*/
The Legal Services Commission has toned down its plans for complex criminal cases, following sustained lobbying.
The Commission’s new proposals for very high cost cases (VHCCs), launched in December, drop plans for hourly rates and propose a fixed fee element for the core tasks, with the rest of the pre-trial preparation fee subject to negotiation. There is no longer a requirement for advocates to join a panel, or to be part of a litigator’s team when they bid. Litigators will negotiate how much work they carry out in a contract, and cases will be structured around a series of core litigation tasks.
The proposals were drafted by a steering group including the Bar Council, Ministry of Justice, Criminal Bar Association, Law Society, Crown Prosecution Service and Legal Services Commission.
The Bar Council and Criminal Bar Association have welcomed the consultation paper. Tim Dutton QC, 2008 Bar Council Chairman, commented that the “robust scheme” was “testament to the professionalism and goodwill which all involved have shown”.
Barristers largely boycotted the VHCC panel set up last January, forcing the Commission to revise its plans, and the revised scheme set up in its place is due to expire in July 2009.
Tim Dutton QC said: “The proposed scheme should provide a fair payment mechanism, which reflects the complexity of the cases in question, and the concomitant expertise required of those advocates who conduct them. It will deliver within budget.”
The consultation will run until 30 January 2009. A separate consultation will run in March to consider the details of the advocate’s contract; thought to be case-specific.
The Commission’s new proposals for very high cost cases (VHCCs), launched in December, drop plans for hourly rates and propose a fixed fee element for the core tasks, with the rest of the pre-trial preparation fee subject to negotiation. There is no longer a requirement for advocates to join a panel, or to be part of a litigator’s team when they bid. Litigators will negotiate how much work they carry out in a contract, and cases will be structured around a series of core litigation tasks.
The proposals were drafted by a steering group including the Bar Council, Ministry of Justice, Criminal Bar Association, Law Society, Crown Prosecution Service and Legal Services Commission.
The Bar Council and Criminal Bar Association have welcomed the consultation paper. Tim Dutton QC, 2008 Bar Council Chairman, commented that the “robust scheme” was “testament to the professionalism and goodwill which all involved have shown”.
Barristers largely boycotted the VHCC panel set up last January, forcing the Commission to revise its plans, and the revised scheme set up in its place is due to expire in July 2009.
Tim Dutton QC said: “The proposed scheme should provide a fair payment mechanism, which reflects the complexity of the cases in question, and the concomitant expertise required of those advocates who conduct them. It will deliver within budget.”
The consultation will run until 30 January 2009. A separate consultation will run in March to consider the details of the advocate’s contract; thought to be case-specific.
The Legal Services Commission has toned down its plans for complex criminal cases, following sustained lobbying.
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
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
With gender earnings inequality at the Bar getting worse, not better, Judith Ayling KC discusses concrete solutions and collective action – including steps taken by the Personal Injuries Bar Association
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
