*/
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.
Now is the time to tackle inappropriate behaviour at the Bar as well as extend our reach and collaboration with organisations and individuals at home and abroad
A comparison – Dan Monaghan, Head of DWF Chambers, invites two viewpoints
And if not, why not? asks Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Head of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, discusses the many benefits of oral fluid drug testing for child welfare and protection matters
To mark International Women’s Day, Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management looks at how financial planning can help bridge the gap
Casey Randall of AlphaBiolabs answers some of the most common questions regarding relationship DNA testing for court
Maria Scotland and Niamh Wilkie report from the Bar Council’s 2024 visit to the United Arab Emirates exploring practice development opportunities for the England and Wales family Bar
Marking Neurodiversity Week 2025, an anonymous barrister shares the revelations and emotions from a mid-career diagnosis with a view to encouraging others to find out more
David Wurtzel analyses the outcome of the 2024 silk competition and how it compares with previous years, revealing some striking trends and home truths for the profession
Save for some high-flyers and those who can become commercial arbitrators, it is generally a question of all or nothing but that does not mean moving from hero to zero, says Andrew Hillier
