Clapham Omnibus - legal magazine.

L UTH

SO

ND

ON LA

W SOCIETY

THE

O

CLAPHAM OMNIBUS the journal of the South London Law Society Spring Issue 2015 - www.southlondonlawsociety.co.uk

› Conflict as a Private Client solicitor (cover story) › Residential Conveyancing › Book Reviews

Inside this issue:

Sponsors this edition

Contents

Contents PUBLISHER

5

Ian Fletcher Benham Publishing Limited 3tc House 16 Crosby Road North Crosby Liverpool L22 0NY 0151 236 4141 Tel: Fax: 0151 236 0440 email: admin@benhampublishing.com web: www.benhampublishing.com

20

ADVERTISING AND FEATURES EDITOR Anna Woodhams

PRODUCTION MANAGER Neil lloyd

ACCOUNTS DIRECTOR Joanne Casey

MEDIA No. 1393

9 PUBLISHED March 2015 © Benham Publishing Ltd

30

12 32

LEGAL NOTICE © Benham Publishing.

None of the editorial or photographs may be reproduced without prior written permission from the publishers. Benham Publishing would like to point out that all editorial comment and articles are the responsibility of the originators and may or may not reflect the opinions of Benham Publishing. No responsibility can be accepted for any inaccuracies that may occur, correct at time of going to press.

Benham Publishing cannot be held responsible for any inaccuracies in web or email links supplied to us.

DISCLAIMER The South London Law Society welcomes all persons eligible for membership regardless of Sex, Race, Religion, Age or Sexual Orientation.

All views expressed in this publication are the views of the individual writers and not the society unless specifically stated to be otherwise. All statements as to the law are for discussion between member and should not be relied upon as an accurate statement of the law, are of a general nature and do not constitute advice in any particular case or circumstance.

Members of the public should not seek to rely on anything published in this magazine in court but seek qualified Legal Advice.

COVER IMAGE Hannah Mantle, Russell-Cooke

16 34 5

INTRODUCTION

6

MEMBERS REPORT

25 JUNIOR LAWYERS DIVISION

9

NEWS

26 SPOTLIGHT ON...

16 SOCIAL EVENTS

27 PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE

18 RESIDENTIAL CONVEYANCING

32 THEATRE AND THE LAW 34 BOOK REVIEWS

The Clapham Omnibus 3

Introduction

Officers President

Vice-President

Council Member

Gareth Ledsham

Robert Hush

David Taylor

Tel: e-mail:

Tel: e-mail:

Tel: e-mail:

020 8394 6413 gareth.ledsham@Russell-Cooke.co.uk

020 7815 6725 hushr@lsbu.ac.uk

020 7228 0017 dxt@hanne.co.uk

Treasurer

Hon. Secretary

Magazine Editor

Andrew Pavlovic

Sarah Hughes

Richard Busby

Tel: e-mail:

Tel: e-mail:

020 8394 6455 andrew.pavlovic@Russell-Cooke.co.uk

020 7940 4060 sarah_hughes@anthonygold.co.uk

Tel: e-mail:

O

ND

ON LA

W

SO

The Clapham Omnibus 4

SOCIETY

UTH

L

Web Address: www.southlondonlawsociety.co.uk

020 7091 2755 richard.busby@fishermeredith.co.uk

Introduction

President’s Review

Changing Times Change is inevitable and lawyers in south London will have become well used to adapting to a seemingly unending stream of changes over recent years, coming at them from different sides. From regulatory changes such as ABSs allowing new entrants to the market, to cuts to legal aid and the recent increase to civil court fees.

The South London Law Society has also been undergoing changes. After a term of three years, Stephen Whitaker has decided to stand down as president of the Society and I would like to take this opportunity to thank him for all his hard work. He will remain on the committee going forward, however.

Notwithstanding they are going to be difficult shoes to fill, I have been elected to serve as the Society’s president for the year 2015. I look forward to the challenge of steering the Society into the unchartered waters ahead.

We are also sad to say goodbye to Andy Unger who has stepped down from the committee to concentrate on other projects. Andy has served on the committee for a great many years, (more than I think he can remember!) including five years (another figure about which memories are a little hazy...) as President of the Society. To state that the Society is where it is today is as a result of Andy’s contribution would be an understatement.

He has been particularly instrumental in developing the Society’s CPD programme and the successful relationship between the Society the London South Bank University. The Society is very pleased to be able to support South London’s future lawyers.

