*/
Convicted defendants will have to pay fees of up to £1,200 towards the cost of their case, under provisions of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, which came into force on 13 April.
The new charges start at £150 for those who plead guilty to a summary offence in the magistrates’ court, rising to £500 following conviction in the magistrates’ court, and £1,200 for those convicted following a Crown court trial
Lord Chancellor, Chris Grayling MP, said the charge will ensure criminals “pay their way”, but critics have warned that the fees, which were introduced without consultation, risk encouraging the innocent to plead guilty and add to the mountain of uncollected debt owed to the court service.
Bar Chairman, Alistair MacDonald QC, said: “In times of austerity, it is difficult to argue against the proposition that convicted offenders should make a contribution towards the cost of their trial.” But, he said charging fees of £1,200 is “completely unrealistic”.
He said the Bar Council is reviewing its policy on criminal court fees and will be making representations to government about it.
The Act contained a range of law changes, the creation of new offences and increased prison terms for terrorism offences and internet trolling.
New offences included revenge porn, punishable with a sentence of up to two years in jail, and four crimes of juror misconduct.
It also introduced controversial changes limiting access to judicial review, which the Government claims will speed up the process and cut the number of meritless claims “clogging” the courts.
The new charges start at £150 for those who plead guilty to a summary offence in the magistrates’ court, rising to £500 following conviction in the magistrates’ court, and £1,200 for those convicted following a Crown court trial
Lord Chancellor, Chris Grayling MP, said the charge will ensure criminals “pay their way”, but critics have warned that the fees, which were introduced without consultation, risk encouraging the innocent to plead guilty and add to the mountain of uncollected debt owed to the court service.
Bar Chairman, Alistair MacDonald QC, said: “In times of austerity, it is difficult to argue against the proposition that convicted offenders should make a contribution towards the cost of their trial.” But, he said charging fees of £1,200 is “completely unrealistic”.
He said the Bar Council is reviewing its policy on criminal court fees and will be making representations to government about it.
The Act contained a range of law changes, the creation of new offences and increased prison terms for terrorism offences and internet trolling.
New offences included revenge porn, punishable with a sentence of up to two years in jail, and four crimes of juror misconduct.
It also introduced controversial changes limiting access to judicial review, which the Government claims will speed up the process and cut the number of meritless claims “clogging” the courts.
Convicted defendants will have to pay fees of up to £1,200 towards the cost of their case, under provisions of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, which came into force on 13 April.
Chair of the Bar reports back
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
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
A career shaped by advocacy beyond her practice, and the realities of living with an invisible disability – Dr Natasha Shotunde, Black Barristers’ Network Co-Founder and its Chair for seven years, reflects on a decade at the Bar
The odds of success are as unforgiving as ever, but ambition clearly isn’t in short supply. David Wurtzel’s annual deep‑dive into the competition cohort shows who’s entering, who’s thriving and the trends that will define the next wave
Where to start and where to find help? Monisha Shah, Chair of the King’s Counsel Selection Panel, provides an overview of the silk selection process, debunking some myths along the way
Do chatbot providers owe a duty of care for negligent misstatements? Jasper Wong suggests that the principles applicable to humans should apply equally to machines
There is no typical day in the life as a Supreme Court judicial assistant, says Josephine Gillingwater, and that’s what makes the role so enjoyably diverse
