header-logo header-logo

Criminal fees fight will go to court

28 June 2023
Issue: 8031 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Criminal
printer mail-detail
Permission has been granted for a legal challenge against the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) for failing to raise solicitors’ criminal defence rates by the minimum 15% recommended by Lord Bellamy’s independent review on criminal legal aid

The High Court gave the go-ahead last week for the Law Society’s judicial review on the basis the government’s decision was irrational, lacked reasons and was in breach of the constitutional right of access to justice.

Lord Bellamy recommended an ‘immediate’ 15% rise in fees for both solicitors and barristers, in his review in 2021. However, the MoJ’s response, in 2022, while appearing to give a 15% rise was found, on closer analysis by the Law Society, to amount to about 11% for solicitors.

Law Society president Lubna Shuja said the High Court’s decision was ‘a significant and positive step forward.

‘We would encourage the new Lord Chancellor to reconsider his predecessor's refusal to engage with us in some form of alternative dispute resolution and to address our concerns without the need for continued intervention from the court. We are keen to work with the Lord Chancellor to find a way forward which will make this crucially important work financially viable for criminal defence solicitors.

‘Duty solicitors continue to leave criminal legal aid work in their droves because the work is not financially viable—more than 1,400 duty solicitors have left since 2017.’

However, duty solicitors received some good news this week, after the Legal Aid Agency announced it was amending contracts to speed up payments.

From 1 July, solicitors will be able to claim for police station cases when their client is released on police bail.

The Law Society lobbied the Ministry of Justice on the issue after receiving complaints that solicitors were left in financial limbo, often having to wait several months to be paid. One firm told the Law Society it had 101 cases on bail—costing it as the money sat in an ‘arbitrary no-man’s land’.

Law Society president Lubna Shuja said: ‘This change will allow duty solicitors to claim a month after their work in the police station.’

Issue: 8031 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll