Features

Toby Craig examines whether corporate social responsibility is just good business or is part of the Bar’s DNA?  

Very few people love lawyers, or will even countenance their existence... until they need one. It is a profession in need of some public rehabilitation. Sadly, the bright idea of ‘International be Kind to Lawyers Day’, was also the date chosen by the Ministry of Justice on which to announce yet more legal aid cuts. Maybe the Lord Chancellor did not get the memo. It’s true, lawyers are probably held in slightly higher esteem than our friends in the banking community and, say, tax collectors, but they have never been the most popular professionals. In some ways, that’s odd. There is great affection for the traditions of the Bar. Its traditions, and sense of theatre, help, in part, to fuel a brand which is recognised and respected all over the world, perhaps more than it is here. But, whilst the family GP or a teacher in a local school is instinctively seen as a positive role model, there seems to be a more natural suspicion of the bewigged and hidden world of the Bar. 

Schona Jolly explains the Bar Human Rights Committee’s concerns over the Bangladesh War Crimes Verdicts.  

In the dying days of Bangladesh’s 1971 War of Independence, in which liberation from what was then known as West Pakistan was sought, grave and widespread atrocities were committed. Estimates of the killings range from about half a million up to three million people, but there is no reliable data. Over forty years later, the attempts to bring much-sought justice for those atrocities are being mired by the controversies surrounding the International Criminal Tribunal (ICT) which was set up in 2010 to try Bangladeshis accused of being complicit in those crimes. 

Nigel Pascoe QC reviews the recent staging of Judgement at Nuremberg at the Bridewell Theatre to which lawyer-actors brought their forensic skills  

Judging the Judges is a diverting philosophical exercise. The Bar are at it every day. But in the third Nuremberg trial it happened with a vengeance when four Nazi Judges faced an American panel of three. Was it to be victor’s justice and the least they deserved? Or were there real defences in law which could be deployed? 

In recent years, Judgement at Nuremberg  has been staged at the Tricycle Theatre as well as other lawyer’s productions, including 12 Angry Men, Inherit The Wind  and To Kill a Mockingbird ; all directed very successfully by Sally Knyvette. Any lawyer-actors would love the chance to bring their forensic skills to a professional venue and professionally directed, they can bring authentic attack and real flair to these classic court-room dramas: so again with this new staging at the Bridewell Theatre. The great virtue of this compelling play is that without ever losing its moral core, it is pretty even-handed in examining the issues and particularly who knew what of the Holocaust in legal and civilian circles. It reaches the right conclusion, but in the process, also allows us to follow the fall of a great but flawed German judge. Unlike his co-defendants whom he despises, this Judge has the moral courage to condemn himself. In dramatic terms then, a stonking great speech for a lawyer-actor and a marvellous central part - the fair and modest small-town American Judge. 

Sadness that the dumbing down of the office of Lord Chancellor has inevitably led to a lack of protection for an independent legal profession 

May 6, 2013: “I won’t insult your intelligence by suggesting that you really believe what you just said.” William F. Buckley, Jr.  

When I was a sixth-former, I decided to try for Oxford. In those days, there was an Entrance Examination. My Headmaster suggested I practise the General Paper. The first question was “Might you as well be hanged for a sheep as for a lamb?” Entirely missing the point, I wrote what I thought to be a humorous piece about the virtues of capital punishment. It was returned sporting a “Delta” and the comment: “You’re in the Sixth Form now. Grow Up.” 

Dr Vicky Kemp examines PACE protections and access to legal advice  

For more than a quarter of a century the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (‘PACE’) and its Codes of Practice have provided legal protections for those arrested and detained by the police; including access to free and independent legal advice. How has it worked in practice? Why do so many refuse to take up the offer of free legal advice? 

