Barristers predict a rise in public access work

19 Apr 2016News

Market liberalisation scheme is benefitting consumers, say regulators

Public access barristers are expecting the volume of work obtained directly from clients to increase over the next few years as consumers bypass solicitors.

New research, taken from a survey jointly commissioned report by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) and the Legal Services Board (LSB), found that just over half of registered public access barristers had undertaken up to five cases in the past year.

While a relatively small proportion of barristers' overall caseload, public access work has increased markedly over the past three years in the family, chancery, employment, commercial, and general common law practice areas.

The barristers surveyed considered that the scheme had brought relatively modest benefits for consumers thus far, with respect to widening choice, improving timeliness of access to services, and reducing costs.

However, barriers for consumers were found to include a lack of awareness of the scheme and the services that counsel are able to provide.

The regulatory framework was found to be largely effective in protecting public access clients, although some barristers suggested that further clarity was required within the public access guidance and the associated training requirements.

Ewen MacLeod, the BSB's director of regulatory policy, said: 'We are pleased with the insight the findings give us into the operation of the public access scheme for barristers.

'We will take them into account when deciding what, if any refinements should be made to the regulatory arrangements governing the scheme.'

Also commenting on the findings, the LSB's head of research and development, Steve Brooker, said: 'This joint research is an important stock take of where the public access scheme currently stands. While representing a relatively small proportion of a barristers' caseload it is, nonetheless, growing.

'Benefits for consumers that are starting to emerge from this key market liberalisation measure - wider choice, improved timeliness of access to services and lower costs - are important and can be expected to grow as public access work grows.'

Legal News desk contact: editorial@solicitorsjournal.com|

Public access barristers are expecting the volume of work obtained directly from clients to increase over the next few years as consumers bypass solicitors.

However, barriers for consumers were found to include a lack of awareness of the scheme and the services that counsel are able to provide.

Ewen MacLeod, the BSB's director of regulatory policy, said: 'We are pleased with the insight the findings give us into the operation of the public access scheme for barristers.

'We will take them into account when deciding what, if any refinements should be made to the regulatory arrangements governing the scheme.'

Employment tribunal cases rising sharply

Recent Ministry of Justice figures reveal a significant increase in open Employment Tribunal cases and challenges faced by employers

SRA updates guidance for litigation supervision

The Solicitors Regulation Authority has enhanced its supervision guidelines to clarify litigation conduct after recent court rulings

Millions of fathers lack parental responsibility

Many fathers may be surprised to learn about their parental responsibility rights and how to secure them

Re Poundstretcher: cross-class cramdown survives even when six landlord classes say no

The Chancery Division sanctions Poundstretcher's restructuring plan despite six dissenting landlord classes, applying the Adler and Petrofac framework.

Ponsford v Sali: a property partnership's messy divorce shows why documentation wins partnership disputes

The Chancery Division takes a pragmatic, evidence based approach to untangling a property partnership built on undocumented cash dealings.

North Somerset District Council v Secretary of State: failing the flood sequential test is not the end of the story

The Planning Court confirms that a failed flood risk sequential test still gets weighed in the planning balance, not treated as an automatic refusal.

Thomas Armstrong (Aggregates) v Housing Secretary: when landfill buries a quarry's right to be reviewed

The Planning Court applies Pilkington and Hillside to find a 1954 quarry permission can no longer be revived under the ROMP regime.

Clerkenwell Lifestyle v HG Construction: be careful what you call "agreed" in extension of time correspondence

The TCC enforces a £955,943 adjudication award after rejecting a contractor's late attempt to recast email exchanges as a binding settlement.

Ward v Donnellan: when both sides lie, "no order for costs" is not a free pass

The Court of Appeal overturns a no order for costs ruling, finding a judge let a dishonest claimant off too lightly.

London Borough of Camden v BW: when a single missing fact can decide a capacity case

The Court of Protection finds an expert's failure to explore one consequence, losing a placement, was enough to undermine his capacity assessment.

Griffiths v Essex County Council: EAT clarifies causation in discrimination remedy awards and sends pension loss back for recalculation

A single act of indirect disability discrimination can ground a full loss of earnings award, even where a later constructive dismissal claim was framed only...