*/
Criminal Bar Association members have voted overwhelmingly in favour of the Ministry of Justice ‘deal’ to defer cuts to the Advocates Graduated Fee Scheme (AGFS) and to suspend further action. In a controversial agreement struck with Bar leaders at the end of March, the Government agreed to defer the AGFS changes until summer 2015 in exchange for calling off the ‘no returns’ policy and future days of action: “This will allow us to take into account the outcomes of the reviews by Sir Bill Jeffrey and Sir Brian Leveson, as well as any impact on legal aid spend from falling crime rates, and earlier remuneration changes. In the same way, we will consider any impact from the above factors before introducing the second fee reduction for litigators.”
As a condition of the deal, the Bar Council and CBA made clear that there was no in principle objection to working on Very High Cost Cases at the new rates, and the Government pledged to continue to engage with the Bar leaders. The Lord Chancellor Chris Grayling stated: “I have always said that, given the current economic climate, I have no choice but to make savings, but that I also wanted to do what I could to ease their effects on lawyers. Hopefully [the] agreement proves that I am true to my word.”
However the decision – made in an emergency meeting of the CBA Executive – to accept the offer in its two-day window prompted “angry criticism” from barristers, chambers and solicitors that the full membership was not consulted and that the deal was “anti-solicitor”, effectively splitting apart the professions.
CBA Chair Nigel Lithman QC explained: “It was not practicable to ballot the Bar in the time frame. At the same time, the Circuits consulted or met with Heads of Chambers on their individual Circuits. The vote was overwhelming in favour from five of the Circuits, the Heads of Chambers on the South East Circuit who were informed were 100%.” He added: “We genuinely believed we could get you no better [deal].”
Calls for an extraordinary general meeting precipitated a full ballot of the CBA membership in April. An unprecedented turnout saw 1,878 votes cast: 1,249 voted to accept the deal and suspend further action (66.51%); whilst 629 (33.49%) voted to continue action until all cuts have been abandoned. Welcoming the mandate, Lithman said that this was the “first step” of a “long road ahead” and that the views of the one-third who “felt obvious misgivings about how the Bar would be impacted upon by cuts and dual contracts being imposed on solicitors… will not be ignored”.
“Whilst the CBA has naturally concentrated on removing the imminent threat of cuts to the junior Bar, it knows that this has to be seen within a broader context. We will thus now hope to reengage with solicitors and hold constructive talks. “The immediate task to hand is for the leadership to reunite the membership as we move forward in pursuit of an ever more secure criminal Bar.”
Bar Chairman Nicholas Lavender QC said the deal was “testament to the profession’s commitment to speaking with one voice in making sincere and evidence-based arguments, steeped in the public interest”.
“In the interests of building sustainable and high quality legal representation, we should take this opportunity to move forwards, by engaging with the reviews... resuming normal working relationships with our partners in the criminal justice system and calling off any further days of action.”
Criminal Law Solicitors Association Chair Bill Waddington expressed his disappointment at the deal, noting that the “more substantial” concessions to the Bar “may well reflect their unity and militancy”. Together with the London Criminal Courts Solicitors Assocation, it is coordinating a “fast moving, rolling programme” of direct action, including withdrawal days from Crown Courts. Having received “positive counsel”, they are also raising funds to challenge the Ministry’s handling of the legal aid cuts through judicial review.
However the decision – made in an emergency meeting of the CBA Executive – to accept the offer in its two-day window prompted “angry criticism” from barristers, chambers and solicitors that the full membership was not consulted and that the deal was “anti-solicitor”, effectively splitting apart the professions.
CBA Chair Nigel Lithman QC explained: “It was not practicable to ballot the Bar in the time frame. At the same time, the Circuits consulted or met with Heads of Chambers on their individual Circuits. The vote was overwhelming in favour from five of the Circuits, the Heads of Chambers on the South East Circuit who were informed were 100%.” He added: “We genuinely believed we could get you no better [deal].”
