Clause 70 - Criminal Procedure Rule Committee
Courts Bill [Lords]
10:15 am

Mr Nick Hawkins (Surrey Heath, Conservative)
This is a large group of amendments, and I am indebted for them to my friends at the Institute of Legal Executives, who do an excellent job—I hope that the Minister will confirm that—and are part of the backbone of the legal profession in this country.
Most members of the Committee will probably already know that legal executives are employed in solicitors' offices and in local government to conduct criminal work. They have a wide range of responsibilities, including giving advice to clients, preparing cases for trial in both magistrates and Crown courts, and seeing clients at police stations and prisons. Fellows of the Institute of Legal Executives, who specialise in criminal work, are accredited police station representatives, and representatives of the institute have contributed substantially to the review
of the operation of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.
Legal executives employed in local government have rights of audience in a magistrates court under section 223 of the Local Government Act 1972. That allows authorised officers of a local authority to prosecute or defend cases in magistrates courts on behalf of that authority. I know from having worked with many legal executives over the years that it is not easy to obtain a legal executive's professional qualification; a great deal of work and study goes into qualifying as a fellow of the institute, particularly, but much work is also involved in the lower exams.
Legal executives, by virtue of their professional qualifications, their experience of magistrates courts work and the regulatory regime under which they operate, are entirely suitable, in my view, to be considered for appointment to the criminal procedure rule committee. There should be provision in the Bill to provide for legal executives' particular practical expertise at the sharp end of preparing criminal cases to be represented on the criminal procedure rule committee.
I hope that when the Minister responds, he will acknowledge the work that has been done by the Institute of Legal Executives and by all their members, especially their fellows. Even if he cannot accept the amendment today, I hope that he will be prepared to say that the Government will look carefully at the advantage of involving the institute.
We tabled amendment No. 141 to clause 77 on a similar matter. It, too, relates to the role of legal executives in public and private family matters. Legal executives have a wide range of responsibilities, including giving advice and preparing cases for trial in the county court, the High Court and the magistrates court. Anyone who has been involved in family cases, as I have been—I am sure that the hon. Member for Stafford and some other hon. Members will have had similar experiences—knows that a great deal of the work could not be done without experienced legal executives.
Legal executives have rights of audience on family matters in chambers in the county court and in the High Court. Those who are employed in local government have rights of audience in the family proceedings court under the Local Government Act 1972. Those who are authorised as legal executive advocates by the institute have rights of audience in open court, not only in chambers in the county court, as well as before magistrates in family and related proceedings in the family proceedings court. Legal executives who satisfy the Law Society's criteria, by having the required years of experience and the requisite hours of chargeable work, are eligible for membership of Law Society panels, including the family law panel, the family law panel advanced and the family mediation panel. Legal executive advocates are eligible for membership of the children's panel.
We consider that it should be clearly stated in the Bill that the practical expertise of legal executives in
family proceedings should be used on the family procedure rule committee, too. That is why we have suggested amendment No. 141. Similarly, amendment No. 144 relates to the civil procedure rule committee under clause 83. Again, legal executives are heavily involved in the Law Society panels, such as the civil and commercial mediation panel, the clinical negligence panel and the personal injury panel. It would therefore be helpful if it were clearly stated in the Bill that a legal executive who has particular experience of the practice in the county courts could be a member of the civil procedure rule committee. That is the basis on which we are suggesting that improvements could be made in the Bill to recognise the crucial work of legal executives.
I hope that the Minister, even if he cannot accept our amendments, will at least say that the Government will continue to keep the matter in mind and may table amendments at a later stage to incorporate the work of legal executives and the contribution that they can make to the different rule committees.
