LETTER : The Bar: cheap at the price
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Mr David Holland
Sir: As a practising barrister, I believe the proposed "demolition" of the Bar ("Time for a new order in the court", 18 May) would make litigation more expensive and difficult for most people.
The authors fail to realise that a relatively small percentage of the legal aid budget goes on barristers' fees.
It is also the case that the cost of court appearances would be significantly higher in most cases if barristers, who have much lower overheads and who charge a fixed fee, were replaced by solicitors, who charge an hourly rate and include travel and waiting time. A large and well-known London firm of solicitors a few years ago asked its accountants and was told that the pounds 2m it had incurred in counsel's fees that year would have been pounds 4m if the same work had been carried out by its own solicitors. Most of my practice is spent in the County Courts where solicitors have had rights of audience for years, and yet few choose to exercise that right in anything other than very short hearings.
The abolition of the Bar would also have serious consequences for hundreds of small- and medium-sized solicitor's firms that simply could not offer their clients a cost-effective litigation service without barristers. They would not be able to employ their own full-time advocates.
The independent Bar should not fear competition from solicitors or employed barristers.Whether one adopts the inquisitorial or retains the adversarial system, one will always need advocates. Advocacy is a specialist skill requiring specific training and experience. The Bar currently represents a pool of trained advocates available for hire to any member of the public. The latter would be ill-served by the disappearance of the former.
Yours faithfully,
DAVID HOLLAND
London, WC1
20 May
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments