All parties to suffer under domestic abuse case boycott, solicitor warns

Matthew McGovern

The Scottish Solicitors Bar Association (SSBA) said this week that is members would no longer accept new instructions in summary cases where a contravention of section one of the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018 (DASA) is alleged from May 3.

Section one of the Act, which introduced a new offence to tackle coercive control, covers abusive behaviour towards a partner or ex-partner.

Matthew McGovern, a partner at McGovern Reid, tweeted that the decision had been reached “reluctantly”.

“Criminal defence firms - uniquely within the criminal justice system - require to operate for profit. It is simply not profitable to provide representation in section 1 of the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018 cases,” he said.

He added: “These cases are far more complicated and time consuming to prepare than other summary complaint cases.”

He said a current DASA case of his would ultimately take some 19.5 hours to prepare.

“The fixed fee for this case is £524.53 which works out as an hourly rate of only £26.89. That is not my hourly rate, but from that fee I’ve to pay staff, run a business and meet all of the associated costs of running a business before I see a penny of the fee. Frankly it isn’t fair to the accused to have their defence prepared for that fee and it is no wonder solicitors across the country will now decline to accept instructions in s1 DASA cases.”

The solicitor warned that, as a result of the action, there is a risk that the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Office will “decline to prosecute s1 DASA cases and instead use s.38(1) or s.39(1) of the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) 2010 which will mean much of abusive behaviour complained about goes unpunished as the Scottish Parliament’s flagship legislation lies dormant on the statute books”.

He concluded: “There is now an obvious inequality of arms in the justice system and anybody who believes in the presumption of innocence should be afraid about what’s happening. That’s why the profession’s decision is necessary - and in the interests of justice.”