header-logo header-logo

06 January 2014
Issue: 7589 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Courts empty for legal aid action

Criminal lawyers desert courts in protest over legal aid cuts

Criminal barristers and solicitors massed outside criminal courts across England and Wales today in a half-day of action against legal aid cuts—the Bar’s first walkout in its history.

Lawyers deserted Crown and Magistrates’ courts in droves, with many trials listed for the morning re-scheduled ahead of the protest.

The campaigners, many sporting full court attire of wigs and gowns, are calling for a re-think of Ministry of Justice (MoJ) plans to cut £220m a year from the criminal legal aid budget. They argue that the cuts will be unsustainable, and will increase the risk of miscarriages of justice.

Barristers and solicitors face a cut of about 17.5%—30% in their fees if the plans go ahead, while solicitors will be paid the same amount if their client pleads guilty or not, raising a conflict of interest.

Earnings at the criminal Bar vary widely, with many making less than £25,000.

James Welch, Liberty’s legal director, says the proposals “put the fairness of our criminal justice system in serious jeopardy”. 

In contrast with the robust action on display this week, the Law Society has controversially pursued a policy of engagement with the MoJ over legal aid, leading to it losing a vote of no confidence in its leadership 228 votes to 213 shortly before Christmas.

James Parry, partner at Liverpool firm Parry Welch Lacey, who led the campaign for the vote, says proposed fee cuts will make the majority of criminal defence work unviable, and two-thirds of criminal law firms could go out of business. Fees are to be cut by 17.5%, although Parry says the cuts will be worse in reality as there will be a flat fee of £321 for magistrates’ court trials.

However, Des Hudson, chief executive of the Law Society, defended its tactics, saying non-engagement “did not work”.

Issue: 7589 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Sidley—James Inness

Sidley—James Inness

Partner joins capital markets team in London office

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Firm announces appointment of partner as UK general counsel

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Firm appoints first chief marketing officer to drive growth strategy

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll