I wonder how many solicitors undertaking occasional litigation are aware of the Bar Council’s terms of work, and in particular the mechanism that comes into play if the solicitor disputes a barrister’s fee note. If counsel complains to the Bar Council about non-payment, then unless the solicitor submits to arbitration by ‘joint tribunal’, thereby ousting the jurisdiction of the court, the Bar Council directs all chambers to ‘withdraw’ credit, the consequence of which is that ‘money up front’ has to be paid for any instruction or brief delivered by the solicitor to any chambers. Clearly the implication is that the solicitor has defaulted, when in fact the disputing of a non-agreed fee may be justified.

It is apparently the view of the Bar Council, endorsed by the ombudsman, that there is no requirement for a barrister to give fees information in advance, and that overcharging is not a matter of ‘conduct’. What a contrast to the rules under which solicitors operate. Others may share my concern that, whereas most ‘businesses’ dealing with the public may, if they overcharge or provide inadequate goods or services, be required to justify their charges before the court, members of the bar enjoy a privileged position of having the Bar Council act with them and not against them.

Awareness of the above may cause many solicitors to think twice before seeking the ‘quick advice’ that was seemingly the safe option when faced with a new or difficult problem. Your client has all the mechanisms of consumer protection at their disposal, but you do not.

Keith Whitehorn, Whitehorns, Edgware