Reviews for lawyers living off legal aid

By JO-MARIE BROWN and JAN CORBETT

Incompetent lawyers living off taxpayer-funded legal aid could be put out of business by performance reviews the new Legal Services Agency hopes to have in place by the end of this year.

Agency chairman and Dunedin barrister Stephen O'Driscoll is working with senior defence lawyers to establish a set of standards, after the profession acknowledged too many substandard lawyers were being supported by legal aid because they either could not get jobs in law firms or were not good enough to attract private fee-paying clients.

The legal aid bill for criminal work reached $45.5 million for the year to June 2000.

Incompetence not only clogs the court system, but can lead to miscarriages of justice.

Critics of the system say there are examples of trials being run on legal aid so that lawyers can increase their experience and move up the rankings, allowing them to be funded for more complex trials. In some of these cases the defendant should have been advised to plead guilty, saving both money and court time.

Bar Association president Stuart Grieve, QC, who is helping devise performance measures, said "no lawyer is owed a living on legal aid" and only those assessed as competent should be allowed to draw it.

The problem has been building for some time as the number of law graduates each year exceeds the number of jobs available. Solicitors require three years' experience in a firm before they can practise alone, whereas barristers appearing in court need no experience and can work alone. It makes criminal law an attractive option for graduates unable to find jobs in law firms.

The issue came to a head after South Auckland lawyers came under fire from Chief District Court Judge Ron Young, who has branded some counsel's work as "below a reasonable expectation."

The rebuke saw more than 100 lawyers meet Judge Young at the Manukau District Court this week to defend their collective reputation and find out exactly what the problem was.

The Weekend Herald understands Judge Young has refused to pinpoint which counsel he believed were below par, after having observed them in the former Otahuhu District Court last August.

The meeting was told judges no longer had time to take counsel aside and offer constructive criticism, as has often occurred in the past.

The Auckland District Law Society has been left to find a way forward and plans to implement new training programmes to help lawyers polish their courtroom performance.

The society's executive director Margaret Wong said Judge Young's criticism has raised awareness among all lawyers of the need to help those not up to scratch.

"The whole issue of training younger practitioners is something we've been aware of for quite some time.

"It's not always easy for young practitioners who become barristers to get the necessary training."

Ms Wong said those employed by firms generally received guidance from senior practitioners, but those left to go it alone sometimes struggled.

A formal mentoring programme was also likely to be established so lawyers had someone to turn to if they needed help, Ms Wong said.

"There seems to be a lot more pressure on everybody these days, particularly in the Auckland environment," Ms Wong said.

"We just need to take a step back and say, well, in order to make sure that everybody is getting appropriate training and assistance we need to put in place some procedures and systems to make that happen."

Judge Young said the meeting at Manukau had been valuable and constructive but has declined to comment any further.