*/
Solicitor-advocates may be appointed for cases beyond their competency because of a desire to keep costs low, a report commissioned by the Legal Services Board (“LSB”) has found.
The report, “Cost benefit analysis of policy options related to referral fees in legal services”, looked into the impact on clients of referral fees and fee-sharing in criminal advocacy, conveyancing and personal injury. The LSB is considering the Law Society’s call for referral fees to be banned, and is expected to make a decision later this summer.
Referral fees are not used in criminal advocacy, although fee-sharing is common and can have similar effects.
The report, carried out by Charles River Associates, found there had been an increased use of solicitor-advocates as changes to the Advocate Graduated Fee Scheme (“AGFS”) encouraged more solicitors to obtain higher rights of audience. However, it was “not possible to conclude that this has reduced quality”.
Interview evidence revealed that some solicitors appoint external advocates on the basis of fee sharing, which caused them to prefer solicitor-advocates compared to barristers in order to avoid the Bar Protocol which sets out how fee sharing among barristers should occur under the AGFS, and to prefer those solicitor-advocates who were prepared to accept non-Protocol fees. The report found no evidence that fee-sharing itself reduced quality.
It noted: “However, there are concerns that a focus on profitability causes solicitor advocates to be appointed for cases beyond their competency although the greatest impact of this is observed on less complex cases.
“It is also possible that this will lead to a potential reduction of experienced barristers in the future or a change in career path for advocacy with more in-house advocates and fewer independent barristers.”
Referral fees in personal injury have risen from about £250 per case in 2004 to about £800 today, the report found. There was no evidence that this had led to an increase in the price of legal services.
The report, “Cost benefit analysis of policy options related to referral fees in legal services”, looked into the impact on clients of referral fees and fee-sharing in criminal advocacy, conveyancing and personal injury. The LSB is considering the Law Society’s call for referral fees to be banned, and is expected to make a decision later this summer.
Referral fees are not used in criminal advocacy, although fee-sharing is common and can have similar effects.
The report, carried out by Charles River Associates, found there had been an increased use of solicitor-advocates as changes to the Advocate Graduated Fee Scheme (“AGFS”) encouraged more solicitors to obtain higher rights of audience. However, it was “not possible to conclude that this has reduced quality”.
Interview evidence revealed that some solicitors appoint external advocates on the basis of fee sharing, which caused them to prefer solicitor-advocates compared to barristers in order to avoid the Bar Protocol which sets out how fee sharing among barristers should occur under the AGFS, and to prefer those solicitor-advocates who were prepared to accept non-Protocol fees. The report found no evidence that fee-sharing itself reduced quality.
It noted: “However, there are concerns that a focus on profitability causes solicitor advocates to be appointed for cases beyond their competency although the greatest impact of this is observed on less complex cases.
“It is also possible that this will lead to a potential reduction of experienced barristers in the future or a change in career path for advocacy with more in-house advocates and fewer independent barristers.”
Referral fees in personal injury have risen from about £250 per case in 2004 to about £800 today, the report found. There was no evidence that this had led to an increase in the price of legal services.
Solicitor-advocates may be appointed for cases beyond their competency because of a desire to keep costs low, a report commissioned by the Legal Services Board (“LSB”) has found.
Sam Townend KC explains the Bar Council’s efforts towards ensuring a bright future for the profession
Giovanni D’Avola explores the issue of over-citation of unreported cases and the ‘added value’ elements of a law report
Louise Crush explores the key points and opportunities for tax efficiency
Westgate Wealth Management Ltd is a Partner Practice of FTSE 100 company St. James’s Place – one of the top UK Wealth Management firms. We offer a holistic service of distinct quality, integrity, and excellence with the aim to build a professional and valuable relationship with our clients, helping to provide them with security now, prosperity in the future and the highest standard of service in all of our dealings.
Is now the time to review your financial position, having reached a career milestone? asks Louise Crush
If you were to host a dinner party with 10 guests, and you asked them to explain what financial planning is and how it differs to financial advice, you’d receive 10 different answers. The variety of answers highlights the ongoing need to clarify and promote the value of financial planning.
Most of us like to think we would risk our career in order to meet our ethical obligations, so why have so many lawyers failed to hold the line? asks Flora Page
If your current practice environment is bringing you down, seek a new one. However daunting the change, it will be worth it, says Anon Barrister
Creating advocacy opportunities for juniors is now the expectation but not always easy to put into effect. Tom Mitcheson KC distils developing best practice from the Patents Court initiative already bearing fruit
Sam Townend KC explains the Bar Council’s efforts towards ensuring a bright future for the profession
The long-running fee-paid judicial pensions saga continues. The current cut-off date for giving notice of election to join FPJPS is 31 March 2024, and that date now gives rise to a serious problem, warns HH John Platt
