header-logo header-logo

25 June 2014
Issue: 7612 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Income drop for barristers

Average takings drop 12% as profession feels pain of cuts

Barristers’ average income has fallen 12% in the last two years—from £123,000 to £108,000.

The figures, gathered by finance provider LDF, mean many may struggle to meet their 31 July bill deadline. The July bill is a payment on account for self-employed persons, usually equal to half of the previous year’s tax bill.

The average income may seem very generous indeed to many barristers. Junior criminal counsel, in particular, have been hard hit by cuts to legal aid fees. A 30% reduction in fees for Very High Cost Cases has led to a boycott by criminal barristers, which resulted in the high-profile stay of a multi-defendant fraud trial at Southwark Crown Court last month (R v Crawley). The case has since been ordered to continue.

Junior counsel in criminal cases often earn less than £28,000—sometimes as low as £14,000—once costs such as chambers rent are deducted.

According to LDF, a 19% rise in new entrants to the profession—by an extra 2,000 to 13,000 in the two years leading up to 2011/2012—has contributed to a decrease in workload. A combination of fixed fees for immigration, asylum and other areas of legally aided work, and the removal of legal aid completely from large swathes of civil work, has added to barristers’ woes.

Peter Alderson, LDF managing director, says: “As well as the cuts to legal aid meaning there is less work available for barristers, the Legal Aid Board is notoriously slow to pay them for their work, a big problem for barristers relying on quick payment to cover their bills. Late paying clients are also proving a real problem for barristers, which means a barrister’s cash-flow can hit extreme peaks and troughs throughout the year—if a tax bill hits during a trough, many barristers could find their backs against a wall.”

 

Issue: 7612 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Chief information officer appointment strengthens technology leadership

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Firm strengthens Wilmslow team with two solicitor appointments

DWF—Ian Plumley

DWF—Ian Plumley

Londoninsurance and reinsurance practice announces partner appointment

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll