*Please note this post is full of hyperbole which will know doubt get me in trouble much like it does for any prosecutor*
I have attempted in previous posts, to outline some serious threats to the criminal Bar (now spelt with a big B, because after all it is somewhat important). These mainly being solicitor advocates, the Legal Services Commission and the Lord Carter reforms. I don't think it will be necessary to repeat my ramblings on either three topics seeing that they raise the blood pressure of any actual or potential criminal barrister. What I am however trying to attempt is to conclude what my assessment is on the situation and my learned friends to see whether endeavouring to be a criminal barrister is worth the hassle nowadays.
The impending doom
There is likely to be at some point in the near future an implosion in the criminal bar. It raises questions whether us students should get our foot in the door before the system crumbles or should wait to rise out of the ashes. The Barrister v Solicitor line has been irrevocably blurred to the point that both sides are in a silent(or not so silent if we read The Times) war with each other. The system of interdependence has broken resulting in the current feud of the legal profession.
Barristers depend on solicitors for instructions. Solicitors however are now seeing that some of the work done by barristers isn't really that difficult and with the addition of the Legal Aid reforms firms feel it would be much preferable to keep costs in house and use solicitor advocates. This is obviously cost-efficient for the solicitor and also more efficient in the sense that you may have the same solicitor representing you in the police station and at the Crown Court. This will lead to a lack of work for barristers in the Crown Court.
Not quite so apocalyptic?
Is it likely that this will have a major effect on the criminal Bar, very junior and some less junior cases will go to solicitor advocates. What is however unlikely for the time being is solicitor advocates appearing in the High Courts, Court of Appeal or House of Lords. I believe that your standard solicitor advocate will be appearing at one or two Crown Courts that are local to their practice and perhaps a wider range of practice for more established solicitor advocates.
Now what does this mean for the Bar? The work is definitely going to change, having less trial work will ultimately lead to barristers being relied upon for their "specialisms" in chosen fields, most notably serious crime such as homicide and sexual offences, for the time being will be instructed to counsel and junior practitioners will appear with their more learned leaders. As solicitor advocates are not generally experienced enough, and would as I have heard prefer cases to go to barristers.
Specialism will therefore become more and more important for barristers at the criminal Bar. As noted above if there is less junior trial work they will have to pair up in order to survive, the very nature of criminal work may change as we know it.
A mutual agreement?
Unless there is a mutual agreement between solicitors and barristers about the criminal justice system and how it works it it very likely it will implode. Easy solutions could be made to reassure the next generation of young barristers that the criminal bar will not die and that it is a worthwhile pursuit. The recent bickering between both sides, barristers deeming solicitor advocates as inadequate and the majority of solicitors viewing barristers as pompous and in some cases "dreadful" shows that a coherent system needs to be put in place. There need to be clear roles for each party.
This obviously leads to problems of whether a solicitor should really be allowed to practice advocacy and whether direct access to a barrister should be allowed to give "advice". Both give rise to the fact that each party is trying to out do one another instead of working together.
If both are trying to perform each role then should this be continued or should it be resolved by confining them to their original roles? This legal evolution of adding on tidbits to one an other's profession is unlikely to go away. Nor do I suggest is the problem between the two professions.
What is key to perhaps understanding the view of solicitors is that they see barristers as pompous, overpaid and why should it be their "right" to be the next judiciary. They have a direct line to the Home Office, the Prime Minister and the Ministry of Justice. They have power to effect very influential people because ultimately they come from a similar background, Oxbridge educated etc. This lack of diversification in the Bar (though I profess it is becoming better) annoys solicitors. I was told recently by a solicitor advocate that the more the Bar pulls strings to only enrich their own profession solicitors will try and claw back what they can from there.
Essentially the idea here is that there is a lack of balance between what solicitors are paid and what barristers are paid. An average partner of a criminal practice makes about £40,000, that is the starting salary of many students a Magic Circle and Silver Circle firms. According to BarBoy (please inform me if I am wrong) a junior criminal barrister can easily make £40,000. Why is it that solicitors should be paid more than barristers? This problem needs addressing, barristers must show and prove why they deserve to be paid more, by proving their worth. The days of old are gone, which is why many barristers I believe are struggling to make ends meet.
The CPS
Much of the focus of this post has been on the discussion of the solicitor advocates affect on the criminal bar, this is only part of the larger dilemma of a bewilderingly crippled criminal justice system.
Whilst criminal barristers are losing more work due to solicitor advocates they are also having their work depleted by in the in house advocates of the CPS. Whether or not these advocates are deemed as "failures" is not to be discussed here they have a job to do and they are put under an increasing amount of pressure to do it.
The polarisation of the Bar may even have a bigger effect than solicitor advocates in total. Half of the work disappearing to the employed Bar must have a notable effect, but does it matter less because these advocates once belonged to the independent bar so are more trustworthy to conduct cases? I am unsure with my limited knowledge to make any such contention.
Nevertheless there appears to be a lot of work being swallowed up by otherwise than the independent bar.
