*/
Criminal barristers voted by a narrow margin to accept the government’s fee offer and end its protest action.
In the ballot, 3,038 barristers voted by 1,566 (51.55%) to 1,472 (48.45%) to accept the offer to put £15m into the revised Advocates’ Graduated Fee Scheme (AGFS) with a 1% fee rise in April 2019.
Since the reformed AGFS payments were introduced in April most criminal barristers have refused to take new cases. Moves to up their action were put on hold pending a vote on the government’s offer.
Angela Rafferty QC, Chair of the Criminal Bar Association, said: ‘Whilst the majority wishes to accept the proposal, it cannot be said that the anger and disillusionment has gone away. Indeed it is exceptionally strong. The criminal Bar is not going to be quiet.’
She said investment in the AGFS scheme was the ‘first step in a long road to rehabilitation’ for the criminal justice system. She said: ‘The damage done in recent decades will not be undone in weeks, or perhaps years. This proposal is the beginning and not the end of our campaign to improve the broken system we all work in every day.’
Rafferty added: ‘This outcome is neither a defeat nor a victory. The criminal Bar has faced degradation and despair and it still does. This is a step forward. We must all ensure we do not take any more steps back.’
She announced a campaign to improve the lot of prosecutors, whom she said for too long ‘have tolerated the intolerable too’. The failings within the Crown Prosecution Service were highlighted again when the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, revealed that almost 50 rape and sexual assault cases had been discontinued due to disclosure failings.
Bar Chair, Andrew Walker QC said the vote would end action in the short term, but added: ‘Let there be no doubt that the closeness of the vote reflects the very real frustration, anger and concern for the future across the criminal Bar.’
He said: ‘Those voting to accept the Ministry of Justice’s proposal did not do so because they thought that it was a long term solution, any more than did those who voted to reject it. The changes are just a patch repair.
‘The situation in the criminal justice system remains dire. Addressing the crisis is still urgent.’
He warned that if sufficient change was not seen, ‘barristers will no doubt consider once more what steps they can take to make sure that our voice is heard’.
Criminal barristers voted by a narrow margin to accept the government’s fee offer and end its protest action.
In the ballot, 3,038 barristers voted by 1,566 (51.55%) to 1,472 (48.45%) to accept the offer to put £15m into the revised Advocates’ Graduated Fee Scheme (AGFS) with a 1% fee rise in April 2019.
Since the reformed AGFS payments were introduced in April most criminal barristers have refused to take new cases. Moves to up their action were put on hold pending a vote on the government’s offer.
Angela Rafferty QC, Chair of the Criminal Bar Association, said: ‘Whilst the majority wishes to accept the proposal, it cannot be said that the anger and disillusionment has gone away. Indeed it is exceptionally strong. The criminal Bar is not going to be quiet.’
She said investment in the AGFS scheme was the ‘first step in a long road to rehabilitation’ for the criminal justice system. She said: ‘The damage done in recent decades will not be undone in weeks, or perhaps years. This proposal is the beginning and not the end of our campaign to improve the broken system we all work in every day.’
Rafferty added: ‘This outcome is neither a defeat nor a victory. The criminal Bar has faced degradation and despair and it still does. This is a step forward. We must all ensure we do not take any more steps back.’
She announced a campaign to improve the lot of prosecutors, whom she said for too long ‘have tolerated the intolerable too’. The failings within the Crown Prosecution Service were highlighted again when the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, revealed that almost 50 rape and sexual assault cases had been discontinued due to disclosure failings.
Bar Chair, Andrew Walker QC said the vote would end action in the short term, but added: ‘Let there be no doubt that the closeness of the vote reflects the very real frustration, anger and concern for the future across the criminal Bar.’
He said: ‘Those voting to accept the Ministry of Justice’s proposal did not do so because they thought that it was a long term solution, any more than did those who voted to reject it. The changes are just a patch repair.
‘The situation in the criminal justice system remains dire. Addressing the crisis is still urgent.’
He warned that if sufficient change was not seen, ‘barristers will no doubt consider once more what steps they can take to make sure that our voice is heard’.
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
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
Why were some Caribbean nations given such dramatically different constitutional frameworks when they gained independence from the UK? Dr Leonardo Raznovich examines the controversial savings clause
