A row has broken out after the Bar Council claimed that the costs of a barrister acting in a Court of Appeal case under its public access scheme, which allows lay clients to instruct the bar directly, were 'ten times cheaper'.

In GE Capital Bank v Rushton & Jenking, a hire purchase agreement dispute, the bank instructed a barrister through a solicitor and claimed £68,082 costs of the appeal.


The defendants, who instructed their barrister directly, submitted a costs summary of £6,400. The case is believed to be the first under the scheme to reach the Court of Appeal.


Anthony Speaight QC, chairman of the council's access to the bar committee, said: 'A client who acts directly will himself have to undertake some administrative work that a solicitor would do, [but] this case demonstrates the considerable cost savings that can be achieved.'


A Law Society spokesman said: 'This case cannot be used to make any meaningful comparisons. Anyone who believes that using barristers is a way to save costs is living in cloud cuckoo land.'


See Editorial