The London Criminal Courts Solicitors' Association's Library
We intend to make available to our visitors documents and reference material that may be useful to our members, as well as the criminal justice system. Access to some of thse may be restricted, but the vast majority of material in our library will be made available to all.
| Category | Document Name | Description | Link |
|
The Advocate |
Advocate - Issue 57 |
There are good losers and bad losers: which category does the Ministry of Justice fall into? It does not seem so long ago that I was writing in this column about the magnificent and successful work done by the association and other organisations in opposition to the introduction of a best value tendering (BVT) scheme. With the congratulations still ringing in practitioners’ ears, the MoJ comes up with another proposal for BVT, which, if put into effect, will mean catastrophe for the vast majority of our members. In my last editorial, I mentioned how this government moves the goal posts. This proposal is a classic case: the ink could not have even have been put in the printer on the new criminal contracts when, boy, did these goal posts move. You can rest assured that the association will once again be working with the other representative organisations to try and look after our members’ best interests. Indeed, with committee member, Anil Rajani, I shall represent the LCCSA at a working group of practitioners organised by the Law Society. The group will aim to identify areas where unnecessary bureaucracy can be minimised or removed. Please feel free to forward any suggestions you may have to either Anil or me. We work in very difficult times but, every so often, something does cause some amusement. I was at a Crown Court recently when it was discovered that the CPS had not served 4,000 pages of paginated documents in time. “Why?” asked the judge. The reason: they had run out of paper! I suppose it may not be long before we shall have to provide our own paper if we wish to be served material by the prosecution. At the end of Strictly Come Dancing, they say, “Keep dancing!” All I can say is, “Keep battling!” |
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 56 |
This issue includes an interview with the director of Justice, an article on vulnerable defendants, a number of book reviews and an obituary of Graham Parkinson, former chief magistrate. The editorial makes a plea to any new government which may follow the General Election and the LCCSA president argues against the virtual court system. On the back page, Bruce Reid describes how a couple of DJs may be chatting on facebook. |
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 55 |
As we approach the New Year, our thoughts must
turn – with some trepidation – to what might happen and how we can play our part in the process. The Advocate's editor recently attended a meeting of the London Criminal Justice Board and raised a number of concerns on behalf of defence practitioners. For instance, he mentioned that we are not consulted – as other agencies are – about summary trial movements to other courts. I indicated that I had understood we were equal partners. The reaction was – and this is a fair point – that it is very difficult to consult defence practitioners for various reasons, one of which appears to be non-attendance at the relevant meetings. I appreciate that, at these meetings, we are likely to be the only people around the table who are not being paid for their time; but it is very important that defence practitioners get involved with court user groups – both at the Crown Court and at the magistrates’ court – so that our views can be heard. Even if they fall on deaf ears, our views and ideas can be minuted and we should, at least, provide a presence. So, please, at these very difficult times, give some thought to joining your local court user group to
assist, not only yourself, but also your fellow defence practitioners – and the association. Even if the forthcoming election brings a change of government, things may not not improve immediately – if at all – and our voice will become even more important. The association and its committee continues to work for all members and, if you do have views, please let any committee member know. If you don’t, we cannot try to help. We know that, given the news announced on page 3, my wishes may have a somewhat hollow ring but, "Happy New Year!” |
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 54 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 53 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 52 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 51 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 50 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 48 |
The Advocate - Issue 48 |
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 46 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 45 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 44 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 43 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 42 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Asset Recovery Action Plan - this consultation seeks views on the Asset Recovery Action Plan. |
Asset Recovery Action Plan
This consultation seeks views on the Asset Recovery Action Plan.
The proposals outlined in the Plan include new powers to build on our efforts in the recovery of criminal assets.
The consultation is aimed at those with an interest in the recovery of criminal assets as well as Criminal Justice, and feedback is also welcomed from other Government Departments, interested organisations and members of the public.
The closing date for comments is 23 November 2007.
