*/
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.
The Chair of the Bar reports back
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, explains how global events can influence the performance of pensions and ISAs, and why taking a long-term approach to investing is often the most effective strategy
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, discusses what family law professionals need to know about hallucinogens, from the main hallucinogenic drugs encountered in family proceedings, to their effects and the testing options available
Harmony Christian Ministries is the latest charity to benefit from a £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
By David Green
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, examines the forensic science underpinning hair drug testing, its evidential scope and limitations, and why it remains the gold standard for evidencing patterns of drug use in family proceedings
Developing a tech start-up demands a different definition of excellence to the Bar, says Saara Idelbi. The co-creator of Advocatr on entrepreneurship, AI advocacy training, and matching the thrill of a killer cross-examination
At the start of her term, Chair of the Bar 2026 Kirsty Brimelow KC set out a series of priorities for the year ahead. One of those priorities was children in the justice system
As the world becomes more digital, Barbara Vinagre Mota examines international research into the mental health consequences of judges’ exposure to graphic and immersive evidence, highlighting the importance of support systems
Reviewed by Daniel Barnett
James McNeill Whistler at Tate Britain until 27 September Rothko in Florence at Palazzo Strozzi until 23 August Reviewed by Stephen Cragg KC
