header-logo header-logo

Minimum offer may not placate criminal lawyers

17 March 2022
Issue: 7971 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Criminal , Profession
printer mail-detail
Ministers have offered a rise of 15% (an extra £135m) in legal aid fees for criminal defence―the minimum recommended by Sir Christopher Bellamy’s Independent Review of Criminal Legal Aid―but it may not be enough to avert strike action by barristers

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) published its response to Sir Christopher Bellamy QC’s Review this week, along with plans to reform the system. The consultation paper had not yet been published at the time of going to press but proposals include removing the financial cap on eligibility for Crown Court defendants (the ‘innocence tax’), restructuring the fee scheme, providing funding for training and removing barriers for CILEX Lawyers.

Law Society president I Stephanie Boyce said: ‘It is disappointing that the fee increases will be delayed for a few months more after so many years of waiting and it remains to be seen whether the investment will be enough to halt the exodus from criminal defence work, but we hope this injection of cash can begin to turn the tide.’

However, a Criminal Bar Association (CBA) ballot of members returned this week showed more than 94% in favour of refusing to accept return work under the Advocates’ Graduated Fees Scheme from 11 April onwards, if fee increases were delayed until September.

In a statement published after the government’s response to the Review, CBA chair Jo Sidhu QC said: ‘Our members have already made it clear that the suggested increase in fees by Sir Christopher Bellamy will not be sufficient to retain enough criminal barristers to keep the wheels of justice turning and that means victims will be failed.’

The MoJ also proposes raising the income and capital legal aid thresholds to include a further two million people, removing the means test for some victims of domestic abuse, providing free legal representation for all under-18s and for parents challenging doctors over withdrawal of their child’s life support, and providing free legal help for families at inquests where there has been a potential human rights breach.

Bar Council chair Mark Fenhalls QC said: ‘These proposals will help the most vulnerable have access to justice.’

Issue: 7971 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Criminal , Profession
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