Solicitor Advocate - Practice Today

Practice Today

Solicitor higher court advocacy has developed significantly since its first authorisation by the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990. Although only a handful of solicitors acquired higher rights in the first batch of advocates in 1994, they included some of the most senior figures in the legal establishment of the time such as Sir David Napley, founding partner of Kingsley Napley. There are now approximately 4,000 advocates authorised for crime, civil, or both. There is a wide spectrum of experience. Whilst there has been a steady growth of numbers in recent years, the bulk of the serious advocacy is still undertaken by solicitor advocates with many years of advocacy practice behind them. Some solicitor advocates have been working exclusively in higher courts for fifteen years (or longer if former barristers) and have developed particular specialisms, for example in regulatory and disciplinary work such as Andrew Hopper QC; in family work, such as June Venters QC; in extradition cases, such as Michael Caplan QC; and elsewhere in various parts of the criminal field, such as in terrorism work and fraud; e.g., Niall Quinn QC. Solicitor advocates are regularly appointed to the ranks of Queen's Counsel, albeit that numbers of applicants are relatively low. Solicitor advocates have also been appointed to the High Court Bench. Lawrence Collins, Baron Collins of Mapesbury, a former Herbert Smith partner was the first appointee as a solicitor QC in 1997 before being appointed to the High Court Bench. He was recently appointed as a Law Lord.

The bar and Judiciary have been generally supportive of the growth of solicitor advocacy asserting that the bar would not be threatened by individuals acquiring new skills and practices; and that the ethnic, gender and class diversity that this wider pool of advocates would bring to the profession would be welcome. However in recent years the bar has found its work being reduced - partly as a result of Legal Aid cuts principally directed at solicitors' firms - and this has generally soured its approach.

Instruction of solicitor advocates became more prevalent as firms saw the advantages of keeping work in-house without the need to instruct outside counsel. This pioneering approach is frequently seen across England and Wales, particularly in areas such as New Birmingham. The previous monopoly of counsel in higher court advocacy led to complacency by some - it remains fairly common for late withdrawal from serious cases of the counsel of choice due to other work commitments. Occasionally this was accompanied by an attempt to foist upon both solicitor and client a new counsel with no previous involvement in the case. Practice choices such as these worked to the benefit of solicitor advocates who had the advantage of appreciating the consequences of such behaviour and knowing the client. Equally, the independent bar met with some limited competition from chambers of solicitor advocates - independent practitioners with common clerking and conference facilities who operated in a similar way to barristers, but with less aggressive clerking arrangements so that late return of briefs was relatively unusual.

Competition has led to criticism from the bar and judiciary of the extent of solicitor advocacy practised in the higher courts, (particularly as solicitor advocates are regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority or Law Society of Scotland rather than the Faculty of Advocates or Bar Standards Board). In fact, solicitor advocates have a Code for Advocacy which is almost identical to the Bar Code of Conduct, and solicitors are bound by a number of additional ethical rules to ensure that clients interests are safeguarded in any choice of advocate - whether in-house or otherwise.