Direct access is no longer an adjunct to traditional practice; it is a mature and increasingly central way of delivering specialist legal services. Although the cab rank rule does not apply in the same way to such work, and counsel retains a greater degree of choice as to whether to accept instructions, the model has now been established for over 20 years and is widely understood across the profession.
Direct access, or public access as it was originally known, was introduced in 2004 to allow individuals and organisations to instruct barristers without going through solicitors. Since then, the scheme has developed considerably. The regulatory framework has evolved, training has improved, and practitioners are now able to offer their services directly at much earlier stages of disputes and across a wider range of practice areas.
What was once viewed with some scepticism is now an established and important feature of practice at the Bar.
Relationship with Solicitors
One of the most persistent concerns about direct access has been that it might undermine the relationship between barristers and solicitors. In practice, that concern has proved largely unfounded.
Many lay clients are, in fact, referred by solicitors who recognise that a particular issue would benefit from specialist input delivered in a cost-effective and focused way. In areas such as planning and property law, where disputes can quickly become technical, early involvement of specialist counsel can assist in clarifying the issues and advising on realistic outcomes without the need for a fully managed litigation process at the outset.
This alignment benefits all concerned. The client obtains targeted advice at proportionate cost. The referring solicitor reinforces client trust by directing them to the most appropriate form of assistance. The barrister is able to provide specialist input at an early stage. Direct access, properly understood, complements rather than competes with the work of solicitors.
Equally, there are many cases where the involvement of a solicitor is not only desirable but essential. Issuing proceedings, managing compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules, dealing with disclosure, and maintaining the day-to-day conduct of litigation are functions that are often better suited to solicitors. Direct access works best when each branch of the profession operates within its strengths, and when clients are directed to the model that best suits their needs.
Conducting Litigation
Barristers may conduct litigation where they have obtained the necessary authorisation. However, many practitioners choose not to offer this service, even where they are accredited to do so.
Conducting litigation requires barristers to assume responsibility for case management and compliance functions typically undertaken by solicitors. This includes maintaining a detailed overview of the progress of a case, ensuring that deadlines are met, managing correspondence, and dealing with procedural obligations on an ongoing basis. It is a significantly more continuous and administrative role than the traditional work of advising, drafting, and advocacy.
For many barristers, whose practices are structured around providing specialist legal input at key stages of a dispute, this is not an attractive model. The reasons that draw practitioners to the Bar—focused advisory work and advocacy—do not always sit comfortably with the demands of running a case in the manner required when conducting litigation.
As a result, direct access often operates most effectively where the client remains a litigant in person, supported by counsel as required, or where a solicitor is engaged alongside counsel when the case demands it.
Access to Justice and Funding
Direct access has an important role to play in promoting access to justice. With the reduction of legal aid in many areas, individuals and businesses continue to face disputes for which they require legal advice, often at an early stage and often with limited resources.
Barristers are well placed to provide that advice. Their experience of litigation enables them not only to assess the legal merits of a case, but also to advise on how it is likely to unfold in practice. This combination of legal analysis and practical insight is particularly valuable at the outset of a dispute.
Early engagement can prevent clients from pursuing unmeritorious claims or defences, thereby avoiding unnecessary cost and stress. Equally, it can enable clients with legitimate grievances to pursue them with confidence, where they might otherwise have been deterred by uncertainty or perceived cost.
Funding remains a central issue. Direct access does not remove that difficulty, but it does allow it to be addressed at an early and informed stage. Options such as pro bono assistance, crowdfunding (with appropriate care as to how funds are held and disbursed), reduced fees, or conditional fee arrangements—where permitted within the regulatory and insurance framework—can all be considered.
Importantly, these discussions can take place directly between client and counsel, without the need for multiple layers of instruction. This can make the process more efficient and allow clients to make informed decisions at an earlier stage.
Practical Advantages of Early Involvement
One of the most significant advantages of direct access is the opportunity for early involvement in a case. Where counsel is engaged at the outset, they are often far more familiar with the factual background and evidential landscape than when instructed later through solicitors at discrete stages of litigation.
This familiarity brings practical benefits. Counsel who have worked closely with a client from an early stage are better able to respond quickly as a case develops, without the need to repeatedly revisit the detail. This can lead to greater efficiency and, in many cases, lower overall cost.
Direct access also enables barristers to play a meaningful role in shaping the course of a dispute. This includes advising on pre-action correspondence, drafting letters before action, and engaging in settlement discussions or alternative dispute resolution. Such work will not usually amount to conducting litigation, though the boundary is fact-sensitive and must be approached with care.
In practice, early involvement often assists in narrowing the issues between the parties and promoting resolution at a stage where positions have not yet become entrenched. Even where disputes proceed, the groundwork laid through early advice frequently results in a more focused and coherent case.
There is also an important protective function. Litigants in person can be at a disadvantage when dealing with represented opponents, particularly where procedural or tactical points are taken. By advising and supporting the client directly, counsel can help ensure that the dispute is conducted fairly and proportionately, reducing the risk of imbalance or unnecessary escalation.
From the perspective of the court or tribunal, the involvement of counsel can also assist in the efficient presentation of cases, even where the client remains formally a litigant in person.
The Bar’s Strategic Opportunity
Direct access also presents a strategic opportunity for the Bar. The legal services market continues to evolve. Solicitor advocacy has expanded, clients are increasingly cost-conscious, and traditional funding models have been reduced in scope.
In that context, the ability to accept instructions directly opens up new sources of work. In many cases, such work is paid for on an up-front basis, providing a degree of financial certainty. More broadly, it allows the Bar to engage directly with a wider range of clients, including individuals and businesses who might not otherwise seek specialist advice.
The Bar’s strengths remain clear: specialist knowledge, independence, and advocacy experience. These qualities are particularly valuable to clients seeking realistic and impartial advice at the outset of a dispute, or targeted intervention at critical stages.
Direct access allows those strengths to be deployed more flexibly. It enables barristers to assist clients at the beginning of a problem, rather than only once litigation is fully underway. It also allows for more tailored involvement, whether through discrete pieces of advice, drafting, or representation at hearings.
Conclusion
Direct access is now an established and valuable part of practice at the Bar. It enables barristers to engage more directly with clients, to understand cases more fully, and to deliver legal services in a way that is both efficient and proportionate.
It also serves a broader purpose. By providing early, realistic advice and supporting litigants in person, direct access contributes to the effective functioning of the justice system. It can reduce unmeritorious litigation, assist in the resolution of disputes at an earlier stage, and improve the quality of cases that do proceed to court or tribunal.
As one client observed after avoiding costly litigation, following what he described as a “clear and blunt” preliminary discussion, direct access gave him confidence in both the advice and the outcome: “I knew I had made the right choice… I was more than happy with the end result… Overall, I gained peace of mind.”
Kevin Leigh, Barrister, Thomas More Chambers
