header-logo header-logo

03 December 2025
Issue: 8142 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Lammy's overhaul of jury trials 'goes too far', say lawyers

Criminal defence lawyers have expressed dismay at the Lord Chancellor David Lammy’s plans to reduce the backlog by scaling back jury trials to murder, rape, homicide and other indictable crimes where the sentence is three years or more

Magistrates’ sentencing powers will be increased from one year to 18 months, and could be extended to 24 months if necessary.

Lammy’s plans, delivered in Parliament this week, build on Sir Brian Leveson’s Independent Review of the Criminal Courts. While Sir Brian proposed an extra court tier where a judge sits alongside two magistrates, Lammy plans to introduce a judge-only ‘swift’ court.

Law Society vice president Brett Dixon said the government’s proposals ‘go too far in eroding our fundamental right to be judged by a jury of our own peers.

‘Allowing a single judge, operating in an under resourced system, to decide guilt in a serious and potentially life changing case is a dramatic departure from our shared values.’

The latest government figures for April to June 2025 showed 78,329 outstanding cases in the Crown Court and 361,027 in the magistrates’ court. Lammy told MPs the backlog is projected to rise above 100,000 cases.

However, David Corker, consultant at Corker Binning, said the government should have adopted the Canadian and Australian model in serious fraud cases of giving the accused ‘the right to choose to be tried by a judge or by a jury.

‘Defendants in complex cases in those jurisdictions predominantly opt for the former, and having done so, the outcomes attract their and the public’s confidence’.

Mark Jones, partner at Payne Hicks Beach, said: ‘Court delays stem from long-term underfunding, not juries.

‘If the government is serious about reducing the backlog, it must invest in the justice system rather than weaken a defendant’s right to elect to be judged by their peers.’

Matthew Hardcastle, partner at Kingsley Napley, said: ‘The continued “silver-bullet” and headline driven approach to change is deeply disappointing.

‘Changing some aspects of the criminal justice system will not magically solve systemic issues.’

Lammy also pledged an extra £550m over three years for specialist support services for victims and witnesses. 

Issue: 8142 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

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