Issue 248  25th June 2022

The criminal bar has voted to escalate action over the government’s refusal to meet their legal aid demands – with the first court ‘walkouts’ scheduled to begin next week. Since April, hundreds of barristers have adopted ‘no returns’ in response to the government’s refusal to uplift their fees by 25% as well as other changes. After being balloted on whether and how to escalate the action, the Criminal Bar Association announced this morning that the majority of members have voted for the highest form of escalation: court walkouts and refusing to accept new instructions as well as no returns...

The first walkout will begin next Monday. Participating barristers are encouraged to attend the Old Baily or Crown courts in Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Bristol and Cardiff from 10am to show their support. The ‘days of action’ will escalate each week, culminating in a five-day walkout on the week commencing 18 July. The action will then be suspended for a week before resuming on 1 August with a five-day walkout. Barristers will walk out every other week subject to a satisfactory response from the government...

The judiciary is not a party to the dispute between the Criminal Bar Association (the CBA) and the Government and will not enter into the substance of the dispute... Cases in which a communication is received from any member of the Bar that they will not be attending at court because of the CBA’s “days of action” should remain listed. This applies to forthcoming trials and hearings, and trials that are currently being heard... A failure to attend at court, having accepted instructions, may amount to professional misconduct. The CBA itself has indicated in its communications to its members, that once a barrister has accepted instructions, their personal professional duties and obligations “apply in the usual way”. All cases in which there is non-attendance should be referred to the Senior Presiding Judge’s Office to consider whether to involve the Bar Standards Board. The question whether a failure to attend amounts to professional misconduct, will then be a matter for any disciplinary process.

Dozens of silks have accused the lord chief justice of ‘intimidating’ lawyers with his warning over court walkouts. Hundreds of placard-bearing lawyers are expected to gather outside the Old Bailey and Crown courts in Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Bristol and Cardiff on Monday for the first of an escalating number of ‘days of action’ in response to the government’s controversial legal aid reform package. Solicitors have been encouraged to join them on the picket line.

Earlier this week the lord chief issued guidance to judges stating that all cases where there is non-attendance should be referred to the senior presiding judge’s office to consider whether to involve the Bar Standards Board. ‘The question whether a failure to attend amounts to professional misconduct will then be a matter for any disciplinary process,’ the lord chief said. However, dozens of silks said the lord chief’s guidance ‘is being read by many of us who prosecute and defend as an attempt to intimidate us’ in a letter to The Times today...

50 Criminal Silks have volunteered for the CBA panel to provide pro bono advice and support for criminal barristers at this unprecedented time. More are joining each day. Further to the intervention by the Lord Chief Justice, we understand that criminal juniors are understandably very concerned. We are writing to all of you to make clear that you are not alone. You have the complete support of the CBA and the signatories to this letter. If you are in any way worried about your position, whether you support the action or not, do not worry alone. Speak to senior colleagues, Silks in chambers, your Head of Chambers or contact the CBA and you will be referred to the CBA Silks panel. We will offer you individual advice and support. In the event of a referral to the BSB, and if regulatory action were to follow, you would be represented by a Silk without charge, whether you are covered by indemnity insurance or not. We are aware the CBA are also working with a team of specialist civil lawyers, to fight any referrals or disciplinary action, in the event any occur...

New recruits will enter the police service in one of three ways from April next year, following a change in Police Regulations by the government. The training is practical and new recruits will spend 75% of their time on the job. The updated courses cover traditional crime such as burglary, as well as how to: combat fraud and online crime, become better operational leaders, maintain their resilience and wellbeing. The updated training is already offered by 42 of the 43 police forces in England and Wales, but is being made mandatory from April next year...

The Director of Public Prosecutions, Max Hill QC, has today supported the review into legislation to ensure more money can be returned to victims of crime. Giving evidence at the House of Lords Fraud Act 2006 and Digital Fraud Select Committee earlier today, the Director highlighted the limitations of the current compensation legislation, and recommended the government consider court powers to reimburse victims with any additional funds that are recovered.

A Confiscation Order identifies the amount a criminal financially benefited from their crime and orders the defendant to repay this figure, or part of it if they do not have the means to pay the full amount. If they are not ordered to pay the full amount, current legislation gives the power to increase a Confiscation Order if a criminal is later found to have additional money or assets. However, there is no equivalent power to increase Compensation Orders, which give money back to victims. This means any additional funds recovered through an increased Confiscation Order cannot be used to further compensate those who have lost out financially to criminal activity...