Westminster update: government agrees to criminal legal aid fee increase

Autumn Budget 2025

Read about the government’s latest Budget and what it means for the legal sector – from scrapped limited liability partnership tax plans to training reforms and more.

Government agrees to criminal legal aid fee increase

The government confirmed that most fees paid to criminal legal aid solicitors will increase, with the first changes taking effect via Statutory Instrument (SI) on 22 December.

This follows an earlier consultation on how solicitor fees should be reformed, after we had secured a commitment to an increase.

The changes include:

• a standard fee of £320 (plus VAT) to apply across all police station schemes
• the threshold for claiming additional escape fees for complex cases dropping from £960 to £650, making it easier for solicitors to get paid more for exceptional cases
• all magistrates court fees rising by 10%, including youth court cases
• appeals fees rising by 10% to match magistrates’ court increases
• prison law fees to go up by 24%
• changes to the Litigators’ Graduated Fee Scheme (LGFS) to set clear ratios for guilty pleas, cracked trials and full trials, and to increase fees for the lowest-paying offences

A second SI will follow once the Legal Aid Agency stabilises its systems after a cyber attack earlier this year.

This will cover the higher-level criminal fees and appeals in the High Court.

Law Society vice president Brett Dixon said: “Criminal defence lawyers help ensure that there is a level playing field across the system, that cases can be dealt with efficiently and that victims, witnesses and defendants can get timely justice and fair outcomes. This additional investment is a positive step forward and a short-term boost for the profession after decades of underfunding and cuts.

“We are particularly pleased to see the government has taken on our feedback including increasing the escape fee for police station work. Disappointingly, the Ministry of Justice has not chosen to address the additional costs of out-of-hours work.”

Fees for housing and immigration work will also increase as part of a £20m annual investment to make the system more sustainable, taking effect via SI on 22 December as well.

In these changes:

• housing legal aid fees will go up by 42%
• immigration and asylum legal aid fees will rise by 31%
• new minimum hourly rates will be set at £65.35 outside London and £69.30 in London
• fixed fees will also increase proportionately, with at least a 10% uplift across the board

Vice president Brett Dixon said: “For the first time in 30 years the UK government will enact a fee increase for solicitors working in housing and immigration legal aid. Civil legal aid is a vital public service that supports our communities and reduces the strain on other public services.

“Our Frontier Economics research was influential in shaping the proposed increase to rates for legal aid work under housing and immigration contracts, which is a significant step forward that was both necessary and overdue.

“We are disappointed that part of the expected increase is being held back, given it is long overdue, but we welcome the rise on behalf of our members.”

Lord chancellor announces jury trials reforms

On 2 December, deputy prime minister and lord chancellor David Lammy announced sweeping criminal court reforms affecting jury trials, following the first stage of the independent review of criminal courts led by Sir Brian Leveson.

The announcement comes amid a Crown Court backlog of 78,000 cases, which Lammy described as a “systemic failure” and “a betrayal of victims”, warning that caseloads could reach 100,000 by 2028.

The reforms aim to accelerate justice without relying on “investment alone”.

They include introducing 'Swift Courts', where judges rather than juries will hear cases likely to be given sentences of three years or less.

The government estimates this model could be 20% faster, with judges providing open reasoning for their verdicts.

We are deeply concerned about the proposed reforms, which go well beyond the recommendations made by Sir Brian Leveson.

We also haven't seen any real evidence that expanding the types of cases heard by a single judge will reduce the courts backlog.

Defendants in either-way cases will also lose the automatic right to choose a jury trial, with judges and magistrates choosing the appropriate forum instead. Jury trials will remain for the most serious offences such as rape, murder and grievous bodily harm.

Magistrates’ sentencing powers will also be expanded to 18 months – potentially rising to two years – alongside tighter limits on automatic appeals.

In exceptionally technical or lengthy fraud cases, judges may be allowed to sit without juries.

While acknowledging calls for increased funding, Lammy highlighted recent investments of £150m in court improvements, £92m annually for criminal legal aid and record Crown Court sitting days.

Additional measures include:

• up to £34m per year for criminal legal aid advocates
• matched funding for pupillages to widen access to the criminal Bar
• negotiations for three-year certainty on sitting days

The proposals sparked strong opposition across the Commons.

Citing the Law Society among other stakeholders, shadow lord chancellor Robert Jenrick argued that jury trials are not the cause of delays. He highlighted underused court sitting days, accusing the government of misdirecting resources.

Liberal Democrat justice spokesperson Jess Brown-Fuller warned of a “historic upheaval” with profound consequences.

She stressed that systemic failures such as broken contracts, absent interpreters, poor witness coordination and crumbling infrastructure, with maintenance backlogs of £1.3bn, are the real drivers of delay.

Few MPs welcomed the announcement.

UK-India FTA: legal services left out

On 2 December, chair of the Business and Trade Select Committee Liam Byrne MP (Labour) brought together experts across goods and services to scrutinise the government’s negotiation of the UK-India FTA.

The Business and Trade Committee heard from major British and Indian businesses, professional services firms, the trade minister and the UK’s chief negotiator to see what the UK’s biggest bilateral deal since Brexit actually delivers for British exporters, and where the trade-offs fall.

This is linked to the Committee’s inquiry into UK trade with the EU, US and India.

We responded to that call for evidence, setting out the current state of market access and sharing our recommendations on how to improve trade and remove barriers for UK lawyers hoping to offer legal services.

The sessions began with the goods sector. Witnesses from the National Farmers' Union (NFU), AstraZeneca, Jaguar Land Rover and Pernod Ricard explained how the deal benefits their different industries.

They raised concerns over quotas, non-reciprocal agreements and a “sell out of the UK dairy sector” according to the NFU.

In the services panel, the Committee heard from representatives of the Indian IT sector, TheCityUK, Deloitte and head of international trade at Ashurst, Claus Zimmerman.

Regarding legal services, Claus explained that leaving them out from the deal was a huge missed opportunity.

The UK has an open and liberalised legal market which allows Indian lawyers to provide services under Indian law as well as retrain in English and Welsh law.

If UK firms could establish offices and partner with local firms, this would benefit the other industries that are now able to access the Indian legal market.

He pointed to a potential review of the FTA in five years as a good moment to try and open up the market again.

Coming up

We are working closely with MPs and peers to influence a number of bills before Parliament: