This article reports on an evaluation of a pilot project in the tendering out of legal aid defence services for criminal matters in the Queensland District Court. Comparisons were made on quality and cost between the assignment of matters through competitive contracting and conventional assignment to private practitioners through a panel and scale fee system. Results show no significant differences in case outcomes and client perceptions of quality. In the interests of further cost reductions, any extension of tendering would need to focus on relatively simple, high-volume areas of prescribed crime, where there is less risk that competitive pricing will reduce the quality of service delivery. In addition, the evaluation indicated that greater savings might in future be obtained by enhanced utilisation of in-house (salaried) legal aid practitioners.