Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Monday, January 30, 2012 | 2 Comments »
Listen to the podcast: A surreal and most enjoyable chat with a fellow parodist….
I did this a couple of years ago – when everyone knew that @Geeklawyer was a satirist…. but hadn’t turned themselves into Sherlocks to discover the identity behind 
***
My post on Geeklawyergate and The Time Blawg’s analysis: Lawyers cannot hide on Twitter
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Thursday, January 26, 2012 | 35 Comments »
A Command Performance….
Court News reports: “A barrister who called opposing lawyers ‘slimebags’ in a series of insulting tweets from court was today (Thurs) thrown out of the profession. David Harris was wrongly acting for an internet piracy company he owned.
He bragged that ‘whoring and drinking’ would begin after he finished the trial and described an opposing lawyer as a ‘p***k.’….”
Well… as it happens… I know @Geeklawyer well (and like him) – an amusing figment of his own imagination who, taking of mead and his favoured strawberry beer libations in sufficient quantities, tweets nonsense late at night. It would appear that he has managed to get himself disbarred for LIFE according to the Court News report.
As yet, the BSB – The Bar Standards Board - has not posted the decision on the website nor, indeed, managed to inform Mr Geeklawyer / Harris about his exit from Bar Departure Gate 1 when I contacted him for his thoughts on the matter. I spend a fair bit of time thinking about “Fair” treatment of people in my reclusion these days. Fair that Court News got “info” before Geeklawyer / David Harris?
Geeklawyer and I talked over the phone this afternoon and he was more than happy for me to write about the matter – not that I had any plans to do so when I contacted him. I suspect that failing to disclose things to a high court judge and other unusual practice behaviour at the trial may well have had a significant bearing on the decision to disbar – I have no information on this as at the time of writing.
Assuming that the charge of bringing the profession into disrepute was one of the issues behind the decision to disbar – Mr Geeklawyer / Harris confirmed that he was indeed charged with same; I thought it would be interesting to ask what defence he put forward. [ Mr Geeklawyer / Harris is perfectly entitled to tell me about his defence, as I am entitled to write about his account (with his blessing), given the publicity which the disbarment has attracted thus far in the press.]
The Geeklawyer / Harris defence may be summarised as follows:
1. It wasn’t him qua David Harris, a practising barrister – it was Geeklawyer wot dun it. Geeklawyer doesn’t exist and is not a practising barrister recognised by The Bar Council
2. The tweets were not communications made in the course of professional practice. They were social.
3. Social conduct does not, save in extreme cases such as criminal behaviour, form a lawful basis for sanctions by professional conduct committees as it transgresses both the right to a private life and the right to private correspondence under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Geeklawyer was able to tell me – as I wiped tears of laughter from my eyes: “Geeklawyer has the Article 8 Convention rights mentioned before. This charge is a disproportionate and meritless interference with that right to converse flippantly. To say that Geeklawyer is not able to tell his friend @XXXXX that he has a hangover because somehow the faith of the public in the Bar would be shaken to their core to learn that barristers drink is absurd. We are rarely confused with monks. The tweets are between friends and colleagues however uncouth. They are not unprofessional simply because they were made socially and outside work. It is hard to imagine that any member of the modern, as opposed to Victorian, public would be shaken by the revelation that barristers use words like ‘prick’ ‘fuck’ and make jokes about colleagues.”
Please note – for newshounds who may wish to consider this report when writing (or, indeed, as their own – by nicking it) that - The Court News report discloses “Harris owned Newzbin, a website which allowed users to download films illegally before the company was sued by major film companies including 20th Century Fox. He did not disclose his interest to the High Court was forced to stand down eight days into the hearing when his link to the firm was discovered.”
I’ve been tweeting for many years now with Geeklawyer. His tweets are absurd, outrageous at times, more often than not amusing – if one accepts and understands (as most sane people do) that Geeklawyer doesn’t exist. I have never, as it happens, been “whoring, taking cocaine, bribing judges, calling lawyers slimeballs and pricks” with Geeklawyer. I am certain that Mr David Harris hasn’t been doing these things either.
It will be interesting to see what weight The Bar Standards Board gave to the twitter performances of Geeklawyer in their decision to disbar – if any. The Court News report was fairly unequivocal….and, no doubt, most useful in raising their ‘Profile and Farkin Klout rating’ – ? “HARRIS: BARRISTER HANDED LIFETIME BAN OVER TWITTER ABUSE.” I suspect the other unfortunate matter of not disclosing a matter to a High Court judge has caused what will be a minor inconvenience to David Harris. I understand he has other amusements planned for his future.
Well.. there we are…. Friday tomorrow…. and it may be that we’ll see some barristers on twitter – and, indeed, some very well known solicitor lawyers - considering their behaviour and rushing for the delete button on twitter! (Some make a habit of deleting tweets – Bless! I won’t be offering this post – or any of my posts … up for the Schnorvitz Prize… Pets Win Prizes ?)
***
A further thought… added later… It is just as well The Bar Standards Board is not claiming jurisdiction over fictional lawyers… Sir John Mortimer QC’s …”Rumpole” … or even … others ? I am confident… hopefully… that the BSB is not claiming such jurisdiction.
I am informed – and this will no doubt be confirmed or not by the BSB judgment / decision on Geeklawyer / Mr Harris when they publish it – that a fine was levied for the @Geeklawyer tweets. I really… do hope not. That would be most interesting given that Geeklawyer does not exist? We shall see in due course… as they say … in the new era of transparency.
After all.. how can one disbar or fine a ‘fictional barrister’ for tweeting… or blogging ?
***
Dr Strangelove …. CEO of Muttley Dastardly LLP.… is acting for me ( I am a figment of my imagination) … and he always does the biz… always…. (I have never known Dr Ersasmus Strangelove to lose a case …. extraordinary record… No FEE.. NO WIN.. he ain’t daft)
Friday Update… The Telegraph reports: Barrister who Tweeted insults struck off
Harris disbarred for conduct of a case - and fined for the tweets…the latter interesting given that few in the profession, let alone the wider ‘public’, would have known David Harris was tweeting as Geeklawyer. I would suggest that a fair amount of investigation work would be needed to link Geeklawyer to David Harris…. over the last four years…very few knew!
One assumes that Rumpole need not fear an investigation into bringing the profession into disrepute by drinking too much Chateau Thames Embankment at Pomeroy’s wine bar? Mind you – it would not take sterling detective work to work out that Rumpole was the creation of Sir John Mortimer QC, so who knows?
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Friday, January 13, 2012 | 1 Comment »
Mario Puzo
And today there is news of a barrister facing jail after admitting stealing £81,500 from his Chambers in Manchester. Manchester-based lawyer David Friesner, 46, admitted theft when he appeared at Leeds Crown Court for the start of his trial today – Manchester Evening News
And RollonFriday.com has news of another Manchester barrister up to no good: Top barrister done for drink driving
Unusual behaviour from M’learned friends is not confined to Manchester barristers. RollonFriday writes about an outbreak of festive hooliganism at a law firm Christmas party: Exclusive: Fight erupts at DLA Piper Christmas celebration
A pre-Christmas night out for DLA Piper staff turned into a brawl, with a senior member of staff hospitalised.
Members of the firm’s marketing department were having a few festive pints at The Gables on Moorgate when a pissed-up reveller (with no connection to the firm) tried to crash the party. After making repeated advances to female members of the group, which were ignored, he announced that “one of you is going to get my cock“. The silver tongued charmer.
