header-logo header-logo

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

Bar votes to halt protest action

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll