*/
The government was forced to publish the legal advice from the Attorney General on the controversial Brexit deal.
The six-page letter was published the day after MPs voted by 311 to 293 to find the government in contempt of Parliament for its failure to reveal the contents. The Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox QC, had previously published an overview, but argued that disclosing the full advice would compromise client confidentiality and be against the national interest.
The ministerial code states that neither the fact that the law officers have given advice, nor its content, may be disclosed outside government without ministers’ consent.
Andrea Leadsom, Leader of the House of Commons urged referral to the Privileges Committee for consideration of the motion in its ‘full constitutional and historical context’.
But lawyers were divided over the issue. The former Solicitor General, Lord Garnier QC, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: ‘It is a matter of convention that the law officers don’t disclose their advice – and it used to be the convention that they don’t disclose whether they had given advice on a particular issue.’
In The Guardian human rights barrister Geoffrey Robertson QC wrote: ‘There is no political “convention” more misguided and less examined than the supposed rule that legal advice to ministers must remain confidential.’ He said that public money is spent instructing counsel to provide an opinion on the law, which everyone is entitled to know.
Crossbench peer Lord Carlile said in The Times that as a matter of law, it is up to the client and there was no contempt of Parliament to refuse to publish privileged legal advice.
The government was forced to publish the legal advice from the Attorney General on the controversial Brexit deal.
The six-page letter was published the day after MPs voted by 311 to 293 to find the government in contempt of Parliament for its failure to reveal the contents. The Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox QC, had previously published an overview, but argued that disclosing the full advice would compromise client confidentiality and be against the national interest.
The ministerial code states that neither the fact that the law officers have given advice, nor its content, may be disclosed outside government without ministers’ consent.
Andrea Leadsom, Leader of the House of Commons urged referral to the Privileges Committee for consideration of the motion in its ‘full constitutional and historical context’.
But lawyers were divided over the issue. The former Solicitor General, Lord Garnier QC, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: ‘It is a matter of convention that the law officers don’t disclose their advice – and it used to be the convention that they don’t disclose whether they had given advice on a particular issue.’
In The Guardian human rights barrister Geoffrey Robertson QC wrote: ‘There is no political “convention” more misguided and less examined than the supposed rule that legal advice to ministers must remain confidential.’ He said that public money is spent instructing counsel to provide an opinion on the law, which everyone is entitled to know.
Crossbench peer Lord Carlile said in The Times that as a matter of law, it is up to the client and there was no contempt of Parliament to refuse to publish privileged legal advice.
Chair of the Bar reports back
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
The odds of success are as unforgiving as ever, but ambition clearly isn’t in short supply. David Wurtzel’s annual deep‑dive into the competition cohort shows who’s entering, who’s thriving and the trends that will define the next wave
Where to start and where to find help? Monisha Shah, Chair of the King’s Counsel Selection Panel, provides an overview of the silk selection process, debunking some myths along the way
There is no typical day in the life as a Supreme Court judicial assistant, says Josephine Gillingwater, and that’s what makes the role so enjoyably diverse
The Bar Council is ready to support a turn to the efficiencies that will make a difference
The white-collar criminal and civil silk Jonathan Fisher KC, Independent Reviewer of Disclosure and Fraud Offences, advocates modernising the disclosure regime and harnessing AI to reduce the court backlog. He tells Anthony Inglese CB about his career path and conclusions of his review