And… the judges get in on the act as well…
In the wake of my astonishment (reported below and here) at the new logo being sported by BPP Law School earlier 
After commenting on BPP’s new ‘Lion’ logo, Alex Aldridge goes on to dissect the performance of a few of the law schools taking extracts from recent Bar Standards Board reports. I have read all the BSB reports now and they make interesting reading. I plan to do an analysis next week in some detail.
Solicitor and journalist David Allen Green has an interesting piece on the recent fisting Obscenity trial: Obscenity victory
The jury at Southwark Crown Court has returned unanimous Not Guilty verdicts on each of the six charges under the Obscene Publications Act 1959 against Michael Peacock.
The prosecution failed to convince a single juror that any of the DVD material distributed by Peacock was “depraving and corrupting” under the 1959 Act. The DVDs contained sexual practices such as fisting, BDSM, and so-called “watersports” depicted between consenting adults.
It is an important case – one where the jury revealed the flaws in an out of date Obscenity act and took a more tolerant attitude to sexual behaviour among consenting adults.
Law blogger Obiter J asks the question in a thoughtful piece in Legal Week: Do we need the Obscene Publications Acts?
The UK Human Rights blog also reports: Making a Fist of It: The Law and Obscenity
The internet has become an important work and social tool for many. Adam Wagner considers the issue: Is internet access a human right?
And finally – a useful round up of some of the UK Law blogs from Shireen Smith: UK Blawg Roundup #9 – Legal Services Act and Alternative Business Structures
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Sunday, January 8, 2012 | 4 Comments »
Foul-mouthed judge resigns rather than face the music
RollonFriday.com reports: “A crown court judge who turned the air blue after appearing in court on a dangerous dog charge has resigned. Judge Beatrice Woodcock-Bolton hit the headlines a year ago when her German Shepherd, Georgina, bit one of her neighbours in the leg. Woodcock-Bolton was hauled before Carlisle Magistrates Court where she chewed gum, described the verdict against her as a “f**king travesty” and complained that she would “never sit in a court of law again“…..”
Rather than face the inevitable sack, Judge Woodcock-Bolton resigned on medical grounds…”The Lord Chancellor and the Lord Chief Justice have decided no further disciplinary action is required.”
And then there was #Abbottgate – allowing twitter to explode in a frenzy of some real and largely imagined offence-taking. It was, perhaps, unfortunate timing but a day after the verdict and sentencing in the Stephen Lawrence trial for her to tweet “White people love playing divide and rule. We should not play their game,’ and referring to ‘tactics as old as colonialism’. I gather that Diane Abbott, after Ed Miliband gave her a ‘dressing down’, then remarked on the tendency for London cabbies to drive past black people.
For my part, whatever it is worth, I don’t think that Diane Abbott MP is a racist. Her tweet was a bit careless. But not as careless as Ed Miliband’s wonderful tweet on hearing of the death of Blockbusters game show host Bob Holness:
@Ed_Miliband
Sad to hear that Bob Holness has died. A generation will remember him fondly from Blackbusters.
I understand that the tweet was deleted fairly sharpish and replaced with one without the typo – but The Sun, ever keen to pick up on the the political faux pas of labour politicians caught the tweet just in time. While I have voted Labour for thirty years, I am not keen on Ed Miliband as a future PM. I tweeted this morning that he reminded me of a Police Community Support Officer keen to inspect car tax discs.
This week also brought ‘Fisting’ to the fore on twitter: Obscenity trial – the law is not suitable for a digital age
Myles Jackman in the Guardian: “I welcome the jury’s verdict but the OPA means the state is still capable of acting as a voyeur in the bedroom”
I need not trouble you with the facts of R v Peacock. The coverage has been extensive in the press. I have no doubt that meedja lawyers and others will blog about it. Suffice it to say two things: (1) That I can’t for the life of me see what business it is of the State’s to get involved in private matters between consenting adults and (2) I have not managed to get around to this particular activity in my 50+ years on the planet. It is unlikely that I will need to develop skill with this technique. It doesn’t appeal.
Obiter J, in the wake of the Stephen Lawrence trial has an interesting blog post: A look at racial murder, hate crime and the criminal offences available.
Professor Richard Moorhead, Cardiff University Law School asks: Does the legal profession need scholars?
“If we leave the question at ‘do lawyers need to be scholars?’ it is a relatively simple answer of no. We do not need practising lawyers to be devoted purely to the pursuit of knowledge. We cannot expect it of them, nor would it be in their client’s best interests. Lots of lawyers do not have to think or learn in the scholarly sense. They understand, research, diagnose, advise, act.
We should also understand that much of what legal education does is filter students. What firms are really interested in is the best candidates. They go to the universities they regard as the best, and those universities pick whom they regards as the best students. There are flaws in the judgements of universities and firms, but the reputation and quality of UK universities is a key part of the reputation of UK firms. And the ability of UK universities to attract the best students – which will be an increasingly global not national competition – will be a key part of that.”
Bitcher & Prickman cartoons are always worth a look – from US lawyer Charles Fincher Esq
A pleasure to see that family lawyer John Bolch is continuing to provide a remarkable online resource with his coverage of family law matters in Family Lore….@familylaw: Three thousand followers can’t be wrong…
Professor John Flood over at his RATs blog… continues to probe the legal profession’s future with his latest post: PI(I)GS Might Fly!
The Troika is upsetting big bar associations because it is demanding the liberalization of professions in countries it is bailing out. Key complainers are the American Bar Association and the CCBE. (Thanks to Peter Lederer for the H/T).
The Wall Street Journal Law Blog reported that the ABA and CCBE have written a letter to Christine Lagarde, head of the International Monetary Fund and former head of the world’s largest law firm, Baker & McKenzie, asking her to pass on their concerns at the end of independence of the bar to the heads of the European Union and the European Central Bank…..
“American born but long term UK resident photographer Eve Arnold has died aged 99. She spent a lot of time photographing Marilyn Monroe. As – erm – can be seen. I’m sorry, I couldn’t help myself…..”
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Friday, December 16, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
Posted in Charon, Charon After Dark, Rive Gauche on Sunday, December 11, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
I shall return to blogging on the morrow … but with more emphasis on the absurd, egomaniac, self aggrandising and surreal aspects of law during the festive season… I am on an extended Christmas break – I haven’t had a holiday for just over five years… time to amuse myself… and if it amuses readers of the blog… that will be fine by me. I am also Painting some new F*ckArt.
Enjoy your Christmas break..
Charon
PS… the Rule of Law schtikery in my header and tweet… I believe it to be a fair representation of what statute law is about. After all.. we live in an imperfect democracy and are governed, ineluctably, by imperfectly formed minds… that is not to suggest that all the perfect minds are to be found punting, bloviating, self aggrandising or judging on Dragons’ Den, Strictly Come Drinking.. or even in our (‘Best in The World’ - Copyright D Cameron 2011) revered Parliament - or smug blogs. I would venture to suggest… at the risk of immediate public opprobium and excommunication from the world of law blogging (not that it would trouble me) that this is far from the case
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Friday, December 2, 2011 | 1 Comment »
Time to have a look at the world of law from the left field again….
In the wake of the truly absurd #Clarkson episode this week – where over 21,000 complainers have contacted the BBC to vent their outrage and many on twitter have knee-jerked their thoughts onto the timeline – David Allen Green wrote it up in The New Statesman: Why Unison is wrong to seek the sacking and arrest of Jeremy Clarkson
The trade union Unison is seeking “urgent legal advice” about what to do regarding Jeremy Clarkson’s comments about strikers being “executed in front of their families. The press release — the words are put to the mouth of Dave Prentis, Unison General Secretary — is worth reading carefully.
Amanda Bancroft followed suit in her blog Beneath The Wig: Calm down, dear!
I’m afraid I could not be bothered to take Clarkson’s remarks as anything other than a badly laboured attempt at humour and do not add to the erudition of analysis and debate with my observations on twitter…
@LoveandGarbage usually hits the nail on the head with satire..and this EXCELLENT blog post is a must read if you feel the need to be ANGRY on Twitter… Cut out and keep guide to how to be angry on twitter
Perhaps a bit of serious for the weekend … Sir / Madam?
Alex Aldridge starts the good cheer at Christmas with…
“With 65 students applying for each training place, many would-be solicitors face not finding a job within the five-year post-graduation limit…”
The Lawyer reports:“Aspiring lawyers will have to pay up to £13,550 and £16,540 respectively for the LPC and BPTC in London. Currently the fees are £12,900 and £15,750. The cost of studying the Graduate Diploma in Law (GDL) will also rise, up by £450 from £8,950 to £9,400. BPP chief executive Peter Crisp said: “Since 2009, the fees for many of our law programmes have either been frozen or increased at a rate below inflation – for example our GDL and LPC fees have been held for two years. “With a modest increase this year, overall the percentage increase in fees over the last three years has been small and in line with the current rate of inflation.”
With my current taste for a bit of the Latin… this maxim is appropriate… Non plaudite. Modo pecuniam jacite – Don’t applaud. Just throw money
And so we go on… with the profession that just keeps giving…
The judges are not silent…Lady Hale warns of consequences of legal aid cuts The Guardian reports: “The supreme court judge’s speech to the Law Centres Federation’s conference on the effects of the government’s proposed legal aid bill.”
Lady Hale does, however, note before she delivers an interesting speech..“It is not the proper role of any judge to attack Government policy. If the Government of the day decides that the right solution to a massive budget deficit is massive cuts in public spending, that is a matter for them to decide and Her Majesty’s loyal opposition to oppose if they see fit. The role of Her Majesty’s loyal judges is to decide the resulting disputes according to law.”
The Guardian: £350m cut to legal aid judged a ‘false economy’ and block to swift justice for most vulnerable
Has the Ministry of Justice taken heed.. or is this plan just to suit Government convenience? : Ken Clarke postpones legal aid reforms and tendering
The Law Society Gazette reports: “Solicitors are dismissed as ‘superfluous intermediaries’ in a new bar consultation paper which recommends making it easier for the public to bypass them and instruct barristers directly.
The Bar Standards Board is examining whether barristers should be able to accept direct instructions from clients eligible for public funding, and also whether to lift the ban on barristers with under three years’ practising experience from accepting public access instructions.”
Will be interesting to see how this wheeze pans out…
I’ll pop back later, perhaps, with a bit more Rive Gauche. I feel a need for some medicinal Gin & Mango juice to fortify myself…
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Thursday, November 24, 2011 | 1 Comment »
Friday seems to be upon us once again.. so time for Rive Gauche…
I thought I would kick orf with a wonderful piece from The Guardian…
The Guardian: Sir Nicolas Bratza criticises hostility of senior government figures towards European Convention on Human Rights
Europe’s most powerful judge has publicly complained about “senior members” of the UK government fostering hostility towards the European Convention on Human Rights.
Citing the “vitriolic” and “xenophobic fury” directed against judges on the European Court of Human Rights, Sir Nicolas Bratza has acknowledged that relations between Strasbourg and the supreme court in London are under “strain”.
Sir Nicolas, the UK’s own nominee on the court and currently its president, made his comments at a conference earlier this year but they have only recently been published in a law journal. The paper has been referred to approvingly several times this month by supreme court judges.
Quality stuff…. and well worth a read. Lord Phillips and Lord Judge gave evidence recently to a Joint Committee and this speech by Bratza is, I presume, the speech they referred to. The film of Phillips and Judge giving evidence is also worth looking at.
Before the Gin & mango juice I am taking to exorcise a rather tedious cold I have takes hold – a few more serious pieces: This from barrister Francis Hoare is an interesting read…
Education Investor reveals: “Pearson is slugging it out for the College of Law deal with at least two private equity firms, EducationInvestor understands. The private college is considering bids from Palamon Capital Partners and Providence Equity Partners, as well as the giant education firm….
…The college is expected to fetch at least £175 million, but some put the likely value of any sale as high as £250 million.”
I’ve commented on this before on the blog. Pearson was an obvious ‘contender’. BPP – now with added University cachet – was purchased for a bit more than that by US firm Apollo some time back. The two big beasts will be able to ‘slug it out’ as private companies if the sale of The College of Law goes through in the brave new dawn envisaged by David ‘Two Brains’ Willetts MP, Minister for Universities.
RollonFriday.com will, no doubt, be on the case soon – with a picture of CEO Nigel Savage mocked up to look like a looter, no doubt. In the meantime, they content themselves with a story about crap food at The College of Law’s Guildford branch. RoF is / are keen to expose crap food in law schools all over the country – so if you are a victim of crap food… enter the RoF competition
The Law of Unintended Consequences 101
Predictably, in the wake of the recent success for The Law Society in closing down the Solicitors from Hell website… this… as reported in The Lawyer:
But madness does not begin nor end there. Solicitor David Allen Green weighs in on ‘The Freemen’ quackery with a rather good piece in The Lawyer…
Carl Gardner picks up an interesting twist to the Freemen story… Why would BNP activists be at a “freemen on the land” stunt?
Carl Gardner writes…“I don’t accuse “freemen” generally, and certainly not “commonly known as dom”, of supporting the BNP. No doubt many of them were unaware that BNP activists were present in Birkenhead. But it’s important for anyone who comes into contact with “freemen’s” pseudolegal ideas – especially anyone who thinks of themselves as a radical who meets them, say at a protest – to be aware of the right-wing nature, attraction and potential of “freemanism”. It seems the BNP are aware of it.”
I read with interest this brutally honest and well written account of alcoholism - Law Society Gazette: Anthony Bogan, a former Law Society Council member who stood for President in 1996, endured the terrifying realisation that he was an alcoholic, but found that there was light at the end of the tunnel
AND FINALLY… a few blogs and articles which caught my eye…
Auntie Em from Legal Cheek writes: I want to jack in law to become an artist
Adam Wagner of the UK Human Rights blog comments: Rights on the rocks: Some Bill of Rights Commission responses
One way or another, by the end of this Parliament, rights protections in the UK will look very different. If you could pull yourself away from the spectacle of actor Hugh Grant giving evidence to the Leveson Inquiry into phone hacking, the main event in yesterday’s live legal transmission bonanza was the second debate on the Legal Aid and Sentencing of Offenders Bill in the House of Lords.
Although the bill is likely to pass, it is likely to do so in slightly revised form – knowledgable tweeters were predicting that the domestic violence and clinical negligence provisions were most likely to be affected.
Jon Robins in The Guardian: examines the highlights of the Lords debate on the legal aid bill being considered alongside welfare reform and health
And babybarista has this.. Those pesky solicitors – OldSmoothie complains that they should never have let solicitors anywhere near court
The Lawyer reports: Old Square Chambers barrister Charlie Woodhouse has been hailed a hero by fellow members of the bar after an unlikely turn of events at the Central London County Court saw him go over and above the call of duty.
On Tuesday afternoon Woodhouse, who specialises in personal injury and clinical negligence, was making his way up a staircase en route to a courtroom when he witnessed a man tie a nylon rope around his neck and jump from the first-floor balcony.
According to sources, Woodhouse caught the man by the shoulders of his suit jacket and supported his full body weight for several minutes. He then managed to haul the man over the banister before police arrived.
And end with a couple of tweets… enjoy Friday….
UPDATE: Unfortunately.. I woke up at 3.00 on Friday morning … far too early…and had to suffer the misery of early morning BBC telly News…. at 5.00… before the excellent Today prog on Radio 4
AND… really.. finally…
I shall.. naturally.. ensure that my ‘novel Snell on Equity Christmas Tree’ has a fairy with very clean hands on top.
There are a couple of podcasts below which may be of interest….
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Thursday, November 17, 2011 | 5 Comments »
“The first instalment of the new series of Garrow’s Law (The weekend’s TV, G2, 14 November) showed William Garrow, habitual advocate for the underdog, defending the madman Hadfield, accused of high treason for shooting at King George III. It was a travesty. The heroic defender who secured Hadfield’s acquittal was not Garrow, but Thomas Erskine. Garrow was indeed involved: but as junior counsel for the crown. So his role was precisely the opposite of the one the BBC assigned to him.”
The Prof is, of course, correct – but I am not over bothered. It is only telly after all.
RollonFriday.com continues to be the scourge of the law schools with their latest revelations about the College of Law…
Exclusive: College of Law agrees compromise over student fees dispute
The College of Law has shown an unlikely chink in its armour by offering a compromise to settle a claim against a student for non-payment of its fees.
Recently the College’s solicitors, Nelsons, have been claiming the full amount of fees from students who accepted a place on their courses but then withdrew before the course started. But there is at least a glimmer of hope for students who would prefer not to fund Ferraris for the College board without ever having received a single lecture in return.
One student has told RollOnFriday that when he cancelled his place after the CoL’s deadline, Nelsons pursued him endlessly for £4,080 in fees. Eventually he gave in and sent them £2,000, saying that that was all he could afford. And while Nelsons wrote back to say that this wasn’t acceptable, it did indicate the College would be prepared to take £3,080.
Interestingly.. as one commenter on the RollonFriday site pointed out – one assumes that the College of Law is suing for loss in Contract Law for the students who withdrew - which raises questions of mitigation (Did they fill the place withdrawn from?) and damages for loss sustained et al. [From memory - law schools are validated to run courses for a specific number of places. I assume that the College of Law is subject to a maximum on each validated course]
I taught Contract law for 30 years. In fact I have a free textbook online with lectures on the subject. I seem to recall there are five general principles which I quote from my book:
8.2 Damages for Breach of Contract – General principles
The general principles applicable to damages claims can be summarised as follows:
1. Breaches of contract are actionable per se
2. The object of damages is to compensate
3. There is a requirement to mitigate loss
4. Damages can be recovered only for loss sustained
5. The loss must be caused by the breach.
I would have thought that the College – even in these dark days – would have had no difficulty filling the ‘withdrawn from ‘ place on the course. Puzzling. I may have to revise my own knowledge of penalty clauses, terms and conditions, object of damages and quantum. I have downloaded The College of Law terms and conditions for some light bedtime reading.
It being Friday – and Rive Gauche day – here is something not only from ‘left field’ but orf the farkin planet. The film shows a group of ‘freemen’ (and assorted tin foil hat wearers ?) arresting a ‘treasonous judge’ and seizing a court. This is world class nonsense – the claimant standing on the table asserting some fantastic cod law, citing Magna Carta and claiming that HM The Queen will back him up. Remarkable and well worth a watch to see how little some people know about our law. The comments on the YouTube film are ‘revealing’.
Just to take you unawares – I am slipping in a bit of sensible law. Neil Rose at Legal Futures is always worth reading if you want to keep up with what is going on in the world of practice and alternative business structures et al. This latest piece is worth a look.
I particularly enjoyed this tweet from Neil Rose…
And still in the realm of the serious… but interesting… this from the United Kingdom Supreme Court blog caught my eye as I took some Gin and Mango juice on Thursday night: It is a truth universally acknowledged …
… that white men in possession of large fortunes are overly represented on the bench. Yet, while it is easy to label the judiciary as “too white, too male, too posh”, constructive solutions to the situation have proved difficult to implement. The 2010 report on judicial diversity recognised that “there is no quick fix to moving towards a more diverse judiciary … Sustained progress on judicial diversity requires a fundamental shift in approach from a focus on selection processes towards a judicial career that addresses diversity at every stage.” It is hoped that the current inquiry being carried out by the Lords Constitution Committee into the appointments process contributes a step towards this shift in approach.
Rosalind English, 1 Crown Office Row, writes: “... is at the core of Jonathan Sumption QC’s FA Mann Lecture. His central point is not human rights as such, but our misconception of Parliament and the perceived need for judicial constraints on the action of the state.”
Given that Jonathan Sumption QC is about to take his seat in the Supreme Court after finishing the The Battle of The Oligarchs case – the post is worth a read.
And this from Editor of Legal Week, Alex Novarese is excellent: If judges don’t want to get involved in politics, maybe they should stop giving speeches
I enjoy popping over to Alex Aldridge’s latest blog Legal Cheek. We share a taste for winding lawyers up – and, on occasion, each other. This latest post from a young woman seeking a training contract is interesting: KEEP CALM AND CARRY ON
Paul Gilbert, writing in the Lawyer blogs section, states: In another life I once held positions as general counsel in two major companies and so watching the News International phone hacking story play out in the press and on television I cannot help having a thought for Tom Crone and wondering what he must be going through now and what it was like for him when he was at N.I.” Read more…
Well.. mustn’t overdo the law for Rive Gauche… so.. on to other matters of interest…first: the Human Condition…
A selection from the tabloids: Drunk zoo visitor ends up in hospital after climbing into monkey enclosure ‘to play | Pilot causes mid-air terror scare by locking himself in toilet and then sending passenger ‘with Middle Eastern accent’ to cockpit for help| PC Anthony Wallyn is Britain’s tallest police officer at 7ft 2in
And… on that note... Salut to you for Friday… orf for a bit of BBC Question Time and read the ranters view of it on twitter..
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Friday, November 11, 2011 | 8 Comments »
And… on that note… back on the morrow with a blog about law bloggers… and… I may even have time to do a ‘Postcard’..
It is fairly obvious that I am not enamoured of ‘technocrats’.
Bread and circuses.. or as we say at The Duck and Biller... a fine bar in my imagination… …. panem et circenses… aided by Wikipedia… “is a metaphor for a superficial means of appeasement. In the case of politics, the phrase is used to describe the creation of public approval, not through exemplary or excellent public service or public policy, but through diversion, distraction, and/or the mere satisfaction of the immediate, shallow requirements of a populace.The phrase also implies the erosion or ignorance of civic duty amongst the concerns of the common man (l’homme moyen sensuel).”
Jeez… tell me that Prime Minister Camcorderdirect didn’t get his farkin Big Society idea from Wikipedia? Nothing, however, would surprise me.
I did like this quote – also in Wikipedia – “American author Robert Heinlein said, “Once the monkeys learn they can vote themselves bananas, they’ll never climb another tree.”
Enjoy the weekend…
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Friday, November 11, 2011 | 2 Comments »
I am doing a podcast on this astonishing issue with Jack of Kent over the weekend… should be interesting.
In the meantime, you may enjoy this wonderful stuff from Private Eye… Don’t tell him, Pike
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Friday, November 4, 2011 | 4 Comments »
“Fairness and equality are central values of the law, and the courts should reflect this. Everyone should be able to see the courts as their courts, there for all sections of society and not just for some.”
Baroness Hale, Justice of The Supreme Court of The United Kingdom
Lady Hale, rightly, has expressed the view that the judiciary is not diverse enough – drawing attention to the fact that she remains the only female justice in The Supreme Court. Jennifer MacLeod, in The Guardian, has an interesting article on the theme: Resistance to diversity among judges is misguided and writes “Lady Hale’s right, diversity is a constitutional issue but a more representative bench would make for better decisions.”
It isn’t, of course, simply a matter of gender diversity. To gender we must add ethnicity and background – or, to be blunt about it, class background. Professor J.A.G Griffiths published a seminal book in 1977 – The Politics of The Judiciary. I remember reading it and enjoying it at the time. The charge was made that the English judiciary was middle aged, middle class and white. Middleminded may well have also been mentioned as an epithet. I can’t recall if Griffiths or another commentator added the latter.
I found this on Google when I searched for Griffiths’ book… I just cannot resist..
Wikipedia, interestingly, notes Lady Hale’s membership of The Athenaeum.
I’m afraid I tend to the Groucho Marx school of thought about clubs these days: “I sent the club a wire stating, PLEASE ACCEPT MY RESIGNATION. I DON’T WANT TO BELONG TO ANY CLUB THAT WILL ACCEPT ME AS A MEMBER.”
I will admit to having been a member of several – East India, Reform and Queen’s Club – the latter two as part of a corporate deal. I believe that I am still a member of The Union in Soho – but haven’t been for years and my membership may have lapsed. I was not a member of The Groucho Club in Soho but I had far too many amusing evenings there as a guest to need to be or wish to be.
Anyway, I digress – back to diversity and the best judge for the job. The clue is in the last phrase ‘ the best judge for the job’. I am all for diversity – but I am not keen on positive discrimination or tokenism; it demeans the appointee and does not serve the system well. In that, I am possibly in a minority – but I can see no benefit in selecting second best. The better question is – are women, ethnic minorities and those from less privileged backgrounds getting a fair crack of the whip? I am not a practitioner. I am not a sociologist – but I do keep my eyes and ears open and I have come to the view that there is a fair amount of ‘bird flocking togethery’ going on in the legal profession and this leads me, ineluctably, to a personal conclusion that the answer is NO.
I do accept that the profession is trying to bring in greater diversity. I do accept that the selection of judges is more open – but I suspect that we have a fair way to go before we get a genuinely diverse legal profession and judiciary – a judiciary which is representative of society as a whole and one which will be more highly regarded because it will be seen to be so.
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Friday, October 28, 2011 | 2 Comments »
Life can get in the way of amusement and blogging on occasion – but, fortunately, I now have time to have a look about and see what is happening in the legal world.
I am not a fan of mavenry, “Top this and that lists” and awards on social media – A ‘painting’ I did some time back in my F*ckart series sums up my attitude to awards dispensed for legal blogging et al. I’m all for promoting law blogging – and both Legal Week and The Lawyer are doing this well - but I see no need to have prizes. I had a minor rant on twitter this morning about the “Blog Post of the Week” feature in the weekly round up of blogs done by David Allen Green in The Lawyer. David’s review this week draws attention to some interesting blogs. Legal Cheek puts iron into irony – rightly taking the mickey about my rant – with this post. 15-Love to Mr Aldridge!
Dr Erasmus Strangelove, senior partner of Muttley Dastardly LLP emailed me this morning….
Charon…
I am pleased to announce that Muttley Dastardly LLP will be launching a new award – Maven of The Week. As I am too busy billing (indeed we are all too busy at MD LLP) would you be kind enough to keep an eye on things…. for a fee, naturally, which we will be more than happy to satisfy after a suitable 75% ‘haircut’ and re-schedule to 2017 for settlement.
Best
Dr Erasmus Strangelove LLB, BCL, Ph.D, DAGCMG (and Bar)
Senior Partner, Muttley Dastardly LLP
Quondam legal meedja correspondent for The Loftlagger’s Weekly
I was reminded by a fellow tweeter about a post I did some time ago in relation to ‘reviews’….I shall quote the relevant section:
I happened to be on Twitter exchanging tweets with @ntheowl who was complaining about having to do a book review. I suggested that he use Sir Maurice Bowra’s famous aphorism which I paraphrase…“Be sure… I shall lose no time at all in doing so” when asked to review a colleague’s latest work. @ntheowl responded with… “‘I cannot begin to say how useful this book is …’ This prompted me to look up Sir Maurice Bowra in Wikipedia. He was known for his wit…. I particularly like this aphorism which resonates with “Englishness”… “Buggery was invented to fill that awkward hour between evensong and cocktails.”
Anyway… all done in the best possible taste and not to be taken seriously…. so to more sensible matters – albeit briefly.. and as I was unable to Eyes Only yesterday – put a few blog posts and newspaper articles I have enjoyed reading this week before you:
Anna Raccoon casts a caustic eye over the OccupyLsx occupation at St Pauls:
The Occupy UK shower have done their best, there was always a delicious irony in their making their bed in the guest accommodation of the wealthiest ‘corporation’ in Britain and certainly the one that pays the lowest rate of taxation, whilst protesting against ‘capitalism’; but all credit to them for forcing the caring sharing happy clappy Church of England to reveal that their concern for equality and the poor ‘they are very welcome to stay’ only lasted until the moment that worship at the altar of Mammon, in the form of the temple traders, shop and restaurant, was suffering a downturn in projected profits. ‘It is with great regret’ etc…
And I did enjoy Lucy Reid’s review of The UK Supreme Court : Super Supreme – and The Guardian’s short film interview with five of the Supreme Court Justices.
Apart from Legal Week, The Lawyer and The Law Society Gazette, Neil Rose’s Legal Futures is another good source for keeping up to date with developments in the legal profession: Clients “will head to brands” but independent lawyers can still forge a future
The Guardian: Under government plans, countries would not only implement human rights law but interpret it – and decide if they complied
I’m doing a Without Prejudice ‘Special’ with Carl Gardner of Head of Legal blog over the weekend to cover some fascinating developments in the law – including the proposals for mandatory sentences. I’ll pop back later this evening, hopefully, with some more Rive Gauche….
AND Finally.. this is extraordinary…
The Telegraph: A criminal appealed his conviction after he discovered that the barrister defending him was sending “sexual” text messages to his girlfriend during the case.
Posted in Charon, Charon after a glass Pics, Rive Gauche on Friday, October 14, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Saturday, October 8, 2011 | 4 Comments »
David Allen Green, solicitor, blogger, tweeter, legal correspondent for The New Statesman and now media correspondent for The Lawyer, considers tweeting lawyers… and puts the boot in, indirectly, to the ‘flawgers’ by not mentioning them..
Twitter provides a poor “return on investment” for cynical lawyers and related professionals who just want to expand their internet presence as a commercial end in itself. Indeed, such folk should probably do other things than waste time in trying to develop a Twitter account which then languishes with a few dozen followers at best….
