Profession

Debate on the future of the Human Rights Act 1998 (“HRA 1998”) illustrates a number of contemporary political themes.  

There is convergence – both Labour and the Conservatives invoke the spirit of the Glorious Revolution with arguments for a new Bill of Rights. There is divergence – in essence, Labour and the Liberal Democrats are for the HRA 1998 and the Conservatives against it – though all sides have their mavericks. There is an awful lot of confusion, if not wilful obfuscation. And, underneath the politics, there are, largely unacknowledged, constitutional principles that limit what can practically be done. 

Members of the Bar can enjoy many exclusive benefits provided by Member Services, an entirely self-funding department of the Bar Council which helps to offset the cost of representing the Bar through commercial activity. 

Member Services are committed to negotiating tailored goods and services for the Bar, often at preferential prices unavailable to the general public.   Our Service Partners offer high quality services at best-value prices through high standards of customer care. Service Partners are selected on the basis of excellent service, an understanding of the Bar’s needs and a commitment to providing tailored services, often with substantial exclusive discounts. Wherever you see this logo, you can be assured that the organisation has signed up to this commitment. http://www.barcouncil.org.uk/for-the-bar/explore-member-benefits/ 

Vivian Robinson QC explains why, after a successful career at the criminal Bar working for both sides of the fence of the Serious Fraud Office, he has joined the organisation as the first General Counsel 

How has the advocacy strategy deployed by the CPS been working in practice in the Crown Court? David Wurtzel investigates.  

In 2004 the new Director of Public Prosecutions, Sir Ken MacDonald, launched an advocacy strategy vision in which the Crown Prosecution Service (“CPS”) was to become “an organisation that routinely conducts its own high quality advocacy in all courts, efficiently and effectively”. In that first year, Crown advocates conducted 7,433 sessions; in 2008−09 it was 56,519 sessions including 8,401 trials. The aim was to achieve 25 per cent of the cost of advocacy-in-house by 2011; it is now 21.3 per cent. 

The Treasury Solicitor’s Department dispels the myths surrounding appointment to the Attorney General’s Civil Panels.  

The Attorney General maintains (by means of an open advertisement and application process) four panels of junior counsel to undertake civil and EU work for all government departments. She has three London panels and a regional panel. 

Following the response to our recent survey we are now able to target our resources on meeting those needs which have been identified by the Bar itself, writes Paul Mosson.  

Back in January the Chairman of the Bar, Desmond Browne QC, authored an article in this magazine to raise awareness of a member research project being conducted by mruk research ltd on behalf of the Bar Council (“Meeting your Needs”, Counsel, January 2009, pp 10-11). Subsequently all members of the Bar were invited to complete an online questionnaire asking what products and services the Bar would like Member Services to secure on their behalf and how they wished to be contacted about them. I know I speak for all at the Bar Council when I thank the 4,333 members of the Bar who freely gave their time to help shape the Member Services of the future by completing this questionnaire. They represented 25 per cent of those surveyed by email and 7 per cent of those surveyed by post, a very high response rate for a survey of this kind. 

The Treasury Solicitor’s Department dispels the myths surrounding appointment to the Attorney General’s Civil Panels.  

The Attorney General maintains (by means of an open advertisement and application process) four panels of junior counsel to undertake civil and EU work for all government departments. She has three London panels and a regional panel.  The panel system means that whether junior counsel are acting for the government in relation to an inquiry into deaths in Iraq, a judicial review against a planning decision, a claim for defective construction of a motorway, an injunction against a newspaper, or indeed any other aspect of contentious and non-contentious legal work for which counsel are needed, then the counsel selected will be members of one of the Attorney General’s Civil Panels. 

The 2009 Conference promises to be accessible, and of interest, to all members of the Bar, says Fiona Jackson.  

On 7 November the 24th Annual Bar Conference will consider as its theme “Access to Justice — Justice for All?”. To answer the perennial question “Why should I go?”, key reasons this year include: 

• A programme including a broad range of workshops debating core issues affecting the whole profession and the justice system. Barristers practising in all areas will find sessions directly relevant to them 
• Prestigious and expert speakers considering Access to Justice issues at home and abroad 
• What better way to earn at least six CPD points and network with colleagues? There are also free and discounted places, online booking and free childcare facilities available 

How has the advocacy strategy deployed by the CPS been working in practice in the Crown Court? David Wurtzel investigates.  

In 2004 the new Director of Public Prosecutions, Sir Ken MacDonald, launched an advocacy strategy vision in which the Crown Prosecution Service (“CPS”) was to become “an organisation that routinely conducts its own high quality advocacy in all courts, efficiently and eff ectively”. In that first year, Crown advocates conducted 7,433 sessions; in 2008−09 it was 56,519 sessions including 8,401 trials. The aim was to achieve 25 per cent of the cost of advocacy-in-house by 2011; it is now 21.3 per cent. 

The Australian Bar Association Conference examined how English law deals with human rights considerations, privacy issues and direct access, reports Justice Glenn Martin.  

Why did 150 Australian barristers and judges come to London in June to hear about the law of England and Wales? We, the Australian Bar Association (“ABA”), came precisely because the law is, to varying degrees, different in this jurisdiction. And because of the different ways in which the profession and the judiciary have dealt with problems which have also arisen in Australia. And because exposure to different ideas and attitudes challenges you to re-assess your own decisions and behaviour.