Claire Ruckin Legalweek Mon, 06 Jul 2009 11:35:00 +0100 Shoosmiths has reported a marginal drop in turnover for 2008-09 but seen profits per equity partner (PEP) plunge by 54% - the biggest drop in profits at a top 50 firm to date. Shoosmiths’ PEP plummeted by 54% to £150,000 for the last financial year down from £327,000 in 2007-08. Revenue dipped by 4%, falling from £103.4m in 2007-08 to £99m.

Original post: 
Shoosmiths 2008-09 partner profits plummet by 54% to £150,000 PEP

Previous economic recessions have generally been accompanied by a rise in commercial litigation. Is the current global financial crisis any exception?

Read more from the original source: 
1. Current Economic Conditions

It had all the trappings of a dream wedding: the happy couple stood before their priest on a seaside rooftop and said their vows in the sunshine before joining their guests for a lavish dinner. But Gillian Hudson was told yesterday that it was not a valid ceremony, she was not legally married and — most important of all — she could not file for divorce.

Read more from the original source: 
Judge rules Gillian Hudson’s ceremony with priest was not a marriage

Tory grandee Sir Peter Viggers forced to quit over £30,000 gardening bill Times: The purge of Conservative MPs caught up in the expenses scandal intensified last night as David Cameron forced out a grandee who had claimed £30,000 for gardening. Off with their heads? As Gordon dithers while Westminster burns, rejects Cameron’s calls for an immediate election and admits that a conservative government being elected at a snap election would cause chaos Richard Gordon, QC, writing in the Times states – “Thinking the unthinkable is what constitutional lawyers are paid to do. Many are now saying that with the daily revelations about improper expenses claims from beleaguered MPs the Queen should step in and dissolve Parliament — against the Government’s wishes — forcing a general election to compel MPs to stand for immediate re-election after a scandal on the scale of that of the pre 1832 rotten boroughs. Trust has now been destroyed. It can, so the argument runs, be rebuilt only by a neutral third party, the Queen, and not by a self-interested and wholly discredited cabal of politicians. ” I suspect that an immediate election would do more harm than good at present and The Queen would be best advised to keep well out of this sorry mess. The prospect of an immediate election at a time when we are in the midst of a serious financial situation is not one that appeals greatly – a view quite possibly shared by many who sit back and reflect on the wider picture. While The Queen may have constitutional prerogatives to dissolve Parliament, in the event that she stays her hand, the timing of the next election will be at the discretion of Gordon Brown – assuming, of course, that the Labour Party men in togas, knives hidden within the folds of cloth, do not call upon the prime minister late of an evening shortly. Far more interesting is the nature and scale of the cull of MPs coming. Tory grandees are dropping like flies. Hogg, Steen and now Sir ePter ‘Donald Duck’ Viggers are standing down… what will Gordon Brown’s Star Chamber do. Hazel Blears, we are told by the PM, has behaved unacceptably. Unacceptably enough to be removed? There are others, at a senior level within the Labour Party who should be considering their position. They may also have to look at their shoulders frequently to see if their collars are being felt by PC Plod. Jonathan Fisher, QC , in a most interesting article in The Time today writes: ” A police investigation into the MPs expenses scandal will swiftly identify false accounting as the criminal offence most likely to have been committed by the most egregious of the SW1 claimants. ” Bar Boy , commenting on my blog yesterday wrote: “Do any of you grown up lawyer experts have a view over those of our esteemed parliamantarian troughers who also happen to be barristers, such as Hogg, Straw and Hoon. No one, to my knowledge, has yet commented on this aspect. The Bar is very insistent, to the point of being annoyingly repetitive, when banging on about standards and conduct, blah, blah, yawn etc. Should, for example, Inner, now be making an example of governing bencher Straw, and passing him the pearl handled revolver ? ” He has a point. I may be making a telephone call to the Bar Council this morning and make yet another nuisance of myself. *** Insite Law Magazine has been updated – major update of news, blogs, law reports – and I have a new Best Seller books *Carousel*. In the spirit of our times, so I stay within the rules and I am transparent, I disclose a personal interest in what follows…. So if you want to buy your books for the beach etc – buy them through me and you will laze on the beach secure in the knowledge that the derisory commission offered by Amazon of 5% will go straight into my Rioja acccount and this may give you a warm glow.  It will certainly give me one! To be honest… I am not bothered about the commission… I just liked the Bestseller carousel widget… I am into widgets. Have a look and see what is selling well at the moment in the bookshops and on Amazon!

