*/
There is a popular misconception among non-lawyers that barristers who practise in particular areas are, somehow, sympathisers of those whom they represent. It is true that many who practise in a particular area do sympathise with the difficulties encountered by their lay client, and some may hold views, political or otherwise, that may accord with those whom they represent. It is regrettable that some sections of the media criticise certain lawyers for the cases that they take on. If that logic was pursued, no one would represent anyone charged with a serious offence through fear of condemnation. My beliefs are separate from my legal arguments, but my beliefs should inform my character.
I became a Christian when I was a teenager and, although I always wanted to be a barrister, when it came to my degree I swerved into studying theology before doing the law conversion course. There was a module entitled ‘law, morality and religion’ where we looked at the moral basis for law. I originally wanted to practise property law, but instead undertook a pupillage in a criminal set. Over 33 years, my practice has moved from criminal law into regulatory and professional disciplinary law and ecclesiastical law.
Memories of my first case are still vivid. I was in pupillage and represented the defendant (D) at the old s 6(2) committal hearing. D liked me, so the solicitor asked the clerks for me to have the Crown Court brief at Middlesex Guildhall (now home to the Supreme Court). D was accused of burglary. We had a trial, the jury convicted and the judge looked at D’s extensive record for burglary and theft (which in those days did not get put before a jury) and gave him 12 months’ immediate imprisonment. I got leave to appeal his sentence, as he had stayed out of trouble for a few years, and went to the Court of Appeal. The court was charming but refused to allow the appeal due to his record of offending.
The hardest case I faced when starting out was when I was about four years’ call and ended up running a cut-throat defence in Court 4 at the Old Bailey. My client had been charged with murder but it was dropped to ABH and the brief was returned to me. The co-defendant, who remained charged with murder and blamed my client for the fatal punches, was represented by a highly experienced QC who later became an appeal court judge. It was daunting. The case was emotionally charged. During my cross-examination of a witness, he shouted across the court: ‘You are chatting shit at me.’ I had to take a deep breath, and carry on. Unfortunately, the jury agreed with the witness and my client was convicted. His sentence brought about his immediate release due to the time he had spent on remand.
More recently, I was on a short break with my family when the clerks rang. I had just taken a sip of beer in the sunshine on a beach. Would I be prepared to represent a regulator tomorrow online? They knew I was on holiday but the regulator had been let down at the last minute. I had never represented that regulator before but was able to read the brief due to the time difference and appeared online from a hotel room. That case resulted in an appeal to the High Court, where the findings of fact were upheld but the sanction was reduced.
I have always believed in getting stuck into my local community. I was asked to be a churchwarden of our local church, only a year or so after joining the congregation. Thus began a stint that lasted 22 years. Everything from re-ordering the church, selecting the next vicar through to leading services and preaching were required. Having addressed juries for many years, standing up and saying something in church was not difficult. However, I also had to talk about my faith and speak from my own personal experience.
There is quite a difference between sitting down after a closing speech in a trial and sitting down after delivering a sermon. With the former, you are generally buzzing and there begins a process of anxiously waiting for a decision that you hope concurs with your submissions. With the latter, there is peace and silence followed by a hymn to be sung or a creed to be said, and at the end over coffee someone will engage you in conversation about what you said. In June last year, I was ordained as a priest in the Church of England. I continue to practise full-time as a barrister. This has presented its own challenges. Which day should I have off? Sunday? Oh no, I have a service to take. Saturday? I am preparing next week’s case…
I was appointed a Deputy Chancellor of a Diocese (an ecclesiastical judge) due to my lengthy experience as a churchwarden and my interest in matters ecclesiastical. Within a short time, I had to preside over an ecclesiastical court where a parish was split down the middle regarding whether an extension should be built to a church. The matter had caught the attention of the press and, when I sat at the front in my barrister’s wig and gown, the church was as full as a wedding. The aisle was the dividing line between the two sides. The wig does have authority, but not as much as being in the House of God, and I gave the assembled public a polite talk about the importance of keeping quiet during the evidence, reminding them of the solemnity of the proceedings. It worked, we got through the evidence and eventually I made a decision allowing the extension – based on the evidence and not the ever-present emotions of those who expressed their views.
During the COVID-19 lockdown I was made a Chancellor of a Diocese, appointed by the Bishop and the Lord Chancellor. This requires me to deal with multiple petitions for faculties (permission) to alter churches, repair items of ancient and significant value and occasionally requests to exhume someone who is buried in a churchyard. I am supported by a dedicated team of lawyers and advisers. Part of my role is also to consider the missional benefits of proposals to alter churches, particularly those with increasing congregations. My experience as a churchwarden over many years has been invaluable.
Alongside my ecclesiastical practice I regularly prosecute multi-handed drugs conspiracies. I also practise in regulatory and disciplinary law, dealing with regulators for accountants, barristers, healthcare professionals, the Police and solicitors appearing at Tribunals and in the High Court and I specialise in representing care homes. I have sat on the Clergy Disciplinary Tribunal, appointed as a lay person by my Diocese, and more recently have represented clergy before the Tribunal. Clergy Disciplinary Tribunals are the only legal proceedings that I am aware of, where we begin the proceedings with prayer.
There is a popular misconception among non-lawyers that barristers who practise in particular areas are, somehow, sympathisers of those whom they represent. It is true that many who practise in a particular area do sympathise with the difficulties encountered by their lay client, and some may hold views, political or otherwise, that may accord with those whom they represent. It is regrettable that some sections of the media criticise certain lawyers for the cases that they take on. If that logic was pursued, no one would represent anyone charged with a serious offence through fear of condemnation. My beliefs are separate from my legal arguments, but my beliefs should inform my character.
I became a Christian when I was a teenager and, although I always wanted to be a barrister, when it came to my degree I swerved into studying theology before doing the law conversion course. There was a module entitled ‘law, morality and religion’ where we looked at the moral basis for law. I originally wanted to practise property law, but instead undertook a pupillage in a criminal set. Over 33 years, my practice has moved from criminal law into regulatory and professional disciplinary law and ecclesiastical law.
Memories of my first case are still vivid. I was in pupillage and represented the defendant (D) at the old s 6(2) committal hearing. D liked me, so the solicitor asked the clerks for me to have the Crown Court brief at Middlesex Guildhall (now home to the Supreme Court). D was accused of burglary. We had a trial, the jury convicted and the judge looked at D’s extensive record for burglary and theft (which in those days did not get put before a jury) and gave him 12 months’ immediate imprisonment. I got leave to appeal his sentence, as he had stayed out of trouble for a few years, and went to the Court of Appeal. The court was charming but refused to allow the appeal due to his record of offending.
The hardest case I faced when starting out was when I was about four years’ call and ended up running a cut-throat defence in Court 4 at the Old Bailey. My client had been charged with murder but it was dropped to ABH and the brief was returned to me. The co-defendant, who remained charged with murder and blamed my client for the fatal punches, was represented by a highly experienced QC who later became an appeal court judge. It was daunting. The case was emotionally charged. During my cross-examination of a witness, he shouted across the court: ‘You are chatting shit at me.’ I had to take a deep breath, and carry on. Unfortunately, the jury agreed with the witness and my client was convicted. His sentence brought about his immediate release due to the time he had spent on remand.
More recently, I was on a short break with my family when the clerks rang. I had just taken a sip of beer in the sunshine on a beach. Would I be prepared to represent a regulator tomorrow online? They knew I was on holiday but the regulator had been let down at the last minute. I had never represented that regulator before but was able to read the brief due to the time difference and appeared online from a hotel room. That case resulted in an appeal to the High Court, where the findings of fact were upheld but the sanction was reduced.
I have always believed in getting stuck into my local community. I was asked to be a churchwarden of our local church, only a year or so after joining the congregation. Thus began a stint that lasted 22 years. Everything from re-ordering the church, selecting the next vicar through to leading services and preaching were required. Having addressed juries for many years, standing up and saying something in church was not difficult. However, I also had to talk about my faith and speak from my own personal experience.
There is quite a difference between sitting down after a closing speech in a trial and sitting down after delivering a sermon. With the former, you are generally buzzing and there begins a process of anxiously waiting for a decision that you hope concurs with your submissions. With the latter, there is peace and silence followed by a hymn to be sung or a creed to be said, and at the end over coffee someone will engage you in conversation about what you said. In June last year, I was ordained as a priest in the Church of England. I continue to practise full-time as a barrister. This has presented its own challenges. Which day should I have off? Sunday? Oh no, I have a service to take. Saturday? I am preparing next week’s case…
I was appointed a Deputy Chancellor of a Diocese (an ecclesiastical judge) due to my lengthy experience as a churchwarden and my interest in matters ecclesiastical. Within a short time, I had to preside over an ecclesiastical court where a parish was split down the middle regarding whether an extension should be built to a church. The matter had caught the attention of the press and, when I sat at the front in my barrister’s wig and gown, the church was as full as a wedding. The aisle was the dividing line between the two sides. The wig does have authority, but not as much as being in the House of God, and I gave the assembled public a polite talk about the importance of keeping quiet during the evidence, reminding them of the solemnity of the proceedings. It worked, we got through the evidence and eventually I made a decision allowing the extension – based on the evidence and not the ever-present emotions of those who expressed their views.
During the COVID-19 lockdown I was made a Chancellor of a Diocese, appointed by the Bishop and the Lord Chancellor. This requires me to deal with multiple petitions for faculties (permission) to alter churches, repair items of ancient and significant value and occasionally requests to exhume someone who is buried in a churchyard. I am supported by a dedicated team of lawyers and advisers. Part of my role is also to consider the missional benefits of proposals to alter churches, particularly those with increasing congregations. My experience as a churchwarden over many years has been invaluable.
Alongside my ecclesiastical practice I regularly prosecute multi-handed drugs conspiracies. I also practise in regulatory and disciplinary law, dealing with regulators for accountants, barristers, healthcare professionals, the Police and solicitors appearing at Tribunals and in the High Court and I specialise in representing care homes. I have sat on the Clergy Disciplinary Tribunal, appointed as a lay person by my Diocese, and more recently have represented clergy before the Tribunal. Clergy Disciplinary Tribunals are the only legal proceedings that I am aware of, where we begin the proceedings with prayer.
The Bar Council continues to call for investment for the justice system and represent the interests of our profession both at home and abroad
By Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
AlphaBiolabs has made a £500 donation to Sean’s Place, a men’s mental health charity based in Sefton, as part of its ongoing Giving Back initiative
Q&A with Tim Lynch of Jordan Lynch Private Finance
By Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Little has changed since Burns v Burns . Cohabiting couples deserve better than to be left on the blasted heath with the existing witch’s brew for another four decades, argues Christopher Stirling
Six months of court observation at the Old Bailey: APPEAL’s Dr Nisha Waller and Tehreem Sultan report their findings on prosecution practices under joint enterprise
The Amazonian artist’s first international solo exhibition is wholly relevant to current issues in social and environmental justice, says Stephen Cragg KC
Despite its prevalence, autism spectrum disorder remains poorly understood in the criminal justice system. Does Alex Henry’s joint enterprise conviction expose the need to audit prisons? asks Dr Felicity Gerry KC
It’s been five years since the groundbreaking QC competition in which six Black women barristers, including the 2025 Chair of the Bar, took silk. Yet today, the number of Black KCs remains ‘critically low’. Desirée Artesi talks to Baroness Scotland KC, Allison Munroe KC and Melanie Simpson KC about the critical success factors, barriers and ideas for embedding change