header-logo header-logo

Bar votes to halt protest action

14 June 2018
Issue: 7797 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Close vote to end action reflects ‘frustration, anger & concern’

Criminal barristers have voted by a narrow majority to end their protest action and accept the government’s £15m offer on legal aid investment.

Since 1 April, the Criminal Bar has been refusing to take on new cases under the advocates graduated fee scheme (AGFS) in protest at fee cuts for legal aid work. However, the protest came to an end this week when a poll of 3,038 barristers resulted in 1,566 (51.55%) voting to accept the government’s concession and 1,472 (48.45%) voting against.

Barristers had been poised to escalate their protest by refusing returns—where barristers pass on cases due to a timetable clash—when the Ministry of Justice offered an extra £15m. The offer comprises an extra £8m for fraud, drug and child abuse cases, a one per cent increase in the AGFS from next April (worth about £2.5m) and an extra £4.5m for junior barristers.

The Criminal Bar Association (CBA) paused its ‘no returns’ action until its members could consider the offer.

Announcing the results of the vote, Angela Rafferty QC, chair of the CBA, said: ‘We still face exceptional difficulties, as do our solicitor colleagues. This will not fix the terrible conditions, the unhealthy and unreasonably onerous working practices and the general decrepitude.

‘However, if we consider it a start we can build on it. The fact we have achieved this small gain shows that we as a profession are both capable and motivated to unite and unite we will if things do not continue to change in the near future.’

Andrew Walker QC, Chair of the Bar, and Richard Atkins QC, Vice-Chair of the Bar, said: ‘The situation in the criminal justice system remains dire.

‘This vote will bring action to an end in the short term, but let there be no doubt that the closeness of the vote reflects the very real frustration, anger and concern for the future across the Criminal Bar. Those voting to accept the Ministry of Justice’s (MoJ) proposal did not do so because they thought that it was a long term solution, any more than did those who voted to reject it. The changes are just a patch repair.’

Issue: 7797 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
James Grice, head of innovation and AI at Lawfront, explores how artificial intelligence is transforming the legal sector
back-to-top-scroll