*/
Barristers are not obliged to speak to the media and must be wary of appearing to promote themselves when doing so, the Bar Council’s ethics committee has reiterated in an updated note.
The committee reminded barristers that since the removal of the prohibition in April 2013, they are permitted to talk to the media ‘generally and in respect of concluded litigation’ in which they acted, subject to their general professional duties.
But pointing to guidance from the Bar Standards Board (The BSB Handbook: gC22 and Media Comment Guidance), it noted that they are under ‘no obligation’ to do so and that it is not a legal service and does not form part of barristers’ duties to act in the best interests of any of their clients.
As such, it warned that barristers may not be insured against any consequences of expressing a personal opinion to the media. The BSB also reminded barristers of the risk of liability in contempt, defamation or malicious falsehood that can arise personally, or for the lay client.
Barristers were advised to consider the following before speaking to the press: the nature and type of proceedings; the stage proceedings have reached; the nature of the proposed comments; what information they are permitted to convey; whether they need the client’s consent; and the likelihood of prejudice arising from the comments.
They were reminded that their role is not to act as their client’s mouthpiece or to identify themselves personally with their client’s cause, and warned that in speaking to the media their motives for doing so may be called into question.
‘Even if this is not what you intend’ by speaking to the press, it warns, ‘you run the risk of appearing to promote your own interests over those of your client’.
Barristers are not obliged to speak to the media and must be wary of appearing to promote themselves when doing so, the Bar Council’s ethics committee has reiterated in an updated note.
The committee reminded barristers that since the removal of the prohibition in April 2013, they are permitted to talk to the media ‘generally and in respect of concluded litigation’ in which they acted, subject to their general professional duties.
But pointing to guidance from the Bar Standards Board (The BSB Handbook: gC22 and Media Comment Guidance), it noted that they are under ‘no obligation’ to do so and that it is not a legal service and does not form part of barristers’ duties to act in the best interests of any of their clients.
As such, it warned that barristers may not be insured against any consequences of expressing a personal opinion to the media. The BSB also reminded barristers of the risk of liability in contempt, defamation or malicious falsehood that can arise personally, or for the lay client.
Barristers were advised to consider the following before speaking to the press: the nature and type of proceedings; the stage proceedings have reached; the nature of the proposed comments; what information they are permitted to convey; whether they need the client’s consent; and the likelihood of prejudice arising from the comments.
They were reminded that their role is not to act as their client’s mouthpiece or to identify themselves personally with their client’s cause, and warned that in speaking to the media their motives for doing so may be called into question.
‘Even if this is not what you intend’ by speaking to the press, it warns, ‘you run the risk of appearing to promote your own interests over those of your client’.
Chair of the Bar finds common ground on legal services between our two jurisdictions, plus an update on jury trials
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
An interview with Rob Wagg, CEO of New Park Court Chambers
With at least 31 reports of AI hallucinations in UK legal cases – over 800 worldwide – and judges using AI to assist in judicial decision-making, the risks and benefits are impossible to ignore. Matthew Lee examines how different jurisdictions are responding
What has changed, and why? Paul Secher unpacks the new standards aligning the recruiting, training and appraising of judges – the first major change to the system for ten years
The deprivation of liberty is the most significant power the state can exercise. Drawing on frontline experience, Chris Henley KC explains why replacing trial by jury with judge-only trials risks undermining justice
Ever wondered what a pupillage is like at the CPS? This Q and A provides an insight into the training, experience and next steps
The appointments of 96 new King’s Counsel (also known as silk) are announced today