year should be abolished. You might feel disposed to agree with this view since the introduction of Civil Legal Aid and in the light of the above stated history. Further, the Bar Committee suggests that fees should be related to the fees payable in prosecutions by members of the Bar on the Attorney General's fiat, and to those payable in Civil Legal Aid cases. It is suggested that this is reasonable in that the burden carried by Defence Counsel in criminal cases is usually no lighter than in the other two instances.
We should point out that prosecutions on the Attorney General's fiat are offered to practising barristers of the Attorney General's choice, and doubtless the fees marked on the Brief are related to the standing of the barrister con- cerned. On the other hand criminal defences are assigned by yourself in rotation and the standing of Counsel is not usually taken into consideration.
Perhaps a fair revision of fees would be to fix a minimum of, say, $750 on the Brief with $250 refreshers, which fees could be payable to barristers of limited experi- ence, whereas more experienced Counsel would be remuner- ated at a level approximating prosecutions on the Attorney General's flat and Civil Legal Aid Briefs.
I thought it would be of mutual assistance if the above views were communicated to you prior to our meeting to discuss the matter.
Yours sincerely, (Sd.) S. V. GITTINS
37
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.