Features

Nichola Higgins, Chairman of the Young Barristers’ Committee, looks at the challenges facing the younger members of the Bar and how they will need to adapt to survive.  

You are not alone in feeling some despair as the Ministry of Justice continues its drive to reduce the need for lawyers, to divert cases towards alternative forms of dispute resolution and reduce lawyers’ remuneration. 

Geoff Everett and Toby Tallon of Smith & Williamson outline the key business structures available to chambers  to enable them to withstand the stormy times ahead.  

Critical analysis after disaster strikes is seldom kind. As seen recently in Japan, commentators have found it all too easy to lay the blame for the aftermath of the tsunami on the inadequate  plans, safety measures and management structures that were in place. A weather warning has now been issued for the UK Bar. 

Gray’s Inn was the setting for a stirring debate on libel reform in January. The timing was perfect. The Coalition Government was due to publish its draft Defamation Bill and Nick Clegg, only days before the debate, set out the Government’s commitment to libel reform, saying: “Our aim is to turn English Libel laws from an international laughing stock to an international blueprint”.

Chaired by Baroness Helena Kennedy QC, the five panellists covered a wide range of issues including: access to justice; the impact of libel reform on UK tabloids; how should libel law draw a distinction between the defamation claims against a blogger with a dozen readers and the defamation claims against a newspaper with millions of readers? 

Nancy Erika Smith takes a sceptical approach towards the impartiality of justice in the US and asks whether judges and juries can put aside firmly held beliefs just because they have taken an oath to do so.  

Sir Stephen Sedley’s article about judge recusal is probing and provocative. He points out our universal view that judges with a pecuniary interest in the outcome of a case must recuse themselves. Unfortunately, the West Virginia case (Caperton) is not the worst example of that principle being violated. 

In the February issue of Counsel Andrew Neish QC put the case for a pupillage “Wild Card Scheme” and invited responses. Here, Simon Myerson QC sets out some drawbacks of the scheme

I would like to deal with some of the matters raised by Andrew Neish in his recent article, People like us. We ought to begin with why diversity is a good thing. There are, I think, two answers. 

Job titles
Chief Executive and Senior Civil Clerk, 9 Gough Square Chambers

A leading common law set based in London but appearing in courts throughout England and Wales and abroad. Key practice areas are personal injury, clinical negligence, professional negligence, fraud and serious crime, family, police law, employment and property.

Max Hill QC and Nichola Higgins explain why the CBA, which is cautiously supportive of the scheme, has significant reservations about how it will work.  

The Advocate Panels scheme, which was launched on 31 March 2011, will consist of seven regional, circuit based panels divided into four “Levels” across each of the circuits plus an additional London Panel. 

Just what does the Coalition Government stand for? Charles Hale and Toby Craig investigate…

As we approach the first anniversary of the Coalition Government and the all-important alternative vote referendum, the past month has given us some of the clearest indications yet of what the unexpected alliance is all about. 

Keir Starmer QC welcomes the launch of the CPS Advocate Panels Scheme, which he believes represents a turning point in the delivery of prosecution advocacy and improved relations between the CPS and the Bar.  

The CPS currently prosecutes just over one million criminal defendants every year. The vast majority are in the magistrates’ courts, but many are in the Crown Court and some are in the appellate courts. The advocacy in those cases is carried out either by self-employed advocates, mostly barristers, or by barristers and solicitors employed by the CPS. In my view, that is a healthy mix. 

“No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause” and yet surely a judicial oath is an answer to the appearance of partiality? Sir Stephen Sedley looks at the tests for recusal and who decides upon them.  

Few people in this country, I would guess, reading the headnote above, attached to the official report of a recent decision of the US Supreme Court, would regard it as a difficult case.