*/
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.
The Bar Council is ready to support a turn to the efficiencies that will make a difference
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
An interview with Rob Wagg, CEO of New Park Court Chambers
What meaningful steps can you take in 2026 to advance your legal career? asks Thomas Cowan of St Pauls Chambers
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, explains why drugs may appear in test results, despite the donor denying use of them
Ever wondered what a pupillage is like at the CPS? This Q and A provides an insight into the training, experience and next steps
The appointments of 96 new King’s Counsel (also known as silk) are announced today
Ready for the new way to do tax returns? David Southern KC continues his series explaining the impact on barristers. In part 2, a worked example shows the specific practicalities of adapting to the new system
Resolution of the criminal justice crisis does not lie in reheating old ideas that have been roundly rejected before, say Ed Vickers KC, Faras Baloch and Katie Bacon
With pupillage application season under way, Laura Wright reflects on her route to ‘tech barrister’ and offers advice for those aiming at a career at the Bar