CBA Briefing: Magistrates’ Court minimum fees rise by 10 per cent

The CBA Briefing
7th September 2026

Let there be absolutely no doubt: the Criminal Bar Association is fundamentally opposed to the proposed restrictions on the right to jury trial.

In this edition

• Update from the Chair
• COIC launches the Matched Funding for Criminal Pupillage scheme
• National Listing Framework: an open meeting with the judges, 16th September
• LCCSA, Bar Council and CBA: protocol on Magistrates’ Court fees
• Legally Lifelong celebrates its first anniversary
• Jury equity and conscience acquittals
• Sexsomnia in sexual offences cases: interviewees sought
• Domestic Abuse Protection Notices and Orders: national rollout from 25th November
• Early release: new Regulations published
• This week in criminal law

Update from the Chair

We had a very productive meeting with the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, Alex Norris MP, this week. Topics discussed included the timetable for the AGFS consultation, prisoner early release, matched funding for pupillage and recruitment at the independent Bar. We reiterated the Criminal Bar’s views on the retention of jury trial.

Together with the Leaders of the Circuits, we also met senior prosecutors from the CPS. Vice Chair Kama Melly KC began her term of office with an appearance on Channel 4 News. We also gave interviews to LBC and to BBC East Midlands about the temporary closure of Nottingham Crown Court following structural damage.

COIC launches the Matched Funding for Criminal Pupillage scheme

Further to the announcement last week, the Council of the Inns of Court has published details of the Matched Funding for Criminal Pupillage scheme on its website, including a link to the application form: coic.org.uk/pupillage-matched-funding.

COIC says that, following the Ministry of Justice’s scheme to invest up to 1.5 million pounds a year in match-funded criminal pupillages, it is partnering with the Ministry to distribute the funding alongside its own established scheme. The Ministry’s money will fund up to 100 matched pupillages in addition to those already matched by COIC, and sits on top of the existing COIC scheme, which covers chambers and other approved training organisations predominantly engaged in legally aided work.

The funding is available where pupillages are offered in addition to those which would have been offered in any event. The grants are 12,400 pounds for 2027 to 2028 London pupillages and 11,350 pounds out of London, rising to 13,500 pounds for 2028 to 2029 London pupillages and 12,350 pounds out of London.

On Wednesday 23rd September 2026 we will host a webinar together with COIC and the Ministry of Justice. All chambers are strongly encouraged to send one or more representatives. We will set out the aims of the scheme and take you through the application process.

National Listing Framework: an open meeting with the judges, 16th September

The new Practice Direction on Listing in the Criminal Courts, known as the National Listing Framework, comes into effect on 1st October 2026.

All criminal practitioners will need to be familiar with the Practice Direction and the effect it will have on the conduct of PTPHs. It matters for the further reason that it governs every practitioner’s diary, their fees and their ability to plan a practice.

The Practice Direction is here: judiciary.uk. That page also carries a video in which the Lady Chief Justice, Baroness Carr, and Lord Justice Edis discuss the listing Practice Direction and the new guidance on remote hearings.

HHJ Martin Edmunds KC, Resident Judge at the Crown Court at Isleworth and Honorary Recorder of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, and HHJ Andrew Menary KC are leading the judicial implementation of the new arrangements.

From 1st October, barristers conducting a PTPH will be required to help the court identify the appropriate Priority Tier for the case, and whether it should have a Fixed Date or Flexible Date listing.

The CBA is holding an open meeting at which members can put questions about the scheme to HHJ Edmunds KC and HHJ Menary KC, on Wednesday 16th September 2026 from 16:45, online by CVP from the Crown Court at Isleworth. It is a rare opportunity to put questions directly to the judges in charge. Please note that the date has moved from the one previously trailed.

The meeting is deliberately being held online so that as many practitioners as possible can attend, wherever they are sitting that day. There will be an overview of the changes, an explanation of what they mean in practice, and time for questions. There is no need to book and all members are welcome. The CVP joining link will be circulated on the day of the meeting, and we ask that you join muted. If you have a question you would like put to the judges beforehand, send it to [email protected].

LCCSA, Bar Council and CBA: protocol on Magistrates’ Court fees

Agreement has been reached between the London Criminal Courts Solicitors’ Association, the Bar Council and the CBA to increase the scale of minimum fees in the Magistrates’ Court Protocol by 10 per cent, reflecting the increase awarded by the Legal Aid Agency to solicitors earlier this year.

The Revised Protocol for the Instruction and Payment of Counsel in Magistrates’ Courts Cases within the Greater London Area was originally agreed in 2019. It provides a best practice framework for instructing counsel in the Magistrates’ Court, covering delivery of instructions, terms of payment and what is expected of counsel, and it sets minimum fees for barristers undertaking Magistrates’ Court advocacy. Those minimum fees were set in 2019 and increased by 15 per cent in 2024 following an earlier Legal Aid Agency increase. The LCCSA has now agreed to match this year’s 10 per cent increase in solicitors’ fees.

By way of example, the minimum fee for an all-day trial was 150 pounds in 2019, rose to 172.50 pounds in 2024, and now becomes 189.75 pounds. We welcome the increase, which is a fair reflection of what the Legal Aid Agency has done, but it remains very poor remuneration for skilled advocacy. Taking preparation and travel into account, in many cases advocates will be earning not much more than 20 pounds an hour. The Bar and solicitors are united in our concern about the underfunding of this work.

