PLANS by the Lord Chancellor and judges to slash the length and cost of criminal trials have run into the ground over a claim by barristers for £40 million of extra fees.

Pilot schemes due to start today in crown courts in Preston and Nottingham have been cancelled after barristers refused to operate the measures without an increase in fees. At Preston, trials have been temporarily halted, as defendants would have been unrepresented. A previous pilot due for the Old Bailey also failed to go ahead.

An unpublished Bar survey indicates that a majority of barristers are prepared to refuse legal aid work under the system. Last week the Lord Chancellor outlined proposals to shift a huge chunk of work to an early stage of proceedings, so that the trial itself could be cut in length, saving millions of pounds. The idea is that most of the work is done before the hearing, with the trial focusing only on issues in dispute.

The reforms have the backing of the Lord Chief Justice and judiciary who have drawn up new rules for the way in which cases will be prepared, with the courts moving over to the kind of case-management system brought into civil trials. Judges are expected to become “trial managers”, dictating the pace of proceedings and fixing tight timetables.

The Bar argues that the shift in work to pre-trial means extra work that must be paid for, particularly if trials end up not going ahead because defendants plead guilty. It says that criminal fees are extremely low and that forcing barristers to take on extra work for no pay will lead to large numbers giving up criminal legal aid work.

Officials at the Department for Constitutional Affairs insist that there is no extra work involved and also that there is no more money to be found in the £2 billion legal aid budget. An official said: “Barristers want an extra £100 per case, which if rolled out nationally would cost £40 million for doing work that we think they are already supposed to be doing.”

Guy Mansfield, QC, chairman of the Bar, said that the pilots would not now take place until October. “This is a pity because the majority of the Bar wants to work with the courts to improve case management,” he said. However, the new scheme was supposed to be implemented in line with a revised remuneration package, he said. That had not happened.

There was also concern, he said, that the DCA was failing to make its case with the Treasury for more funding for the justice system. “At present, barristers are paid £100 for a hearing on plea and directions, which is fairly straightforward.

“But what is being proposed now is that they have to do much more detailed work on the case, and possibly not even do the trial at the end of it, and still just be paid £100.”

• Controversial plans to make solicitors enter price-bidding wars to obtain criminal legal aid contracts are condemned today by the Young Barristers’ Committee of the Bar Council.

  In a report, it says that plans for competitive tendering for criminal defence work in police stations and magistrates’ courts in London “will harm justice, restrict access to high-quality representation . . . and reduce the calibre of advocacy”.

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• BGC 'set aside £40m to lure Tullett brokers'
• Legal aid review to ensure value
• Fears as 21 magistrates' courts face closure