Big cut in legal aid work for QCs

Criminal defence QCs face a substantial drop in their workload under new rules which could oblige them to do some work at half their usual rates or go idle.

The lord chancellor is pressing ahead with controversial plans to cut overmanning in criminal cases by limiting the number of cases in which legal aid will pay for two defence barristers or for a QC.

Under the regulations, which will be laid before parliament soon and come into force in September, "junior" barristers - those who have not attained QC rank, regardless of age - will be expected to do much of the defence work handled by QCs. And in many cases where QCs are allowed, they will have to work alone, without a supporting junior.

Judges will decide what level of counsel the case warrants, under guidelines designed to ensure that legal aid pays for a silk only in the most difficult and complex cases. Rape defendants, for example, are less likely to qualify for a QC.

The Bar Council and senior judges have wrung a number of concessions from Lord Irvine designed to give judges more discretion, but they will still be kept to strict guidelines. Yesterday the lord chief justice, Lord Bingham, would only say: "The senior judiciary were very grateful that the lord chancellor felt able to make some concessions."

The bar's chairman, Jonathan Hirst QC, said that the changes had made "an enormous improvement" but there were "areas which we still think are too tight".

A senior QC who did not want to be named said: "It's the triumph of Treasury cost-cutting over the merits of arguments in favour of members of the public having the best possible representation in serious cases."

David Lock, minister in the lord chancellor's department, said: "It will be for the judges to apply the guidelines strictly. But we expect a very substantial change to the number of cases where two counsel are used and a substantial change to the number of cases where a QC is used. It will stop any routine overmanning."

Lord Irvine has told the Bar that if the move leaves QCs short of work there will be nothing to stop them taking cases for juniors' rates of pay. These tend to work out at around half the rates for QCs.

In a letter to Mr Hirst, Lord Irvine said: "A number of individuals have expressed concern about the consequential reduction in work available to QCs when my proposals are introduced.

"Whilst I do not accept that I have any duty to maintain a particular level of income for any group of practitioners or any duty to maintain a particular level of work, I do accept that QCs should not be prevented from undertaking work they are otherwise qualified to do."

He proposed to change the rules to make it clear that QCs may accept cases certified by the court as suitable for a junior "providing payment is on a junior basis and the QC does not look to the client to top up the payment". The move is expected to save millions of pounds, and is one prong of the lord chancellor's assault on the £300m legal aid bill for crown court cases.

Barristers, and particularly QCs, the most successful of whom can earn £300,000 to £400,000 a year from criminal legal aid, also face curbs on their pay rates. Lord Irvine proposes to bring prosecution and defence barristers' rates into line by cutting defence fees while prosecutors, traditionally paid less, have their rates increased.

Very high cost cases, mainly fraud, will be covered by contracts at specified hourly rates.