header-logo header-logo

02 March 2022
Issue: 7969 / Categories: Legal News , In Court , Profession , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Criminal Bar could refuse returns from next month

Barristers to vote on no returns policy

Ballot papers have been issued to criminal barristers, asking them to vote on a ‘no returns’ policy from 11 April.

The Criminal Bar Association (CBA) set out the two options for its members this week. ‘Returns’ are where another barrister takes over the case if there’s a diary clash. The ballot ends at one minute to midnight on 11 March.

Option A is to refuse all return work under the advocates graduated fee scheme (AGFS) from 11 April, unless the government agrees to: a 25% per annum increase in remuneration under the AGFS; pay for written work as recommended by the Independent Review of Criminal Legal Aid (CLAR); create an effective pay review body; expedite the timetable for consultation on the CLAR recommendations; pay a second brief fee payment for s 28 YJCE hearings; and index link AGFS payments.

Option B is to wait for the government’s response on CLAR in the week of 14 March, followed by a consultation until end of June 2022, and any relevant statutory instruments being implemented by end of September.

The CLAR recommended an increase of at least 15% in fees.

A survey of CBA members in January found 94% in favour of action if the government did not set out its proposals to expedite reform by 14 February. However, this was ‘simply ignored’ by the government.

Jo Sidhu QC, CBA chair, said: ‘The overall timetable for the reform of criminal legal aid funding set by government takes us to October 2022 with no prospect of an increase in fees until 2024.

‘Neither criminal barristers nor criminal solicitors can afford to wait that long. We have already paid a heavy price in attrition from our ranks for the inexcusable failure to deal post-haste with the impact of diminishing real incomes, and we are both facing decimation if critical intervention is not forthcoming.’
Issue: 7969 / Categories: Legal News , In Court , 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