Eleanor Mawrey
9 Gough Square
Year of call: 2001
Area of work: general crime
Young Bar Conference committee member
Barristers thrive on challenges, no more so than in their first few years of
practice; the challenge of a new case, of a new area of law, the challenge
of being successful. Over the past few years, however, those challenges have
also come from the changes made to our profession particularly in the form
of the Carter Report and the Legal Services Bill. Furthermore, in the area
of crime, which has been the most affected by these changes, it is now
harder for the young barrister to gain courtroom experience because of the
increased use of in-house advocates, both in the magistrates' court and
Crown Court. The financial implication of this alone is substantial,
particularly on the young Bar where its impact has been most heavily felt.
However, as the recent Young Bar Conference demonstrated, the enthusiasm to
meet those challenges is undiminished.
There are undoubtedly further changes on the horizon. The Legal Services Bill
with its introduction of alternative business structures will alter the very
framework in which legal services can be provided. The impact this will have
on the self-employed Bar in particular remains to be seen. What the
workplace of a barrister will look like in a decade is hard to tell. But we
can be certain that the barrister will still be providing the high standards
determinative of their profession. It is by maintaining a commitment to
excellence, particularly in the field of advocacy, that the Bar can remain
confident of its survival. By ensuring those qualities we will be set apart
from our competitors and demonstrate that we provide an unparalleled
service.
Lucy Garrett
Keating Chambers
Year of call: 2001
Area of work: Construction (commercial)
The main challenge facing the Bar is the necessity to adapt to the increased
competition from solicitors and, once the Legal Services Bill becomes law,
any other body offering legal services.
In my field of work, the particular challenge is retaining drafting and
advisory work, more and more of which is nowadays done by solicitors. The
Bar has to persuade its lay clients that barristers are a good value as well
as a high-quality resource. However, I think that the roles of solicitor and
barrister are very different and that both sets of skills are required for
an effective legal team, particularly on high value and complex cases
(frequent in construction). Barristers have the time and the inclination
(because of a more limited number of cases) to go through a claim with a
fine toothcomb and carry out a detailed analysis of the issues. There will
always be a market for the truly anal barrister!
The Legal Services Bill will potentially have a dramatic effect on the Bar
since it will enable much more flexible and wideranging services to be
provided. This is generally a good thing for consumers since it increases
competition. The Bill also covers regulation of the Bar. At present the
proposal is that the (independent) Bar Standards Board will continue to
regulate; this is also positive since the board has significant experience
and carries out its function at no cost to the public. At one time the Bill
proposed that complainants should bear all the costs of a complaint whether
or not it was upheld which was plainly very unfair; but this was changed in
the House of Lords and it is to be hoped that the Government will retain
this amendment.
Life at the Bar is as exciting, as hard work, as intellectually demanding and
as much fun as I thought it would be. It’s the best job in the world.
Belle Turner
4 Paper Buildings
Year of call: 2003
Area of work: Family law, in particular in cases involving the abuse and/or
neglect of children
Elected member of the Bar Council and the Family Law Bar Association
The biggest challenge facing the Bar is the imminent decimation of publicly
funded (legal aid) work. If those changes happen (and there are some
positive signs that they may not) then the Bar will shrink considerably and
the Government will have something very close to the “one-lawyer” system
that it seems to want in criminal and family work. Other areas of the Bar
will then have to fight to remain.
The problem with the question of whether legal aid work will survive is that
the Legal Services Commission’s position on the subject is impossibly
unclear. Family law was to have been the trial arena for the one-case
one-fee changes at the Bar and these were to have started this month but the
deadlines for the changes have constantly changed – to now, perhaps, October
next year. This makes it very difficult for the profession to respond properly
to the changes or prepare itself for the future.
One-case, one-fee would be disastrous for the family law Bar. You cannot put
family cases into boxes. No two are ever the same. Each requires a different
amount of work, time spent at court and additional support for lay clients
and solicitors outside court. It is right that that work should be
remunerated for. I cannot tell you the number of nights I spend working for
most of the night putting in the extra that can really make a difference in
representing parties in family cases. I do that because I care about the
people I represent, and much of that work goes unpaid even under the present
system. One-case one-fee would make it impossible for young barristers,
however committed, to take that approach to their practices.
The Legal Services Bill should result in the public being reassured that the
Bar provides well-regulated and competitive services. It is important that
our regulation is transparent and that the work we do can be better
understood. However, it is difficult to respond positively to the prospect
of increased regulation when there is so little clarity in relation to
whether publicly funded family work will even continue.
Faisal Osman
Furnival Chambers
Year of call: 2002
Area of work: serious crime, criminal/civil fraud, anti-terrorism,
regulatory
Legal aid is a criminal barrister’s greatest concern. Cuts in legal aid go
beyond setting the level of our fees. I'm more concerned about the effect
that the new provisions will have on solicitors. The changes are aimed at
cutting the number of firms so that legal services are provided in bulk. To
survive, firms will have give priority to throughput. More serious and
complex cases, by their nature, require more time and consideration. They
will inevitably involve issues not always apparent from the face of the
papers Those issues may not be pursued with enough rigour, time or detail,
simply because a firm cannot afford to do so.
That undermines our efforts to defend our clients to the best of our ability.
We will lack the tools and information needed to mount the best and
strongest defences possible. We would, simply, be failing in our collective
duty as defence lawyers. The Bar is concerned that solicitors will be forced
to simply complete a minimum checklist of what needs to be done when
preparing a case and nothing more. That is even more worrying when it comes
to defending vulnerable clients such as those with mental health problems
and the young. They may only be able to express the fact that they are "not
guilty" but at the same time fail to recognise or tell us about
critical factors in support of their defence.
Small firms will close. There is no doubt that the Bar will suffer. Many
barristers have spent years developing professional relationships with
solicitors. Those solicitors may decide to abandon criminal work completely.
They may be forced to join large firms who have cost-driven decisions to use
one or two sets only. If choice is taken away from solicitors, clients are
unable receive the best barristers for their position and that completely
undermines the nature of us as a referral profession. It is a slow creep
towards barristers becoming the in-house advocate section of large service
providers.
Actually, Mr Osman has touched on the effects this will have on clients and the ability of Barristers and Solicitors alike to provide clients with the best service. The profession as a whole is/will be undermined.
Elaine, London, UK
Well Howard, you try studying solidly for 5 years to get a well thought of job and then see what figures high on your personal agenda.
Lawyers are business people just the same as anyone else. The fact that they might sometimes get the chance to help someone or do some justice or have some fun is just gravy. And remember, for every heroic lawyer fighting a case to a successful conclusion, there is, by definition, another who loses...that does not make the former or latter a bad person. He or she is just doing a job.
Steven, Southwick, West Sussex
Interestingly the interests of the clients do not appear to be especially important to these "young lawyers". The implications for the profession itself, ie, profit, are all that matters. So nothing is likely to change.
Howard, Milton Keynes, UK