Responses to the consultation should be emailed to: AR.consultation@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
Or you can write to us at:
AR Consultation
Organised and Financial Crime Unit
Home Office
5th Floor Fry Building
2 Marsham Street
London SW1P 4DP
Date: Thu May 24 09:38:22 BST 2007
Asset Recovery Action Plan Consultation (310 K )
Adobe provide a free online tool which converts PDF files to text. To use this service visit http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/access_onlinetools.html |
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 41 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 40 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 39 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 38 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LSC Consultation Paper: 'Legal Aid: a sustainable future' - 13 July 2006 |
Lord Carter has published his independent review into legal aid procurement, which the Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) commissioned in July 2005 as part of A Fairer Deal for Legal Aid.
The Review sets out a programme of reforms to achieve a market based system which will change the way the Government buys legal advice on behalf of the public.
Lord Falconer, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and the Legal Services Commission (LSC) have responded to the Carter Report with a formal joint consultation paper, Legal Aid: a sustainable future, which reflects Lord Carter's recommendations.
The LSC and the DCA are seeking views from all stakeholders between now and Thursday 12 October 2006, when the consultation closes.
Please send responses by email, post or fax at the earliest opportunity to:
|
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Lord Carter's Independent Review of Legal Aid Procurement - 13 July 2006 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LCCSA response to HAC inquiry into young black people in the criminal justice system - July 2006 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LCCSA's response to the LSC's Preferred Supplier Consultation Paper - June 2006 |
|
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Otturburn Legal consultancy's summary of Lord Carter's 2005 and 2006 Surveys of Criminal firms - June 2006 |
The purpose of this report is to summarise the work the consultancy have undertaken to obtain a better understanding of the cost base and revenues of publicly funded firms of solicitors. The objective of this work had been to establish whether a low cost, sustainable, model currently exists that might form the basis for a new system of publicly funded criminal work.
The report is based on two pieces of research. The first, undertaken by FreshMinds, was a large-scale telephone survey of firms. Difficulties however were encountered in finding firms willing to take part in this research, which, together with the length of the questionnaire, and the fact that the interview was conducted by telephone, means that the financial data from that survey has to be treated with care. The responses to this initial survey were predominantly from smaller firms. The second piece of research, conducted by ourselves, concentrated on larger crime firms and was undertaken to investigate the cost base of these firms in more detail. This second research resulted in a relatively small sample of firms, but represented a good cross-section of larger crime firms. |
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Review of the legal professions delivery of legal aid services for the Carter Review Part 2: Solicitors - April 2006 |
|
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Review of the legal professions delivery of legal aid services for the Carter Review Part 1: Solicitors - April 2006 |
|
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Freshminds Solicitors' Survey - June 2006 |
This survey of solicitors’ firms was carried out by telephone over a 4-week period from mid-November to mid-December 2005. The questionnaire was designed by FreshMinds in consultation with PKF and the Carter Review team and signed off by both parties. |
|
|
Miscellaneous |
The Legal Aid Market for Solicitors: Summary of new and published research - 15/06/2006 |
This paper provides a brief summary of key findings from new and published research in relation to the current legal aid market for solicitors’ services. It highlights features of the analysis that have either helped inform Lord Carter's proposals for market based reform, or are pertinent to those proposals. |
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LCCSA's response to Lord Carter's Interim Report - May 2006 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LCCSA's response to the Law Commission's consultation document: 'A New Homicide Act for England and Wales?' |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LCCSA reponse to Sentencing Advisory Panel Consultation Paper on Bail Act Offences |
|
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Forensic Science on Trial: Government Response to the Committee's Seventh Report of Session 2004-05 |
|
|
|
Training Documents |
MDA Research on Ethnic Diversity amongst suppliers of Legal Aid services - April 2006 |
A report of the research findings prepared by MDA for the Legal Services Commission in relation to Ethnic Diversity amongst suppliers of Legal Aid services |
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 37 |
Issue 37 of the Advocate |
|
|
Miscellaneous |
CPS Annual Report 2004 - 2005 |
|
|
|
Miscellaneous |
CPS Annual Report 2003 - 2004 |
|
|
|
Miscellaneous |
CPS Annual Report 2002 - 2003 |
|
|
|
Miscellaneous |
CPS Annual report 2001 - 2002 |
|
|
|
Miscellaneous |
CPS Annual Report 2000 - 2001 |
|
Restricted Access
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Legal Services Commission - Outcome of Consultation - Outcome of Consultation on General Criminal and General Civil Contracts - April 2006 |
Outcome of Consultation - General Criminal and General Civil Contracts. The LSC issued consultation papers on amendments to Contracts in November 2005. |
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Legal Services Commission: Preferred Supplier Consultation - 20/03/2006 |
The LSC is consulting on the national Preferred Supplier scheme that will radically change the way it administers the £2 billion spent on legal aid services each year by setting higher entry standards for law firms and advice agencies wanting to do legal aid work. |
|
|
Consultation Papers |
SAP's Consultation Paper on Bail Act Offenses - Annexed Tables |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
SAP's consultation paper on Bail Act Offences - 27/01/2006 |
|
|
|
Miscellaneous |
CaseMap Template File |
|
Restricted Access
|
|
Consultation Papers |
DCA Reponse Paper - Supporting Magistrates' to Provide Justice - March 2005 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
DCA White Paper - Supporting Magistrates to Provide Justice - November 2005 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Response to the Home Office Paper
BRIBERY – Reform of the Prevention of Corruption Acts and SFO Powers in Cases of Bribery of Foreign Officials, A Consultation Paper, December 2005 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LCCSA's Response to Consultation Paper: The Witness Charter - New Standards for Care in the Criminal Justice System - February 2006 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
The Witness Charter - New Standards for Care in the Criminal Justice System - November 2005 |
|
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Application to join the London Criminal Courts Solicitor's Association |
|
|
|
Practice & Procedure |
Disclosure: A Protocol for the Control and Management of Unused Material in the Crown Court |
The judiciary has drawn up a new protocol on the disclosure of unused material in Crown Court criminal trials in England and Wales.
The protocol is designed to establish firm principles for the management of disclosure, whether by the prosecution or the defence, in order to improve the efficient delivery of justice and thereby enhance public confidence in the criminal justice system. The protocol will be effective from its date of publication (20 February 2006). |
Restricted Access
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Crown Prosecution Service: Effective use of Magistrates’ Court Hearings |
The NAO report makes a number of recommendations to improve joint working with other criminal justice areas; maintain proper oversight of cases; make more prosecutor time available for review and preparation; prioritise some cases to ensure that they are ready when they come to court; and remove duplication and release resources by updating case records electronically at court. |
Restricted Access
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Lord Carter's Preliminary Report: Procurement of
Criminal Defence Services. Market-based reform - February 2006 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
A fairer deal for legal aid |
This paper outlines the DCA's long-term strategy for legal aid reform and was laid in parliament on 5 July 2005. It sets out proposals that the DCA claims will guarantee continued fair and equal access to justice; improve outcomes for those who most need publicly funded legal services ensuring that the taxpayer gets value for money from those who provide legal services. |
|
|
Consultation Papers |
A New Homicide Act for England & Wales? Law Commission consultation |
On 20 December 2005 the Law Commission published their provisional proposals for reforming the law of murder. Responses to the Consultation Paper are invited until 13 April 2006. In their 2004 report, "Partial Defences to Murder" they described the current law on murder as "a mess" and recommended a complete review of the law of murder. In October 2004, the Home Office anounced that such a review would take place. This was confirmed on 21 July 2005, when Home Office Minister Fiona MacTaggart announced the terms of reference of a comprehensive review of murder law. |
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Application for ID Card |
LCCSA application for photo identification card |
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Improving Value for Money for CDS in London |
The LSC believe that the current remuneration scheme does not do enough to secure
value for money for the taxpayer and is too inflexible to reflect the local market
conditions facing solicitors. Moving away from paying for inputs, such as time and letters, to a system of paying fixed amounts for outputs provides a positive incentive for service providers to deliver results for their clients in the most time and cost efficient way.
