*/
The Supreme Court dismissed a challenge to the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates (QASA).
Lords Reed and Toulson ruled that the controversial accreditation scheme was the “only way” to provide the desired level of protection to the public, and confirmed that it was lawful and proportionate.
Previously, the High Court and Court of Appeal had also rejected the attempt to overturn the Legal Service’s Board’s approval of the scheme granted in 2013.
The challenge to QASA, which was designed by the three main legal regulators – the Bar Standards Board, Solicitors’ Regulation Authority and CILEx Regulation – had been brought in the name of four criminal barristers.
Welcoming the judgment, Dr Vanessa Davies, BSB director general, said: “The objective of providing a high level of public protection through a precautionary scheme has long been the underlying principle behind QASA.
“Given the length of time that has passed since the scheme was approved by the LSB, we need to consider the scheme’s implementation and likely timescales involved.”
The Criminal Bar Association, which financially backed the challenge, said it was “deeply disappointed” by the ruling. It added: “The CBA remains of the view that the scheme is a bad one.”
Meanwhile the BSB has begun a consultation on reforming its disciplinary tribunal system.
Proposed changes include modernising terminology, reducing the role of the Inns of Court, extending the regulator’s ability to appeal the outcome of disciplinary tribunals and limiting the costs claimed by barristers who represent themselves.
The BSB is also seeking views on measures to mitigate the costs of the disciplinary system, replacing all five-person panels with three-person panels, and shifting the decision on the readmission of disbarred barristers from the Inns of Court to itself.
The Supreme Court dismissed a challenge to the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates (QASA).
Lords Reed and Toulson ruled that the controversial accreditation scheme was the “only way” to provide the desired level of protection to the public, and confirmed that it was lawful and proportionate.
Previously, the High Court and Court of Appeal had also rejected the attempt to overturn the Legal Service’s Board’s approval of the scheme granted in 2013.
The challenge to QASA, which was designed by the three main legal regulators – the Bar Standards Board, Solicitors’ Regulation Authority and CILEx Regulation – had been brought in the name of four criminal barristers.
Welcoming the judgment, Dr Vanessa Davies, BSB director general, said: “The objective of providing a high level of public protection through a precautionary scheme has long been the underlying principle behind QASA.
“Given the length of time that has passed since the scheme was approved by the LSB, we need to consider the scheme’s implementation and likely timescales involved.”
The Criminal Bar Association, which financially backed the challenge, said it was “deeply disappointed” by the ruling. It added: “The CBA remains of the view that the scheme is a bad one.”
Meanwhile the BSB has begun a consultation on reforming its disciplinary tribunal system.
Proposed changes include modernising terminology, reducing the role of the Inns of Court, extending the regulator’s ability to appeal the outcome of disciplinary tribunals and limiting the costs claimed by barristers who represent themselves.
The BSB is also seeking views on measures to mitigate the costs of the disciplinary system, replacing all five-person panels with three-person panels, and shifting the decision on the readmission of disbarred barristers from the Inns of Court to itself.
Chair of the Bar reflects on 2025
Q&A with criminal barrister Nick Murphy, who moved to New Park Court Chambers on the North Eastern Circuit in search of a better work-life balance
Revolt Cycling in Holborn, London’s first sustainable fitness studio, invites barristers to join the revolution – turning pedal power into clean energy
Rachel Davenport, Co-founder and Director at AlphaBiolabs, reflects on how the company’s Giving Back ethos continues to make a difference to communities across the UK
By Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
AlphaBiolabs has made a £500 donation to Sean’s Place, a men’s mental health charity based in Sefton, as part of its ongoing Giving Back initiative
Little has changed since Burns v Burns . Cohabiting couples deserve better than to be left on the blasted heath with the existing witch’s brew for another four decades, argues Christopher Stirling
Six months of court observation at the Old Bailey: APPEAL’s Dr Nisha Waller and Tehreem Sultan report their findings on prosecution practices under joint enterprise
Despite its prevalence, autism spectrum disorder remains poorly understood in the criminal justice system. Does Alex Henry’s joint enterprise conviction expose the need to audit prisons? asks Dr Felicity Gerry KC
With automation now deeply embedded in the Department for Work Pensions, Alexander McColl and Alexa Thompson review what we know, what we don’t and avenues for legal challenge
Why were some Caribbean nations given such dramatically different constitutional frameworks when they gained independence from the UK? Dr Leonardo Raznovich examines the controversial savings clause
