All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

A consultation into the Advocates’ Graduated Fee Scheme – AGFS – began on 5 January 2017 that runs until 2 March 2017. The intention is that Crown Court advocates’ fees be restructured to ‘ensure fair payment for work done’ and ‘more certainty for all advocates, in particular junior advocates’.

While there might be other arguments to be had about which kind of advocate should receive the larger fees, or whether the fees should be directed towards a certain kind of case, perhaps the immediate concern for all who earn the fees will be whether, across a range of offence that any given advocate can expect to do, the new fees represent a fee cut.

Increased Sustainability?

This will allow discussion as to whether the proposed fees improve (or not) the financial viability of criminal legal aid work and therefore the sustainability of the profession, whether as a barrister at the independent bar or an employed solicitor advocate.

The work that we did was on advocacy fees billed in January 2017 from our Nottingham office, and included calculations for cases dealt with both in-house and by external counsel.

The figures produced were hardly surprising. In cases that we dealt with in-house the comparison showed that there would be a fee reduction of 16% across the sample of cases. In relation to those cases briefed to external counsel, although the overall gain was 21%, this was almost entirely accounted for by a single trial for a terrorism offence where the percentage uplift was an incredible 297%. Without that case, there would have been a modest fee increase of 2%.

Reduction in AGFS  fees across the board

Across the entire month of January, removing the terrorism case, if the proposals are brought in unchanged then we can expect them to be reflected in a reduction in fees of 7%. Assuming that the work we undertake is a broad range of case types and comparable to other firms or advocates, it seems likely that an overwhelming number of those undertaking this type of work will receive a similar fee cut.

The AGFS consultation paper requests an answer to twenty-five questions. Only one of them asks ‘Do you agree with the individual fees proposed?’ If the work that we have done is representative then none of the modelling put forward in the consultation document would seem correct.

Incorrect MoJ Analysis?

For example, an analysis of sexual offence cases billed in January shows a much more modest increase of 4% rather than the 32% predicted in this table. Further, half of our calculations for sex cases resulted in a fee reduction rather than even a modest increase.

Our work over a single month has demonstrated that the effect on employed junior advocates alone is not cost neutral, and it appears hard to see how the modelling could have reached that conclusion.

Our analysis of burglary/robbery bills suggest that they remain cost neutral rather than result in a 4% fee uplift. An admittedly small sample of drugs offences resulted in a 33% reduction in fees that will be able to be claimed.

Need for an Increase not a Re-shuffle

To return to the aims of the reform, it seems that the only certainty for the junior bar with a caseload comparable to the workload the we undertake is that they will be paid less across the piece. As a result, it appears difficult to see how this can result in ‘fair payment for work done’.

Hopefully others will be reflecting upon similar figures under the new AGFS, and arguing that the only answer to sustainable provision of legally aided representation before the Crown Court is an increase in fees across the board, rather than a restructuring that amounts to the cliched rearranging of deckchairs on the Titanic.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

We hold criminal legal aid contracts that allow us to continue representing our existing and new clients under the legal aid scheme from our offices in Nottingham, Derby, Chesterfield, Mansfield and Newark.

Our Newark Office

Our office in Newark demonstrates our commitment to providing advice and representation to local communities who in other ways have been let down by the justice system.

Newark no longer has a police station where suspects can be interviewed and the Magistrates’ Court closed several years ago.  Those appearing in court now have to travel over 20 miles to Nottingham Magistrates’ Court, while those arrested are taken to Mansfield police station, a similar distance.

Local Offices Serving Local Communities

VHS Fletchers has made the decision that we will be able to provide criminal advice and representation in the police station, Magistrates’ and Crown Courts while being based in the heart of the communities that we serve.

We will hopefully contribute to reducing the stress and anxiety that investigations and proceedings can bring by making it easy and affordable for our clients to visit their legal representatives in a local office.

This approach should also allow for our clients to receive continuity in terms of the advisers and solicitors they meet, which we know clients value.

Details of the lawyers that you will meet at each office can be found here.

Contact Us to Discuss Criminal Legal Aid

If you face police investigation then advice and assistance at the police station will always be free under criminal legal aid.  Magistrates’ criminal legal aid is both means and merits tested, and means tested for the Crown Court.

You can read more about the different legal aid schemes here.

We can give you further advice at your local office.

Details of our offices can be found here.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

Senior Crown Court litigator Laura Clarson was responsible for the preparation of a case before Wolverhampton Crown Court recently.  She assembled an expert firearms team of barrister and witness. Her client was acquitted by a unanimous jury verdict following a trial lasting eight days.