For my part, I enjoy twitter. I appear to have managed to find time over the last two to three years to rack up over 90,000 tweets. I enjoy the social interaction. I have met some great people through twitter – real life and virtually – and I enjoy the often interesting and amusing exchange of ideas and views. I particularly enjoy ‘engaging’ with the more surreal tweeters, the un-reconstructed and the ‘pissed tweeters’ late at night. I don’t take it too seriously and while WordPress posts my blog posts to twitter and I do the occasional follow up tweet, there is no doubt that twitter has brought visitors to my blog. I had a look at the stats on that. It would appear that about 5% of my visitors come through twitter. Most of my readers don’t seem to tweet. I have little interest in lawyers or law firms (or any other tweeters) who simply broadcast their news or services…. in the syle… “Great shame about that Volcano erupting killing thousands… meanwhile, if we can help with your personal injury claim. 0898 1234567″ and I have little interest in the “Flawgers” – a term coined by Antonin Pribetic of The Trial Warrior blog - or snake oil social meedja gurus and mavens. There is a great deal of comment and useful information, across a wide range of topics and subjects, out there on twitter – and long may that continue.
Although David Allen Green was kind enough to describe me as a ‘doyen of legal blogging’ – that is not how I would describe myself. I think Antonin Pribetic’s description of me as a flâneur is more amusing…and probably more accurate….
Wikipedia notes: The term flâneur comes from the French masculine noun flâneur—which has the basic meanings of “stroller”, “lounger”, “saunterer”, “loafer”—which itself comes from the French verb flâner, which means “to stroll”. Charles Baudelaire developed a derived meaning of flâneur—that of “a person who walks the city in order to experience it”.
I have a Facebook page which I never use. I deported myself from Linked In because I described myself as CEO of Charon Inc, money launderer and short seller of bank shares, and some did not appear to understand that I do not actually exist. They kept on sending me messages to get Linked In. Charon QC is a figment of my imagination – as my ‘About’ section makes clear. I lost the will to live after trying Google + for half an hour… I kept going round in ‘circles’. I also appear to have broken Google ‘Terms of Service’ by using a fake name… “Charon QC’. When I last looked, Google appears to think Charon QC is real and does exist. Result!
Scots solicitor Brian Inkster has written extensively on the subject of law blogging and his thoughts (and the many comments) are worth reading: I Blawg. You Flawg. Period?
“The clients of a legal aid lawyer have recreated a John Lennon and Yoko Ono magazine cover to support her fight to keep her practice.
Yvonne Hossack has dedicated her legal career to helping vulnerable people and, in particular, is known for her work on behalf of care home residents facing eviction. She’s acted for over 2,000 clients, saved care homes from closure and taken cases to Strasbourg. But it’s not been an easy ride: her firm has lost over £100,000 in the last year and she’s been fighting a battle against the Legal Services Commission which refused Hossack’s application for a legal aid contract (citing incorrectly filled out forms).
Therefore former clients Roger Kinsey, 66, and his wife Chris, 58 – whose disabled daughter was represented by Hossack – have decided to draw some attention to her plight by recreating Lennon and Ono’s 1968 Rolling Stone cover.”
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
The Without Prejudice podcast this coming Thursday will be on Human Rights. We hope that Hugh Tomlinson QC, a leading light on privacy and other legal matters, and Adam Wagner of 1 Crown Office Row and The UK Human Rights blog – will be able to join us – work permitting.
I am delighted that our audience is growing for these podcasts – and I very much appreciate that experienced lawyers are prepared to give of their time – free – to come down to The Staterooms at Battersea to record the podcasts. I am also delighted to report that The Lawyer has become a sponsor and will be covering the fortnightly podcasts on The Lawyer website going forward helping us to reach a wider audience of lawyers – who don’t read blogs or tweet.
I enjoyed Neil Rose’s article in The Guardian: So far so good: the Legal Ombudsman celebrates a smooth first year
“It’s not often that public sector projects come in under budget and go live with no discernible hiccups, but the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) seems to have done just that.
A year old on Thursday, the organisation – an independent body dealing with complaints against lawyers – has had a remarkably smooth first 12 months, at least to judge by the positive reaction of the legal profession, which had feared being at the wrong end of some rough justice (although LeO has had to take three solicitors to court to force them to comply with various directions)…..”
The Guardian reports: Justice secretary unlikely to survive next reshuffle as No 10 backs home secretary in fall out over Human Rights Act
I am not a Tory – but Ken Clarke is one of few Tory MPs I like and understand. He entered parliament when PM Camcorderdirect was three. I do hope that he survives. He was right on #Catflapgate and Theresa May was wrong. I commented on this earlier in the day in the post below…
Orf now to write some more Chapters of my novel, ‘noir’. Back with a Postcard From The Staterooms on te morrow.. or Sunday. Enjoy the weekend.. and don’t let the Tory Beserkers get to you…
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Friday, September 30, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
Peter Lodder QC, Chairman of the Bar, will say at a Conservative conference fringe event next week:
“I repeat here what I have said to your Coalition partners in Birmingham, and in many statements to the press, the public and parliamentarians from across the political spectrum. The Government’s cuts to legal aid, coming on top of successive rounds of cuts under the last Administration, will seriously undermine the efficiency of the justice system. Barristers operate on the front-line to ensure that our justice system works efficiently, effectively and, most importantly, fairly for all involved….”
The cuts to legal aid and, in particular, the Clause 12 issue on legal advice being available in police stations will have a significant effect on the rights and liberties of those who need effective high quality legal representation in civil and criminal matters.
Here is a selection of podcasts and blog posts on the issue:
Without Prejudice discussion with Francis FitzGibbon QC | Charon podcast with John Cooper QC on Clause 12 LASPO | Charon podcast with Nic Higgins, Chair of The Young Barrister’s Committee on a range of issues including difficulties faced by young barristers
And a few blog posts: Nick Armstrong, Matrix Chambers – The LASPO car crash |CrimSolicitor: If you would like legal advice please press #1 now…(and make sure you have your credit card details to hand) | James Vine Guest post on Clause 12
And just before I go orf-piste… a new initiative to give all students a chance of getting work experience with law firms and a fair start?
LC.N Says – Claire Butler – Time working-class kids were PRIME candidates?
Well… that is the serious stuff.. but it is the weekend.. and we are in the middle of a heatwave… so time for some Rive Gauche…
UK Blawg Roundup #8 – Change!An excellent round up of UK law blogs by Vic Moffat. It is good to see that UK law blogging is not only growing in range and scope – but is healthy. It was kind of Vic Moffat to mention my blog. I now feel like Methuseleh… and having a methuseleh.
And now… a bit of irony as reported by Rollonfriday.com…
“Law Society fined for disability discrimination ” “The Law Society has been found guilty of discrimination after making a disabled member of staff redundant. And in a devilish twist of irony, the person doing the firing was the Law Soc’s “diversity champion”.
Elizabeth Marshall – who suffers from cerebral palsy – had worked as a speechwriter at 113 Chancery Lane for eleven years before being summoned to a meeting with Stephen Ward, the Law Soc’s grandly-titled Director of Communications, Inclusion and Corporate Responsibility. During the meeting, it transpired her position was to be made redundant on grounds of business need. So that’s the Head of Inclusion getting rid of the sole full-time Law Society employee with a disability. Nice….”
Alex Aldridge has a most interesting piece in The Guardian about Acculaw – a new initiative to cut the costs to law firms of training. I’m still doing my thinking on this venture – but it is a good read from Alex.
“Today law firms seem to have figured out a way to spend less money on their young recruits. Last week a company called Acculaw – founded by a former lawyer and backed by several senior figures within the profession – launched a new cut-price lawyers’ training model. The firm will employ graduates on considerably less favourable terms than most current law recruits enjoy, then loan them out to law firms, where they will complete their training contracts.
Because Acculaw does not provide legal services itself, and has no reputation to protect, it does not have to worry about the PR implications of paying its trainees roughly half the salary of their peers at top firms. Nor does it lose any kudos by making no contribution at all towards its recruits’ law school fees. And, unlike law firms, Acculaw is under no pressure to provide a secure path into a permanent position once recruits have completed their training contracts
The BBC reports: “Christine Hemming, wife of Yardley MP John Hemming, was filmed by CCTV cameras stealing a kitten from the Birmingham home of her husband’s mistress Emily Cox. Hemming denied burglary and said she was dropping off post and did not know there was a cat there. She said she tried to return the kitten when she realised she had it. The 53-year-old, from Moseley, Birmingham, was convicted at the city’s crown court.”
AND FINALLY… who was it who said…
‘One thing that has become apparent to me in my years of Parliamentary service is that David Cameron is a complete c**t’.
Enjoy the heatwave.. back at the weekend with a ‘Postcard From The Staterooms‘.
Posted in Rive Gauche on Friday, September 16, 2011 | 7 Comments »
Friday and the weekend provides me with an opportunity to look at some of the more surreal or even bizarre events in the legal world as well as covering a few law blogs. It seems appropriate to start with the theme of “Piss ups in breweries”.
As ever, RollonFriday.com does the business with: Exclusive: Irwin Mitchell offers training contract by mistake
There are red faces all round at Irwin Mitchell, after at least one applicant for a training contract was offered a job by mistake – and then had the offer retracted. The student was phoned up and told that he’d been lucky enough to secure a training contract. And he then got another call the next day (presumably while he was shaking off the celebratory hangover) from an embarrassed HR manager, who said that it was all down to an “admin error” and the offer would need to be retracted. Nice….
I marvel that a well known law firm can make elementary errors of this nature and recommend my own online text on the Law of Contract and a series of free lectures. The topic of Offer and Acceptance may be a good place to start? If, of course, the offer had not been accepted – then communication of withdrawal of offer rules would apply. Or… by some arcane regulation are training contracts and law firms exempt from the the Law of Contract? I’d be delighted to know what rules and regulations govern this situation if the common Law of Contract does not? I’m a bit hazy these days on the regulations governing training contracts. Perhaps a reader could enlighten me? [Law student readers starting university this year - or studying Contract - may find my free materials on Contract of some use?]
Rather more serious than a piss up in a brewery is Clause 12
The Independent: “The Government plans to remove the “fundamental right” to free legal advice for people held in police custody – 27 years after it was introduced to stop miscarriages of justice.
Coalition MPs have voted through one of the most controversial sections of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill which would restrict access to legal advice for criminal suspects. Clause 12 paves the way for secondary legislation to introduce means testing for legal advice for those held in a police station. It would also see the director of legal aid, a post which does not yet exist, decide which detainees deserve legal aid in the “interest of justice” without any right to appeal.
It is part of sweeping changes which aim to cut the legal aid bill by a fifth. Legal campaigners argue clause 12 encroaches on civil liberties and will tarnish the reputation of Britain’s justice system. The right to free legal advice was enshrined in the 1984 Police and Criminal Evidence Act after a swathe of miscarriages of justice involving the fabrication of confessions and intimidation of suspects by police in the 70s and early 80s….
This is a very serious matter. Many are surprised that Lib-Dem MPs nodded it through. The right to legally aided 
This excellent piece by CrimSolicitor is worth reading… September 15, 2011 New Just one reason why telephone advice is not good enough…
But.. let’s get back to “Piss Up in a Brewery” territory.
The Guardian: Unprecedented move sees Scotland Yard use the Official Secrets Act to demand the paper hands over information
This excellent piece by David Allen Green, writing on his Jack of Kent blog, is marvellous stuff… Today’s Met Statement “This is the Met statement just released regarding the production order they are seeking against the Guardian. The last two paragraphs are the stuff of parody…”
Again… RollonFriday.com provides a bit of light relief… in this case from a US lawyer relieving his customers by over charging to the tune of $100,000… Greenberg Traurig partner gets six years hard labour for overbilling
After all this nonsense… a bit of sensible review from the law blogs and recent developments.
Obiter J, as ever, provides good analysis with his latest post: Legal Roundup – mid September
The Ministry of Justice reports: Kenneth Clarke: UK should be lawyer and adviser to the world
Justice Secretary Kenneth Clarke has reaffirmed his commitment to promoting the UK’s legal services to a worldwide audience, during a speech to legal and business leaders in London.
‘Law as an industry has sometimes felt itself to be overlooked in its treatment by government – certainly relative to financial services. So I want to make it clear that for this Government, the City of London is a legal centre – not just a financial one.
‘The rule of law is one of our greatest exports but there is more that we can do to help UK legal services thrive.
‘I am prepared to wear out much shoe leather promoting the UK as lawyer and adviser to the world, particularly in areas where protectionist regulations remain an impediment.’
All very laudable – and great for the legal elite in the City – but it is somewhat ironic that we are exporting our “Rule of Law’ ideals to a grateful world while our own legal system is being run into the ground by a Tory led Coalition hell bent on cutting costs and cutting access to justice by degrading the ideals of Legal Aid.
Mind you… there aren’t many cuts to be had in the prison service. Quite the opposite in fact, now that politicians have taken up the sport of interfering with an independent judiciary in the wake of the recent riots. The Guardian reports: English city riots involved ‘hardcore’ of repeat offenders, first analysis shows
There is, however, some good news. The UK Human Rights blog reports: Lord Justice Jackson: legal aid should remain for clinical negligence
Joshua Rozenberg, in The Guardian, notes: Ken Clarke is right – the European court of human rights needs reform
AND FINALLY… a bit of dark humour… from John Bolch over at Family Lore. Venal & Grabbit, Solicitors launch new client satisfaction survey…
1. Did we deal with your matter promptly?
2. Were our charges reasonable?
Yes – you should charge more
AND… good to see former practising solicitor John Bolch adding to his repertoire on his excellent Famly Law blog by doing commentaries on the profession in a new series “In Practice” - In Practice: Latest developments in the profession
Have a good weekend.. back with a Postcard from The Staterooms tomorrow or Sunday.
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Monday, September 12, 2011 | 4 Comments »
An old cocaine/hooker story about Chancellor Osbore has resurfaced today from Guido Fawkes about Mr Osbore’s alleged antics in an earlier life. There is now an added #Hackgate and #Coulsontmakeit up spin. The Aussies have got in on the act with an interesting interview with the woman at the epicentre of the story – See @tom_watson tweet below.
Even Tom Watson MP.. he of #Hackgate (the only member of the DCMS Select Committee able to ask a decent forensic question) has got in on the act….with this tweet, earlier:
“Editor helped chancellor manipulate news.” bit.ly/r6n5UN (definitely worth a read).
Meanwhile…in the wake of the Vickers Report this morning on Bankers et al and their ‘Regulation’: I have to award my *Tweet du Jour* to…
We do live in astonishing times. We shall see soon enough if there are any leather thigh boot clad legs in this story. Personally, I could not give a damn what Mr Osbore did or did not get up to when younger. I suspect that many of us did some pretty daft and unusual things in our youth. It is rather more important what he gets up to today – managing the country’s economy et al – free from ‘undue influences’.
UPDATE
Guido Fawkes has pointed out that Osborne denied these allegations some time back – here is an old Guido blog post
Posted in Charon, Rive Gauche on Thursday, August 25, 2011 | 11 Comments »
The final bank holiday of the year until Christmas is upon us. Next week I shall return to detailed commentary on the law, but for now a few items from ‘left field’.