In other sectors, competitive tendering is a well-established method of delivering quality public services. These proposals are part of a programme of reform focusing on these aims and developing new ways of working with those who provide legal services. In particular, our preferred suppliers pilot is exploring a new style of partnership that benefits service providers, the client and the taxpayer. |
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 36 |
Issue 36 of the Advocate |
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LCCSA's Response to Lord Carter and the DCA's Consultation Paper "A Fairer Deal for Legal Aid" - 26/12/2005 |
Our response to the DCA's paper "A Fairer Deal for Legal Aid", made as part of our submissions to Lord Carter during his review of legal aid procurement. |
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Do Lawyers Do Any Good |
Research paper by Avrom Sherr, Director, Institute of Advanced Legal School of Advanced Study, University of London. In the introduction, Mr. Sherr explains "The paper represents some very early fruits research which until now was simply not possible to carry out in any jurisdiction - anywhere in the world. It is therefore quite exciting to consider what it might be telling us. You will probably be surprised that the questions that are being asked have not been asked or rather answered before. Answers, such as they are, which are proposed in this paper are proposed as a set of conjectures based on this newly appearing data.
So, what I have to say will be both earth shatteringly new and completely unimportant all at the same time. Earth shatteringly new because it has not been done before and completely unimportant because until it has been done again and properly reflected upon, it would not be right to draw any lasting conclusions from what I say". |
Restricted Access
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 35 |
Issue 35 of the Advocate |
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Legal Services Commission - Consultation on amendments to the General Criminal and General Civil Contracts from April 2006 - Published October 2005 |
Consultation on amendments to the General Criminal and General Civil Contracts from April 2006. The LSC has consulted with professional bodies on proposed amendments to the General Criminal Contract and General Civil Contracts. Changes resulting from the consultation will come into force on 17 May 2006.
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Letter to Criminal Defence Service Policy Team setting out initial representations regarding reduction in legal aid rates for VHCC - August 2005 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Letter from Lord Falconer to Lord Society announcing "a radical shake-up of the legal aid system" - 5th July 2005 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Response to LSC Consultation Paper: Independent Review of Legal Advice & Legal Work - July 2005 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 34 |
Issue 34 of the Advocate |
|
|
Training Documents |
The Youth Court Justice System - Good Defence Practice 2005 Training Materials. Naimo Redhouse & Mark Ashford - May 2005 |
|
Restricted Access
|
|
Training Documents |
The Youth court Justice System: Good Defence Practice 2005. Training Materials. Naiomi Redhouse and Mark Ashford. Regional Notes |
|
Restricted Access
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 33 |
Issue 33 of the Advocate |
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Sentencing Advisory Panel's Consultation Paper: RECOMMENDATION FOR DEPORTATION FOLLOWING A CRIMINAL CONVICTION |
|
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Price Competitive Tendering Update - February 2005 |
|
Restricted Access
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LSC Press Release: LSC moves to ensure value from criminal legal aid - 28 January 2005 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Legal Aid Reform: the LSC put "London Competitive Tendering in Context" - January 2005 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Response to LSC's consultation paper: Police Station Representatives and Solicitors Attending the Police Station - January 2005 |
|
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 32 |
Issue 32 of the Advocate |
|
|
Training Documents |
The Youth Court Justice System: Good Defence Practice. Update to Training Materials. Naiomi Redhouse & Mark Ashford - December 2004 |
|
Restricted Access
|
|
Committee |
PROPOSAL FOR APPOINTMENT OF EXECUTIVE OFFICER - November 2004 |
|
Restricted Access
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Letter to members regarding appointing executive officer - 18 November 2004 |
|
Restricted Access
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Response to the Department of Constitutional Affairs Consultation Paper on the future of Queen’s Counsel - November 2003 |
|
|
|
Miscellaneous |
LCCSA's Constitution |
The Constitution of the LCCSA |
Restricted Access
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 31 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LCCSA RESPONSE TO THE SENTENCING ADVISORY PANEL CONSULTATION PAPER ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SENTENCING - October 2004 |
