Pay Dispute: Lord Irvine accused of unequal handling of publicly-funded work feesFamily lawyers in bonus wrangleThe Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine, might soon face a legal challenge from family practitioners overlooked when he handed out pay bonuses last month.Spearheading a growing number of angry family practitioners is Claire Jones of Jones Goodall in Wakefield.

This week, Ms Jones confirmed that she was considering a judicial review of the Lord Chancellor's decision, which left Law Society family panel-accredited solicitors with only a flat 10% increase in pay rates for publicly-funded work.By contrast, the Law Society's 2,076-strong children's panel and the 328-strong Solicitors Family Law Association panel, received an additional 15% increase (see [2001] Gazette, 18 January, 1).Ms Jones described the situation as 'appalling' and said she would mount a judicial review if Law Society family law panel solicitors were not similarly rewarded.She said: 'What is the point in the Law Society devising an accreditation system, and practitioners going to the trouble of getting on it, if it is seen as second-rate by the Lord Chancellor and means the difference between a pay rise of 10% or 25% for those doing the same publicly funded work?'It is all about numbers and money, and shows that the Lord Chancellor doesn't really want to give us much of a pay rise at all,' she added.Peter Watson-Lee, chairman of the Law Society's family law committee, said he was aware that many accredited solicitors were 'furious' to have been overlooked and that he was 'extremely frustrated' by the situation.

Letters have already been sent to Lord Irvine raising the Society's concerns and the point would be made again in its official response to the consultation paper, he said.SFLA chairman Rosemary Carter said that, given the announcement of enhanced rates and a scheduled review of the Law Society's scheme, the panel 'may wish to raise its sights in so far as standards are concerned'.A spokesman for the Lord Chancellor said he chose the SFLA and Law Society's children's panel because of the 'depth and breath' of knowledge demonstrated to win accreditation.

'This should not deter Law Society family panel members from seeking the enhanced rate on individual cases should they think their work justifies it,' he added.

Sue Allen