Read more:
He’s Ducked!…

There are many uses for Facebook and it was through Facebook that I discovered the proposal of the Treasurers of Inner Temple and Middle Temple to merge the two Inn libraries. I have not been able to read any details - for no details of this proposal are, as yet, public.  Nor have I, at this stage, contacted the Treasurers to ask for  detail.  It may be, in any event, that the proposals are not at a stage yet for more public debate by outsiders. Update 11.00: The reference on Facebook has now been deleted The plan as revealed on the Middle Temple Facebook page is to merge the two collections, with a suggestion mooted of housing them in Middle Temple library and to use the library space at Inner Temple for advocacy and other training purposes. Both the Middle Temple and I nner Temple libraries house important collections and archives and, I understand, that to squash these important collections into one building will be extremely difficult if the integrity of the collections is to be maintained and serviced properly.  It is also likely that merger will result in redundancies and the inevitable  loss of valuable expertise and knowledge from the dedicated librarians of both Inns. I spoke to a few senior members of the bar I have known and the reaction was not favourable.  It was pointed out to me that Chambers are feeling the pinch and are cutting back on their own library provision and the Inn libraries are, accordingly, an even more important resource than perhaps they were.  There was concern that a reduction in staff and possible cutbacks in resource, already suffering due to budget cuts in the present climate, would impact on the efficient and effective running of the Bar and the daily work of members of the Bar who need to have access to first class resources if they are to maintain high standards. This is not just an issue about collegiate feel - it is about the provision of resources to the Bar as a whole and the reputation of each member within the profession reliant on a world class law library resource.  I am confident that the proposal will not be supported by the staff of either Inn library. So - without further ado, given that the cat appears now to be out of the red bag - I would be interested in hearing from barristers, students, solicitors and academics on their views of this proposal. If there are sufficient views expressed in the comments section, perhaps these could be passed on to the Treasurers of both Inns for their consideration? I will also do some more research and take opinion from my sources and revert. Over to you.

Continued here: 
Inner and Middle Temple Libraries to merge?

Obvious and Tangible Cheating… The Oxbridge Training Contracts saga continues with Oxbridge Training Contracts demanding that Simon Myerson QC pay attention to their demands… I quote from Mr Foster (representing OTC) … “ The following comments refer to the blog ‘Integrity and a Suitable Place for It’ posted on your website on March 31st, 2009.The blog is both highly deceptive and defamatory and we demand its immediate removal, the deletion of associated comments and that you print a retraction making very clear the deceptive nature of the comments printed there hitherto.” ( See: Integrity - The Man speaks ) Myerson, clearly unruffled by Mr Foster’s demands,  refused to comply and responded: Integrity - the deadline passes and Moving on . In his his latest “Moving on” blog post, Simon Myerson makes a number of particularly important points in relation to cheating - first, in relation to paying organisations like OTC to write puillage application forms for you and, secondly, in relation to the even more serious issue (in my view) of paying porganisations to provide answers to tailored essay questions. The fiction, of course, is that OTC and similar organisations (which they make clear in their terms and conditions) are simply providing students with these answers for their private research. They go further and say that it is a breach of their terms and conditions for students to use these answers for any other purpose than private research and include submission of such answers as their own work for university or law school course work. Given that these tailored, bespoke, answers cost £200 or even more per answer depending on whether the answer is 2.1 or First class stabndard, or delivered seven days or seven hours later, it does not take a genius to work out that students are (a) using these bespoke answers and passing them off as their own work or (b) may be tempted to use the material as a substitute for their own research  (c) are using the work as research and then ‘modelling’ their own answers on the answers provided. In all three cases the student is cheating. there is really no other term for it. Many, if not most institutions make it clear to students that they may not have any third party assistance with assessed coursework. Myerson, rightly, makes this observation: ” I extend this to the writing of essays - whether by way of ‘model’ answer or otherwise. The test is simple: if the teaching isn’t good enough at your institution then you should be able to recover the cost of your payment to OTC by way of legal action for breach of contract. If you wouldn’t sue then you shouldn’t use what you’ve bought. Try working harder.” Simon Myerson QC is a member of The Bar Council and is actively involved in the matter of Bar education. His blog posts on this issue are worth reading - as are the comments written by prospective barristers. Myerson’s Pupillage and How to Get It blog is a first class resource for any prospective barrister. I have no hesitation in recommending it. [I gave Mr Foster the opportunity to talk about Oxbridge Training Contracts in a podcast. If you wish to listen to it - click here ] *** The news is up on Insite Law.  No new law reports - Easter vacation.  OI shall do an update of UK blogs either later today or tomorrow.

