header-logo header-logo

07 May 2009
Issue: 7368 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-detail

High earners list published

Warning that payments to lawyers and firms alike have potential to mislead

Leading fraud silk Charles Salmon QC, of 2 Hare Court, has topped the list of high earners for barristers in criminal legal aid, with earnings of more than £1m.

In the civil legal aid category, Simon Hirst earned £442,000, family barrister Michael Keehan QC, of St Ive’s Chambers, earned £372,000, family barrister Alison Ball QC, of 1 Garden Court, earned £371,000 and Paul Storey QC earned £354,000.

Criminal barristers Howard Godfrey QC, of 2 Bedford Row, and David Whitehouse QC, of 3 Raymond Buildings, earned £988,000 and £959,000 respectively, according to Ministry of Justice figures for the year ending 31 March 2008.

Among firms, criminal law firm Tuckers earned £9.3m, considerably more than the second highest-earning firm, The Johnson partnership, at £6.2m, and, in third and fourth place, Forbes Solicitors with £4.6m and Kaim Todner with £4.2m. In the civil category, London firm Duncan Lewis earned £6.2m last year, Switalskis came second with £4.6m and Stephensons third with £4.3m.

A Bar Council spokesperson said: “The payments to barristers listed by the Ministry of Justice all include VAT and make no allowance for expenses of up to 30%.

“They were paid under the old scheme where the court assessed the appropriate fee at the end of a case. After assessment by the court, each of the payments was specifically approved by the Legal Services Commission. Under the new system for Very High Cost Cases scheme, fees paid are very much less.

“Even under the old system payments on this scale were never typical. Of the 10 barristers named, the top five and one of the remainder were all instructed to act for different defendants in the prosecution of Terry Adams by the Serious and Organised Crime Office. This was one of the biggest criminal cases ever mounted, finally concluding in March 2007. At least one of the QCs had been briefed as early as July 2003. The payments therefore all cover several years of work. They are not annual payments or gross payments, and to present them as in any way typical would be highly misleading.”

Issue: 7368 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
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
back-to-top-scroll