*/
Changes to the Bar Standards Board’s (BSB) complaints and disciplinary processes come into force on 31 March.
The changes are the culmination of an 18-month implementation project arising from recommendations made by Rob Behrens in his 2007 Strategic Review.
Key changes include a new process for referring complaints received by the BSB back to chambers to consider, with an obligation on heads of chambers to ensure that any complaints referred by the BSB are investigated and the outcome reported. For the first time, sentencing guidance in relation to disciplinary cases will be available and published on www.barstandardsboard.org.uk, allowing barristers to gauge the potential sanctions that might be imposed.
Another first is the introduction of a new disciplinary process known as “determination by consent”. This allows the BSB Complaints Committee to determine the outcome of complaints, with the barrister’s consent, and thereby avoid the time and expense of a formal disciplinary hearing.
A wide range of other changes have also been made to improve communications and accountability. A complaints information line for barristers and complainants has been set up and the appointment of an Independent Observer will ensure the operation of the processes is reviewed on a continual basis.
The introduction of a user satisfaction survey for all barristers and complainants involved in complaints will provide the BSB with essential information in shaping the future of the complaints and disciplinary system.
Sue Carr QC, who chaired the BSB’s implementation group, says: “These important changes demonstrate the BSB’s commitment to continual improvement in raising standards at the Bar and are a significant step forward in creating a more streamlined and effective complaints system that addresses the interests of the public as well as the profession.”
The changes are the culmination of an 18-month implementation project arising from recommendations made by Rob Behrens in his 2007 Strategic Review.
Key changes include a new process for referring complaints received by the BSB back to chambers to consider, with an obligation on heads of chambers to ensure that any complaints referred by the BSB are investigated and the outcome reported. For the first time, sentencing guidance in relation to disciplinary cases will be available and published on www.barstandardsboard.org.uk, allowing barristers to gauge the potential sanctions that might be imposed.
Another first is the introduction of a new disciplinary process known as “determination by consent”. This allows the BSB Complaints Committee to determine the outcome of complaints, with the barrister’s consent, and thereby avoid the time and expense of a formal disciplinary hearing.
A wide range of other changes have also been made to improve communications and accountability. A complaints information line for barristers and complainants has been set up and the appointment of an Independent Observer will ensure the operation of the processes is reviewed on a continual basis.
The introduction of a user satisfaction survey for all barristers and complainants involved in complaints will provide the BSB with essential information in shaping the future of the complaints and disciplinary system.
Sue Carr QC, who chaired the BSB’s implementation group, says: “These important changes demonstrate the BSB’s commitment to continual improvement in raising standards at the Bar and are a significant step forward in creating a more streamlined and effective complaints system that addresses the interests of the public as well as the profession.”
Changes to the Bar Standards Board’s (BSB) complaints and disciplinary processes come into force on 31 March.
Update from the Chair of the Bar
AlphaBiolabs has been awarded the contract to provide drug, alcohol, and DNA testing services for Hull City Council, following a rigorous competitive tender process
By Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group
Modernising communication and collaboration at a leading Chancery set. A Zexi case study
How to build profile without compromising professional duties. By Naumaan Farooq, Co-Founder of Inked PR
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the role of cut-off levels, and the wider range of factors that must be considered when interpreting results for family court proceedings
A decade of reviews and research has disrupted accepted thinking in the search for causality. Suicides following abuse have overtaken domestic homicides. Is the law keeping up? Professor Susan Edwards KC (Hon) examines recent cases and the obstacles to successful prosecution
At least not that way, says Richard Paige
The case against judge-only justice – and why efficiency is not enough. By Professor Leslie Thomas KC
Heritage as an anchor and a compass, finding our common humanity and embracing the power of the outsider – Melina Antoniadis’s lessons learnt
Lauren Fullerton examines the how, what and why of setting up a second chambers base