Looking ahead, there is much work to be done. Litigation lawyers will be acutely aware of the recent introduction of an increase in civil court fees - of up to 600% in some cases. Despite assurances from

government ministers, this increase will adversely affect access to justice - with the civil courts only available to those able to afford them. Certainly, small firms cannot be expected (as they cannot afford) to carry such fees as unpaid disbursements. The changes are currently subject to a challenge by the national Law Society and the South London Law Society will be supporting its efforts. If any practitioners have examples of how the increase in fees is affecting them and their clients, we would be pleased to hear from you.

have something you would like to see in these pages, please let us know.

Change of course can be for the better.

Over the coming months we will be interacting with South London solicitors, trainees and law students to find out what you want from your local law society: it is your society, and we want to make it work for you.

GARETH LEDSHAM President South London Law Society

In this edition of the Clapham Omnibus you will find broad range of articles on issues affecting South London lawyers.

Amongst these, Hannah Mantle will be commenting on the difficulties that can arise with conflicts of interest - even where a conflict might not in fact exist. We also have a timely piece on the trainee minimum salary from trainee solicitor, Louise Taylor. We also have an excellent piece on the Magna Carta in the context of the digital age by Professor Sara Chandler. Immediate past President Stephen Whitaker also reviews the Society’s Summer 2015 16th July 2015 annual dinner last year, Autumn 2015 30th October 2015 which was an excellent Spring 2016 17th February 2016 occasion. Plans are underway for this year’s Members wishing to submit editorial please contact us before copy deadline. event which I hope will be attended by as many of you Anyone else wishing to advertise or submit editorial for publication in the Clapham Omnibus please contact as possible. We are always Anna Woodhams, before copy deadline. interested to hear from Email: anna@benhampublishing.com members with articles / comment pieces etc. If you Tel: 0151 236 4141

COPY DEADLINES

The Clapham Omnibus 5

Members Report

Council Member’s Report

David Taylor Council Member Partner in Hanne & Co, Clapham Junction. Graduated from the University of Kent at Canterbury in 1976 with a degree in Social Policy & Administration. He then joined the Citizens Advice Bureaux service, working in Sheffield & London, specialising in welfare benefits and employment. He was the manager of Battersea CAB for 10 years.

He joined Hanne & Co in 1988 and was admitted as a solicitor in 1994. His practice is in employment and regulatory law.

He is a member of the Employment Lawyers Association, Association of Regulatory and Disciplinary Lawyers and the Industrial Law Society. He is an accredited mediator through the Centre for Effective Dispute Resolution. He was president of South London Law Society from 2003 to 2006.

Council welcomed Catherine Dixon, the new permanent chief executive, to her first Council meeting. Catherine reported a busy programme in her first month in office, including meetings with staff; attendance at boards and meetings with committees; full-day visits to Wales, Brussels, Manchester and Newcastle, meeting members, staff and local stakeholders; meetings with several local law societies; and a meeting with the Ministry of Justice (MoJ).

Strategy development Catherine invited Council to consider her proposals for developing a strategy for the Law Society. The strategy will inform the purpose of the Society and enable priorities and plans for the future to be clarified. It will take account of the many opportunities and challenges facing the profession and the Society in the coming years, and set the Society’s vision for the future. Council agreed to these proposals, which will include a programme of consultation with members of the profession to help inform and develop the strategy over the coming months.

Presidential update Andrew Caplen updated Council on his recent activities as President following the last Council meeting, under the three key themes of his presidential plan: Access to Justice - including crime duty contract roadshows across the country, a dinner for the new Attorney General and some members of the profession at which CPS changes and access to justice were among the subjects discussed, and a speaking engagement with the All Party Parliamentary Group on legal aid Rule of Law - including, notably, the Society's application for judicial review of the MoJ's decisions on criminal legal aid duty contracts which commenced at the Royal Courts of Justice on 15 January 2015 (and on which, at the time of writing, the verdict was still awaited), as well as continued planning of activity around the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta, and the holding of a number of wellattended events during Human Rights Week Diversity and Inclusion - including events in Liverpool and Birmingham for students interested in becoming solicitors. Andrew noted a number of regional events and meetings outside London, regular meetings with the Solicitors Regulation Authority and the Legal Services Board, as well as a visit to the new Lord Mayor of London to brief him on the market for

6 The Clapham Omnibus The Clapham Omnibus 6

English and Welsh legal services and our international objectives. He noted that he, and other Law Society people involved, would use every opportunity offered by the forthcoming Global Law Summit to re-iterate the Society's commitment to the rule of law and access to justice, and its opposition to the damaging programme of changes and cuts. A copy of Andrew's report to Council is attached.

Representing and promoting the profession Significant work reported to Council included: Access to Justice - responding strongly to the Ministry of Justice's announcement regarding significant increases to court fees, and liaising with other affected bodies to explore scope for joint influencing and lobbying Strategy for legal services regulation - securing an extension of existing arrangements on consumer credit, avoiding the original requirement for solicitors to be regulated by the FCA as well as the SRA from 1 April 2015 The Law Society had also been active in calling for a limit of 28 days for police bail in response to the Home Secretary's consultation on the issue, in supporting the Malaysian Bar Council's struggles with rule of law issues, in engaging with EU matters including the new anti-money-laundering directive and the directive proposal on special safeguards for children in criminal proceedings, and in making representations on a number of pieces of domestic legislation. The Society also continued activity to reduce barriers acing member firms seeking to establish themselves in key international markets including Nigeria and Brazil.

that the Society's accreditation schemes cover law and practice in Wales Continuing development of key relationships in the City and elsewhere, including international organisations.

Governing the Society Council agreed to proposals relating to candidates for Deputy Vice President (who succeed automatically as Vice President and then President) as to the nature of the statements that should be provided detailing their suitability for office, and to proposals to 'stagger' the terms of Junior Lawyers' Division members on Council to ensure that younger members of the profession are represented as effectively as possible.

PASTORAL CARE PRACTICE ADVICE SERVICE Tel: 0870 606 2522 practiceadvice@lawsociety.org.uk This provides advice from experienced solicitors on legal practice issues including conveyancing, costs, probate, Law Society policy and practice notes including anti-money laundering. Lines are open from 9:00 am to 5:00pm Monday to Friday.

LAWYERLINE Tel: 0870 606 2588 lawyerline@lawsociety.org.uk This provides advice on client care and complaints handling. Lines are open from 9:00 am to 5:00pm Monday to Friday.

Serving the profession

PASTORAL CARE HELPLINE

Among matters reported to the Council were:

This provides personal, financial, professional and employment advice.

Lines are open from 9:00 am to 5:00pm Monday to Friday.

Over 3,000 calls answered by the Practice Advice Service between 11 November 2014 and 8 January 2015, with a 94% satisfaction rate Continued high volumes of calls to the Find a Solicitor service, showing an increase of 17% compared to last year, following the success of the Society's consumer marketing campaign A new webinar platform for the CPD Centre, which now has over 42,000 registered members Close working between the Wales office and the accreditations team in Commercial Affairs to ensure

020 7320 5795

JLD HELPLINE 0800 085 6131 Pastoral care for junior lawyers. Lines are open from 9:00 am to 9:00pm Monday to Friday.

Please contact me with any issues that you wish me to take up at dxt@hanne.co.uk

The Bill of Middlesex 7

8 The Clapham Omnibus

News

Conflict as a Private Client solicitor Conflict is an issue which arises from time to time for all solicitors. However, it arises somewhat more often for private client solicitors, who are regularly instructed by an individual and later by his personal representatives; or by multiple executors or beneficiaries. It also arises in relation to individuals with declining capacity. It is these issues which I am going to consider.

I will look at the meaning and effect of a conflict of interest, and the similar issues surrounding confidentiality, before considering some of the common situations in which they apply for private client solicitors - capacity, probate and executors/beneficiaries.

Conflict as a conduct issue arises in the SRA Code of Conduct (the “Code”) - both chapter 3 (conflict) and chapter 4 (confidentiality/disclosure).

Although not explored it is important to keep in mind that conflict is also a legal issue (e.g. when considering fiduciary duties).

“Conflict is an issue which arises from time to time for all solicitors.”

Conflict of Interest Chapter three of the Code deals with conflict of interest and clarifies that this can occur between a solicitor and his clients (“own interest conflict”) and between your clients (“client conflict”), which I will refer to collectively as a “conflict”.

The starting point for a retainer is, of course, that a solicitor should not act if there is a conflict, or a significant risk of conflict. As solicitors will be aware, this is subject to exceptions, but only in the case of client conflict. There are no exceptions for own interest conflict. As a result, a solicitor can act where his clients, despite a client conflict or significant risk of one, have a substantially common interest and the benefits of a joint instruction outweigh the risks. The solicitor must have explained (and the clients must have understood) the relevant issues and risks and have given their informed consent in writing.

One of the indicative behaviours set out in the Code is that a solicitor should not act where he cannot represent all clients even-handedly. As I consider below, this might be the case where he already knows one of a number of beneficiaries, or executors.

Confidentiality and Disclosure The other issue that arises in respect of conflict, is the conflict between the rule of confidentiality and that of disclosure. In the normal course of events, a solicitor owes a duty of confidentiality to his client and owes him a duty to disclose documents which are relevant to his matter. However, the duty of confidentiality takes precedence, for example, when acting for a party following someone’s death, the duty of confidentiality to the deceased client could override any duty to disclose documents to the continuing client.

It is worth remembering that the duty of confidentiality survives death, such that a Will prepared by an individual who is now deceased cannot simply be disclosed by virtue of his death. It can only be released to the executor(s) or on their authority (or on an order of the Court).

Capacity Conflict and confidentiality issues can arise in a number of ways, in relation to capacity. Firstly, it is important to keep in mind that capacity is task specific, most commonly, someone might have capacity to make a relatively modest gift, but not to make a Will. It is therefore something to be kept under review, as instructions are received to take subsequent steps.

It is extremely important to keep in mind not only actual conflicts of interest, but also the perception of conflict - for example, is a Will more likely to be challenged because a firm has also advised one of the beneficiaries on a different matter?

If a client does lose capacity, their solicitor should remember that the duty of confidentiality remains. They cannot release their files or Will without their (capacitous) consent or a court order. A solicitor should always consider whether to include a provision in an LPA or when applying for deputyship, in order to ensure that relevant documents can be released. Sadly, if a client loses capacity during the course of a matter, their solicitor cannot breach their confidentiality to inform the family of their wishes so that appropriate steps can be taken.

Probate Considerations of conflict arise in two main ways when dealing with an estate - in acting for multiple executors and/or beneficiaries (which I address further below); and as an own interest conflict when a Will is challenged.

It is understandably difficult for a solicitor or firm to remain neutral if a Will they have drafted is challenged. However, unless allegations are made against the solicitor or firm itself, they should remain neutral. Even if there is, strictly speaking, no conflict, a perception of conflict can taint the whole matter and make a negotiated settlement far more difficult and expensive to achieve, which is unlikely to be in the clients’ best interests.

Even if there are fees to be made in acting on the probate, is it worth the additional exposure to an already contentious matter?

Executors/Beneficiaries There is almost always a significant risk of client conflict between multiple executors or beneficiaries - they might have different interests in the estate, or different claims on it; they might be in different financial positions from one another; or they might have different relationships or motives in dealing with the estate.

Keeping in mind the exception to chapter 3 of the Code, the key is to warn clients at the outset that, if a conflict arises, they will have to seek separate representation. This can also minimise the risk of a complaint regarding costs, or to the Legal Ombudsman if a conflict does arise at a later stage.

It is also important that instructions are taken appropriately, to ensure that all beneficiaries have had the opportunity to consider the steps taken. For example, a solicitor might be willing to take day to day instructions from one client, but need to take key instructions from them all.

Conclusion In addition to the legal and conduct issues, conflict is a reputational and financial concern for law firms. If a firm acts where there is a conflict (or a perception of one), they are more likely to be on the receiving end of a complaint or of costs that they later can’t recover. Is it worth the reputational damage or the incurring of ultimately irrecoverable costs?

On balance, if the possible conflict causes a solicitor to pause for too long, there probably is a conflict, or at least the perception of one.

by HANNAH MANTLE, associate at Russell-Cooke

The Clapham Omnibus 9

News News

DIGITAL RIGHTS and HUMAN RIGHTS INTRODUCTION The current high level of security alerts because of risk from terrorism following the terrorist attacks in Paris has raised the question of the capacity of governments to protect the population from attack, and the level of mass surveillance necessary to enable the security forces to do this.

As lawyers we are concerned with the preservation of legal professional privilege and the trust that is central to all professional relationships between lawyer and client: that of client confidentiality. Our concern arises out of the developments of the internet which has eroded the protection of data, and made vulnerable confidential communication between lawyer and client, lawyer and the Courts, and lawyer to lawyer.

There are different standards of protection in different countries. However, protection needs to be at Europe and world-wide level.

Harmonisation of these standards will bring benefits to the citizens and residents of member states to protect confidentiality and trust based on legal professional privilege.

DATA RETENTION AND THE EUROPEAN UNION In 2006 the EU promulgated the Data Retention Directive 2006/24. The Directive sought to ensure that communications data were available, for a limited period of time, to prevent, investigate, detect and prosecute serious crimes, such as, in particular, organized crime and terrorist acts. To achieve this, providers of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks were required to retain traffic and location data as well as certain related data necessary to identify the user. The Directive did not permit the recording and retention of the content of the communication.

Prior Directive 95 /46/EC in Article 6 contains obligations concerning measures to ensure confidentiality and security of processing of data. The objectives of Directive 2006/24/EC Directive were to harmonise the obligations on providers to retain certain data and to ensure that those data are available for the purpose of the investigation, detection, and prosecution of serious crime, as defined by each member state in its national law. Since this cannot be achieved sufficiently by each member state alone, it can be better achieved at Community level, by reason of this Directive. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, the Directive does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives.

