header-logo header-logo

19 March 2009 / Lucy Theis KC
Issue: 7361 / Categories: Opinion , Family
printer mail-detail

A fee cut too far?

The government should heed the warnings of those who work at the sharp end of the family justice system, says Lucy Theis QC

The Family Law Bar Association (FLBA), like many other organisations working in the family justice system, has real concerns about the government’s plans to overhaul publicly funded fees in the family cases (see Family Legal Aid Funding from 2010: A Consultation).

The FLBA, which represents the interests of specialist family barristers and has over 2,300 members nationally, has advocated for many years the principle of equal payment for equal work—whoever undertakes the advocacy.

We proposed an integrated approach to the Family Graduated Fee Scheme (FGFS) in the late 1990s, which was rejected by the Legal Services Commission (LSC). However, the current FGFS was carefully crafted, after lengthy consultation, and produced a reasonable and durable business model for the remuneration of advocacy services. It has graduation within its structure to properly remunerate the complexity of the case.

Public fund mismanagement Its proposed successor, the Family Advocacy Scheme (FAS), has

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll