Legal expense insurance (LEI) is a well-established industry and a significant source of legal funding in many developed jurisdictions, notably in Europe. It is established, but less developed in some common law jurisdictions, including Canada and some parts of the United States. Elsewhere in the world, however, legal expense insurance has been a vexed aspect of the access to justice initiatives of the profession. The reasons most often cited for the failure of LEI to establish itself in otherwise-developed jurisdictions have included the intransigence of governments, the indifference of the insurance industry, the lack of understanding of the concept within the legal profession, the size of certain markets and a lack of transparency of approach. LEI is a simple concept. It has often been proposed as a solution to deal with the issue of access to justice for the ‘forgotten middle’. It recognises that a section of the community will always have the ability to access and afford legal services when the need arises. It likewise recognises that those who cannot, and are never likely to be able to access such services, will be assisted by the public purse. The need for access to legal services generally arises out of a crisis, or at least an untimely event not of the person’s choosing. Middle income earners do not expect, and do not plan, to have the resources on hand to meet the costs of such a need as and when it arises. Since not all people will need access to legal services, it becomes a classic example of an event for which spreading the risk of such a need by means of insurance is the answer. Over the course of 2018–2019, the Access to Justice and Legal Aid Committee has been researching the following issues in LEI provision, and it will present a session on its findings, and proposed solutions to improve access to justice through LEI. Jurisdictions where LEI is widely available: 1. In which jurisdictions is LEI available? 2. How is it marketed? 3. How is LEI regulated in different jurisdictions? 4. What roles exist for bar associations in the maintenance of standards of legal services and promotion of product? 5. What measures are in place to ensure choice of lawyer for the insured client? 6. What are the contractual arrangements between lawyers and LEI providers? Jurisdictions where LEI is underutilised: 1. What are the reasons for the underusage? 2. What impediments exist to the greater use of LEI? 3. To what extent has the introduction of LEI been supported by the insurance industry and the legal profession? 4. Can research establish best practice principles that could be used to widen the use of LEI in different jurisdictions? The research was undertaken by questionnaire to bar associations, law societies and members of the IBA, as well as LEI providers and associations. The Access to Justice and Legal Aid Committee intends to use the session in Seoul to present its research, as it has done successfully in previous years.