*/
RARELY, in my experience, is a talk is so gripping and helpful that you wish it was longer. A packed Inner Temple Hall was treated to such a talk by Jonathan Sumption QC on 29 September 2009. His subject was Appellate Advocacy.
Throughout the talk he delighted the 300-strong audience with quips such as “Appellate judges are bigger than you and they hunt in packs”. These mild digs at the judges reminded everyone that this speaker was not a judge but a practising barrister like them. Jonathan shared some instructive insights into the judicial mind based on his experience. He said that judges had become less reverent of authority than in the past and that they cited fewer cases in their judgments these days. There was now a tendency to set out broad principles of law exemplified by the authorities across a range of subjects rather than applying authorities directly to the case being decided. He also noted and welcomed an increasing willingness by judges to consider the social and economic implications of their decisions in their judgments.
Starting with the premise that “Judges start with an instinctive view and work backwards to justify it”, Jonathan made some practical suggestions for skeleton arguments and oral advocacy. Here are five out of a much longer list that will be at the forefront of my mind when I appear in the Court of Appeal:
Perhaps the best question was “What can you do about the difficult judge?”. To this JS said “You can’t force him to listen, you can only hope he makes a real mess of the judgment. It is good to lose as comprehensively and unfairly as possible to make it easier in the Court of Appeal”. Alas, that such this excellent advice should be of such small comfort in civil work – with permission to appeal nearly always required, the judge rarely giving it and the costs of seeking permission from the Court of Appeal so high, the difficult judge may well escape his come-uppance.
Starting with the premise that “Judges start with an instinctive view and work backwards to justify it”, Jonathan made some practical suggestions for skeleton arguments and oral advocacy. Here are five out of a much longer list that will be at the forefront of my mind when I appear in the Court of Appeal:
Perhaps the best question was “What can you do about the difficult judge?”. To this JS said “You can’t force him to listen, you can only hope he makes a real mess of the judgment. It is good to lose as comprehensively and unfairly as possible to make it easier in the Court of Appeal”. Alas, that such this excellent advice should be of such small comfort in civil work – with permission to appeal nearly always required, the judge rarely giving it and the costs of seeking permission from the Court of Appeal so high, the difficult judge may well escape his come-uppance.
RARELY, in my experience, is a talk is so gripping and helpful that you wish it was longer. A packed Inner Temple Hall was treated to such a talk by Jonathan Sumption QC on 29 September 2009. His subject was Appellate Advocacy.
Throughout the talk he delighted the 300-strong audience with quips such as “Appellate judges are bigger than you and they hunt in packs”. These mild digs at the judges reminded everyone that this speaker was not a judge but a practising barrister like them. Jonathan shared some instructive insights into the judicial mind based on his experience. He said that judges had become less reverent of authority than in the past and that they cited fewer cases in their judgments these days. There was now a tendency to set out broad principles of law exemplified by the authorities across a range of subjects rather than applying authorities directly to the case being decided. He also noted and welcomed an increasing willingness by judges to consider the social and economic implications of their decisions in their judgments.
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
A career shaped by advocacy beyond her practice, and the realities of living with an invisible disability – Dr Natasha Shotunde, Black Barristers’ Network Co-Founder and its Chair for seven years, reflects on a decade at the Bar
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
Do chatbot providers owe a duty of care for negligent misstatements? Jasper Wong suggests that the principles applicable to humans should apply equally to machines
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
