Stephen Ward explains why the traditional barrister expenses model is under pressure
Traditionally, most barristers unite with other barristers to form an expenses sharing environment because funding rooms, staff, IT and marketing costs individually is simply too costly. Here lies the fundamental problem with the traditional chambers model. All of the items in a budget are a cost and therefore a liability. Staff are therefore commonly considered to be an unnecessary expense rather than an asset.
Difficult decisions
Decision making in many traditional chambers can be a challenge particularly if you have groups of barristers undertaking different areas of law, with different funding schemes and vastly varying hourly rates. Trying to please each member of chambers is almost impossible and leads to negativity, delay in decision making and divisive behaviour. While there may be a huge amount of friendship between barristers within a set, getting agreement on major investment with competing objectives can be tricky, if not impossible. Add to the pot the issue of joint and several liabilities in a chambers constitution—when anyone is free to leave and join another chambers (for whatever
