header-logo header-logo

31 May 2018
Issue: 7795 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Criminal bar considers offer in stand off with government

Criminal barristers have suspended their ‘no returns’ policy until 12 June, pending consideration of a conciliatory offer made by the Ministry of Justice.

The Criminal Bar has been refusing ‘returns’ work—where one advocate covers for another who has been delayed or called away—since 1 April in protest against changes to the Advocates Graduated Fee Scheme (AGFS) which would cut fee income.

A heads of chambers meeting was scheduled for this week to discuss the offer. In her weekly update, Angela Rafferty QC, Criminal Bar Chair, said barristers will be balloted following the meeting.

The offer on the table is an extra £15m investment, of which £8m will go to fraud, drug and high-page sex cases, £4.5m will be earmarked for junior fees, and there will be a 1% rise across all fees in April 2019. The scheme will be reviewed within 18 months.

Meanwhile, the Law Society is bringing a judicial review against cuts to the Litigators' Graduated Fee Scheme (LGFS), which would reduce payments for prosecution evidence in Crown Court cases from 10,000 to 6,000 pages.

Law Society president Joe Egan said: ‘We’re pleased the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has recognised the argument that there needs to be proper funding in the criminal justice system, as evidenced by the proposed release of additional funds for legally aided work.

'We hope the MoJ will now withdraw their opposition to the Law Society’s judicial review for the LGFS cuts. We look forward to a similar announcement in relation to the work carried out by solicitors, including the withdrawal of the most recent pages of prosecution evidence cut.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll