*/
Advocacy standards have slipped but independent barristers are better than solicitor advocates and in-house counsel, judges told legal regulators.
Published by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) and the Solicitors Regulation Authority, the Judicial Perceptions Report was produced by the Institute for Criminal Policy Research of Birkbeck, University of London and involved in-depth interviews with 50 High Court and Circuit judges.
Most thought advocacy was ‘generally competent’, but a large proportion felt standards were poorer than when they had practised.
Some said the quality differed depending on the seriousness of the case and advocate’s professional background, with solicitor-advocates and in-house barristers less well reviewed than independent barristers.
The most common concern was that advocates took on cases beyond their level of experience, particularly where solicitors’ firms, for financial reasons, kept cases in house rather than instruct appropriately experienced independent counsel.
More than half felt declining pay and associated low morale negatively affected quality, partly because some of the most able advocates left criminal practice for more lucrative civil work.
BSB Director General,Vanessa Davies accepted there was some ‘poor performance’, but highlighted the finding that financial pressures threaten quality. She said the BSB was determined to ensure standards of advocacy are maintained and improved.
Advocacy standards have slipped but independent barristers are better than solicitor advocates and in-house counsel, judges told legal regulators.
Published by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) and the Solicitors Regulation Authority, the Judicial Perceptions Report was produced by the Institute for Criminal Policy Research of Birkbeck, University of London and involved in-depth interviews with 50 High Court and Circuit judges.
Most thought advocacy was ‘generally competent’, but a large proportion felt standards were poorer than when they had practised.
Some said the quality differed depending on the seriousness of the case and advocate’s professional background, with solicitor-advocates and in-house barristers less well reviewed than independent barristers.
The most common concern was that advocates took on cases beyond their level of experience, particularly where solicitors’ firms, for financial reasons, kept cases in house rather than instruct appropriately experienced independent counsel.
More than half felt declining pay and associated low morale negatively affected quality, partly because some of the most able advocates left criminal practice for more lucrative civil work.
BSB Director General,Vanessa Davies accepted there was some ‘poor performance’, but highlighted the finding that financial pressures threaten quality. She said the BSB was determined to ensure standards of advocacy are maintained and improved.
The beginning of the legal year offers the opportunity for a renewed commitment to justice and the rule of law both at home and abroad
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management sets out the key steps to your dream property
A centre of excellence for youth justice, the Youth Justice Legal Centre provides specialist training, an advice line and a membership programme
By Kem Kemal of Henry Dannell
By Ashley Friday of AlphaBiolabs
Providing bespoke mortgage and protection solutions for barristers
Joanna Hardy-Susskind speaks to those walking away from the criminal Bar
From a traumatic formative education to exceptional criminal silk – Laurie-Anne Power KC talks about her path to the Bar, pursuit of equality and speaking out against discrimination (not just during Black History Month)
Yasmin Ilhan explains the Law Commission’s proposals for a quicker, easier and more effective contempt of court regime
Irresponsible use of AI can lead to serious and embarrassing consequences. Sam Thomas briefs barristers on the five key risks and how to avoid them
James Onalaja concludes his two-part opinion series
