TNAG-0112-FCO40-148-Detainees-and-prisoners-following-19671968-disturbances-1969 — Page 172

but they also take no account of the relative standing of counsel. At the same time, a fixed fee does have the advan- tage of avoiding comparison between counsel that could be more invidious here than in England where these matters are resolved relatively smoothly by the highly developed system of chambers, clerks etc. A fixed fee also has the advantage that, taking the rough with the smooth, the balance in the end may not greatly differ from that achieved by a more flexible system involving extra expenditure of much time and energy on the unproductive work associated with taxation etc.

It seems to me that the whole question of the proper level of fees requires a new and more thorough study than appears to have been given to the problem in the past. The points which seem to me to require attention are:—

(a) Whether the existing system of rotation should be retained or whether something more selective should be introduced, bearing in mind the amount of material which is likely to be available to any- day in the Judiciary responsible for making such a selection;

(b) Whether the system of fixing fees should be re- tained or something more flexible introduced which could take account of the relative difficulties of individual cases and the standing of those hand- ling them, without engendering too high a propor- tion of unproductive work

(c) What fees would be appropriate in the future for

cases in the Supreme Court;

(d) What fees would be appropriate if and when legal aid is extended to cases in the District Court; and

(e) The approximate cost of any recommendations

made.

39