First up… the news that Rocket Lawyer is coming to town to take advantage of the brave new world of law under the Legal Services Act.
To infinity and beyond: Google Law prepares for blast off
Louise Restell writes: “Several years ago, when I was campaigning to bring about the Legal Services Act, some bright spark at Which? suggested to me it wasn’t Tesco law that would bring about a revolution in legal services, but Google Law. I wouldn’t say I dismissed his prediction out of hand, but at the time it was quite a big leap to see how you could buy legal services in Tesco, never mind from Google. Well, last week this colleague’s prediction turned out to be right as the Google-backed Rocket Lawyer announced its intention to launch in the UK in 2012. It’s a measure of how far we’ve come that the news caused merely a ripple, rather than the tsunami we would have surely had in the past.”
And if that doesn’t worry you, what about this?: A US law circus is coming to town…
Legal Futures reveals: “Pioneering US legal services business LegalZoom is planning to launch in the UK next year, Legal Futures can reveal.
Co-founder Eddie Hartman, who is also president of attorney services, told Legal Futures that the company is “deep into the planning stages” of its UK entry, with the hope of bringing them to fruition in the next six to 12 months.
However, he emphasised that LegalZoom was taking its time to understand the UK’s legal culture. “We have to pay close attention to what the UK customer wants – we are still working out what that is,” he said.
I have no idea how these two initiatives will impact on the legal services market yet. I am, however, doing a podcast with Professor Gary Slapper on Monday. Gary Slapper has written a detailed text on the English Legal System, so we should be able to ‘shed some light’ on this in the podcast. We should be thankful that Mr Hartman of Legal Zoom is going to be doing some ‘deep planning and thinking’ – a fairly useful thing to do when launching a new product?
“This case seems a particularly clear example of the dangers of a politician – who knows only part of a story – second guessing a judge who has heard all the evidence. An injunction which was designed to protect the interest of a child was repeatedly breached by the losing party in litigation, encouraged and assisted by a number of websites and by Mr Hemming’s abuse of parliamentary privilege.”
Adam Wagner and the UK Human Rights blog has this news: President of Family Division’s press release on paedophile allegations case
With thanks to the Judicial Press Office, below is the full press release from the President of the Family Division in a case involving a “super injunction”, John Hemming MP, false allegations of pedophilia and some poor press reporting.
I will blog about this once the full rulings are released, but in the meantime see Lucy Reed: Bared Teeth – Grrrrr! | Pink Tape; Inforrm; News: Hemming MP’s “super injunction victim” named as sex abuse fabricator « Inforrm’s Blog, and the Fighting Monsters blog: Hemming and Haigh – The Journey of an Injunction.
And then, of course, we have our political masters not learning the lessons of history from King Canute. King Canute, you will recall, to prove to his “followers” that he was not omnipotent, demonstrated that he could not hold back the waves. Following the riots, Prime Minister Camcorderdirect, currently enjoying his fifth holiday of the year in Cornwall, and Home Secretary Theresa May, appear to be under the delusion that they can hold back the waves of social media.
The Guardian reports: “Facebook and Twitter are preparing to face down government ministers over calls to ban people from social networks or shut their websites down in times of civil unrest The major social networks are expected to offer no concessions when they meet the home secretary, Theresa May, at a Home Office summit on Thursday lunchtime….”
As I write, I do not know the outcome of the meeting with May. But I can tell you that the BBC is reporting that Deputy Prime Minister Clegg was pelted with blue paint. I’m not a fan of pie throwing or paint chucking as a means of protest. Mr Clegg had the right attitude in shrugging it off… “These things happen. It’s not a big deal.”
The GCSE results were out today and trending on twitter… A’s, B’s C’s. The incorrect use of the apostrophe is endemic in this country – prompting me to observe (lightly) this morning..
Update: Mary Wombat (@little_mavis)
I thought the same about the apostrophe & was discussing this with someone on Twitter today. Then I found this
http://oxforddictionaries.com/page/punctuationapostrophe
Right at the bottom. Apparently for single letters & numbers it is acceptable to use an apostrophe to indicate a plural
I was taught at school by a stickler for the apostrophe. It would appear that I have erred! I have always used the convention of simply adding an ‘s’ to indicate the plural. One learns every day!
A fascinating issue on university fees has escalated into law…
The Guardian: If claims of discrimination against non-Scottish UK students are proved, Westminster may be forced to interfere in domestic matters devolved to Scotland
I am not a fan of the increase in fees to £9000 next year. Iwasn’t a fan of the Labour government’s plan to charge fees at all. My generation were fortunate. We did not pay fees. The government says we have run out of money. Universities must stand on their on feet. The future of our country in terms of workforce and wealth creators must now pay for their own education – borrowing the money but paying it back over a lifetime. I don’t know the answer to this problem, but I suspect, if we pulled back from entering unwise wars which we can’t actually win, we may have more money to invest in the future of our country and the high quality of education which we do provide at university level. This, of course, may be far too naive and simplistic a view and is unlikely to find favour with our political masters. I would like to see this case won. I don’t see why an English or Welsh student who wishes to attend a university in Scotland should pay a higher fee than a Scots student or other student domiciled in Scotland pays – another view unlikely to find favour with political masters. – in this case Scotland’s.
I’ll leave you to enjoy your bank holiday weekend with this from Professor Gary Slapper…
Posted in Charon, Charon after a glass Pics, Charon After Dark, Law Review, Rive Gauche on Saturday, July 23, 2011 | 18 Comments »
Two stories have caught my eye overnight…both from The Telegraph…
The Telegraph: The Chancellor, George Osborne, flew to New York and had dinner with Rupert Murdoch two weeks before the media regulator was due to decide on whether to approve his takeover of BSkyB.
AND… this.. rather more important one…
The Telegraph: The judge in charge of the phone hacking inquiry has attended parties at the home of Rupert Murdoch’s son-in-law.
Lord Leveson’s office insisted that David Cameron had been informed of the judge’s attendance at the parties and had not raised any objections.
Lord Leveson’s office continued: “Lord Justice Leveson was not involved in that meeting and he has neither met nor spoken to anyone from Freud Communications since January 2011.
“There is, in any event, no continuing relationship. Prior to his appointment to the inquiry, Lord Justice Leveson ensured that these matters were brought to the attention of the Prime Minister.”
Twenty years ago I was involved in a contract dispute. I won. The first High Court judge to try the issue had to recuse himself (stand down). The plaintiffs objected on the grounds that I had had a drink with the judge when he was a QC. The judge had no problem with this. Nor did I.
In the present climate – I am surprised that the Prime Minister, aware of the minor connection between Lord Justice Leveson and the Murdochs as reported in The Telegraph – thought it fitting that Leveson LJ should head the inquiry. I am sure that Leveson LJ would be impartial. He is highly regarded. But on this very complex and emotive issue of #Hackgate – it is surprising (a) that this story was not announced at the time Leveson LJ was appointed and, frankly, (b) that Leveson LJ was appointed, and (c) accepted the appointment.
My view on this may not find favour in some circles…. but I do feel, strongly, that Leveson LJ – assuming The Telegraph story is accurate in all respects – should stand down. There must be other judges with no connections to the Murdochs or their empire, who could do just as good a job?
Chris Bryant MP has objected. I think we should also object...strongly.
Without Prejudice podcasts Charon QC » Charon Podcasts
