News

A rush to slash legal aid fees will cause damage to the quality of justice, barristers have warned Ministers. A raft of submissions from the Bar Council, the Criminal Bar Association (CBA), young barristers and the Bar's regional circuits are unanimous in criticising proposals by the Ministry of Justice for cuts in criminal legal aid. 

The Government wants to cut pay for barristers doing publiclyfunded criminal defence work by up to 23%. They propose to reverse the 2007 implementation of a review of legal aid by Lord Carter of Coles which was designed to head off a crisis in the criminal justice system triggered by a 10-year pay freeze for barristers. The Bar Council and CBA today voice grave concerns about the impact of the cuts on the diversity of the Bar and the Judiciary, and the potential risk of miscarriages of justice which cause needless cost to the public purse. 

Lord Goldsmith QC has expressed concern that budgets for pro bono and voluntary advice sector budgets are falling just as the recession is increasing demand. 

Addressing the National Pro Bono Conference, in London in November, he emphasised the need for lawyers to seek pro bono costs
orders, pointing out that they produced a “double win” for pro bono clients by generating new funds to support other pro bono work in the future. Lawyers needed to be “creative” to fi nd other means of funding, such as unclaimed client accounts. “This sector is stretched to capacity, swamped by an ever increasing demand and an ever decreasing budget,” he said. 

All practising barristers are required to undertake CPD, whether as part of the New Practitioners’ Programme or Established Practitioners’ Programme. 

The Bar Standards Board encourages practitioners to return their record card to our offices as soon as possible. A prompt return will enable us to enhance our ability to process your record card efficiently and expeditiously. The deadline for completion of your CPD hours is 31 December 2009; the final deadline for receipt of all CPD record cards is 31 January 2010. 

THE Bar Council and the Criminal Bar Association (CBA) have welcomed the final approval by Parliament of many of the changes for which they had been calling to the Coroners and Justice Bill which received Royal Assent on 12 November 2009. 

The Bar Council and the CBA were concerned about a number of features of the Bill, particularly those relating to the reform of the coroner’s system, on which they had made representations to the Government and Parliament over the past year. The Government has recognised that legal aid should be available for bereaved families and other interested parties where the state is represented and that the size of coroners’ juries should not be reduced. Potentially farreaching proposals for data sharing were dropped by the Government in response to widespread concern, including from the Bar. The Bar Council is pleased that the use of Damages Based Agreements has been restricted to regulation of damages-based agreements in respect of employment claims which may go to an employment tribunal. This will allow the Government and others to take into account the conclusions of the review of the costs of civil litigation which is being conducted by Lord Justice Jackson, to which the Bar has contributed. 

On 9 October, the Swedish Presidency tabled a draft set of guidelines and model rules for use by the EU legislator when inserting criminal law provisions into EU legislative instruments. The idea is also referred to in the Presidency draft Stockholm Programme. 

See:
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/09/st14/st14162.en09.pdf 

The Commission has publicly confirmed its intention to produce a legislative proposal on matrimonial property regimes, probably in late 2010. 

The Commission is consulting the public on how to develop vibrant online markets for goods and services protected by intellectual property rights. The consultation addresses the role of legal online markets and explores a variety of copyright management models. Deadline for responses is 5 January 2010. See: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2009/content_online_en.htm 

The Lugano Convention of March 2007 (which covers similar ground to the Brussels I regulation, but as between the EC, Denmark, Iceland, Norway and Switzerland) now has an accompanying explanatory report, for use by national courts to clarify the meaning of the Convention and facilitate its uniform application. 

See: http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/09/st12/st12277-re01.en09.pdf 

A Bar Council snapshot survey of chambers around England and Wales has revealed that the proposed cuts to criminal legal aid fees
would force many barristers to leave publicly funded criminal work while several chambers said they would be unable to offer pupillages
and one chambers feared closure. The proposed cuts are contained in the Ministry of Justice Consultation Paper, “Legal Aid: Funding
Reforms”. The consultation period closed on 12 November and the Bar Council, the Criminal Bar Association, young barristers and
regional Circuits have opposed the cuts, claiming they could drive barristers away from publicly funded criminal defence work, and create a potential risk of miscarriage of justice. Criminal Bar Association Chairman, Paul Mendelle QC said: “The cuts proposed in this paper are an unjustified and unprincipled attack on criminal legal aid. The government has gone back on the agreement made a mere two years ago following the Carter review.” 

RARELY, in my experience, is a talk is so gripping and helpful that you wish it was longer. A packed Inner Temple Hall was treated to such a talk by Jonathan Sumption QC on 29 September 2009. His subject was Appellate Advocacy. 

Throughout the talk he delighted the 300-strong audience with quips such as “Appellate judges are bigger than you and they hunt in packs”. These mild digs at the judges reminded everyone that this speaker was not a judge but a practising barrister like them. Jonathan shared some instructive insights into the judicial mind based on his experience. He said that judges had become less reverent of authority than in the past and that they cited fewer cases in their judgments these days. There was now a tendency to set out broad principles of law exemplified by the authorities across a range of subjects rather than applying authorities directly to the case being decided. He also noted and welcomed an increasing willingness by judges to consider the social and economic implications of their decisions in their judgments.