header-logo header-logo

26 September 2018
Issue: 7810 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Ongoing delay to promised fee increase is ‘fraying’ trust

The Chair of the Criminal Bar Association (CBA) has hit out at ‘completely unacceptable’ delays to £15m fee increases promised by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ).

The MoJ is currently consulting on the spending increase, which would be fed into the advocates’ graduated fee scheme (AGFS) for criminal defence advocates in the Crown Court. The MoJ promised the extra money at a meeting with the CBA in May, in return for criminal barristers suspending their protest action.

However, the four-week consultation, which was originally pitched to begin in mid-July, did not start until 31 August and has now been extended by a further fortnight to 12 October.

CBA Chair Chris Henley QC, in his weekly message to members, said Bar leaders were told of the extension in an email at 20:28 the night before, and that the MoJ are now aiming for a December commencement date.

Expressing ‘profound unhappiness’ at the delay, Henley said that when the offer of the £15m increase was made, ‘no one in the room believed that come October the new enhanced fees would not be in place’.  

‘Any remaining trust is hanging by a fraying thread,’ he said.

‘Every week that passes saves the MoJ money, and costs us. This has not escaped us, and will not have escaped them. We know of no legal reason why the new fees cannot be backdated. We are waiting to be shown any legal advice, if it exists, that would prevent this.’

Moreover, Henley said the modelling data released by the MoJ suggested the fee rises being consulted on would have delivered only an £8.6m increase to the annual budget, which was ‘not good enough’.

Issue: 7810 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

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