header-logo header-logo

17 March 2022
Issue: 7971 / Categories: Legal News , Legal aid focus , Criminal , Profession
printer mail-detail

Minimum offer may not placate criminal lawyers

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

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