The controversial Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates (QASA) is set to go ahead after the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal against the scheme this morning (24 June) though the Bar Standards Board (BSB) has said it will need to consider the timing of its introduction given the delays caused by the legal challenge.
The appellants, four criminal barristers supported by the Criminal Bar Association, were challenging the scheme put forward over two years ago which will regulate all advocates appearing in England and Wales’ criminal courts. It proposes that advocates will need to be assessed as ‘competent’ by a trial judge and then only accept trials on a par with their assessed and graded abilities.
The scheme brought protest from the criminal Bar when it was announced with a number of barristers resigning from the BSB disciplinary prosecution panel in September 2013.
The Bar Standards Board’s director general Vanessa Davies said: ‘This morning’s Supreme Court judgment brings to an end the legal challenges surrounding QASA. We are pleased that the final ruling has confirmed QASA as lawful and proportionate. Clearly we need to look carefully at the detail in today’s judgment, but the objective of providing a high level of public protection through a precautionary scheme has long been the underlying principle behind QASA. The Supreme Court has recognised this.’
Davies added: ‘Given the length of time that has passed since the scheme was approved by the Legal Services Board, we need now to consider the scheme’s implementation and the likely timescales involved.’
The appellants were represented by Blackstone Chambers’ Tom de la Mare QC, Tom Richards and Jana Sadler-Forster, and Mark Trafford QC from 23 Essex Street Chambers instructed by Baker & McKenzie partner Joanna Ludlam, who was working pro bono on the case.
Ludlam said: ‘Whilst we are disappointed with today’s outcome, the judgment shows that the Supreme Court Justices found in favour of our submissions on the law. This will force the regulators to think seriously about future developments of QASA and will help achieve a scheme which better serves the interests of the public and the legal profession.
She added: ‘This case is also groundbreaking in that it has set a new legal precedent and will henceforth be a leading authority on the application of the principle of proportionality of EU Law.’
The Legal Services Board turned to Fieldfisher’s senior partner Matthew Lohn, who instructed 11KBW’s Nigel Giffin QC and Brick Court Chambers’ Martin Chamberlain QC, while the BSB as intervener used Bevan Brittan’s Iain Miller, who gave instructions to Fountain Court Chambers’ Timothy Dutton QC and Tetyana Nesterchuk.
michael.west@legalease.co.uk
