header-logo header-logo

12 January 2022
Issue: 7962 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Barristers consult on protest action

The Criminal Bar Association (CBA) is polling its members on taking direct action or ‘as a minimum’ adopting a no returns policy should ministers fail to commit to increase fees
Practitioners have been asked to respond to a seven-day survey launched this week, on what increase they deem acceptable and what protest action they are prepared to take.

In December, Sir Christopher Bellamy’s Independent Review of Criminal Legal Aid recommended at least £135m extra per year be added to the budget to keep the criminal justice system functioning effectively. This would increase funding for solicitors and barristers by 15% above present levels, amounting to an extra £35m in fees.

The Ministry of Justice said it would issue its full response to the review and consultation by the end of March 2022.

In his ‘Monday Message’ this week, however, CBA chair Jo Sidhu QC says he ‘made it abundantly clear’ at a meeting on 15 December with the under-secretary of state for justice that it would be ‘utterly unacceptable for the Criminal Bar to wait another 15 weeks to hear the government’s verdict’ with any ensuing consultation meaning the outcome would not be known until the end of June.

Sidhu described the proposed ‘modest increase’ as ‘an insultingly small improvement in annual incomes’ that would do nothing to discourage hundreds more colleagues from leaving legal aid work.

The CBA survey asks whether the respondent agrees: it is unreasonable for the government to delay its response until the end of March; that unless the government undertakes to complete both its response and consultation by the end of March, criminal barristers should ‘take action to include, as a minimum, no returns’; an increase of £35m (15%) is insufficient; and criminal barristers should take action unless the government commits to a ‘substantial increase’.

Issue: 7962 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll