QASA set for further delay as barristers win permission to appeal


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

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog


A new route to practice rights for chartered legal executives

Following approval from the Legal Services Board in May 2022, CILEx Regulation has launched an alternative route for chartered legal executives to obtain independent practice rights.


NFTs, the courts and the role of injunctions

In May, news broke that a non-fungible token was the subject of a successful injunction made by the Singapore High Court. The NFT in question is part of the very valuable Bored Ape Yacht Club series.


Matthew Pascall

Low-value commercial cases – an achievable challenge for ATE insurers

There are many good claims brought for damages that are likely to be significantly less than twice the cost of bringing the claim. These cases present a real challenge for insurers.


Loading animation