mountainyman Closed Account
#16

There are 2 related points.

[1] Irish Barristers are generally overpaid. After 10 years the average earnings at the Irish bar are significantly higher than in the UK.

HOWEVER a salary cap is nonsense.

Look outside this jurisdiction at the Ardagh Glass case in the UK. Ardagh glass is seeking to force quinn to destroy a glass recycling facility worth hundreds of millions. If there were 4 barristers a side the skill and guile of the one barrister was more than another and Quinn spent 1 million on barristers fees for 2 months work and won wouldn't that still be money well spent?

Jim_Are_Great Registered User
#17

mountainyman said:
There are 2 related points.

[1] Irish Barristers are generally overpaid. After 10 years the average earnings at the Irish bar are significantly higher than in the UK.

HOWEVER a salary cap is nonsense.

Look outside this jurisdiction at the Ardagh Glass case in the UK. Ardagh glass is seeking to force quinn to destroy a glass recycling facility worth hundreds of millions. If there were 4 barristers a side the skill and guile of the one barrister was more than another and Quinn spent 1 million on barristers fees for 2 months work and won wouldn't that still be money well spent?


I'm not sure I follow your second point.

Jo King Banned
#18

mountainyman said:
There are 2 related points.

[1] Irish Barristers are generally overpaid. After 10 years the average earnings at the Irish bar are significantly higher than in the UK.

?


What is your source for this?

Tom Young Moderator
#19

mountainyman said:
Look outside this jurisdiction at the Ardagh Glass case in the UK. Ardagh glass is seeking to force quinn to destroy a glass recycling facility worth hundreds of millions. If there were 4 barristers a side the skill and guile of the one barrister was more than another and Quinn spent 1 million on barristers fees for 2 months work and won wouldn't that still be money well spent?


I am not sure I get the point here either - however, there is one thing I will say, to vindicate rights or indeed have an intricate surgery, expertise is required and expertise costs money whether the matter be civil, criminal or surgical I know I'd hire the best I could afford.

Before this one turns into a fight of affording Barristers, I often look at certain non-reputable newspaper reporting of Criminal Legal Aid, which is totally and completely one-sided. If the state decide to have and retain the best possible prisecutors on a case, then I can say that a person who is yet to be found guilty of an offence and is before the courts needs the best possible defence team that money can buy, even if it is and comes in the guises of a criminal legal aid brief.


Tom

Johnny Utah Registered User
#20

Not sure if it would fit well with the traditional wig and gown..........





1 person has thanked this post
Lefournier Registered User
#21

Jo King said:
The 8% reduction is on legal aid fees which are paid by the state. Nothing to do with the o/p's question, which refers to fees paid by the public.


OP was a comment on barristers' earnings in general and did not mention legal aid.

Incidentally, the vast bulk of barristers' earnings are underwritten by the State, directly so when the DPP or some other State body is a party to the action (and somehow that party gets fixed with costs more often than not), but also indirectly in areas such as insurance which are essentially a product of a system underpinned by the State. It's time to stop the gravy train.

focusing Registered User
#22

Their fees are capped, if you just ask them what they'll be at the start of your case.

maidhc Registered User
#23

Lefournier said:
OP was a comment on barristers' earnings in general and did not mention legal aid.

Incidentally, the vast bulk of barristers' earnings are underwritten by the State, directly so when the DPP or some other State body is a party to the action (and somehow that party gets fixed with costs more often than not), but also indirectly in areas such as insurance which are essentially a product of a system underpinned by the State. It's time to stop the gravy train.


I know a lot of barristers, any many of them are excellent. Most earn less than your average civil servant.

Lefournier Registered User
#24

maidhc said:
I know a lot of barristers, any many of them are excellent. Most earn less than your average civil servant.


After a few years practice, the typical working barrister is earning much more than an average civil servant (remember most civil servants are in clerical grades). In any event, do you know of a way to protect the low-paid while hitting the big earners and the incompetent?

Johnny Utah Registered User
#25

Lefournier said:
After a few years practice, the typical working barrister is earning much more than an average civil servant (remember most civil servants are in clerical grades). In any event, do you know of a way to protect the low-paid while hitting the big earners and the incompetent?



You're talking through your hoop there buddy. Troll.

marinbike Banned
#26

mountainyman said:
There are 2 related points.

[1] Irish Barristers are generally overpaid. After 10 years the average earnings at the Irish bar are significantly higher than in the UK.

HOWEVER a salary cap is nonsense.

Look outside this jurisdiction at the Ardagh Glass case in the UK. Ardagh glass is seeking to force quinn to destroy a glass recycling facility worth hundreds of millions. If there were 4 barristers a side the skill and guile of the one barrister was more than another and Quinn spent 1 million on barristers fees for 2 months work and won wouldn't that still be money well spent?


Irish Barristers are among the most overpaid in Europe. They must take a salary cut. Their fees are exceptionally high, compared to Barristers on the continent.

Most people have already taken a pay cut, I don't see why Irish Barristers should be any exception to this. Everyone is complaining about the high fees the legal profession are still charging. Rip-off

nuac Moderator
#27

As a solicitor have had many years experience of choosing barristers. Most clients want the best available for the particular case, not the cheapest.

Barristers are in compeitition with each other for work. Capping their fees or income is nonsense. They don't get salaries.

There have been some massive fees paid for tribunal work. That should not have happened and should have been better controlled.

However tribunal work is a different planet from the normal daily legal grind

Skopzz Banned
#28

nuac said:
As a solicitor have had many years experience of choosing barristers. Most clients want the best available for the particular case, not the cheapest.

Barristers are in compeitition with each other for work. Capping their fees or income is nonesense. They don't get salaries.

There have been some massive fees paid for tribunal work. That should not have happened and should have been better controlled.

However tribunal work is a different planet from the normal daily legal grind


If I was looking for a barrister, I would look for the cheapest. Barristers are paid outrageous sums of money for the work they do. Lawyers are also grossly overpaid.

Lawyers and Barristers should be forced to take a salary cap as well as a pay cut. Anything less that this constitutes greed. Thats whats keping prices so high in this country.

dats_right Registered User
#29

Skopzz said:
If I was looking for a barrister, I would look for the cheapest. Barristers are paid outrageous sums of money for the work they do. Lawyers are also grossly overpaid.

Lawyers and Barristers should be forced to take a salary cap as well as a pay cut. Anything less that this constitutes greed. Thats whats keping prices so high in this country.


Firstly, to clarify for you on your basic ignorances of the legal profession; a lawyer is a generic name for either a solicitor or barrister. In any event, either this is uninformed, ridiculous, nonsense or the poster is trolling. Whatever it is, it is not worthy of further comment.

2 people have thanked this post
johnnysmurfman Registered User
#30

How could you possibly do this? Particularly when barristers are sole traders and where the amount earned depends on the quantity and type of work done. Could you cap sole trader bricklayers' fees?

A barrister can earn fees from so many sources that it would be very difficult to list them, and almost impossible to put in place a scale of fees. A planning law opinion might take 20 minutes or it could take 10 hours, how could you possibly say that the one that takes 10 hours will cost the same as the one that takes 20 minutes?

Barristers are required to provide estimates of their fees in advance though so that is of assistance.

Finally, why did you not suggest capping solicitors' fees when they are almost always higher?

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!