QASA set for further delay as barristers win permission to appeal

Print This Post

12 May 2014


Royal Courts of Justice

Court of Appeal: expedited hearing

The introduction of the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates (QASA) is likely to be delayed yet again after four barristers won permission to appeal against the dismissal of their judicial review by the High Court.

The permission was granted following an oral hearing, after the claimants had been refused permission to appeal by the High Court and then on paper by the Court of Appeal.

The Joint Advocacy Group (JAG) overseeing the scheme announced last month, after the barristers renewed their application for permission to appeal, that the first deadline for registration, on 30 May, would be reviewed.

In a statement after the hearing on Friday, a JAG spokesperson noted that the claimants had been granted leave to appeal on all grounds.

“We welcome the fact that an expedited hearing has been agreed and is likely to be listed for mid-July. We look forward to assisting the court in due course.

“Members of the JAG will consider the implications of today’s decision and issue further information shortly.”

Each regulator decided to adopt a slightly different approach to the phasing of registration. The BSB suspended the phasing of QASA registration pending the outcome of Friday’s hearing, after which the timetable will be reviewed.

However, all barristers who wish to undertake criminal advocacy remain required to register by 31 December 2014.

The SRA said it would review the current registration timetable for solicitors following the hearing. The closing date for chartered legal executive advocates to register with IPS remains 30 May, but IPS also promised to review it.

Lord Justices Tomlinson and Briggs said the appeal raised matters of “fundamental constitutional importance”.

The judicial review application was made in the names of Katherine Lumsdon, Rufus Taylor, David Howker QC and Christopher Hewertson, and supported by the Criminal Bar Association.

The barristers were represented pro bono by Tom de la Mare QC of Blackstone Chambers, Mark Trafford of 23 Essex Street and Baker & McKenzie. The BSB and SRA were also represented.

Tags: , , ,



Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

How to make a case to the unconverted

Jonathan Whittle

The prospect of change is a daunting one, whether you’re a global firm or a small one. You might think that your firm’s working practices are fine, or that there’s no value in altering the way you do things because of the disruption it would cause. You might even see the benefits of using a different methodology, but still refuse to put the effort in to implement it – and you wouldn’t be alone. From our research in the 2016 report, The Riddle of Perception, we know that 73% of lawyers believe that adapting to change is not where their strength lies. However, it’s no longer optional.

November 16th, 2017