header-logo header-logo

Barristers could boycott courts

17 June 2022
Issue: 7983 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Criminal
printer mail-detail
Criminal barristers are voting on whether to drastically escalate their ‘no returns’ protest action by executing court walkouts

Criminal barristers are voting on whether to drastically escalate their ‘no returns’ protest action by executing court walkouts.

The option, which could force the criminal courts to stop proceedings taking place before the end of June, is one of three choices put before practitioners this week in a second Criminal Bar Association (CBA) ballot. The others are refusing to take on any new cases under the advocates graduated fee scheme as well as refusing returns, or ending the protest.

The proposed ‘days of action’ walkouts would escalate, taking place on 27- 28 June in the first week, 4-6 July in the second week, 11-14 July in the third week, 18-22 July in the fourth week and the whole of the week commencing 25 July.

The barristers would refuse to work again for the whole week commencing 1 August, then they would down tools for whole weeks at a time on alternating weeks ‘with no end date… subject to the response from government’.

The ballot will close at midnight on 19 June.

The ’no returns’ protest has been ongoing since April, over low legal aid fees for defence barristers. Last week, the CBA held consultations with members by Zoom to gauge their views. CBA chair Jo Sidhu QC said ‘the overwhelming feedback was… there should be a swift and substantial escalation in the action we are taking’.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has proposed a 15% increase, the minimum recommended by Sir Christopher Bellamy’s criminal legal aid review, to be introduced in October. The CBA say members would not benefit from the increase until at least late 2023. It is asking for a 25% increase and wants the government to ‘at least’ implement the minimum 15% increase with immediate effect.

Sidhu said a quarter of criminal barristers have left their practice in the past five years and 567 trials were postponed last year for want of an available prosecution or defence barrister.

Issue: 7983 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Head of corporate promoted to director

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Firm strengthens international arbitration team with key London hire

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

FCA contentious financial regulation lawyer joins the team as of counsel

NEWS
Social media giants should face tortious liability for the psychological harms their platforms inflict, argues Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers in this week’s NLJ
The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024—once heralded as a breakthrough—has instead plunged leaseholders into confusion, warns Shabnam Ali-Khan of Russell-Cooke in this week’s NLJ
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has now confirmed that offering a disabled employee a trial period in an alternative role can itself be a 'reasonable adjustment' under the Equality Act 2010: in this week's NLJ, Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve analyses the evolving case law
Caroline Shea KC and Richard Miller of Falcon Chambers examine the growing judicial focus on 'cynical breach' in restrictive covenant cases, in this week's issue of NLJ
Ian Gascoigne of LexisNexis dissects the uneasy balance between open justice and confidentiality in England’s civil courts, in this week's NLJ. From public hearings to super-injunctions, he identifies five tiers of privacy—from fully open proceedings to entirely secret ones—showing how a patchwork of exceptions has evolved without clear design
back-to-top-scroll