As a Principal Researcher with the Legal Services Research Centre, which had been the independent research division of the Legal Services Commission, from 2008 to 2012 I had undertaken a number of studies into police station legal advice. The first study involved a survey of over 1,000 users in the criminal justice system, which was conducted in six cities during 2008. Further research was undertaken, including a small-scale study of eight police custody suites (one station was in the city where the survey was conducted and the others based in five different areas) and interviews with defence practitioners. In 2009 we carried out a statistical analysis of over 30,000 police custody records drawn from four police force areas. There followed in 2010 a qualitative study of the main police station in each of these four police force areas. In one of the police stations observed an initiative was set up to help improve access to legal advice. This involved duty solicitors based full-time in the police station and the initiative was subject to a three-month review in 2011 and then again in 2012. 

After a long and tortuous journey, nursery provision is finally in place for the Bar. Fiona Jackson explains the background to, and the role of, the “Bar Nursery at Smithfield House”.  

The problem of retaining barrister parents, particularly women once they start a family, is not new to our profession. For the self-employed Bar, the financial costs of having a family can be particularly high as they are unable to benefit from childcare vouchers and other initiatives available to employees. It must be beyond argument that as a profession and in the public interest we should be striving to ensure the retention of the brightest and the best individuals who have spent many years in training and who, we hope, will go on to become the Queen’s Counsel and judges of the future. 

The Mock Trials Competition introduces the law and the jury system to young people, whether they are likely to become lawyers or to end up in the dock. HHJ Christopher Kinch QC explains  

You might have noticed that the advocates in Court 4 at the Royal Courts of Justice that afternoon did look a bit on the young side and you might have observed that they looked remarkably composed as they waited for their case to be called on in the court where the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales usually sits. They had already completed three trials in the course of a court day that had started at 9.30 (on a Saturday) and at 3 p.m. they were ready for their last trial of the day. That level of “productivity” would have bean counters at the Ministry of Justice salivating. Every defendant had turned up. All the witnesses had been on time. There were no disclosure issues or problems or legal arguments and the judges were completing their summings up in 5 minutes or less. 

Job title: Head of Chambers at 4 Paper Buildings 

4PB is the largest family law set in England, with 70 members of which 12 are Silks, offering advice and advocacy in all areas of family law.  

You are one of four Silks listed as a ‘star individual’ at the Children Bar. What do you credit your success to?
One of only 3 actually as the 4th - Stephen Cobb QC - is now Cobb J. But seriously this is a difficult question to start the interview with. It is probably best to ask others but I guess it is down to a combination of things: the ability and desire to work really hard and not cut corners, emotional intelligence, good communication, approachability, confidence in giving a clear opinion and reliability. I’ve also had great clerks and solicitors throughout my career who have given me amazing chances. Lastly, a fair dose of good fortune in making the right and important decisions at the right time. 

Under CPR 31.5, disclosure has been catapulted to the front of the litigation timetable. James Morrey-Jones and Damian Murphy explain  

One purpose of the Civil Procedure Rules was to narrow the quantity of discoverable documents by making a document disclosable  (the change in nomenclature signifying a break with the past) only when it was going to be relied upon by the disclosing party or when it adversely affected his own case or supported the case of the other side. By the time of Lord Justice Jackson’s review the volume of disclosure, rather than being reduced, was instead high and climbing. The result is CPR 31.5 which will apply to all multi-track cases (apart from personal injury and clinical negligence) where the first case management conference takes place on or after 16 April 2013. 

The new process
The starting point is that 14 days before the first case management conference each party must file and serve a report, verified by a statement of truth, describing the documents that exist or may exist or may be relevant to “matters in issue”. The report must also describe where and with whom the documents are located: and for electronic documents, the way in which the documents are stored. An estimate of the costs of giving standard disclosure is required and the parties must make their selection from the disclosure “menu” at new CPR 31.5(7) and 31.5(8). 

David Wurtzel reviews The Winslow Boy – a tale of a family’s sacrifice as it fights to clear the name of an innocent son  

The Winslow Boy was first performed in May 1946. Watching it now at the Old Vic, one is struck by how much more “relevant” it has become. A plethora of issues comes alive, again and again, in this brilliant production in which every performance is pitch-perfect.