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

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
back-to-top-scroll