Moorhead: Law Society wrong to say there is no evidence of poor-quality advocacy

Print This Post

By Legal Futures

7 June 2011


Moorhead: unparalleled levels of failure

The Law Society is wrong to suggest there is no evidence of a quality problem in criminal advocacy – according to one of the academics who produced it.

Yesterday, Chancery Lane complained that no evidence had been supplied to support the assertion that advocates are falling below the appropriate standards that justify introduction of the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates (QASA).

But Professor Richard Moorhead, deputy head of Cardiff Law School, was part of a team that in 2009 produced a report on the Legal Services Commission’s pilot of a similar quality assurance scheme. He said the findings justified judicial concern about advocacy standards.

Some of the failure rates were at a level “unparalleled in any assessment of lawyer quality in which I have been involved in the last 20 years”, Professor Moorhead recalled.

He added: “These required either a regulatory response or further investigation. The regulators appear to accept the need for a regulatory response.”

Professor Moorhead agreed with the society that “a better quantification of the risk” would have been helpful, but added: “I do not recall any point at which they have seriously argued for that by, for instance, offering to help fund it.

“Proper research on quality is expensive and it is easier to take pot shots from the sidelines, particularly when the ‘representative’ side of the profession’s agenda is, for understandable but I believe misguided reasons, in keeping the cost of regulation as low as possible.”

He suggested that the regulators had instead seen “a reputational hole for the professions opening up and decided to stop digging and start erecting some fences”.

Tags: , , , ,



Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

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

Legal Futures Blog

New right to paid leave for bereaved parents: A welcome move

Kimberley Manning DAS

This year, like many in recent years, has seen some key changes within the employment law field, with the government, trade unions and lobbyists remaining endlessly engaged in seeking to impose their interpretation of fair balance between employers and their respective workforces. Although consensus on that equilibrium can never really be achieved, sometimes there are pieces of legislative movement which are difficult to argue with regardless of your perspective: This is one of those. Published on 13 October 2017, the Parental Bereavement (Pay and Leave) Bill would provide for the first time a legal right to parents who are employed and have suffered the death of a child, a minimum of two weeks’ leave in which to grieve.

November 20th, 2017