applies for legal aid also has to come within the financial threshold: very low income, savings below £8,000 and not own a house worth over £200,000. Very importantly, if a person has legal aid they don't have to pay the other side's lawyers if they lose.

b. "No win no fee" or "No win low fee"
This is the most common way of paying for legal representation in defamation cases. A lawyer will only enter into such an agreement if they believe the survivor's prospects of winning are good, and if they believe the perpetrator will be able to pay their costs if she wins. These arrangements are known as Conditional Fee Agreements (CFAs).

c. Crowdfunding
One way to raise money for legal cases is public crowdfunding through websites such as Crowd Justice. However, this is usually not an option in a defamation case if the survivor has to avoid repeating her allegations against the perpetrator. Even strong cases may not raise more than a few thousand pounds if they relate to an individual rather than a strategic or 'test case'.

d. Paying privately
As in any legal case, she can pay lawyers privately on an hourly rate. A defamation claim can become very costly — if it goes all the way to trial, legal costs can be between £250,000 and £1m for a complex case. This is therefore not usually an option unless the survivor is wealthy.

e. Home contents insurance policy
If the survivor has this kind of policy she can check whether defamation cases are included, however this is extremely rare.

f. Pro bono
This means that the lawyer works on the survivor's case free of charge. This will usually be limited to advising the survivor on the main issues in her case, strengths and weaknesses, and her options going forwards. It is very unlikely that a lawyer will represent a survivor pro bono in a case which has started in court. You can contact Centre for Women's Justice to see if we can help find you a pro bono lawyer (see Q47).

Centre for Women's Justice can give you some recommendations for defamation lawyers on our panel who have experience in dealing with violence against women cases.

Otherwise you can look on the Law Society website in the 'Find a solicitor' page, or in legal directories Chambers & Partners and Legal 500. However, the vast majority of lawyers who do defamation cases only act for media companies or for very wealthy people.

She can threaten to sue him for defamation or malicious falsehood, or actually do this if he continues (see Q2 for a summary of what has to be proved in a defamation case and Q4 on malicious falsehood).

She may be able to threaten or to sue him for malicious falsehood — see Q4 for what needs to be proved in a malicious falsehood claim.

She could also report him to the police for harassment and may be able to take him to court for harassment in a civil case and get an injunction (court order) to stop him doing anything else against her — see Q36.

She should also seek advice from a lawyer who specialises in employment law urgently. There is virtually no legal aid for employment law, but she may be able to get free advice and representation through her trade union if she is a member. If she has a home contents insurance policy she should check whether it includes legal expenses cover. You can also contact Centre for Women's Justice to see if one of the employment lawyers on our panel can give some limited pro bono advice.

Harassment can be a criminal matter or a civil matter.

Criminal matter:
The survivor can report harassment to the police if the perpetrator is targeting her repeatedly. She should report as soon as possible. There are two levels of harassment in criminal law:

• Section 2 Protection from Harassment Act — the lower level, going to the Magistrates Court. The police must charge within six months of the last incident of harassment.
• Section 4 Protection from Harassment Act — harassment which includes fear of violence. This is the more serious offence which can go to the Crown Court and there is no time limit.
• Stalking — where there is harassment and also obsessive or fixated stalking behaviours, this is a separate offence and can also be under section 2 or section 4.

Civil matter:
The survivor can bring a case for harassment against the perpetrator in the civil court (County Court) and get an injunction telling him to stop the harassing behaviour. She can also sue him for compensation for anxiety and for financial loss. The time limit is six years. Legal aid is available for an injunction (if she qualifies financially), but not for a compensation claim.

If she has had an intimate or family relationship with the perpetrator she can apply in the Family Court for a non-molestation order, which is more straightforward than an application for an injunction in the County Court.

To prove harassment the survivor has to show that:

• His behaviour is causing her "alarm or distress";
• The behaviour must be at least two or more occasions (a "course of conduct");
• The behaviour can be speech or actions, and can include unwanted communications or contact;
• She must show that the perpetrator deliberately intends to cause alarm or distress and be oppressive and unreasonable.

She may be able to bring a privacy case against him if he is disclosing aspects of her private life to others. This would apply whether he put information into the public sphere (for example, by posting a public post on his social media) or if he only shared the information with a limited group of people.

This would apply whether the information is true or false. It also applies even if she is not identified by name but is instead identified by factual information known to a small number of people.

To defend himself against a privacy case, the perpetrator would have to show that there is a public interest in him sharing the information. In addition, she might be able to get an injunction — a court order to prevent further publication of private information, so that he has to remove anything in public such as material online.

If a perpetrator shares intimate sexual images of her without her consent intending to cause her distress, then he is committing the criminal offence of 'revenge porn', and she can report him to the police. See also Q45 on disclosing sexual images.

She is not obliged to have a lawyer to bring a legal case, but it is highly advisable to seek legal advice from a lawyer who specialises in defamation and/or privacy rights cases. Most lawyers will not have experience in this area of law so she should try to get advice from a specialist. You can contact Centre for Women's Justice to try to get some initial limited advice from one of the lawyers on our panel.

If she only wants to apply for an injunction in the County Court to order the perpetrator to stop harassing her, she can use a family law solicitor — these cases are very similar to non-molestation orders in the Family Court. She may be able to find a family law solicitor who specialises in non-molestation orders through the FLOWS website, which was set up by Rights of Women. Legal aid is available for civil injunctions, both in the Family Court or in the County Court, but she has to qualify financially and show the Legal Aid Agency that she has a strong enough case.

If the perpetrator's actions affect her employment, she should also seek employment law advice — see Q35.

If she wants to sue the perpetrator for rape, she may be able to bring a civil claim against him for assault. This is a personal injury case and she needs advice from a specialist personal injury lawyer, rather than a defamation lawyer. See Q42 on how to find a personal injury lawyer and how to pay for a lawyer. The biggest hurdles which prevent most of these cases are around legal costs.

If a case goes to trial there will be a finding of whether the rape or sexual assault took place and if she wins she would be entitled to receive compensation from the perpetrator. A civil court cannot find the perpetrator guilty of a crime or punish him in the way that a criminal court can. Most civil cases do not go all the way to trial, but settle out of court. In an out of court settlement the perpetrator would usually agree to pay compensation, but does not have to admit that he is guilty.

Civil claims can take a very long time — on average 2 or 3 years to an out of court settlement and even longer to trial. If a survivor wants to pursue a civil case she has to be prepared to engage and live with it hanging over her for a long time.

A civil claim can be similar to a criminal case against the perpetrator, but if it goes to trial it will be before a judge, not a jury. It may also be easier to win a civil case than a criminal case, as she has to prove her case on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) rather than beyond reasonable doubt.

If a claim is successful or settles out of court, she can get compensation for the assault itself, for any longer-term impact on her mental health, and for any financial losses — for example if she had to take time off work, or dropped out of a university course.

If she has suffered a serious psychological impact from the sexual assault, such as a diagnosed condition of PTSD, clinical depression or anxiety disorder, she may be able to include a claim for compensation for "psychiatric damage". If she has suffered severe distress but it does not amount to symptoms that meet a clinical diagnosis, then it is not possible to include a claim for psychiatric damage.

If she had contact with medical or therapy professionals in relation to the sexual assault, it is very likely that her medical or therapy records would be disclosed in the case, and this could mean they are disclosed to the perpetrator. She will need to have a solicitor to collect other evidence and a barrister to advise and represent her in court if the case goes to trial.

A claim for personal injury has a time limit of three years, but this can be extended in certain circumstances. The time limit runs from when the sexual assault took place, not from the end of a police investigation or other process. If the survivor was under the age of 18 at the time of the assault, the three years start to run from her 18th birthday.

Where more than three years have passed since the sexual assault there are a number of legal rules on whether an extension will be allowed, and every case has to be considered on its own facts. If she has not reported the sexual assault for many years due to trauma this can be taken into account. If she has evidence from a doctor or therapist about the psychological impact on her this will be very useful.

In personal injury cases there is a special rule that if you sue someone you do not have to pay their legal costs if you lose, but they do have to pay yours if you win.

There is no legal aid for a personal injury case against a perpetrator.

The most common way to bring a personal injury claim is using a "no win no fee" (CFA) agreement, where a solicitor does not charge you for their work, but takes the chance that they will be paid by the perpetrator if you win. This means that it is unlikely that a solicitor will take on a case on this funding arrangement unless the perpetrator is either wealthy, or is a professional with insurance, such as a doctor or therapist.

Another option for raising money for legal costs, court fees and expert fees is through crowdfunding (see Q32c). In a civil claim for assault there does not need to be as much money raised as in a defamation case, because there is no danger of having to pay the perpetrator's costs if she loses.

A survivor can also bring a civil claim for assault without a lawyer, as a litigant in person. This is not easy, but many people do go through civil court cases as litigants in person. She could try to find a lawyer to give her free advice behind the scenes or for a limited fee.

The judge will decide whether the perpetrator raped or sexually assaulted her. If she wins he will be ordered to pay her compensation. The amount will depend on what happened during the assault itself, any long-term physical effects, the mental health impacts and any financial losses she has suffered. The perpetrator will also have to pay her legal costs and any expenses she had to pay such as court fees and fees of medical experts.

However, if she loses she does not have to pay the perpetrator anything — including not having to pay his legal costs. The only exception would be if he argues successfully that her case was based on dishonesty, but that would have to go beyond just the issues that were in dispute in the case itself.

Yes, this is called a counter-claim — see Q29. The defamation lawyer can consider whether to include a claim for the rape as part of the libel case, and this may well be a good idea. A defamation specialist usually won't have experience in a personal injury claim (and vice versa), so it may be a good idea to have some advice from a personal injury specialist if the libel is being dealt with by a defamation lawyer.

She could bring a claim for misuse of private information — see Q5 and Q11. Unlike defamation, a claim can be brought where the information that was disclosed is true. Therefore if the survivor has reported 'revenge porn' to the police and they have not prosecuted the perpetrator, she could in theory bring a civil claim for breach of privacy.

However the rules around legal costs are very complicated and the survivor would need to get detailed legal advice on whether she would be at risk of having to pay the perpetrator's legal costs if she were to lose the case. In particular, solicitors may not take a case to court unless the perpetrator is either very rich, or is a professional with insurance. However a solicitor may do more limited work such as sending a letter to a perpetrator or trying to get an out of court settlement.

She has the right to apply to the police for disclosure of all records that relate to her under the Data Protection Act. This is called a Subject Access Request and she can download the application form from her local police force website. She does not need a solicitor in order to make a request. When she completes the form she can say that she wants all documents relating to the police investigation into her report of a specific offence. For example, she can request a copy of her witness statement, video-recorded interview, victim personal statement, the crime report, 999 tape, police officers' notebooks, risk assessments. Obtaining disclosure can take many weeks so allow plenty of time for this.

To obtain evidence that she cannot receive under the Data Protection Act she would have to make an application to the court for an order that the police must disclose all their materials (known as third party disclosure). However, she will have to pay the police legal costs, so she may only want to do this if she knows there is specific important evidence that the police have that she needs for her case.

Send us a message with a summary of what the situation is, what is the last thing that happened and any urgent deadlines, and we will get back to you as soon as we can. You can also call our office number which is on the web page, but contacting us in writing is better.

Disclaimer: These FAQs provide legal information but not legal advice. Every case is different and you should seek legal advice on the particular facts of the case. Centre for Women's Justice does not accept any responsibility for the implementation of these FAQs in individual cases.

Cases that are in scope for legal aid:

• Asylum (including fresh claims), right to life and to freedom from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment
• Asylum support which includes housing and vouchers for asylum seekers
• Destitution Domestic Violence Concession applications (DDVC applications)
• Trafficking and NRM (National Referral Mechanism)
• Immigration detention and bail
• Judicial reviews (not under immigration law but under public law)

Cases that are NOT in scope for legal aid:

• Family life applications — remaining in UK and entry to UK, including on the basis of marriage and UK citizen children. This includes applications by family members of those granted refugee status to join them in UK
• Advice on immigration status generally
• Other applications to remain or enter UK e.g. student, work permit, EU, business, Points Based System
• Citizenship applications
• Issues about travel documents
• Statelessness

You will need to qualify financially for legal aid. A legal aid solicitor can do the calculation with you. If you have a partner you live with, their finances will also be assessed as part of yours.

If you have no formal source of income and are dependent on support from friends and family, you can use a letter from them as evidence of your financial means and explain that you do not have entitlement to benefits, or to work. Legal aid is not considered to be 'public funds' so you can receive it if you have No Recourse to Public Funds.

If you cannot get legal aid you may want to consider paying privately for legal advice. Some organisations provide a low-cost service (see below).

There are some very poor quality solicitors and unqualified legal advisers in immigration law so it is important to try to find a recommended solicitor wherever possible. CWJ can provide a list of recommended solicitors. Local women's services may also recommend solicitors locally who have experience of VAWG cases, especially specialist services for Black and minoritised women.

Legal aid

Paying legal fees

If you do not qualify for legal aid (whether due to scope or financial means) and cannot afford to pay privately, the only option is pro bono advice, but this will be limited advice and it is very difficult to find representation.

The following categories of cases are in scope for legal aid:

• Homelessness applications to council housing department
• Allocation of social housing by a local housing authority, including transfers
• Loss of home through mortgage repossession (under debt legal aid, only via Legal Aid Agency telephone gateway: 0345 345 4345 — very few are granted legal aid)
• Loss of rented home as a result of rent arrears, alleged anti-social behaviour or other allegations
• Claims for unlawful evictions
• Protection from harassment injunction in the County Court
• Occupation orders — these are obtained in the Family Court and come under family law legal aid for injunctions

You will need to qualify financially for legal aid. A legal aid solicitor can do the calculation with you. If you have a partner you live with, their finances will also be assessed as part of yours. Home owners are not eligible if they have over £100,000 equity in their property.

If you are not eligible for legal aid

The following categories of cases are in scope for legal aid:

• Local authority support for children and families (including families with children with no recourse to public funds)
• Local authority reports on children in need and accommodation of children
• Local authority and NHS services due to illness, disability or mental capacity (including Court of Protection)

You will need to qualify financially for legal aid. A legal aid solicitor can do the calculation with you. If you have a partner you live with, their finances will also be assessed as part of yours.

If you do not qualify financially for legal aid, you can still contact a specialist community care solicitor using the above links and ask about paying privately.