Monday Message 31.03.25
Parents at the Criminal Bar
On the weekend that included Mothers’ Day, we salute and admire all parents who have chosen to remain at the Criminal Bar. Our thoughts are with all those who, for a variety of reasons, find the day to be a difficult one.
Whenever we attend careers talks at universities and colleges women tend to ask the same important question; can you be at the Criminal Bar and have a family? We all answer in our own words that it is more difficult but it can be done. Women now form the majority of junior criminal Barristers at 56.3% which is a huge change from 50 years ago. Our women are ambitious. Over 59% aspire to become a KC and over 54% have ambitions to join the judiciary. We are not looking after the women within our profession to enable them to reach their full potential. Sadly, many of them do not return after maternity leave.
The results of the CBA National Survey have caused us to realise that significant work is required across the Criminal Justice System to ensure that mothers remain at the Criminal Bar. Additional work is required to make sure that all parents are able and willing to remain. In our survey, 38.5% of parents were women and 59.5% were men. Of the responses, 36% had children under 18 who they cared for.
Chambers’ policies for maternity and paternity leave are generally considered to be excellent by 80% of those who responded to the survey but the policies are insufficient to deal with the period of time after that leave ends.
There are stark and staggering disparities in how parenthood impacts on the careers of mothers compared to the impact on fathers.
In the survey, 80% of mothers report that being a parent has had a negative impact on their earnings. The figure for fathers is still high at 43%. For the avoidance of doubt, this is not just the cost of maternity leave or the precious time before parents return to work. The negative effect lasts throughout childhood and into adolescence.
Being a mother has a negative effect on the career progression of mothers according to 77% of women and 32% of men consider that parenthood has a negative effect on their career progression.
So how many women return to the Criminal Bar after childbirth? Well, there are 70% at the Criminal Bar who are fathers and only 43% of women who are mothers. We know from the survey that in the last year, 2024, 83% of the Criminal Bar missed important personal or family events and 71% struggled with childcare issues. Over half (54%) described their workload as having a negative impact on their parenting or relationships with their children. Once back at the Bar, 77% of mothers and 32% of fathers considered that parenthood had an impact on career progression and 58% of mothers and 26% of fathers considered it was impacting on career aspirations. Parenting impacted negatively on a feeling of confidence at work for 50% of women and 13% of men.
We know from national studies that women earn less than men at the Bar when prosecuting and defending. Why this is the case is a matter which requires careful and considered work. We intend to work with the EDI committee of the CBA, the Bar Council, WICL, the CPS, HMCTS and Circuit Leaders to see what can be done to improve this now. Women deserve the right to have equal access to work and to be paid the same for the work they do. We must have fair briefing by the defence community and CPS and equal income from that work. That is not happening at the moment and it must.
(Dis)ability at the Criminal Bar
Of the respondents, 10% said that they had a disability and 4% preferred not to say. When then asked if the respondents had any physical or mental impairment which would amount to a disability in law the figure was 17.4% in total. This may mean that members of the Criminal Bar, who have not disclosed their disabilities, are not accessing the workplace adjustments, rights and legal protection available to them under the Act. This does not limit ambition, with 51% aspiring to take Silk and 50% aspiring to join the judiciary. We must do all that we can to assist our members with a disability. Perhaps we might start by modernising the words that we use to describe hugely talented practitioners with physical and neuro-diverse conditions from the negative to the positive.
Other common problems
Common Platform
According to our CBA National Survey 2025, problems with Common Platform have caused defence advocates to be refused payment because they were not signed in for 43% of our respondents. For 10% this happened once or twice, for 8% it happened 3-4 times, for 13% it happened 5-9 times. For others it was higher. In 2024, 13% never had difficulties logging on, whereas 86% did. Some 83% had difficulty using common platform and 76% were told to use common platform but could not sign in as the cases did not appear there.
Security firms routinely failed to deliver prisoners to court in a manner which caused significant delays in 2024 for 54% of respondents, 26% said this happened often and 18% that this happened occasionally. Only 2.73% said that this never happened.
The Backlog
The delayed data from the end of 2024 has now been published. A record number of Crown Court trials were adjourned last year, some 26,910. That figure is higher than during Covid. Of those, 7,822 were adjourned on the first day of trial for a variety of reasons including no Judge, no Barrister, no prisoner, no interpreter, defendant not produced from custody. Even those cases that did reach a conclusion took an average of 22 months. The mean average was 681 days.
We know that there has been a promise of 110,000 sitting days but the reality that we see is few, if any, Recorder vacancies, closed court rooms and cases being listed so that they can be adjourned until 2027 and 2028 due to a lack of sitting days. It is not clear where the additional days are being used but the Criminal Bar and all participants in the trial process are not seeing any benefits from them.
Part of the difficulty with the backlog is the frequency of criminal Barristers being given cases hours and not days before a trial is to begin. In 2024 when prosecuting or defending 34% of our respondents accepted a late instruction or return 1-5 times, 15% did so 6-10 times and 29% did so over 15 times. Over 42% on one to five occasions have prepared a case that was then rescheduled in 2024/2025 and 20% have prepared a case that was rescheduled beyond 2025. Only 16% of us did not do that.
The preparation of sentencing materials is unpaid and can take many hours. Whether prosecuting or defending a sentencing note is now demanded in every case except for where a Judge has heard the trial. Some 84% of respondents prepared disproportionate amounts of sentencing materials.
Some 84% of the Criminal Bar had a hearing cancelled on the day of trial.
These disruptions to case preparation and the unpredictability of when cases are to be heard is a significant additional stressor because payment is not received until years later when the case ends. This is a waste of resources at a time when every minute of the day counts.
There is a strong feeling of anger and frustration at being obliged to prepare opening notes, agreed facts, defence statements, bad character and hearsay applications and sentencing notes for trials or other hearings listed 2-3 years in the future. This is a further waste of resources. The extreme delays which are now commonplace take a toll on all participants.
Next week we will deal with our relationships with CPS, the Judiciary and each other and set out our future plans, taking account of your responses and concerns.
An historic event
Last week saw the inaugural CBA dinner for past Chairs, Vice-Chairs, Secretaries and Treasurers at Inner Temple which was organised with great skill by Aaron Dolan to whom we pass our thanks. It was humbling for your current officers to be amongst those who have served us all with skill and talent over the past 50 years. Our thoughts and prayers were with David Cox QC, Chair of the CBA between 1987-1989, Michael Kalisher QC, Chair of the CBA between 1991-1993 and Anthony Berry KC, Secretary of the CBA between 1991-1993.
Reading the Monday Messages from the past decade demonstrated to us how little things had changed in terms of the CBA having to fearlessly fight for our members and to campaign to save the Criminal Justice System. If only successive governments had listened to these wise voices.
Judicial Reverse Mentoring – Deadline Extended
Members of the Judiciary can volunteer to be mentored by a young practitioner who has a protected characteristic. The young practitioner shares with the Judge the reality of life at the Bar for them and discusses ways in which the Judiciary can be more inclusive and supportive. The scheme significantly benefits the understanding of the Judiciary and has been described by the mentors as benefiting them in their understanding of the role of the Judge and in enabling them to consider a judicial career. This is a good opportunity for young practitioners across England and Wales.
Please see here for the application information for Mentors (Legal Professionals), which includes the MS Forms link to apply.
Applications will be open until midnight on Sunday 6th April 2025, after which the MS Forms will be closed. If anyone has any queries, concerns or issues, please ask them to contact [email protected]
Yours,
Mary Prior KC
Chair, The Criminal Bar Association