*/
The Ministry of Justice is refusing Bar Council requests to extend the deadline for “inadequate and unfair” consultations on Very High Cost Cases (“VHCCs”) and advocates’ graduated fees despite threats of judicial review.
Solicitors acting for the Bar Council have now written, in accordance with the Pre-Action Protocol for Judicial Review Claims, to the Legal Aid Minister, Lord Bach, and to the Chairman of the Legal Services Commission (“LSC”), Sir Bill Callaghan, in order to advance proceedings for judicial review.
The Bar Council and Criminal Bar Association say they have not been given enough information to respond to the LSC consultation on VHCCs. They asked the government to combine the deadlines for responses to these two consultations and to join them to the timetable for the response to the proposed consultation on a single graduated fee for Crown Court cases.
Nick Green QC, Chairman of the Bar, said: “The Bar Council asked the Ministry of Justice and the LSC to adopt a co-ordinated and fair approach to their decision-making on the very important matters which are the subject of these consultations.
“The government has rejected our request to co-ordinate the consultation timetables and refused to supply us with the information for which we asked to enable the Bar to respond to the two current consultations. These are inextricably linked to an, as yet, unpublished third consultation. “The principal basis of our claim will be that the consultation exercise is unfair and, in our view, unlawful.”
A joint statement from the MoJ and LSC said: “[We] received a letter from the Bar Council and Criminal Bar Association on 21 January requesting the deadlines for our current consultations on advocates graduated fees and VHCCs be extended.
“We consider that the current deadlines give adequate time for stakeholders to respond properly and fully to both consultations. We hope the Bar Council and Criminal Bar Association will reconsider their position. “The proposals to pilot a single graduated fee will be consulted on in due course.”
The Bar Council and Criminal Bar Association say they have not been given enough information to respond to the LSC consultation on VHCCs. They asked the government to combine the deadlines for responses to these two consultations and to join them to the timetable for the response to the proposed consultation on a single graduated fee for Crown Court cases.
Nick Green QC, Chairman of the Bar, said: “The Bar Council asked the Ministry of Justice and the LSC to adopt a co-ordinated and fair approach to their decision-making on the very important matters which are the subject of these consultations.
“The government has rejected our request to co-ordinate the consultation timetables and refused to supply us with the information for which we asked to enable the Bar to respond to the two current consultations. These are inextricably linked to an, as yet, unpublished third consultation. “The principal basis of our claim will be that the consultation exercise is unfair and, in our view, unlawful.”
A joint statement from the MoJ and LSC said: “[We] received a letter from the Bar Council and Criminal Bar Association on 21 January requesting the deadlines for our current consultations on advocates graduated fees and VHCCs be extended.
“We consider that the current deadlines give adequate time for stakeholders to respond properly and fully to both consultations. We hope the Bar Council and Criminal Bar Association will reconsider their position. “The proposals to pilot a single graduated fee will be consulted on in due course.”
The Ministry of Justice is refusing Bar Council requests to extend the deadline for “inadequate and unfair” consultations on Very High Cost Cases (“VHCCs”) and advocates’ graduated fees despite threats of judicial review.
Solicitors acting for the Bar Council have now written, in accordance with the Pre-Action Protocol for Judicial Review Claims, to the Legal Aid Minister, Lord Bach, and to the Chairman of the Legal Services Commission (“LSC”), Sir Bill Callaghan, in order to advance proceedings for judicial review.
Chair of the Bar reflects on 2025
Q&A with criminal barrister Nick Murphy, who moved to New Park Court Chambers on the North Eastern Circuit in search of a better work-life balance
Revolt Cycling in Holborn, London’s first sustainable fitness studio, invites barristers to join the revolution – turning pedal power into clean energy
Rachel Davenport, Co-founder and Director at AlphaBiolabs, reflects on how the company’s Giving Back ethos continues to make a difference to communities across the UK
By Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
AlphaBiolabs has made a £500 donation to Sean’s Place, a men’s mental health charity based in Sefton, as part of its ongoing Giving Back initiative
Oscar Davies shares their lessons learnt
Little has changed since Burns v Burns . Cohabiting couples deserve better than to be left on the blasted heath with the existing witch’s brew for another four decades, argues Christopher Stirling
Six months of court observation at the Old Bailey: APPEAL’s Dr Nisha Waller and Tehreem Sultan report their findings on prosecution practices under joint enterprise
Despite its prevalence, autism spectrum disorder remains poorly understood in the criminal justice system. Does Alex Henry’s joint enterprise conviction expose the need to audit prisons? asks Dr Felicity Gerry KC
With automation now deeply embedded in the Department for Work Pensions, Alexander McColl and Alexa Thompson review what we know, what we don’t and avenues for legal challenge