Directive 2006/24/EC seeks to ensure full compliance with citizens’ fundamental rights to respect for private life and communications

10 Clapham The Clapham Omnibus The Omnibus 10

and to the protection of their personal data, as enshrined in Arts 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

The European Court of Justice Decision and Challenge to the Directive April 2014 The 2006/24 Directive was invalidated by the ECJ in its judgment in the “Digital Rights Ireland” case .

Member States Ireland and Austria asked for a ruling, with observations submitted by the governments of Ireland, Austria, Spain, France, Italy, Poland, Portugal, UK, as well as the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission.

The Judgement sets out Article 5 of 2006/24/EC which lists the categories of data to be retained and in Article 5, paragraph 2 states “No data revealing the content of the communication may be retained pursuant to this directive.”

In its judgement the Court stated that:

“Even though the Data Retention Directive does not permit the retention of the content of the communication or of information consulted using an electronic communications network, the Court found it "not inconceivable" that the retention of the data in question might have a chilling effect on the use, by subscribers or registered users, of the means of electronic communication covered by the Directive on their exercise of the freedom of expression, which is guaranteed by Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.”

The Directive interferes in a serious way with rights to respect for private life and communications, and to the protection of personal data, as enshrined in Arts 7 and 8 of the Charter.

In short the ECJ decision was made on the basis that ‘in adopting Directive 2006/24, the EU legislature had exceeded the limits imposed by the principle of proportionality in the light of Articles 7 [respect for private and family life], 8 [protection of personal data] and 52(1) [limitation of rights] of the Charter [of Fundamental Rights of the European Union].

The Court found that the retention of data does not "adversely affect the essence of the fundamental rights to the protection of personal data" and is, in principle, justified by an objective of general interest, namely the prosecution of serious crime, thus ensuring public security.

The importance of the judgement is that the Court found that the Directive violates the

principle of proportionality, which requires "that acts of the EU institutions be appropriate for attaining the legitimate objectives pursued by the legislation at issue and do not exceed the limits of what is appropriate and necessary in order to achieve those objectives."

The Court found that although the retention of data may be considered to be "appropriate for attaining the objective pursued" by the Directive, the retention measures established under the Directive could not be considered "necessary" to achieve the legislative objective (para 46, 51 seq.). According to the Court, the EU legislature has exceeded the limits imposed by the principle of proportionality and was therefore invalid.

The Data Retention Directive covers all persons and all means of electronic communication as well as all traffic data without any differentiation, limitation or exception being made in the light of the objective of fighting against serious crime.

In particular, the Directive applies even to persons for whom there is no evidence of suggesting that their conduct might have a link, even an indirect or remote one, with serious crime.

It also does not require any relationship between the data whose retention is provided for and a threat to public security nor does it restrict retention to data pertaining to a particular time period, particular geographical zone or a circle of particular persons likely to be involved in a serious crime or to persons who could contribute, by the retention of the data, to the prevention, detection, or prosecution of serious offenses.

Even those persons whose communication should be subject to professional secrecy, including legal professional privilege, would be covered under this blanket coverage. Further, the Court criticized the Directive for failing to lay down any objective criteria for determining the limits of the access of the competent national authorities to the data and their subsequent use.

There should be a prior review carried out by a court or by an independent administrative body of request for access to and retention of data by a competent national authority. The Court also found that the data retention period of at least six months, without any distinction being made between the categories of data was not justified under the principle of proportionality.

Nor were there sufficient safeguards to ensure effective protection of the data during the retention period.

News

Examining the effect of the European Court of Justice decision on data retention and digital rights.

EU MEMBER STATES The preliminary ruling was requested by Ireland and Austria, and the ruling now covers their national jurisprudence. In all other EU Member States, the national laws transposing the Data Retention Directive will remain valid until challenged, in accordance with national procedural rules, before the national courts.

In the United Kingdom, the UK government introduced ‘emergency’ legislation three months after the ECJ judgement in the form of the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 (DRIPA). It now proposes to amend DRIPA to retain additional data about IP addresses and the Home Office has consulted on revised Acquisition and Disclosure of Communications Data and Retention of Communications Data Codes of Practice under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA). The consultation on the codes of practice purports to take into account the comments of the ECJ that all persons, even those who communications should be covered by professional secrecy, can have their communications data intercepted and stored. .

Serious concerns have been raised concerning the lack of judicial or independent scrutiny, and the proposed increased powers on data retention.

In general, providers of public communications services and public communications networks will remain subject to national data retention obligations as long as the relevant national laws are not invalidated at Member State level.