Read the original here: 
Obvious and Tangible Cheating…

Well… what a week. I got up shortly before 5.00 am this morning.  There were no gulls or cormorants.  It was too early for them to be about.  The G20 did not appear to have taken place for The News of The World - but I did discover that Jade Goody was given a Princess Di style send off, that an ‘Apprentice’ hunk enjoyed sex up a tree, that Prince Harry partied with a Dancing on Ice star and that ‘Gordon Ramsay went down the vindaloo’. It was far too early for a stiff drink and, despite the best endeavours of the NOTW, I managed to survive long enough to escape to The Observer online without having to seek psychiatric help from NHS Direct…. who would have told me, in all probability, that I was a deeply disturbed individual for visiting the NOTW website. I missed this the first time around - but Guido Fawkes picked up this amusing video from The News of The World: “Who wants to be a Millionaire  MP?” Political blogger, Obnoxio The Clown, covers the pay per view  funeral of Jade Goody in a tasteful way The Depression Recession is Over? The world leaders have flushed the toxic assets down the virtual lavatory, the banks are groaning under the weight of taxpayer cash, some of which doesn’t seem to actually exist in real terms,  Gordon Brown secured his $1 trillion dollars but will still, quite possibly, be able to spend more time with himself after the next election, and the great bull run is about to begin…?  Or so some say. While the BBC autocuties, pundits and reporters ‘on the killing fields’ hyperventilated, some with bosoms heaving - such was their excitement -  the protesters protested, an over nourished  fool taking Fool’s day literally  smashed a window at RBS for the benefit of waiting photographers and hacks with notebooks, I tweeted my way through G20 and then it turned nasty.  I asked whether this is the type of Policing we wanted in our country and elicited a strong response from commentors ( Hat Tip to The Magistrate’s Blog for highlighting my  post ) Fortunately, The Independent has produced a very useful guide to what actually happened at G20 when the leaders of the world had been pictured, Berlusconi had stopped irritating the Queen by being noisy and Gordon had finally slithered into line to have his photie taken. So.. as the sun appeared over the horizon, too early still to go and collect newspapers, I hunted for news of our political masters and their shady dealings.  Guido Fawkes, in a very obscure way, pointed to a story in The Daily Mail about Mr Hoon.  It would appear that he, too, has been doing absolutely nothing wrong, dipping his nose into the trough within the rules and claiming only what he is entitled to within the rules.  The Daily Mail (not a paper I would read  as a matter of course) has the story… “Three homes Hoon: Iraq War Minister claimed expenses on one home, rented out second…. and lived in third rent free” Be that as it may… back to the Depression being over… “ “We have reached the land of a thousand bull dances – phoney maroney, why? Because the market swallowed its Prozac,” Cramer said on CNBC’s “Mad Money” April 2. “And right now, right here on this show – I am announcing the Depression over!” Business and Media Institute So for those who are worrying about where their next Mercedes SLK or Tuscan holiday is coming from - a note of caution .  The Pound - Euro rate is not good.  yesterday someone reported on Twitter that they only got 98p for a Euro and Capitalists@work enlisted the support of the great detective, Sherlock Holmes,  to make a point - a rather good point, as it happens. On the other hand, now would  be a good time to accessorise with your own investment banker. There are certainly quite a few about and for those with a taste for a bit of law in your sex or other  life, why not try an out of work City lawyer , a trainee whose training contract has been deferred or even a BPP lecturer recently made redundant? (BPP Declined to comment on this when asked by The Lawyer). The gulls finally arrived and circled the water as I watched them smoking a cigarette.  