Calls for an extraordinary general meeting precipitated a full ballot of the CBA membership in April. An unprecedented turnout saw 1,878 votes cast: 1,249 voted to accept the deal and suspend further action (66.51%); whilst 629 (33.49%) voted to continue action until all cuts have been abandoned. Welcoming the mandate, Lithman said that this was the “first step” of a “long road ahead” and that the views of the one-third who “felt obvious misgivings about how the Bar would be impacted upon by cuts and dual contracts being imposed on solicitors… will not be ignored”.
“Whilst the CBA has naturally concentrated on removing the imminent threat of cuts to the junior Bar, it knows that this has to be seen within a broader context. We will thus now hope to reengage with solicitors and hold constructive talks. “The immediate task to hand is for the leadership to reunite the membership as we move forward in pursuit of an ever more secure criminal Bar.”
Bar Chairman Nicholas Lavender QC said the deal was “testament to the profession’s commitment to speaking with one voice in making sincere and evidence-based arguments, steeped in the public interest”.
“In the interests of building sustainable and high quality legal representation, we should take this opportunity to move forwards, by engaging with the reviews... resuming normal working relationships with our partners in the criminal justice system and calling off any further days of action.”
Criminal Law Solicitors Association Chair Bill Waddington expressed his disappointment at the deal, noting that the “more substantial” concessions to the Bar “may well reflect their unity and militancy”. Together with the London Criminal Courts Solicitors Assocation, it is coordinating a “fast moving, rolling programme” of direct action, including withdrawal days from Crown Courts. Having received “positive counsel”, they are also raising funds to challenge the Ministry’s handling of the legal aid cuts through judicial review.
Criminal Bar Association members have voted overwhelmingly in favour of the Ministry of Justice ‘deal’ to defer cuts to the Advocates Graduated Fee Scheme (AGFS) and to suspend further action. In a controversial agreement struck with Bar leaders at the end of March, the Government agreed to defer the AGFS changes until summer 2015 in exchange for calling off the ‘no returns’ policy and future days of action: “This will allow us to take into account the outcomes of the reviews by Sir Bill Jeffrey and Sir Brian Leveson, as well as any impact on legal aid spend from falling crime rates, and earlier remuneration changes. In the same way, we will consider any impact from the above factors before introducing the second fee reduction for litigators.”
As a condition of the deal, the Bar Council and CBA made clear that there was no in principle objection to working on Very High Cost Cases at the new rates, and the Government pledged to continue to engage with the Bar leaders. The Lord Chancellor Chris Grayling stated: “I have always said that, given the current economic climate, I have no choice but to make savings, but that I also wanted to do what I could to ease their effects on lawyers. Hopefully [the] agreement proves that I am true to my word.”
The Chair of the Bar reports back
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, explains how global events can influence the performance of pensions and ISAs, and why taking a long-term approach to investing is often the most effective strategy
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, discusses what family law professionals need to know about hallucinogens, from the main hallucinogenic drugs encountered in family proceedings, to their effects and the testing options available
Harmony Christian Ministries is the latest charity to benefit from a £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
By David Green
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, examines the forensic science underpinning hair drug testing, its evidential scope and limitations, and why it remains the gold standard for evidencing patterns of drug use in family proceedings
Developing a tech start-up demands a different definition of excellence to the Bar, says Saara Idelbi. The co-creator of Advocatr on entrepreneurship, AI advocacy training, and matching the thrill of a killer cross-examination
At the start of her term, Chair of the Bar 2026 Kirsty Brimelow KC set out a series of priorities for the year ahead. One of those priorities was children in the justice system
As the world becomes more digital, Barbara Vinagre Mota examines international research into the mental health consequences of judges’ exposure to graphic and immersive evidence, highlighting the importance of support systems
Reviewed by Daniel Barnett
James McNeill Whistler at Tate Britain until 27 September Rothko in Florence at Palazzo Strozzi until 23 August Reviewed by Stephen Cragg KC