It is likely that the European Commission will renew its efforts to establish a legal framework harmonizing the Member States' provisions concerning the retention of data for the purpose of the investigation, detection, and prosecution of serious crime taking into the account the detailed considerations of proportionality spelled out by the ECJ. It is to be expected that, in the future, new (and "improved") data retention obligations under EU law will be established, requiring telecommunications companies to retain data, subject to strict security requirements, in data storage facilities "within the European Union".

These data centres must be subject to "control", carried out on the basis of EU law, by "an independent authority."

Whether the European Commission will opt for the harmonization of European data retention rules on the basis of another directive or for use of the legal instrument of a "regulation", is currently an open question. In view of the lengthy time period required for the transposition of a directive into national law and the likely result of a patchwork of differing national rules, it is possible that the European Commission will opt for a data retention Regulation, which would have direct legal effect in all EU Member States and not require time consuming transposition into national law.

UNITED NATIONS REPORT ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND TERRORISM On 23 September 2014 the report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism was presented to the General Assembly.

The Special Rapporteur describes the pace of technological change as “dynamic” which “enabled some States to secure bulk access to communications and content data without prior suspicion. States are now able to apply automated ‘data mining’ algorithms to dragnet a potentially limitless universe of communications traffic.” Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that any interference with private communications must be prescribed by law, and must be a necessary and proportionate means of achieving a legitimate public policy objective. In the view of the Special Rapporteur, the existence of mass surveillance programmes constitutes a potentially disproportionate interference with the right to privacy.

by PROFESSOR SARA CHANDLER, Past President SLLS, with thanks to Timothy Hill, Law Society of England & Wales

The High Commissioner for Human Rights reported on 30 June 2014 and concluded that the practice of many States revealed a lack of adequate national legislation and/or enforcement, weak procedural safeguards and ineffective oversight, contributing to a lack of accountability for arbitrary or unlawful interference with right to privacy.

In this year of celebration of 800 years of the Magna Carta is it time for a Digital Magna Carta which enshrines the rights of every person to privacy, to confidential communication with their lawyer, and for lawyers to communicate electronically with each other and the Courts while preserving legal professional privilege?

The Clapham Omnibus 11

News

Dating After Divorce The latest figures published by the Office of National Statistics (in December 2012) estimate that 42% of marriages in England and Wales end in divorce. Many of those whose marriages have ended form relationships with new partners which may well lead to cohabitation. The percentage of all UK households comprising a couple living together rose from 14% to 17% in the 10 years to 2011 whilst the percentage of households made up of married couples fell from 70 to 65% over the same period. This article focuses on some of the potential legal implications arising from new relationships after divorce.

Introduction of a New Partner to the children When or even whether a new partner should be introduced to their children can sometimes be a contentious issue between separated parents. Organisations such as Gingerbread, Relate and the Parent Connection all offer useful guidance. The Parenting after Parting workshops (“PAPs”) organised throughout the country by CAFCASS and Resolution offer a specialist programme for separated parents to learn how children of different ages typically react to separation. They also guide parents on ways of minimising conflict with their ex-partner to ensure the children’s best interests are prioritised. Following the advent of the Child Arrangements Programme (CAP) on 1 April 2004 the Courts are increasingly requiring parents to attend PAPs before any application concerning a child can proceed. Another useful resource is the revised Parenting Plan published by CAFCASS earlier this year (www.cafcass.gov.uk/grown-ups/parentingplan.aspx) This gives parents the opportunity to work out arrangements together which they consider will be best for their children. The plan encourages parents to agree and record issues such as how they will share important information with each other (regarding the children) and how to introduce new partners to their children’s lives. It was recognised following the Family Justice Review that parents are best placed to make their own decisions when it comes to their children.

Another aspect of the CAP programme is that before any application is made by a parent to the Court for a Child Arrangements Order they will be expected by the court to have cooperated with each other over a parenting plan.

The presence of a new partner as an integral part of a child’s household is a reality which the family courts are dealing with on an increasing basis. In Children Act proceedings where the Court has ordered a CAFCASS report, the new partner/cohabitee will often be interviewed by the CAFCASS officer particularly if they are part of the child’s household. Obviously the child’s relationship with the new partner may well be relevant to their welfare and potentially a significant aspect of the Section 7 Report.

12 Clapham The Clapham Omnibus The Omnibus 12

Concerns over safety issues can sometimes also arise where new partners are concerned.

In the case of Re D (Child) [2014] EWHC 2376 (Fam) the Court had to consider an application by CAFCASS for safeguarding checks to be completed on the step-father of 2 children aged 14 and 10 who were the subject of contact proceedings brought by their father. Following a difficult family history the children were joined as parties to the proceedings and represented through a CAFCASS children’s Guardian. When interviewed they told the Guardian that they did not like their step-father and found him controlling. At a preliminary hearing CAFCASS raised the question of safeguarding checks on the step-father. The step-father refused to be subject to safeguarding checks and CAFCASS therefore made an application for an order requiring CAFCASS to carry out the checks and requiring the children’s mother to provide all requisite information to enable the checks to be conducted. In his judgment Bodey J said that CAFCASS should seek cooperation from partners in respect of safeguarding checks and if consent is not forthcoming it should be flagged up to the Court before the First Hearing Dispute Resolution Appointment (“FHDRA”).

The judge hearing the FHDRA should then consider the situation and if necessary adjourn the hearing to enable the individual concerned to be given notice and to make representations. The judge also recognised that it was not easy or necessary for the Court to be prescriptive about whether safeguarding enquiries concerning new partners (who are not parties to the proceedings) should be routine. He indicated that much would depend on the precise circumstances of the various relationships and that in practice one would expect that cooperation for those enquiries would

generally be sought in respect of partners of the parties and if a partner did not give his or her consent then an application to the Court would usually be made by CAFCASS in its discretion.

Impact of New Partners on Maintenance Payments In many cases particularly where there are young children, maintenance is payable to the wife as part of the divorce settlement until she re-marries, dies or “further order”. If the wife subsequently cohabits with a new partner this is likely to result in her ex-husband applying to vary the maintenance order as provided under section 31 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973.

The maintenance can be increased or decreased on variation and can also be capitalised to enable a clean break to take place. Whilst cohabitation comes within “all the circumstances of the case….” which fall to be considered under section 25(1) of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 it carries no greater weight than any of the other factors. It can often be difficult for ex-husbands to accept that their ex-wife’s cohabitation does not

News

The Legal Implications automatically disentitle her from receiving maintenance under the court order.

In the 1995 case of Atkinson v Atkinson [1995] 2 FCR 353 the wife moved in with a man a few months after receiving her financial settlement which included maintenance. The husband applied to vary the order down to a nominal sum due to her cohabitation. In his judgment Thorpe J (as he then was) stated: “in assessing the relevance of the cohabitation factor, it seems to me as much - if not more weight must be given not to the presence of the cohabitee as to his financial circumstances, and his capacity to make a reasonable contribution in return for the benefits of the provision of a home”. He went on to reduce the maintenance from £18,000 to £10,000 to reflect what the cohabitee should have been contributing.

In Fleming v Fleming [2003] EWCA Civ 1841 the husband appealed against an order allowing the wife to extend a term maintenance order on the grounds that (inter alia) the judge had not given sufficient weight to the “settled relationship” between the wife and her cohabitee with whom she had lived for over 5 years. The Court of Appeal stated that cohabitation should not be equated with marriage even though society’s attitudes had changed and when assessing the impact of cohabitation the financial consequences of the variation must be taken in to account. It also stated that in a case where there had been lengthy cohabitation the range of discretion held by the judge allowed him to place considerable weight on that factor. The Court of Appeal upheld the appeal as it found that on an application to extend the term of maintenance there was an obligation to consider whether this could be achieved without causing undue hardship to the payee.

Given that the wife was earning and co-habiting so that her combined income with her cohabitee met her outgoings without her having to use savings there was no justification for an extension of the term.

In the case of Re Grey (No 3) [2010] EWHC 1055 (Fam) the wife was reticent about disclosing her relationship with a man by whom she was pregnant. It only emerged in the wife’s cross-examination that she was a) pregnant and b) in a fixed and committed relationship with the new partner. Even though Singer J criticised the wife for her non-disclosure, he held that even if she were cohabiting this would not affect her income award and granted her spousal maintenance of £125,000 per annum.

Unsurprisingly the husband appealed. The Court of Appeal took the view that the judge’s finding of fact on the cohabitation issue was inadequate. It agreed that judges have a duty to “investigate and assess the financial consequences of cohabitation” and to take

“ This article focuses on some of the potential legal implications arising from new relationships after divorce.” account of any such relationships in the order made. The appeal was allowed and the case was remitted for hearing on the cohabitation issue to Singer J as it was found that he had not properly investigated the financial circumstances of the wife’s partner. The case of W v W (Periodical payments: Variation) [2009] EWHC 3076 (Fam) concerned a wife’s application to increase and capitalise her spousal maintenance order of £18,000 per annum, following the husband’s sale of his company for £11.4million net. Even though the wife was cohabiting Moylan J varied her maintenance upwards to £40,000 per annum and capitalised it at £625,000. In his judgment Moylan J stated that the wife’s entitlement to maintenance would not be brought to an end by her cohabitation. Nor did he consider the wife’s needs to be a valid argument for limiting the level of the maintenance.