Expert Firearms Team

Counsel Nick Doherty from Brudenell Chambers instructed to represent our client. He has a particular specialism in firearms law so was a perfect choice.  Laura also instructed firearms expert David Dyson to comment on the evidence as to whether live or blank ammunition was used.

Laura’s client had a licence to hold firearms.  He was charged with possession of a firearm with intent to cause fear of unlawful violence.  It was said that he fired live rounds of ammunition in the middle of the street in which he lived.

Bullet casings recovered from the scene together with evidence of an independent witness which supported this. Laura’s client maintained that no live rounds were discharged from the rifle and that he fired a single blank round in order to scare away two males. They were armed with a machete and a samurai sword.  They were threatening him and his sons with those weapons.

As a result, our client claimed that no unlawful violence was threatened.  He was acting in defence of himself and his family.

Mr Dyson, as a leading expert witness in the field of firearms, was called to give evidence as to the type of ammunition recovered. and was able to give independent opinion supportive of our client’s case.

Undisclosed Evidence

Laura had to actively pursue the prosecution for undisclosed evidence.  A witness had given information to the police that was helpful to her client.  This information had not been disclosed by the police because she wanted to remain anonymous.

Counsel was successful in arguing that her statement should be read to the jury in support of our client’s case.

Judge Dismissive of Defence

Despite direction from the judge that was very dismissive of our client’s case, the jury found him not guilty, presumably on the basis that his actions may have been reasonable in all of the circumstances of the case.

After trial, counsel commented that Laura was ‘a credit to the firm really fights for her clients’.

Contact Us

This case came to us through our consultant solicitor Andrew Broome who has a specialist knowledge of firearms law.  If you are charged with a firearms offence then you will need an expert firearms team to give you advice and representation then we will be able to help.

Please contact Laura on 0115 9599550 or Andrew on 0115 9441233.  Alternatively, they can be emailed here.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

We have been fortunate enough to be able to recruit Clare Roberts, education law specialist and criminal duty solicitor to join us in the Spring.

She will be in post in time to provide advice to those parents who will have been disappointed by decisions made for primary school admissions.  These will be announced in April.

A Complex Area of Law

Clare recognises that issues surrounding education will be very important to those affected.  She will be able to provide our clients with expert legal advice upon the complex rules, regulations and laws that relate to these matters.

Help will be available in the following areas:

• Special educational needs (SEN)
• admission appeals
• exclusion appeals
• discrimination claims
• problems arising at university such as plagiarism or misconduct
• judicial review

Although the intention is that she will provide advice and representation for clients served by our six offices across the East Midlands, she has travelled further afield in the past to provide specialist advice that can be hard to find.

Fixed Fees will be Published

Over the coming weeks we will be devising and publishing fixed fees for certain types of work that will allow our clients to decide upon the level of service and assistance that they would wish and budget accordingly.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

Nottingham solicitor advocate Phil Plant recently dealt with a serious case involving sexual activity with a child that required a sensitive presentation of mitigation to secure a just sentence for his client.  The preparation undertaken by senior crown court litigator Sarah Lees-Collier, including the request for a psychologist report, assisted greatly.

Sexual Activity with a Child

Phil’s female client had pleaded guilty to four offences of sexual activity with a child.  She had had a relationship with a teenage boy involving sexual contact.

The relationship had come to the attention of the boy’s mother.  She had contacted Phil’s client and told her of her son’s age.  She was instructed to end the relationship.  This advice was ignored and the relationship continued and moved to a sexual phase.

The boy had provided the police with a detailed victim impact statement describing how he felt that he had been made to grow up too fast.

Our Client was Vulnerable

In turn, Phil’s client presented as very vulnerable.  She suffered from learning impairment and a lack of social awareness.  She had suffered bullying at school and that had led to difficulties for her in forming peer to peer relationships.

In the view of her parents, and confirmed by a psychologist, she was less emotionally mature than her 15 year old sister.  In addition she had been diagnosed with epilepsy that on occasions left her with slurred speech.

Suspended Sentence Imposed

Phil had to approach the case with sensitivity.  The judge accepted that the offending fell within a sentencing bracket that had a starting point of 12 months for at least two of the offences.  The judge as persuaded, however, that taking into account all the personal mitigation a 16 month prison sentence could properly be suspended for 24 months.

Contact Us

If you face a serious case such as sexual activity with a child then you will need your case preparing and presenting by experienced lawyers with a view to securing the best outcome for you.  If you wish to contact Phil or Sarah then please telephone them on 0115 9599550 or email them here.