*/
Advocacy standards have slipped but independent barristers are better than solicitor advocates and in-house counsel, judges told legal regulators.
Published by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) and the Solicitors Regulation Authority, the Judicial Perceptions Report was produced by the Institute for Criminal Policy Research of Birkbeck, University of London and involved in-depth interviews with 50 High Court and Circuit judges.
Most thought advocacy was ‘generally competent’, but a large proportion felt standards were poorer than when they had practised.
Some said the quality differed depending on the seriousness of the case and advocate’s professional background, with solicitor-advocates and in-house barristers less well reviewed than independent barristers.
The most common concern was that advocates took on cases beyond their level of experience, particularly where solicitors’ firms, for financial reasons, kept cases in house rather than instruct appropriately experienced independent counsel.
More than half felt declining pay and associated low morale negatively affected quality, partly because some of the most able advocates left criminal practice for more lucrative civil work.
BSB Director General,Vanessa Davies accepted there was some ‘poor performance’, but highlighted the finding that financial pressures threaten quality. She said the BSB was determined to ensure standards of advocacy are maintained and improved.
Advocacy standards have slipped but independent barristers are better than solicitor advocates and in-house counsel, judges told legal regulators.
Published by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) and the Solicitors Regulation Authority, the Judicial Perceptions Report was produced by the Institute for Criminal Policy Research of Birkbeck, University of London and involved in-depth interviews with 50 High Court and Circuit judges.
Most thought advocacy was ‘generally competent’, but a large proportion felt standards were poorer than when they had practised.
Some said the quality differed depending on the seriousness of the case and advocate’s professional background, with solicitor-advocates and in-house barristers less well reviewed than independent barristers.
The most common concern was that advocates took on cases beyond their level of experience, particularly where solicitors’ firms, for financial reasons, kept cases in house rather than instruct appropriately experienced independent counsel.
More than half felt declining pay and associated low morale negatively affected quality, partly because some of the most able advocates left criminal practice for more lucrative civil work.
BSB Director General,Vanessa Davies accepted there was some ‘poor performance’, but highlighted the finding that financial pressures threaten quality. She said the BSB was determined to ensure standards of advocacy are maintained and improved.
Our call for sufficient resources for the justice system and for the Bar to scrutinise the BSB’s latest consultation
Marie Law, Head of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, discusses alcohol testing for the Family Court
Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth explains how to make sure you are investing suitably, and in your long-term interests
In conversation with Matthew Bland, Lincoln’s Inn Library
Millicent Wild of 5 Essex Chambers describes her pupillage experience
Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth explores some key steps to take when starting out as a barrister in order to secure your financial future
From a traumatic formative education to exceptional criminal silk – Laurie-Anne Power KC talks about her path to the Bar, pursuit of equality and speaking out against discrimination (not just during Black History Month)
James Onalaja concludes his two-part opinion series
Expectations, experiences and survival tips – some of the things I wished I had known (or applied) when I was starting pupillage. By Chelsea Brooke-Ward
If you are in/about to start pupillage, you will soon be facing the pupillage stage assessment in professional ethics. Jane Hutton and Patrick Ryan outline exam format and tactics
In a two-part opinion series, James Onalaja considers the International Criminal Court Prosecutor’s requests for arrest warrants in the controversial Israel-Palestine situation