header-logo header-logo

Preliminary work to go unpaid under pre-charge scheme

09 June 2021
Issue: 7936 / Categories: Legal News , Disclosure , Criminal , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
Lawyers’ groups have called on the Lord Chancellor to think again on early disclosure plans in criminal investigations or risk them failing before they even begin.

The pre-charge engagement scheme, which came into force this week, is a voluntary process between parties to an investigation which can take place at any time after first interview under caution and before the suspect is formally charged.

Its purpose is to make it easier for the defendant or their solicitor to bring information that may assist their case to the attention of police and prosecutors so that cases can be dropped quickly, if it is appropriate to do so. The scheme can be initiated by an investigator, prosecutor, suspect or suspect’s representative.

However, no fewer than ten groups have written to the Lord Chancellor, Robert Buckland QC, warning that restrictions on payments to solicitors for taking part could scupper the scheme before it gets off the ground. The groups include the Criminal Law Solicitors’ Association, Black Solicitors Network, London Criminal Court Solicitors’ Association, Legal Aid Practitioners Group and the Law Society.

‘The rationale for this scheme is sound but defence solicitors were assured they would be paid for the additional work it entails,’ said Law Society president I Stephanie Boyce.

‘That work necessarily includes getting instructions from the client, examining relevant evidence and advising the client whether or not to take part in pre-charge engagement. However, solicitors will not be paid for this preliminary work as, under the scheme the Ministry of Justice has devised, payments will only kick in if and when they begin engaging with police or prosecutors, and only for work done after that point.

‘Opportunities to save money by bringing cases to an early close will inevitably be missed because hard-pressed defence practitioners simply cannot take on even more unpaid work. This would have adverse financial consequences for the police, prosecutors and the overburdened courts.’

The letter also highlights the low hourly rates for defence practitioners in the new scheme―£51.28 in London and £47.45 outside London.

Boyce called on ministers to ‘substantially’ raise the rate and pay solicitors for advising suspects on the scheme.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

Bloomsbury Square Employment Law—Donna Clancy

Employment law team strengthened with partner appointment

mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

mfg Solicitors—Matt Smith

Corporate solicitor joins as partner in Birmingham

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Freeths—Joe Lythgoe

Corporate director with expertise in creative industries joins mergers and acquisitions team

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll