I can’t reveal his name – yet, but Barrister A will shortly be writing on a regular basis. Barrister A was educated at Harrow, The LSE (LLB), Oxford (BCL) and hacked his way through the old style Bar exams (Now the ‘BVC’) at The Inns of Court School of Law. He was called to the Bar in 1980 and dare not apply for Silk in case it reduces his income. He is married to an actress (resting) and has not had time, nor income, for children. [A friend of his, in another set, was made a Silk recently. Apparently, the new Silk has had the time, since elevation, to appear as a participant on Flog it and Cash in the Attic - telling the presenters of these popular daytime television shows that it 'is time for someone else to enjoy his collection of Georgian Silver and Chippendale chairs.']
We met, somewhat implausibly, at Spearmint Rhino – where we were taken to listen to a lecture (3 CPD points) by Matt Muttley, managing partner of Muttley Dastardly LLP.
Barrister A has political aspirations and is likely to be selected to a safe Labour seat. He tells me that it is a constituency near Doncaster, which he felt sure was somewhere near Birmingham. He accepts that he may not be in ‘government’ after the next election, but takes the entirely sensible view that this will give him time to learn the skills of being a backbench MP and develop his knowledge and skill as a ‘player.’ I am able to say that Barrister A has many of the venal qualities required of political players and I feel certain that it will only be a matter of time before he makes his mark as a future ‘Whip’. He reads The Tribune – or so he says.
Barrister A has few convictions, no scruples – but nor does he feel the need to mess around with ‘rent boys’, indulge in unusual sexual acts involving nooses and satsumas or have secret fantasies about female Tory MPs. He, most definitely, does not wear his shirt tucked into his underpants. I have no direct knowledge of this – but a lap dancer, who we met at ‘Nobu’, recently, assured me that he did not have this unusual habit.
Barrister A has promised me that he will be ready to file his first report here…..shortly…
I am sure he is a fine upstanding chap but yet another Barrister with political aspiration in Nue Arbeit? Just what the country needs! We already have one in Downing Street in charge of a ’shed-full’ of them running the country (into the ground!). All busy modernising Britain (back to the 14th Century!)facing another ’shed-full’ on the opposite side of the House who want to do the same!
God help us!
Barrister A, has the advantage of being a figment of my imagination – which means that I can evict him from The House whenever I wish.
Oh charonqc you are casting pearl before swine. James appears to have missed the point of your teasing and very clever intro of Barrister A completely. Incidentally when he gets here I have a couple of questions for Barrister A concerning the prolific use of CPR r 24 in the lower courts. But back to the point. James can’t keep up with you. Should be a shoe in for the judiciary. As to barristers in Parliament I am inclined to agree. Persons in public life should come from a proper job. Like being a lesbian outreach worker or such.
OT does a third party publishing on your blog give rise to vicarious liability? I wonder.
Root… please do not worry about James – he is more than able to cope – and I am pretty sure he did not miss the point
Unfortunately, Barrister A has not quite worked out the direct access rules and will not, therefore, be able to deal directly with your enquiry about CPR r24. You could try Matt Muttley at Muttley Dastardly LLP. He may have a view – possibly.
RE: your enquiry about vicarious liability (and the comment I give in reply coud not possibly constitute legal advice – even to the British government) I say this:-
If a third party does anything absurd, daft, libellous, etc etc on my blog – you may rest asured that I will deal with it. What are you thinking of doing?
On the matter of lawyers in parliament – I am pleased that so many lawyers want to spend their tme acting as representatives of democracy – the money, these days, is quite good – especially if you do not mind being pilloried in the press every year when the expenses league table is published.
Just remember what Lord Denning MR said – in rebuke to an Attorney-General – some years ago: “Be you never you so high, you are not above the law.’
Coming from Tom Denning that is a bit rich. He made the law up as he went along. You could make up his rulings:
*Take Jenkin’s case. In Blackie’s time. Old Stan Jenkins was 98 years old. And he did a very foolish thing. He got married for the fourth time. She was twenty three. And only had one leg. Now he claims…..* etc. Not a bad impersonation ?
It is another of the CAs favourite manouveres (sp) before they
Nevertheless it is hardly authoriative. After Profumo he lost it. The excitement of his encounter with Christine Keeler was too much for the old boy. Just my 2 cents. I need to broaden my mind a bit. 
breakextend the law – to quote one of Lord Dennings dissenting judgements. Of which there were plenty as you know.I may well contemplate doing something daft on your blog but I was thinking more in terms of Barrister A.
And yes – I did know about James and was in turn pulling his leg. My apologies for any misunderstanding. I need to get out more.
Question for Barrister A: Does he think that members of the bar and the judiciary should continue to carry out their functions in medieval fancy dress? Is it good practice for them for when they join the Freemasons? Mark you few Judges will match the satorial mufti of Uncle Harry, very natty in his checked suiting. Not surprising really. But it scarcely added to the gravity of the situation as he held court on Fridays releasing independently reducing the tariffs (how the heck is tariff spelt?) some of the the most dangerous killers in jail before their time was served.
Root – Apologies for delay….
Doesn’t trouble me one way or the other. Wigs are soon to be cast aside in civil cases.