Solicitor-advocates hit with £8,000 bill for QC label

Fee levels are discouraging solicitor-advocates from applying for QC status, the Solicitors' Association of Higher Courts Advocates (SAHCA) has claimed.

Figures have shown there remains a distinct dearth of applications from solicitor-advocates looking to take silk compared to members of the independent Bar, at a ratio of 1:14.

While solicitor-advocates may be in independent practice, the majority remain employed, and the choice to making an application will often be self-funded, without the support of their employer.

Responding to a QC Appointments Panel (QCAP) consultation on fees incurred by QC hopefuls, SAHCA observed that for a firm to pay £1,800 plus VAT on an application fee represented a considerable outlay on an employee, and one which might not lead to a return on that investment.

By comparison there are obvious benefits in chambers supporting a barrister for silk as the rank is used as a sign of strength of the set.

Self-funding an application is considered financially detrimental to a solicitor-advocate when income tax and VAT are added to the overall costs. Together these increase the real terms cost to £3,024, including VAT and 40 per cent income tax, compared to those in independent practice, SAHCA observed.

In addition, the subsequent appointment fee of £3,000 plus VAT would actually cost self-funded advocates £5,040, giving a total actual cost of £8,064.

By contrast, the fees are tax deductible expenses to members of the Bar, who can also claim back the VAT paid.

The difference in cost between a self-funding solicitor advocate and a self-funding member of the Bar totals £3,264, according to SAHCA.

Leslie Cuthbert, the organisation's chair, said: 'SAHCA has been working for some time to make the QC Appointments Panel aware of some of the specific barriers that stand in the way of solicitor-advocates wishing to be appointed as QCs.

'While the level of fees is only one part of the problem, it is a significant one for the reasons that our response identifies.'

Other factors in need of addressing include the lack of solicitors as higher court judges.

'Judges of the High Court's still remain the preserve of the Bar with very few solicitor advocates or solicitors appointed,' stated SAHCA in its consultation response.

'Additionally in civil cases especially, the attorney general panel of counsel has still to admit a [solicitor-advocate] at any level to the London panel. As such, there is a very significant disadvantage to [solicitor-advocates] in obtaining work in the Higher Courts and secondly have the same number of interactions with judges to obtain the references needed, to establish the high level of work.

'This, in turn, means that the QCA are receiving less applications from the diverse and inclusive [solicitor advocates] compared to the Bar.'