Conclusion
The majority of the reasons why the criminal bar looks doomed, is because it simply isn't viewed as cost efficient. Solicitor advocates and the CPS have no real alternative otherwise than to instruct their own counsel if they want to get by. Will this mean a rise in miscarriages of justice or a deflated notion of justice for all if the independent criminal Bar cannot function as it once did? I again am unsure.
I am sure that it will never be the case that you can pay less and get more in the criminal justice system and it will lead to the brightest and best candidates looking elsewhere to finance lives of luxury that their other seemingly bright friends have chosen in general common law, company law, litigation etc. This is a serious problem that needs addressing.
Will there be enough work for me when I qualify? It is unsure, it all depends on what agreement the Bar and the Law Society can make with one another before the situation implodes and chaos runs amok. Hopefully they will. The current forecast is that there will be light spells and maybe storms, leading to very specialised work in the higher courts for the time being.
Is it worth it? Imagine yourself in 20 years time, and ask yourself if there was anything that you would regret not having done. If you think you would regret not being at the Criminal Bar despite all its difficulties then that is the area for you. If not then it is likely you could probably get away with something else. What is certain is that competition for the Criminal Bar is as tough as any other area. We all hear the phrase "if you are determined enough you will succeed" but how determined does one need to be, in able to try and predict the future of the profession you wish to enter hoping that it will be the right choice and also still alive and kick well enough that you will be able to make a decent living out of it?
I suppose there is always hope....
*note - I hope for a particular reader that this is a little bit more ambitious than my usual posts ;) *
“It must have consequences”
5 days ago
8 comments:
I did not know what a criminal junior could expect to earn, which is why I uploaded a post a few weeks ago. But the only time the figure of £40K was mentioned in the replies was in relation to the pupillage paid by a commercial set.
I am still none the wiser, although as I would rather stick needles in my eyes than practise at the CB, it is not important for me personally.
Whatever the figure, one has to be careful over whether it is gross or net. Aside from chamber's rent and other expenses payable by the practitioner, criminal fees are normally quoted inclusive of VAT because that is how the LSC calculate the fees paid for legal aid.
For any figure of gross earnings up to, say, around £100K, you can pretty much lop off one third to one half for expenses, in order to give you a figure which would be comparable to a pre-tax salary.
The curiosity to me, not mentioned in your post, is why the BSB insist on the syllabus for the BVC being so chock full of criminal law. I think others have said the BSB is not exactly up to speed on its own profession, and where it is going, but it would seemingly make sense to cut the compulsory crim law element of the course down to a minimum and give students the opportunity to do more crim law as elective subjects if that is the direction in which they want to go.
The BVC is packed full of criminal law due to the fact that appart from the select few who end up in the likes of Maitland or 4 Pump Court etc, the majority of Pupils end up in common law sets where there pupillage and early years are spent in the criminal sphere.
This is lessening now of course but until the BVC reforms (lets face it except for a couple of hundred people a year its a totally obsolete course - the providers, inns, and bar council all know this - yet rather than do the honest thing and stop the course until the bottle neck clears, general legal reforms take place or credit crunch is over these organisations still want their cash!!!) thats what it will be!
Re earnings. I have a firned who earned about 15k (gross before exp) their first year, 20 their second and is not sure yet that he is doing any better this year. I was taught by a tutor who was having to teach the BVC to make ends meet and a colluege of his was a taxi driver in the evening.
Beign a barrister is not away to earn big bucks these days, unless of course your at Maitland or 4 Pump Court, but the law schools, inns and bar council laugh all the way to the bank about the fact no one seems to belive this!!!
Barboy i couldnt hope to answer why the BVC is so full of criminal law if i am yet to embark on the BVC myself!
Yet I suppose its because it may be part of the "core" training much like you have the compulsory 7 undergrad topics you have to study to get a law degree?
Don't kno about your BVC provider, BarBoy, but our course appeared balanced on the Civil/Criminal front...
Anon, whilst agreeing with the sentiment of most of what you say, I don't think it is right to attribute blame to the Inns (at least not in that capacity). I have found mine, Inner, to be nothing short of superb in terms of events laid on for students and the efforts made generally towards the novices. Those members, who are newly called, say the same when it comes to the Inn's advocacy training etc., for the newly qualifieds.
Not wanting to spread my sycophancy too far, or too wide, in contrast, I would not give my course provider the steam of my piss on a cold day.
BPP still treating you like shit then BarBoy?
I think Inn's etc are cashing in on people's opportunism. You KNOW the risks of not getting a pupillage, but yet continue regardless!
Perservance is the key and what not..
£40,000 in first year? You'll be lucky to get that after 10 years call at the Criminal Bar. People are leaving in their droves because there is no work, and what little there is pays a pittance.
After all those years of graft, saving , voluntary work and studying fees it doesn't stack up. To the extent that most go beyond sacrifice to being purely unable to live on the money available.
The fees are only going to get squeezed even more after cuts.
When you view this in light of the masses of people completing BVC and trying to get a tiny fraction of pupillage places it makes no sense. Imagine if, like Doctors, our training was govt paid for, there would be immediate outcry.
I love it but really must be bordering on insanity to persist in attempting to gain pupillage.
Cobleys LLP Criminal Law Solicitors Liverpool are a professional legal firm are capable of undertaking difficult and complicated criminal cases.
Post a Comment