I was the one smoking the cigarette, of course, but these gulls are pretty cuunning and in time, who knows, they may take up smoking themselves. Returning to my desk I flicked through the Saturday Times Magazine and came across an excellent piece about Online Death. As I plan to live for ever or, in the alternative, be completely unaware of my own death (unburdened as I am by any nonsense from the religion mumbo jumboists of the world) - I may or may not need these services.  It used to be that milk bottles piling up on the doorstep would tip off neighbours for those of us who do not have families to alert the fire brigade to break in and bring a body bag with them. Apparently, these days, if one does not update one’s Facebook account, fail to go on Twitter for several days, or one’s blog remains sans updates, there are two online services to help.  First, there is www.deathswitch.com .  This will automatically send emails to all my contacts if I don’t check in during a specified period.  Then there is www.slightlymorbid.com .  This also sends emails when a member snuffs it but requires a ‘trusted friend’ using a password to start the process.  I may of course join both …. just to be sure.  I am particularly taken by Deathswitch.com’s call to arms.. . “Don’t die with secrets that need to be free.” Obama has part of his wish list with Nato countries sending more troops to Afghanistan. France, which rejoined Nato formally at the summit, is not offering to send troops but will send 150 military police to help train Afghan civilian police. It is probably all to the good… there will come a time when Afghan police will have to issue parking tickets and speed violation notices… they will be able to do so with Gallic panache and elan. So… what else happened in the week that was? Geeklawyer gave some  advice to a brother barrister and, indeed, almost papal in his writing issued a… Memo to idiot barristers: When you’re in a hole stop digging … The White Rabbit had a nasty accident, enjoyed a bit of morphine, gave up smoking while in hospital and is now, thankfully, on his way to recovery. WhatAboutClients? reported the death of Holden Oliver on 1st April. I was pleased to have the opportunity of honing my obituary writing skills   in the comments section.  It would appear, however, that Holden Oliver is risen on the third day and is back in harness at the coal face writing for the weekend edition of WAC? - WhatAboutHardWork? J Dan Hull - taskmaster and scourge of the slackers has four observations  for the profession in the States (or relevance over here as well).  here are two: Four ‘down-economy’ questions : 1. After the economy stabilizes, “should associates pay their law firms in the first two to three years?” 2. Law schools need to step up–or get out of the way. Isn’t it time to shorten classroom legal education, and let law-firms-that-teach either be paid for–and at least not have to pay for themselves–what they give to young lawyers? For the other two… go here. The prolific Scott Greenfield, US criminal defense lawyer and author of Simple Justice, has an important post on his blog about blogger freedom - and I encourage you to read it: Memo to Bloggers: Beware and Stand Up Well.. that just about wraps it up for this week.  The sun shines…. it is time to go ite and abite and get some newspapers… And… Tartan Week is coming up in the States. I talked to US lawyer and fellow podcaster  J. Craig Williams who is hosting the edition of Blawg Review this week (Monday 6th April) on this very theme. Best as always Charon

