Herbert Smith Freehills kicked off QASA judicial review after high costs proposal

  • Print
  • Comments (17)

Readers' comments (17)

  • Interesting point by 5.07pm on the 9th October. When the new Public Procurement Directive comes into force mid next year this kind of work will have to be tendered or risk falling foul of the Remedies Directive with potentially horrendous financial consequences for the letting public body.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Wow. What an incredible amount of money for. 2 days work. It could almost pay for a number of lawyers for a whole year or the annual salary of the Chief Executive of the Law Society ....

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • How are such huge costs justified? £400K+ for a two day hearing. Costs ultimately funded by practitioners practice fees. The same practitioners who have raised serious concerns re QASA and from which the claimants come from. Dinah Rose QC and Tom De Le Mere should be applauded by acting pro bono in accordance with the conventions and best traditions of the bar. Their selfless act should be adopted throughout

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • This is what MMQC had to say about LSB on 17.9.13 The LSB "is an expensive oversight regulator which consistently seeks to impose its own vision of how legal services should be delivered and expects the legal profession to pick up the bill." Exactly. Shame on them.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Historically the Bar Council and BSB have relied very heavily on pro bono assistance from barristers, often with little or no support from solicitors. The fact that the BSB can no longer do so bears testament to the way they have squandered the profession's goodwill. Many of those of us who have prosecuted disciplinary cases pro bono in the past pro bono will no longer act for them. Frankly the BSB is making an enemy of all whom they regulate - very foolish and short-sighted.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Oh my days. In 1998 an unspectacular but wholly competent senior criminal barrister could earn £150k (£75k take home). Cut, cut, cut , cut, cut and proposed cut (have I missed a cut?) he will earn £50,000 (take home £25k). Can anyone think of any profession - 5 years of training etc - where it is acceptable that you would earn one third of what you did circa 10 years ago?

    You spin me right round, baby, right round right round like a record...to all the political parties. Well, fuck you - house is on the market, kids are out their schools, no pension, chambers collapsing?, can not pay tax bill from earning 2 years ago, no child benefit and you know, justice? There is a certain love and sacrifice doing crime - You will never be rich - It's shocking that all those in power who benefitted from the law, who are in power now are such assholes given a sniff.

    I will strike, and so will every I know barrister but who really cares?

    Is there a civil or commercial barrister who gives a flying one?

    Rant over.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • In answer to Gerry Mohabir: Yes, there are plenty of barristers in commercial practice who care deeply about what is happening. While one public law / commercial barrister is named in the article as taking the LSB's pieces of silver (and apparently lots of them), there are at the same time two who are named as acting entirely pro bono for the Criminal Bar Association. Many commercial barristers have spent years fighting hard against the crazy regulatory structure foisted on us by New Labour (with the disgraceful acquiescence of some of our colleagues), and now we are doing everything we can think of to help resist the fees cuts being imposed on the criminal Bar now. What can we do now? A question for civil barristers on the Attorney General's Panel is whether we would be prepared to take industrial action or resign from the Panels, in solidarity with our colleagues practising criminal and family law. Ultimately it is massively in the interests of all barristers - including commercial practioners - that we form part of the same esteemed profession that defends individuals' rights and liberties in criminal courts up and down the land.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page | 20 per page

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (17)