*/
The Chair of the Bar sought a public clarification from a senior judge over comments he made about the legal profession’s response to piloting extended court sittings.
Lord Justice Fulford, the judge in charge of reform, wrote a letter to ‘demystify’ plans for the pilots, which are due to start at six courts in the autumn, in light of what he termed ‘public comments – particularly from members of the legal profession’.
He said: ‘I regret the extent of the widely broadcast misunderstandings and ill-informed comments from a range of sources’. Responding to critics, Fulford said the scheme ‘is not a disguised attempt to persuade, or force… legal professionals and others to spend more time at court’.
He acknowledged the Bar’s concerns over the scheme’s practicality and impact on diversity and said: ‘If it works, it works; if it doesn’t, it doesn’t.’ He stressed that a ‘detrimental impact on diversity… is not a price the judges are willing to pay’.
Responding, Bar Chair, Andrew Langdon QC, acknowledged there had been misunderstandings, but said that was because the consultation lacked detailed proposals about the scheme, which had been developed in a ‘somewhat piecemeal fashion’.
Langdon said: ‘I hope you did not mean implicitly to criticise the Bar Council… in raising these concerns, and doing so vocally and vehemently.’
He asked: ‘I wonder if, on reflection, you would be prepared, publicly, to make it clear that you did not mean to suggest that the Bar leaders who have been grappling with this had been ill-informed or misunderstood?’
The Chair of the Bar sought a public clarification from a senior judge over comments he made about the legal profession’s response to piloting extended court sittings.
Lord Justice Fulford, the judge in charge of reform, wrote a letter to ‘demystify’ plans for the pilots, which are due to start at six courts in the autumn, in light of what he termed ‘public comments – particularly from members of the legal profession’.
He said: ‘I regret the extent of the widely broadcast misunderstandings and ill-informed comments from a range of sources’. Responding to critics, Fulford said the scheme ‘is not a disguised attempt to persuade, or force… legal professionals and others to spend more time at court’.
He acknowledged the Bar’s concerns over the scheme’s practicality and impact on diversity and said: ‘If it works, it works; if it doesn’t, it doesn’t.’ He stressed that a ‘detrimental impact on diversity… is not a price the judges are willing to pay’.
Responding, Bar Chair, Andrew Langdon QC, acknowledged there had been misunderstandings, but said that was because the consultation lacked detailed proposals about the scheme, which had been developed in a ‘somewhat piecemeal fashion’.
Langdon said: ‘I hope you did not mean implicitly to criticise the Bar Council… in raising these concerns, and doing so vocally and vehemently.’
He asked: ‘I wonder if, on reflection, you would be prepared, publicly, to make it clear that you did not mean to suggest that the Bar leaders who have been grappling with this had been ill-informed or misunderstood?’
The Chair of the Bar reports back
Susie Griffin on the admin that keeps barristers from billable work
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, explains how global events can influence the performance of pensions and ISAs, and why taking a long-term approach to investing is often the most effective strategy
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, discusses what family law professionals need to know about hallucinogens, from the main hallucinogenic drugs encountered in family proceedings, to their effects and the testing options available
Harmony Christian Ministries is the latest charity to benefit from a £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
By David Green
The golden age of advocacy? David Langwallner pays homage to the filmic if contentious barrister Sir Edward Carson and some of his contemporaries
Leah Arthur, a pupil, and her second seat supervisor, John Goss, share their perspectives on building a productive pupil-supervisor relationship
Henry Fingerhut outlines what the Bar Standards Board AI guidance means for early career barristers
The Ministry of Justice will match-fund up to 100 criminal pupillages, with grants available to criminal chambers across England and Wales. Similar to the COIC scheme, the grants will match-fund pupillages additional to those otherwise offered without government funding
Not yet, says Jacob Turner. Regulation, unlike the technology itself, is a domain the legal profession can still control
