Dozens of major trials, including rape and murder cases, are under threat
because barristers are refusing to work for a minimum £91 an hour.
At least five big criminal prosecutions, including the Rhys Jones murder trial
in Liverpool, have been hit by the boycott, The Times has learnt.
Dozens more risk disruption and delays if the dispute over legal aid rates
is not resolved swiftly.
Peter Lodder, QC, the new chairman of the 4,000-strong Criminal Bar
Association, told The Times that judges could have to release
defendants if the dispute is not settled soon.
Trials involving defendants held in custody can only be delayed up to 112 days
between their committal and trial. Courts have the option of releasing
defendants on bail but in serious cases there is a greater risk that they
would abscond, he said.
The crisis has arisen because just three QCs and only about a hundred other
barristers have signed up to the new panel of lawyers set up under the
reforms to handle these long trials, out of a possible total of 2,300.
They are objecting to what Mr Lodder called “derisory” rates of pay offered by
the Legal Services Commission (LSC) for the most serious trials.
The stand-off has developed because ministers thought privately that the
barristers were bluffing and assumed that they would back down once the new
fees regime was in place.
A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Justice insisted last night that trials were
unlikely to be held up for want of a suitable barrister. “Solicitors have
told the Legal Services Commission that they expect to be able to find
counsel of the requisite experience to act in very high-cost cases,” she
said.
Mr Lodder said that some of the trials due to start in October would clearly
not be able to do so.Cases so far affected include: the murder trial of a
teenager and others accused of killing Rhys Jones, 11, which has been
adjourned and is likely to be delayed further; a trial at Oxford Crown
Court of 12 Albanian men charged with conspiracy to sell drugs; a trial of
28 defendants on money-laundering charges, to be heard at Woolwich Crown
Court next year; a trial at the Old Bailey to be heard in March in which
12 youths are accused of murder; and a drugs and firearms conspiracy trial
involving 18 defendants due to take place at Preston Crown Court, for which
no date has yet been fixed.
Mr Lodder outlined the dangers of using inexperienced barristers for complex
cases. He said that if defendants were not properly represented trials would
not run effectively, would cost more and there was a risk that there would
be wrongful convictions.
“Society as a whole has an interest in seeing that these cases are properly
funded,” he said. “If barristers won’t do this work, then the whole ethos of
serving the public suffers – as does the reputation of the criminal justice
system.” He said that under the new rates top Queen’s Counsel were on
preparation rates (for work leading up to trial) of £91 an hour. He said
that a barrister would pocket about half of that after paying overheads,
expenses, tax and so on.
“You might be better off buying a pair of pliers and working as a plumber,” he
said. “This is our livelihood and most barristers are proud of the work they
do. And contrary to public conception, these are not all fat cats – few
barristers doing these high-profile cases earn a lot of money.”
The commission, which is in charge of the £2 billion legal aid budget, is
trying to curb spiralling costs. Reforms have been agreed for all other
smaller cases, but proposals that big trials lasting more than 40 days
should be paid under contract are strongly opposed.
Preparation work rates range from £70 to £100 gross per hour for a junior
barrister to £91 to £145 per hour for a QC. For a day in court the rates
range from £285 to £476 for a top QC. In a privately funded case, he or she
could earn at least double that. A commercial barrister earns up to £500 an
hour.
The barristers also argue that hourly rates of pay encourage delays and are
calling for a system of fixed fees according to types of cases.
Last year there were about 400 defendants funded by legal aid in 100 “very
high-cost” trials, at a cost of £100 million. The commission said: “Defence
teams are typically paid around £400,000 for such cases but costs in some,
such as the Jubilee Line fraud case, have run into several millions.”
The commission has now agreed that in some cases solicitors may employ
barristers outside the specialist panel. The lawyers instructed would be
paid the lower rates of pay that apply to run-of-the-mill cases.
In the Rhys Jones trial, an exception has been made for the main defendant, a
17-year-old youth, so that he can have a barrister of his choosing.
There is still an impasse over the Oxford trial. Heather Howe, of the
solicitors’ firm Criminal Law Advocates, said: “At present three of our
clients have no barrister and the list of panel advocates that are suitably
experienced to take this case and are available is down to two – one of
whom is living in the South of France.
“The trial is likely to be delayed and costs to escalate through the roof if
new counsel have to be instructed at this late stage. Trial is set for
January 5 and we are very concerned.”
Mr Lodder said that in the Liverpool trial the main defendant had declared
that if he could not have counsel of his choice, he would defend himself.
“This would be a nightmare and cause a huge delay. He would not have the
professional expertise and huge amounts of time would be taken guiding him
through the paperwork.”
A spokesman for the commission said that the panel was due to run until July
next year until a new scheme came into effect. He said: “To ensure best
quality and best value for the most expensive criminal legal aid cases, the
Legal Services Commission decided to establish a very high-cost cases panel
which is due to run until July next year.
“The LSC believes this panel offers real benefits to those that have signed up
to it as they have the first opportunity to take on work worth in excess of
£100 million a year.”
He added that the commission was working with the Ministry of Justice, the Bar
Council and the Law Society on alternative payment schemes.
A ministry spokeswoman said that the panel, which was set up after a
competitive tendering exercise, was part of “a balanced package of reforms
to put the legal aid budget as a whole on a sustainable footing”. She said:
“Our reforms are about ensuring the long-term sustainability and future of
legal aid. We want to get the best value for money so that we can help as
many people as possible within the resources available.”
A working group had been set up to make proposals for the scheme that will be
set up from the summer of next year and it would report shortly.
my son has been convicted of an offence of which he is innocent today and the root cause is an incompetent barrister. the case was easily winnable that even a plumber could have won it but this loser threw it away. my son is a police officer who has now had his life ruined.
David Abbott, bury , lancs
As a criminal defence junior barrister 4 years back it once cost me £4.50 to represent a juvenile in court. Time spent on the case: travel 7hrs, preparation 3hrs, court 2hrs. + exs
Anyone recommend a worker from the 'real world' or better still a 'plumber' to do some work for me at similar rates?
J.Johnson, Birmingham, UK
Sounds great until you tumble that it'll cost you £200 or more on the train (before 9.30) to travel to Court as the Contract requires you to take cases anywhere in the country. The figure is turnover not profit. Barristers (like all self-employed people) keep about 10% of a fee.
Richard, London,
I have seen the legal system deteriorate under the labour government. They have turned it into a joke using spin and lies. Wake up and make a stand. Don't let this government take away ur right to defend and prosecute cases properly. One day you could be a victim of a miscaraige?
Ash, London, UK
Quite Right!, The Difficulties are at the "Root"! Don't prosecute the "Inncocent Guy"!, for "Minor Dismeanors"! Get back to "Reality"and "Community Support"!
paul, Newtown,Powys, UK
Oh how my heart bleeds for the poor bleating low paid lawyers and solicitors! The comments from the legal 'profession' are unbeleivable. Low paid? Who do you think you are kidding?
Chris, Banbury,
The BVC costs £20,000 for the year, of those 15% get pupillage. Undergrad costs are around £15,000, and postgrad costs comes to £15-18,000. Now, when you're in court and you're represented by a monkey who is willing to accept these insulting fees, then you'll understand barristers' complaints.
matt, Bath,
Juxtapose the vast resources of the prosecution then most opinions would be different. I see many people defend themselves daily in court and look on in sympathey as they not only fail to understand law and procedure, and more poignantly fail to put their case, inevitably to their detriment.
Simon, Luton,
How clever is this?
The LSC tries to do job on the cheap, spins the results and we ratchet up opinion against a proper defence for serious charges.
They were told that people wouldn't sign up to this regime and they responded by threatening a prosecution against the Bar!
This mess was inevitable
Tim Concannon, Petersfield, Hampshire
Some of the contributors should try being a self-employed professional (I'm an engineer not a lawyer). See how much professional liability insurance will cost you, plus office overheads, travel, support, etc. 91.00 p.h. is nothing for the responsibility that is carried.
Mal, Edmonton, Canada
They take Legal Aid money and do nothing beyond writing useless letters. In my simple, well documented housing case that ruined my whole life they are doing that for the last 10 years.
Krys, London, UK
I am a law student who intends, if I am lucky enought, to practice at the Criminal Bar. It is a very hard course of study coupled with a mountain of debt. It is not enough to be the best, or the brightest, it involves a huge amount of study and dedication. Barristers fees are earned and deserved
kerry, bournemouth, uk
£91-145 hr sounds good until you consider that this is for the highest qualified and most experienced few. To get there barristers spend many years working for much less (even free) after funding their own training. There is no sick, maternity or holiday pay, no pension or even certainty of work.
Paul Spreadborough, London,
If they are unhappy with the money they get, why some barristers refuse to do small cases and accept just the bigger cases?????Also some barristers do various cases in a day so I think that they earn more than they wish to tell us!
Lisa, london,
This just stinks of greed.
m wilson, bidache, france
Bear in mind that barristers are self-employed. No paid leave, sick leave, maternity pay: no work = no pay. And get away from £91ph-that's for QCs who have many years of skill and experience. WOuldn't u want someone like that if u were on trial? Average barristers get c.£40k pa. PLumbers get more.
Catherine Rowlands, Tamworth,
I'm a barrister, but do no criminal work. So, I've no interest in these rates . Nor much sympathy. But, supplying context: 24% of my income pays fixed expenses (rent, support staff etc). We also fund our own travel, books, pensions, etc. Another 15%. Then there is tax and NI on top.
James, London,
My experience of jury service was that the performance of the barrristers was unimpressive. Most seemed to be like trainee newsreaders obviously unfamiliar with the issues they were talking about. Underpaid ? No, not unless Man United players are your yardstick.
Anthony, London, UK
It need not be expensive to prosecute the law, but in todays Britain it is an unaffordable expense. We need to simplify the whole system. It is unfair that career criminals have their fees paid for by honest hardworking taxpayers and often escape justice beacause of flaws in government and courts
Neil Hewitt, Leeds, UK
476 per day.
Normal train fare over 100.
Often a day in court outside your home city entails a 12-hour day, including travel.
Expenses, not including food at 20-25%.
For a highly skilled lawyer, it comes to 23.50 p/h. Plus, there's no guarantee of being able to work as many cases as you want to.
Nik, London, UK
A full-time criminal barrister after nearly 20 years will earn less after expenses than a detective chief constable in the met (67K) or a deputy head at a big London school (65K). GPs earn twice as much (120K). And that's without factoring in the other above jobs' huge public funded pension pots!
Brian Kennedy, East Molesey, Surrey
For me this is just another example of this Government's headlong rush to emasculate the professions.
It's reached a point where a stand has to be taken, and I think other groups are likely to follow this example until a more reasonable regime is voted in.
Greg, Chichester,
The real fault is that suspects are allowed access to such expensive legal expertise at the taxpayer's (i.e. our) cost - you can be sure "normal" citizens have no access to barristers.
Legal aid should mean junior lawyers only, and for sure it's the hardened criminals that abuse the system most.
Richard, Lyon,
I know many 'Juniors' on over £300k a year. These people have somehow concocted that they are self-employed and with that comes massive tax advantages so they don't even pay their fair share of tax or NI.
Law is a get-rich-quick scheme.
Parky Parkerson, Hammersmith, London, UK
This is a supply and demand problem.
Simplify the law by removing from the books masses of useless and politically inspired laws (e.g anti-terrorism etc.).
Increase the supply of barristers by increasing the numbers of those being trained.
Set a maximum of 20% on the number of lawyer-MP's
Alfred, Isle of Wight, UK
To L.Homshaw: Does working world spend MINIMUM 5 years and £30.000 on qualifying as, e.g. a plumber? Instead of spending billions on idiotic war in Iraq the government could pay decent money and the money to those who ensure that YOU, working world, does not live in a police state. They DESERVE it.
Alex, London,
Being paid £10 per hour to represent someone facing a serious criminal charge is a ridiculous suggestion. In the majority of cases, barristers are the experts that solicitors look to for all the extra work that is not paid for out of the legal aid pot, such as looking at unused material.
Clare Ashcroft, Chelmsford,
They may all be desperate for work soon as I understand from a duty solicitor that some magistrates' courts are half empty because no-one is being charged to keep crime figures down. This apparently includes minor burglaries. No charges = no court cases = no trials = no briefs = no fees.
A J Smith, Nottingham, England
You need to consider the fact that even if barristers are paid 70 pounds per hour, and then half is on their overheads (administrative, paying rent in chambers, clerk fees, NI, tax etc.), they do not always work the same number of hours a day. They only get paid when they have cases.
Bahar, London,
Some of these comments are the reaction the government wanted - namely have a go at the "fat cats". These cases are the most serious and high pressure cases that it is possible to do. You want the best people doing them. Why bother when you can earn 5x these rates arguing about a shipping contract.
John, Nottingham,
Most barristers have to go into an astronomical amount of debt, for example, Bar School fees of £15,000. The competetion to then get a pupillage and become a practicing barrister is 1 in every 8 that finish bar school. They certainly deserve to be paid more than a plumber.
Jane, Manchester,
When one considers how much work, knowledge and expertise is required to be a Barrister, coupled with the lack of job security as most work for themselves, it is understandable they charge high rates. These are not garbage men or factory line workers - want a good justice system? then pay for it.
T Welch, Notts,
£91 an hour is too much. Barristers should learn to live in less luxurious offices. Scientists have been doing without for decades. Support staff should be employed separately. Then we might know what the barrister is actually earning, which should be about £30 an hour or less. (~£55,000 yr )
david Slatter, cambridge,
£91 an hour?! It clearly states above that after overheads they take home around half of that, which is still £45 an hour - a lot more than most people's pay. Pay strikes are getting ridiculous - send them to see a 3rd world country and then see if they still think that absurd salary is necessary.
Katy, London,
Get rid of the jury system. Criminals should be judged by a panel of legal experts. It will take far less time and money and judgements will not be tainted by the problems of juries poor understanding of legal issues/the law and lawyers who are good at manipulating juries (and therefore cost more).
Penny, London,
Perhaps if we had a legal system aimed at getting to the truth instead of being focussed on prosecuting someone we would not need all these Barristers................No need no problem.
The cost of these trials would also plummet I suspect.
Alan, Verwood,
I wish someone would pay me £91 per hour to stand up and spout garbage. Their charges are one reason why it's so expensive to go to court. The whole system needs overhauling drastically and these parasites need to learn what it's like in the real world...not Planet Zog which most of them inhabit.
Keith, Grantham,
Maybe employed people who are criticising barristers should try being self-employed for a short while before lecturing about what life is like in 'the real world'. Try paying tax and NI, then 15% of what's left to chambers, liability insurance, accountancy fees, banking fees, travel expenses..etc
John, Manchester, UK
£20 pounds an hour is enough. If Barrister don't like it then they should be disbarred. We could always outsource the work to Indians.
Mark Taylor, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire
Lawyers joining the plumbing trade? I can see sharks in the lavatory bowl already...
Irene Bujman, East Kilbride, Scotland
Other people have overheads too, but they pay them out of their own pocket, not hold the public purse to ransom for additional 'overhead' money!
Graham Rounce, London, UK
If the pickings to be had by barristers is so great why are so many of them politicians?
Tim, Cranleigh, UK
Exactly Mike - prosecution and defence lawyers should get exactly the same - they must have the same support structure to pay for.
This really reinforces my view that defence lawyers are little better than many of those they defend.
Andrew , Cambridge,
We see legal aid for massive drug prosecutions or some yob footballer. Hold on, are these people penniless all of a sudden? If Legal Aid resources were husbanded more wisely, then this issue might be resolved.
Roger Thornhill, London, UK
Steven and Mike and clearly have not worked within the criminal justice system and have based their comments on prejudice. Barristers are simply asking for pay that reflects the responsibility attached to these cases. In comparison to other professionals criminal barristers are paid poorly.
Sarah, London,
If you were innocent and charged with an offence would you want to be represented by a barrister on £10 per hour?
James Hasslacher, London, United Kingdom
the work of a barrisster is enormous, it entails fact finding, alot of reading and sleepless nights but the reward is just peanuts. come on style up and dont be like us in the third world where no national legal aid scheme exists. lawyer's fees is hard earned. is that too much for you to understand?
alziik, kampala, uganda
Never met a poor barrister ! they need to come into the real world. pay them a weekly wage for a set amount of hours or let them go and compete for private work in the free market. let solicitors into crown court for minor trials on fixed payment.
Brian, london,
You have to be rich or very poor to use the law in England. Obviously the poor are doing well at £2bn in legal aid. No wonder the government is concerned. I support their attempts to get this monster bill under control at source.
Colinc, shrewsbury,
Barristers have massive overheads. They have to pay tax and NI (like everyone else) but are also self-employed. Their fees include the costs of all their support staff, office facilities and similar (so the hourly rate is really paying more than 1 person) and then their own equipment, books etc.
John Scott, London,
give them no work at all and then see how they go in the real world at 10 quid and hour. Why does the westminster system allow everyone to be accountable except for these unaccountable dinosaurs. Let them sink in their own arrogance.
steven, Sydney,
Without prejudice it appears these extroverts are holding the legal system to ransom, is that not a crime in itself?. Pay 'em the same rates as the prosecuting barrister(s) who seem content with their lot.
If the laws of the land were spoken in layman's terms would we need such pomp & circumstance?
Mike O Connor, Plymouth,
This barrister is not much in tune with the working world if he thinks all you need to be a plumber is a pair of pliers.
L.Homshaw, Durham, UK
One paragraph is not enough to point out the bias and factual errors in this article. (No I'm not a lawyer.) Criminal barristers are the bottom of the legal food chain. Most earn less than a plumber. Government cynically uses exaggerated figues to create hostility and reduce rates year on year.
richard, Horley, UK