Our answers to the questions posed in the consultation paper by The Sentencing Advisory Panel (SAP) on domestic violence and sentencing follow. In considering these questions, we have adopted the definition of “domestic violence” outlined in paragraph 5 of the consultation paper. For the sake of clarity, we confirm that we have considered that domestic violence includes all violence within a domestic context, including parent / child relationships, stepchildren, foster children, mothers / fathers-in-law, siblings, partners or otherwise. We note that the consultation paper has been drafted further to concerns that sentencing for domestic violence is comparatively lower than sentencing for other offences of violence. Whilst we agree that domestic violence is an extremely serious form of offending which should not be tolerated within today’s society, standard sentencing principles for assaultshould nevertheless be applied. It is not the experience of the members of the LCCSA that domestic violence is treated in a less serious manner. The fact that there is a disparity between the two categories of violence may reflect that there are very different issues to be weighed up by the sentencing court in each case, rather than lenience towards domestic offenders. Whilst victims of violence committed by a stranger are likely never to encounter their attacker again, domestic violence victims will very commonly have an on-going relationship with the offender, especially in cases where the victim and offender have children. In these cases, the court will need to weigh up conflicting factors in particular the protection of the victim (as well as any other parties involved) and any wishes the victim may have to continue their relationship with the offender. Sentencing offenders in domestic situations will never be straightforward and, accordingly, we consider it of utmost importance that flexibility is retained within the revised sentencing guidelines. |
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Roles of the LCCSA Committee |
Roles of the LCCSA Committee and its officers |
Restricted Access
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LCCSA RESPONSE TO THE SENTENCING ADVISORY PANEL’S
CONSULTATION PAPER ON THE SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2004 - June 2004 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LCCSA RESPONSE TO THE SENTENCING PANEL CONSULTATION PAPER ON SENTENCING OF MANSLAUGHTER BY REASON OF PROVOCATION - June 2004 |
This paper has been prepared with reference to the LCCSA’s response to the consultation paper issued by the Law Commission in February 2003 in relation to partial defences to murder (a copy of which is attached). Whilst it is not proposed to revisit the issues raised in that earlier response, attention is drawn to the LCCSA’s concern in relation to the nature and scope of the first consultation paper. As with that earlier consultation paper, it seems that the
questions posed by the Sentencing Advisory Panel are shaped by the particular political climate within which this debate is taking place. The LCCSA stated in its earlier response that “if it is the case that society considers one behaviour which leads to the death of another person less serious than other behaviour which has the same outcome, it ought to deal openly and fully with that issue, for example by debating whether there should be a law introducing different degrees of culpability for murder.” This comment is perhaps even more relevant when considering the appropriate sentences for manslaughter by reason of provocation. The LCCSA questions whether it is premature to be dealing with issues of sentence. Whilst the law concerning partial defences to murder, and, in particular, the vailability of provocation remains under review. |
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LCCSA RESPONSE TO THE CLEMENTI REVIEW - June 2004 |
The Association has not sought to respond to each of the specific questions posed in the Review but has set out a number of general points that indicate The Association’s position on the principle issues raised in each of the Review’s six chapters. The Association has given most consideration to the addressing the objectives and principles it considers are necessary to take forward the provision of legal services and the model it considers best suited to achieve that aim. The Association has not however sought to address the precise detail of the way in which the change that it advocates should be implemented. |
|
|
Consultation Papers |
Response to the Home Office Paper
FRAUD LAW REFORM – Consultation on Proposals for
Legislation, May 2004 |