Legally Lifelong celebrates its first anniversary

Many congratulations to Legally Lifelong and its founders Lucy Fegan-Earl, Tochi Ejimofo and Morwenna Hocken as they complete a successful first year.

Legally Lifelong was founded in 2025 as a grassroots organisation promoting mental health, resilience and professional wellbeing in criminal law. Details are at legallylifelong.co.uk.

Thursday 24th September 2026, 17:30 to 20:30, Big Belly Comedy Club, 30 Stamford Street, London SE1 9LQ. Teams of five, tickets from 11.55 pounds. Book your team.

Jury equity and conscience acquittals

Pete Weatherby KC and Mira Hammad of Garden Court North Chambers have written on jury equity and conscience acquittals, and on the constitutional function the jury performs when it declines to convict. Given how prominently the question has featured this year, and with the right to jury trial itself under pressure, members may find it essential reading.

Read: Conscience Acquittals: A Constitutional Backstop

Sexsomnia in sexual offences cases: interviewees sought

Gwenno Roberts, a Doctoral Teaching Fellow at Durham Law School, is conducting PhD research at Durham University into the use of sexsomnia in sexual offences cases in England and Wales. The study looks at how sexsomnia affects the application of the law in rape and other sexual offences, with particular attention to how the law of automatism operates in practice.

She would like to speak to barristers and other legal professionals who have acted in cases where sexsomnia has been raised, whether on professional views of it as a defence, experience of how such cases have run, or its implications for defendants and complainants alike. If you have that experience, or would like more detail about the study, contact her at [email protected].

Domestic Abuse Protection Notices and Orders: national rollout from 25th November

The Ministry of Justice has confirmed that Domestic Abuse Protection Notices and Domestic Abuse Protection Orders will be rolled out across England and Wales from 25th November 2026. Introduced by Part 3 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, they have been piloted since November 2024 in selected areas across the family, civil and criminal courts.

The Notice and the Order are intended to become the standard protective measures in domestic abuse cases. They go further than existing Domestic Violence Protection Notices and Orders, which are issued by the police and limited to 28 days.

Under the new provisions the police may issue a Notice to give immediate protection, and must then apply for an Order to be heard in the Magistrates’ Court within 48 hours. Alternatively a party may make a freestanding application to a family court. Civil, family and criminal courts all have power to make an Order, so it can be made following conviction in the same way as a restraining order.

The new provisions allow a court to impose electronic monitoring and positive requirements such as behaviour change or substance misuse programmes, alongside the more familiar prohibitions on contact and exclusion zones. A person subject to an Order must notify the police of their name and address within three days and keep that information current for its duration. Breach is a criminal offence.

Legal aid will be available under the civil, family and criminal legal aid schemes. Updated guidance will be published on GOV.UK over the coming weeks. Questions to [email protected].

Early release: new Regulations published

Last week we outlined the Government’s announcement of amendments to the early release scheme under the Sentencing Act 2026. This has now passed into law by virtue of the Sentencing Act 2026 (Commencement No. 6 and Revocation) Regulations 2026, SI 2026/953.

Practitioners advising clients on the effect of a sentence may wish to check whether the offence falls within the definitive list of exceptions in the Schedule to the Regulations. The exceptions now include sexual offences, under both the 1956 and 2003 Acts and other relevant provisions; offences resulting in death, including manslaughter and motoring offences where death is caused; dangerous dogs offences; child cruelty; and causing or allowing a child or vulnerable adult to die or suffer serious physical harm.

This week in criminal law

Key updates from issue 31 of Criminal Law Week.

Crime and Policing Act 2026. Numerous provisions have been brought into force on different dates, covering sexual offences, extradition, anti-social behaviour and SIM farms: SI 2026/960, CLW/26/31/7.

Sentencing Act 2026. The statutory instrument delaying the amendments to the prisoner release scheme to 1st October, carrying an updated list of the offences that will exclude prisoners from the scheme. With commentary: SI 2026/953, CLW/26/31/9.

Parole. On the first referral by the Secretary of State of a Parole Board decision directing the release of a life prisoner, the High Court sets out its approach to determining such a referral, in the case of a prisoner who denied murdering his wife and refused to say where her remains are. With commentary: Secretary of State for Justice v Razzell, CLW/26/31/6, KBD (Cheema-Grubb J).

Extradition. The High Court rules on whether the principle in Pilecki, on satisfying the statutory requirement of four months’ imprisonment in conviction cases, has survived Assange and Brexit, and deals with a further slip caused by artificial intelligence. With commentary: Tobosaru v Romania; Tofan v Same, CLW/26/31/5, KBD (Sweeting J).

Offensive weapon. Whether an offender can be convicted of having an offensive weapon in a public place, as distinct from any separate charge of assault, where they come into possession of the article and use it as a weapon immediately: R. v Kalinga, CLW/26/31/3, CA.

Tipping off. In the first case on section 333A(3) of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to reach the Court of Appeal, whether an investigation is capable of being the subject of a disclosure under that subsection where it is also an aspect of a wider investigation already in the public domain: R. v Osmond, CLW/26/31/4, CA.