See original here: 
Postcard from London: 5th April

Bullying  (or attempts to bully) is one of the least attractive of human traits, often experienced in the playground sadly, but when seen in adults, and worse, by members of the legal profession -  is a disgrace. Today John Bolch of Family Lore reported on a story published by The Telegraph about allegations made against a barrister.  To cut a long story short, John Bolch repeatedly asked the barrister involved (who had cautioned John Bolch to remove the references to him on Family Lore) to answer a very simple question:  Is it true that allegations are being made against you as reported in The Telegraph? Mr Marc Beaumont of Windsor Chambers   did not wish to waste his time with John Bolch’s perfectly reasonable enquiry (and offer to remove the reference on Family Lore  if it transpired that The Telegraph was mistaken about allegations being made) - and threatened to add John as a party to the ‘future defamation proceedings faced by several parties’ . Enter Geeklawyer - in a beautifully constructed piece of writing… “Memo to idiot barristers: When you are in a hole stop digging…” Geeklawyer makes his views on bullying perfectly clear. Rightly. Read

Original post:
Hey ho… hey ho… it’s off to dig we go…

While we do not  yet live in a dystopic society, the dysfunctional nature of modern life; forged on an anvil of oppressive religion and laws devised to suit the needs of the ruling elite of times past, leave us in 21st century Britain with more laws than the  apparatus of the state can remember, let alone operate effectively.  Britain leads the world in the covert and overt surveillance of its people with more CCTV cameras than any other country on earth, a raft of anti-terror laws and criminal and quasi-criminal laws pumped out  of Westminster almost daily as politicians regulate a society that is moving dangerously close to being one of the most over-regulated  in Europe and, possibly, the world…  a society which has seen civil liberties eroded significantly over the past ten years of Labour rule. I am no Tory but I marvel with no pleasure at how a Labour government, elected on the back of a promise to represent the less fortunate in our society, should enact laws which are being misused by councils and petty officials and which are being used to slowly take away the rights and freedoms we once enjoyed. We talk blithely about British justice being the best in the world - it does have many good qualities - but our legal profession is in danger of being reduced to the role of undertaker and embalmer to a once more free country. So what of lawyers and our role in this world? Lawyers are under no more of a duty than plumbers, dentists and taxidermists, to act for society as a whole, to act as a bulwark against oppressive government rule, to take an active and professional interest in freedom and civil rights  and the truth of the matter is that most don’t. We don’t have one legal profession, we have many. We have two branches to the ‘profession’: solicitors and barristers,  each  with different duties and responsibilities.   ‘Magic Circle’  and other corporate-commercial lawyers - as is their right - rarely, if ever come across civil liberty issues - save when a client faces the prospect of prosecution for a white collar crime.  These lawyers represent the interests of business, individuals or corporate entities and government. Private client lawyers generally represent the interests of those who wish to create trusts, optimise their income or avoid tax or purchase property, commodities or goods and they too are, generally, not involved in individual issues of civil liberties.  That is their chosen field of law. That is the work they are trained to do. Listening to those who represent the profession talking about independence, about professionalism, about leading the world in the provision of legal services is enjoyable, but is it any more than ‘hype’ or  ‘blether’ as we say North of the border?  If lawyers in the business and wealthy private client sector don’t render a high quality service, there are plenty who do and who will, gladly, relieve those who don’t of the responsibility for doing so. So, what are we left with in terms of lawyers who take upon themselves the duty and responsibility for representing the less fortunate, those who face prosecution for a crime they didn’t commit, those who need advice in a contentious divorce, those who need the help that our government should provide? What are we left with of a legal profession of 140,000 and more lawyers who have the skills, the knowledge, the desire to ensure that our civil liberties are maintained, that law is applied according to law, that the police act properly, that other officials do not abuse their powers? I don’t know the precise answer, but I doubt that it would amount to much more than 15-20 per cent of the profession, if that. And then what do we do to enable these remaining lawyers to act effectively? What does the government do to help these remaining lawyers?  The government has reduced legal aid in criminal law, family and other civil law fields where there is a demonstrable need for the skills of a highly trained lawyer to represent the vulnerable.  Law Centres can barely function without charitable support and civil liberty organisations, often staffed by lawyers, have also to rely on charity to operate, to protest in a reasoned manner when government acts unfairly or acts to reduce our freedoms. It is a disgrace to our nation that we are in danger of returning to the days when ‘Justice’ was open only, like the doors of The Ritz Hotel,  to those of means, power and influence.  It is a disgrace that legal aid in criminal, family and some civil areas where the vulnerable need protection is being reduced to a point where experienced lawyers are just not able to work for the money provided. Not all lawyers are the ‘fat cats’ beloved of the tabloid press. If a barrister or solicitor, after years of expensive training and now faced with the prospect of huge education debt,  is not able to afford to do this much needed work - the vulnerable will ultimately go unadvised and unrepesented in civil matters, the innocent will not receive proper representation when prosecuted for serious and complex crime and, I venture to suggest,  the police and public officials will feel more confident about using the extensive powers they enjoy in the knowledge that their use is unlikely to be contested by an experienced lawyer -  leaving the burden on judges to redress the balance of strong against weak in court. This may sound extreme - and to some extent I have chosen language carefully to paint a bleak picture -  but those in the profession I have talked to in recent months paint a very bleak picture of our future if we lose the talents of experienced lawyers simply because they cannot afford to do this much needed work. What is ‘justice’ when the strong are well represented and the weak not? Over to you……? Finally… I leave you with this rather chilling piece by Ian Parker-Joseph of The Libertarian Party UK: Just who is planning the violence in London next week? update “When Police Commanders are reported to have said of the over hyped expected violence at the G20 marches that they are ‘up for it’, I seriously begin to wonder whether our prediction that the Government, and the Police, are actually looking to provoke the expected clashes. An article in the Guardian Friday evening tells us: Yesterday, the Metropolitan police was understood to have contacted a number of protest groups warning that the main day of protest, Wednesday, 1 April would be “very violent”, and senior commanders have insisted that they are “up for it, and up to it”, should there be any trouble. Is this what you would call responsible policing?”

Read the rest here: 
Cry God for Harry, St George and England (not forgetting Wales)….