The LCCSA welcomes the creation of a new statutory offence of fraud and has long argued that the definition of any such offence should include an element of dishonesty, which we think will particularly assist jurors in considering their verdicts. However, we have serious reservations as to the proposal that the new offence be split into the 3 separate constituent parts as defined. We fear that the combined definitions are overly restrictive in that behaviour normally considered to be fraudulent may well fail to fall within one of the three components whilst, paradoxically, the individual elements are too widely defined. Our analysis of each of the 3 limbs of the proposed new offence has led us to conclude that they cover many types of behaviour that, whilst of dubious moral probity and possible civil torts, have not been considered fraudulent in the past. This remains a concern despite the need for the Crown to prove that the defendant acted dishonestly. The LCCSA also has serious reservations that within the proposals a theme emerges whereby criminality is defined more by the intent of the perpetrator than the effect upon the victim. So, for example, a fraud by false representation may be committed by a defendant using a stolen credit card in a shop even if the shop assistant is not deceived because s/he ‘is not necessarily interested in whether the defendant has authority to use it …’. Not only do we argue with the factual scenario as presented here (it is our experience that, when questioned, shop assistants will invariably confirm that the card would not have been accepted if it was known or suspected it to have been stolen), but we feel that the proposal focuses the criminality on the intent (mens rea) of the offender without paying sufficient heed to the effect (actus reus) of his/her actions. |
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 29 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LCCSA RESPONSE TO THE LAW COMMISSION CONSULTATION PAPER
(NO. 173) PARTIAL DEFENCES TO MURDER (FEBRUARY 2003) |
In this response we deal with the specific questions asked by the Law Commission in its consultation paper. We do, however, wish to express our concern that the questions asked by the Law Commission, the answers given to them and the scope of the consultation paper itself appear to be shaped and limited by the existing political climate and by a small number of particularly difficult recent cases. We are concerned that as a result of those factors in particular the Law Commission is seeking to deal with developments in our society and our law by pushing existing
statute and case law beyond its natural boundaries when what is needed in order to deal with those developments is a root and branch review of the law of murder. If it is the case that society considers some behaviour which leads to the death of another person less serious than other behaviour which has the same outcome it ought to deal openly and fully with that issue, for example by debating whether there should be a law introducing different degrees of culpability for killing. |
|
|
The Advocate |
Advocate Issue 28 |
Issue 28 of The Advocate |
|
|
Consultation Papers |
RESPONSE TO THE CONSULTATION DOCUMENT ON PROPOSED CHANGE TO CRIMINAL DEFENCE SERVICE FEE STRUCTURES - December 2003 |
|
|
|
Consultation Papers |
RESPONSE TO THE CONSULTATION DOCUMENT ON PROPOSED CHANGE TO CRIMINAL DEFENCE SERVICE FEE STRUCTURES - December 2003 |
All solicitors engaged in criminal litigation have a positive interest in the principle set out in paragraph 11 of the consultation document that early, efficient and effective case preparation is incentivised and rewarded. The different institutional arrangements for prosecution lawyers and defence lawyers make it extremely difficult to devise arrangements that are even handed and applicable to individual lawyers, firms or Crown Prosecution Service Offices and, in so far as the second basis for the revised fee structure is to penalise poor performance, our view is that penalties are highly likely to be seen as discriminatory and unfair by defence lawyers and unlikely to impact on the prosecuting institutions. Lord Falconer has made the point that incentives are more likely to change behaviour than sanctions and we set out below in detail our views regarding adverse observations and the relationship between fee structure and behaviour. The extremely limited time for consultation has meant that we have not had any adequate opportunity of comparing the proposed fee structure to existing cases on a large scale in order to measure the impact. |
|
|
Consultation Papers |
LCCSA's Response to the Criminal Justice Bill 2002 - July 2003 |
The Criminal Justice Bill 2002 contains wide-ranging and significant proposals to reform the criminal justice system. Those proposals cover evidence, procedure and sentencing. The London Criminal Courts Solicitors’ Association (“the Association”) sets out in this response
its views on the individual proposals contained in the Bill but holds the view that their combined overall effect, should they become law, would be to produce a hybrid, more inquisitorial system, working within the adversarial system upon which criminal justice is currently based. The important and finely-tuned balance in that system, to ensure that the guilty are convicted but that the innocent suspect is protected, would be damaged and, possibly, lost. |
|
|
Miscellaneous |
Notes of AGM - 11 November 2002 |
|
Restricted Access
|
|
Miscellaneous |
The Criminal Case Profiling Study: Final Report, Pascoe Pleasence & Hannah Quirk. Legal Services Research Centre - 2001 |
|
Restricted Access
|