header-logo header-logo

02 September 2022
Issue: 7992 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Criminal Bar strike: update

Criminal barristers will down tools indefinitely from next week, in a major escalation of their strike action which has been taking place on alternate weeks

The protest, which has led to an unusual picket line of wigs and gowns, has been ongoing since April, led by the Criminal Bar Association (CBA). The barristers began by operating a ‘no returns’ policy, moving to incrementally increasing strike action in June. They are calling for a 25% increase in legal aid fees for defence work, and demand the government ‘at least’ implement with immediate effect the minimum 15% increase recommended by Sir Christopher Bellamy’s criminal legal aid review (CLAR).

However, the Ministry of Justice has so far promised only a 15% increase in October, which the CBA says would not reach barristers’ pockets until late 2023.

Criminal law solicitors will receive an extra 9% in fees from September.

Last week, nearly 80% of 2,273 CBA members voted to escalate the protest.

Mark Fenhalls QC, Chair of the Bar Council, said: ‘Members of the criminal Bar have been feeling mistreated, undervalued and overwhelmed for a decade or more.

‘Ministers must look again immediately at ways to fund the backlog cases and bring a resolution to this difficult situation.’

CBA chair Jo Sidhu QC said this week the next government should understand ‘we will not be deflected from achieving an outcome that safeguards the future sustainability of our criminal justice system.

‘Faithful to our members, that outcome must include an increase to our fees of 25%, payment for written work, a clear timetable for the implementation of the CLAR recommendations on wasted and special preparation, a second brief fee for section 28 cases, and a pay review body that protects us from the ravages of inflation,’ he said.’

Sidhu will hand over the CBA reins to current vice chair Kirsty Brimelow QC in September. Read Sidhu's final message here.
Issue: 7992 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Firm expands in London and Leeds with dual merger

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Private wealth and real estate firmpromotes two to partner and five to senior associate

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Agile firm expands employment team with two partner hires

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll