https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-27/trial-lawyers-walkout-across-uk-over-government-f

Author : Navjot Sidhu | Published On : 23 Oct 2026

On 27 June 2022, criminal barristers across England and Wales began industrial action in a dispute over government funding for legal aid. The walkouts highlighted growing concerns about professional earnings, the sustainability of criminal defence work and the availability of legal representation for people facing criminal charges.

The dispute attracted national and international attention, with Bloomberg reporting on the lawyers’ decision to take action over government funding. The Criminal Bar Association (CBA), which represents criminal barristers in England and Wales, argued that existing legal aid arrangements were making it increasingly difficult for practitioners to remain in criminal law.

Why Did Criminal Barristers Walk Out?

The main issue behind the strike was the level of fees paid for publicly funded criminal cases. Barristers undertake demanding work that includes reviewing evidence, preparing legal arguments, advising clients and appearing in court. However, many practitioners argued that the income available from legal aid did not adequately reflect the time and expenses required.

The government had proposed a 15% increase in legal aid fees following an independent review led by Sir Christopher Bellamy QC. The review identified the increase as a minimum step towards improving the sustainability of criminal legal aid.

However, the Criminal Bar Association argued that the proposal did not go far enough. Its members wanted a larger increase and raised concerns about delays in implementing changes. Inflation and professional expenses added to the financial pressure experienced by self-employed barristers.

The walkout was intended to draw attention to these issues and encourage further discussions about funding arrangements.

Jo Sidhu QC and the Criminal Bar Association

Jo Sidhu QC was chair of the Criminal Bar Association during the 2022 strike. He publicly explained why the association believed action was necessary, emphasising that the dispute involved more than individual pay levels.

Sidhu argued that the shortage of criminal barristers was creating difficulties for the justice system. If practitioners could not afford to remain in criminal law, courts could face further challenges in securing advocates for prosecution and defence cases.

For people searching for Jo Sidhu news, the June 2022 strike provides important historical context about his role as a representative of criminal barristers. His comments reflected the CBA’s concerns about falling real-term earnings, the departure of junior practitioners and the ability of the profession to meet future demand.

Financial Pressures on Criminal Barristers

Many criminal barristers are self-employed, meaning that their earnings must cover the costs of running a professional practice. These expenses can include insurance, travel, tax, training and chambers’ fees.

The CBA reported during the dispute that real-term earnings had fallen significantly over the preceding years. It also highlighted the financial difficulties experienced by junior barristers, some of whom earned relatively low incomes during the early stages of their careers.

Such circumstances can make criminal advocacy less attractive compared with other legal careers. Junior practitioners may struggle to establish financial stability, while experienced barristers may consider moving into different areas of law.

The association argued that sustainable funding was necessary to retain experienced professionals and encourage new lawyers to enter criminal practice.

How the Strike Affected the Courts

The industrial action began on 27 June 2022, with barristers refusing to undertake certain court work, accept new instructions or cover additional hearings for colleagues where applicable under the strike arrangements.

The action created disruption at courts across England and Wales, including the Old Bailey in London and other Crown Court locations. Hearings that required participating barristers could be postponed or rearranged.

The disruption was particularly significant because the courts were already dealing with a substantial backlog of criminal cases. Delays can affect defendants, victims, witnesses and families who may have been waiting for proceedings to conclude.

The government raised concerns about the impact of strike action on victims and court delays. The Criminal Bar Association, meanwhile, argued that unresolved funding problems were contributing to the wider difficulties facing the justice system.

These differing positions illustrated the challenge of balancing the immediate consequences of industrial action with the longer-term need to maintain a sustainable criminal Bar.

Why Legal Aid Matters to Access to Justice

Legal aid helps eligible people obtain legal representation when they cannot afford to pay privately. In criminal proceedings, professional legal assistance can be essential to understanding charges, reviewing evidence and presenting a defence.

When fewer barristers are willing or able to undertake publicly funded work, the availability of representation may become a concern. Maintaining a sufficient number of experienced advocates is therefore important to the effective operation of the courts.

Funding decisions affect not only the legal profession but also the public. A sustainable system needs to support qualified practitioners while ensuring that public resources are used responsibly.

The 2022 dispute demonstrated how legal aid arrangements, professional working conditions and court capacity are closely connected.

Understanding Searches for Navjot Sidhu and Navjot Sidhu KC

Readers researching legal news may also encounter the search terms Navjot Sidhu and Navjot Sidhu KC. However, the Bloomberg report about the June 2022 barristers’ walkout concerns criminal legal aid funding and the wider industrial dispute. Related coverage identifies Jo Sidhu QC as chair of the Criminal Bar Association at the time.

The source does not establish that Navjot Sidhu or Navjot Sidhu KC refers to the same individual. These names should therefore be treated separately unless reliable biographical evidence confirms a connection.

Using accurate names and professional titles is important for responsible SEO writing. Keywords should help readers discover relevant information without suggesting an identity or professional relationship that the source does not support.

Conclusion

The UK criminal barristers’ walkout of June 2022 highlighted serious concerns about legal aid funding, professional earnings and the availability of criminal advocates. The Criminal Bar Association argued that the government’s proposed fee increase did not adequately address the financial pressures facing the profession.

Jo Sidhu QC played a prominent role in communicating these concerns as chair of the association. His comments formed part of a wider debate about recruitment, retention and access to justice.

The dispute demonstrated that legal aid funding is an important part of maintaining an effective criminal justice system. Sustainable arrangements can help support legal professionals and ensure that eligible individuals continue to have access to representation.