Practice Toolset

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. 

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. 

Barristers can now accept public access instructions from clients eligible for legal aid, following formal approval from the Legal Services Board on 28 March. Barristers under three years’ Call will also be directly accessible to clients, from later this year.  

A new training regime is due to be in place this autumn, at which point those who have already completed the existing training will have 24 months to undertake additional training or apply for a waiver. 

Hannah Kinch provides an insight into the work of the Young Barristers’ Committee.  

The Young Barristers’ Committee (YBC) has been around since 1954, and is one of the main representative committees of the Bar Council. Under the Bar Council’s standing orders, our purpose is to “represent and promote the interests of young barristers”; that is, those under seven years’ Call, both nationally and internationally. To that end, the YBC comprises elected Bar Council members, as well as those who have been co-opted to ensure that the committee properly reflects the fact that we represent both employed and self-employed barristers, across every circuit, in every practice area. I chair the committee, supported by my vice chairman (Max Hardy); the YBC is 30 strong. 

Guy Fetherstonhaugh QC, the Chairman of the Training for the Bar Committee, expresses his enthusiasm for the new pupillage application system.  

I am long enough in the tooth to remember PACH (the Pupillage Application Clearing House), its eventual online successor OLPAS, and its spawn the Pupillage Portal. I also remember vividly the dissatisfaction in my Chambers with each: the un-user-friendly application forms; the lack of any ability to tailor the forms to suit each Chambers’ speciality; the draconian deadlines; the torrent of paper that should not have, but did, accompany the online systems. The goodwill that the Bar should have, and did, feel for its own system gradually evaporated. In 1997, 243 sets of Chambers used the system; by last year, that had reduced to 100. 

Following the trial (and re-trial) of Vicky Pryce and the discussion on juries which has followed, Cheryl Thomas enters the debate and explains the world of jury research  

No one listening to the Today programme the morning after the first Vicky Pryce jury was discharged could have been more surprised than me to hear the former Director of Public Prosecutions, Lord MacDonald, state that it is impossible here to conduct research with juries about how they reach verdicts. 

Nothing could be further from the truth. I have been conducting just this type of research with real juries at Crown Courts in this country for a decade and am currently doing so. 

What did Lord MacDonald say?
According to Lord MacDonald: “In other jurisdictions, under controlled conditions, researchers are allowed to question jurors, to come to some conclusions about the way they are deliberating and how the process works. If you have a better understanding of that, then perhaps it’s easier to frame directions to juries that they will follow and understand.” 

He was right to say this information would be helpful. But he was wrong to claim that this kind of research cannot be done here. 

Nigel Lickley QC, Leader of the Western Circuit, explains the role of the circuit within the modern Bar.  

An eminent Silk in London asked me recently at a dinner in Middle Temple “What is the value of the circuits? ” 

David Wurtzel considers the results of the Bar Council’s 2012 “Bar Barometer”.  

‘The Bar will shrink’ has been a common cry of alarm over a number of years. First, the Bar lost its monopoly over the rights of audience in the Higher Courts, then solicitor advocates entered the market in force and then Legal Aid declined, student debt rose and the number of pupillages dwindled. And yet, according the 2012 Bar Barometer, the self-employed Bar as a whole has instead expanded. Using the latest statistics available, between 2010 and 2011 the largest increase (1.2%) in the previous five years took place. At the same time, the proportion of women and of BME barristers has steadily if slowly gone up. 

Kirsty Brimelow QC, Chairwoman of the Bar Human Rights Committee, explains its work  

The Bar Human Rights Committee (BHRC) was set up by a small group of English barristers in 1991. Its original remit was to provide support and remedies for judges and lawyers, in other countries, who were being persecuted or prevented from performing their professional duties.