*/
Pitch-perfect in court but not hitting quite the right note with lay clients? Kolarele Sonaike shares some techniques for making yourself understood and your clients feel heard
It’s fair to say that we barristers are not always great people-persons. Our role typically requires us to maintain a dispassionate distance from lay clients – all the better to advise them objectively and represent them effectively.
And our work is intense. We often have to assimilate huge amounts of information on unfamiliar subjects in a painfully short space of time. Then we empty our minds and start the whole process again a few days later with a new case. That intensity requires a single-minded focus on the facts, the law and the evidence, leaving the client relationship building to our instructing solicitors.
But where does that leave the lay client? Barristers are adept at drafting complex pleadings, insightful skeleton arguments and delivering pitch-perfect submissions to the judge, but when it comes to communicating with lay clients, we are often detached and clinical.
I admit I struggled with client communication for years. Training at Bar school on this topic was frankly woeful (admittedly that was 26 years ago), and while I have attended many conferences on the law over the years, none of them addressed the skill and technique of communicating with clients. The assumption was that if you know your stuff, you should be able to deal with the client effectively.
Sadly, of course, it’s not as simple as that. It took me years to develop an approach to communication with which I felt confident, and more importantly, with which my clients felt comfortable.
Here are a few of the principles I follow:
Our training encourages us to see all sides of the argument so we can make balanced judgements. But the corollary of that balance is fence-sitting.
Client: Are we going to win?
Barrister: You might win but equally you might lose. It depends on what happens on the day.
Client: They’ve offered a settlement. Should I take it?
Barrister: I can’t tell you what to do.
The worry, of course, is that categorical answers set us up for complaints and litigation if things don’t go perfectly. So we hedge our bets. But our clients deserve more credit. Yes, they want answers, but they are also more than capable of accepting the necessary caveats that go with those answers.
Client: Are we going to win?
Barrister: Yes. I think we will. There are no guarantees in litigation, and your case faces risks A, B, and C, which means we could still lose. But yes, if the case plays out as it should, then I think we will win.
Take a position. Tell it straight.
We like the sound of our own voices. If we didn’t, the job would be intolerable. But that confidence can sometimes intimidate clients into silence. Instead of verbalising their concerns, they defer to our experience and expertise.
The cure is empathetic deep listening. It reassures our clients that we understand their case and creates a permission structure that empowers them to share important facts with us.
At the end of a conference, I always ask: ‘Is there anything we haven’t yet covered that is crucial for me to know?’ This will often lead to a new piece of information that has a significant bearing on the case.
Once a client feels heard, their appreciation of your services will increase exponentially.
What is obvious to us with all our legal training, can seem illogical and complicated to our clients. Analogies can help to bridge that gap. When my clients get excited as things start to go our way during a trial, I calm them down with a sports analogy:
‘It’s only half time. We’re winning but they can still come back in the second half.’
To explain the concept of TUPE transfers in employment law, I will sometimes use the analogy of a restaurant coming under new management but keeping the same name, same staff and same menu. And when my clients can’t decide whether or not to accept a settlement offer, I use the example of the game show Deal or No Deal:
‘Right now, you have a box with £50,000 in it. If you accept it, that’s the end of the game and you will have missed out on the chance of winning a £100,000 box. But if you turn it down, you could also end up with the £1 box. Decide which one of those scenarios would hurt the most, then go with the other one.’
Analogies simplify complexity.
There is a scene in the middle of A Few Good Men when the a young Tom Cruise is explaining the litigation risks to his fellow lawyers. Asked whether he believes in the case, Cruise retorts:
‘It doesn’t matter what I believe. It only matters what I can prove!’
I use this when I find clients are not being diligent with their disclosure efforts. They immediately get that their case will be won or lost not by the merits, but by the evidence they provide in support of their positions.
For some reason, movie quotes resonate with clients. Gather yours and deploy when necessary.
Saying it once, does not mean our clients will immediately understand, much less retain. Before my witnesses take the stand, I give them my ‘evidence speech’:
‘Listen carefully to the question you are asked and answer that question alone. Don’t evade. Don’t argue. Don’t over share. Stick to the truth as it’s the easiest thing to remember. Don’t try to judge how well you are doing because you can’t. Just answer truthfully, wait for the next question, and leave me to worry about the impact of your evidence.’
Five minutes later, I give them the same speech again, and then again, and then again. When I see irritation, I know they have got the message. And when they watch the other side’s witnesses tank their case by giving evidence poorly, they fully appreciate why I was so repetitive with my advice.
Saying it once is not enough.
Repeat. Repeat. Repeat.
Imagine yourself at the hospital about to go under the knife for a major operation. Your life is in the doctor’s hands and you feel completely helpless. Wouldn’t you want to be kept updated about everything? Our clients deserve that same level of information.
They should know what we think of the case; what the risks are; what will happen next; how long the trial will take; what to call the judge; why we didn’t rely on a certain piece of evidence etc.
Most clients will only experience one legal case in their lifetimes. We owe it to them to ensure that they are informed and updated so they can make the right decisions for themselves.
George Bernard Shaw once said: ‘The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.’ As barristers we should work to solve rather than perpetuate that problem.
Kolarele Sonaike is a barrister practising at 1EC Barristers, specialising in employment law and commercial litigation. He is also a communications coach training companies and executives to improve their communication skills.
It’s fair to say that we barristers are not always great people-persons. Our role typically requires us to maintain a dispassionate distance from lay clients – all the better to advise them objectively and represent them effectively.
And our work is intense. We often have to assimilate huge amounts of information on unfamiliar subjects in a painfully short space of time. Then we empty our minds and start the whole process again a few days later with a new case. That intensity requires a single-minded focus on the facts, the law and the evidence, leaving the client relationship building to our instructing solicitors.
But where does that leave the lay client? Barristers are adept at drafting complex pleadings, insightful skeleton arguments and delivering pitch-perfect submissions to the judge, but when it comes to communicating with lay clients, we are often detached and clinical.
I admit I struggled with client communication for years. Training at Bar school on this topic was frankly woeful (admittedly that was 26 years ago), and while I have attended many conferences on the law over the years, none of them addressed the skill and technique of communicating with clients. The assumption was that if you know your stuff, you should be able to deal with the client effectively.
Sadly, of course, it’s not as simple as that. It took me years to develop an approach to communication with which I felt confident, and more importantly, with which my clients felt comfortable.
Here are a few of the principles I follow:
Our training encourages us to see all sides of the argument so we can make balanced judgements. But the corollary of that balance is fence-sitting.
Client: Are we going to win?
Barrister: You might win but equally you might lose. It depends on what happens on the day.
Client: They’ve offered a settlement. Should I take it?
Barrister: I can’t tell you what to do.
The worry, of course, is that categorical answers set us up for complaints and litigation if things don’t go perfectly. So we hedge our bets. But our clients deserve more credit. Yes, they want answers, but they are also more than capable of accepting the necessary caveats that go with those answers.
Client: Are we going to win?
Barrister: Yes. I think we will. There are no guarantees in litigation, and your case faces risks A, B, and C, which means we could still lose. But yes, if the case plays out as it should, then I think we will win.
Take a position. Tell it straight.
We like the sound of our own voices. If we didn’t, the job would be intolerable. But that confidence can sometimes intimidate clients into silence. Instead of verbalising their concerns, they defer to our experience and expertise.
The cure is empathetic deep listening. It reassures our clients that we understand their case and creates a permission structure that empowers them to share important facts with us.
At the end of a conference, I always ask: ‘Is there anything we haven’t yet covered that is crucial for me to know?’ This will often lead to a new piece of information that has a significant bearing on the case.
Once a client feels heard, their appreciation of your services will increase exponentially.
What is obvious to us with all our legal training, can seem illogical and complicated to our clients. Analogies can help to bridge that gap. When my clients get excited as things start to go our way during a trial, I calm them down with a sports analogy:
‘It’s only half time. We’re winning but they can still come back in the second half.’
To explain the concept of TUPE transfers in employment law, I will sometimes use the analogy of a restaurant coming under new management but keeping the same name, same staff and same menu. And when my clients can’t decide whether or not to accept a settlement offer, I use the example of the game show Deal or No Deal:
‘Right now, you have a box with £50,000 in it. If you accept it, that’s the end of the game and you will have missed out on the chance of winning a £100,000 box. But if you turn it down, you could also end up with the £1 box. Decide which one of those scenarios would hurt the most, then go with the other one.’
Analogies simplify complexity.
There is a scene in the middle of A Few Good Men when the a young Tom Cruise is explaining the litigation risks to his fellow lawyers. Asked whether he believes in the case, Cruise retorts:
‘It doesn’t matter what I believe. It only matters what I can prove!’
I use this when I find clients are not being diligent with their disclosure efforts. They immediately get that their case will be won or lost not by the merits, but by the evidence they provide in support of their positions.
For some reason, movie quotes resonate with clients. Gather yours and deploy when necessary.
Saying it once, does not mean our clients will immediately understand, much less retain. Before my witnesses take the stand, I give them my ‘evidence speech’:
‘Listen carefully to the question you are asked and answer that question alone. Don’t evade. Don’t argue. Don’t over share. Stick to the truth as it’s the easiest thing to remember. Don’t try to judge how well you are doing because you can’t. Just answer truthfully, wait for the next question, and leave me to worry about the impact of your evidence.’
Five minutes later, I give them the same speech again, and then again, and then again. When I see irritation, I know they have got the message. And when they watch the other side’s witnesses tank their case by giving evidence poorly, they fully appreciate why I was so repetitive with my advice.
Saying it once is not enough.
Repeat. Repeat. Repeat.
Imagine yourself at the hospital about to go under the knife for a major operation. Your life is in the doctor’s hands and you feel completely helpless. Wouldn’t you want to be kept updated about everything? Our clients deserve that same level of information.
They should know what we think of the case; what the risks are; what will happen next; how long the trial will take; what to call the judge; why we didn’t rely on a certain piece of evidence etc.
Most clients will only experience one legal case in their lifetimes. We owe it to them to ensure that they are informed and updated so they can make the right decisions for themselves.
George Bernard Shaw once said: ‘The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.’ As barristers we should work to solve rather than perpetuate that problem.
Pitch-perfect in court but not hitting quite the right note with lay clients? Kolarele Sonaike shares some techniques for making yourself understood and your clients feel heard
Barbara Mills KC, the new Chair of the Bar, outlines some key themes and priorities
Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management highlights some of the ways you can cut your IHT bill
Rachel Davenport breaks down everything you need to know about AlphaBiolabs’ industry-leading laboratory testing services for legal matters
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management sets out the key steps to your dream property
A centre of excellence for youth justice, the Youth Justice Legal Centre provides specialist training, an advice line and a membership programme
By Kem Kemal of Henry Dannell
Barbara Mills KC wants to raise the profile of the family Bar. She also wants to improve wellbeing and enhance equality, diversity and inclusion in the profession. She talks to Joshua Rozenberg KC (hon) about her plans for the year ahead
Professor Dominic Regan and Seán Jones KC identify good value bottles across the price spectrum – from festive fizz to reliable reds
Reviews by Daniel Barnett
And the winner is… the Bar Council introduces the barristers honoured in the 2024 awards celebrating the achievements of the employed Bar
Mark Neale, Director General of the Bar Standards Board, offers an update on the Equality Rules consultation
ff68877c-4b42-4825-a177-8ca60fa46c1f.tmb-carlisting.jpg?sfvrsn=a20f5111_1){kind=logo}