More recently in the case of AB v CB [2014] EWHC 2998 (Fam) Mostyn J has warned wives of the potential legal difficulties arising from entering into new relationships before their financial settlements on divorce are determined. In this case the parties were married for 10 years and had 2 adopted children. In 2005 they moved into a farmhouse owned by the husband’s wealthy family. In 2009 a Trust was set up in respect of the farmhouse, the principal beneficiary of which was the husband and the main discretionary beneficiaries the children.

After the trust was established the parties spent funds on refurbishing the property. In 2012 the marriage broke down and the wife (who was a journalist) went to live with her parents, the husband remaining in the farmhouse where he lived with his new partner. Mostyn J found that the wife knew it was intended that the farmhouse would stay in the husband’s family and after it had been used by them it would revert to the family estate. The wife did not disclose the fact that she had a new relationship and this was only discovered by

“investigations” by the husband’s lawyers. The wife claimed that nonetheless she had no intention of cohabiting. She was awarded £23,000 from the trust outright (in respect of her contributions) and £134,000 on the terms of a life tenancy. In his judgment Mostyn J stated: “Relationships like this always are a significant fly in the ointment in the assessment of need.

One cannot make assumptions, if it is not a full-blown cohabitation akin to marriage, that it will grow into that, because if it does not, the wife may be left stranded between Scylla and Charybdis if the assumption is wrongly made.

On the other hand, if one makes a needs assessment on the basis she is a single woman and she soon cohabits, then the paying party….can rightfully feel significantly aggrieved”.

Taking all the factors into account the judge concluded that £250,000 would be enough to meet the wife’s needs stating that he could not “ignore the existence of her relationship”.

In conclusion it is clear that if a spouse (most often the wife) is found to be cohabiting, the existence of that relationship will not be ignored, even if no financial support is being provided by the cohabitee. The case law shows that the court’s approach is to focus on what the cohabitee should be contributing rather than his or her actual contribution. This is obviously a factor many ex-wives in particular need to take into account before moving in with a new partner.

by CAMILLA FUSCO, Anthony Gold

TheClapham ClaphamOmnibus Omnibus 13 The

News

Review of Annual Dinner On 23rd October, South London Law Society held their Annual Dinner in the Long Room at The Kia Oval Cricket Ground, another iconic venue for us to add to the list.

Indeed both venue and food were excellent and we were well looked after by an attentive team.

Again the event was a sell-out, all 90 seats sold or taken by our Guests and that was delightful and made for a lively and enjoyable event.

We were fortunate to have as our principal Guest Speaker Vicky Pryce, Chief Economic Adviser for the Centre for Economics and Business Research.

However, Vicky was there to talk about “Prisonomics”, the wonderful book she wrote documenting her stay in, firstly, Holloway and, secondly, East Sutton Park in Kent an Open Prison for Women, in fact one of only two in the UK. In many respects a diary detailing her experiences and views over a two month period, the book is fascinating and insightful and deals with far wider issues than just personal experience - in short the suitability of prison for women

The Clapham Omnibus 14

generally, particularly highlighting children and housing issues.

Vicky proved to be an excellent and interesting speaker, warm and funny.

She spoke passionately about her work as a Patron with “Working Chance”, a Recruitment Consultancy for current and ex women offenders.

Even more warm and more comic, however, was our supporting Guest Speaker, Criminal Barrister Elroy Claxton who entertained us royally with cricketing anecdotes - fitting for the Oval of course - largely from a West Indian perspective.

We were pleased to have no less than three Guest Presidents from Local Law Societies and we welcomed Shona Perkins from West London, Susanna

Heley from City of Westminster and Holborn and Marek Bednarczyk from Surrey.

We were also very happy to have representation from a much greater number of Firms this year, welcoming Amphlett Lissimore, Grant Saw, Wainwright Cummins, EBR Attridge and Sue Antell as well as the usual support from London South Bank University, Fisher Meredith, Hanne and Co, Russell Cooke and my own Firm Anthony Gold.

Finally, very grateful thanks again to our wonderful sponsors JLT Specialty Limited and in particular to Patrick Strange, Financial Risks Partner. Their support was fantastic and made a huge contribution to the success of the event.

We look forward to another great evening later this year.

News

2014

by STEPHEN WHITAKER, Anthony Gold

The Clapham Omnibus 15

Social Events

THE LEGAL CHARITIES GARDEN PARTY

by EDWARD MACEY-DARE SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT OF THE CITY OF WESTMINSTER AND HOLBORN LAW SOCIETY

THE LEGAL CHARITIES GARDEN PARTY (LCGP) WAS FOUNDED BY THE HOLBORN LAW SOCIETY IN 1968, TO FUNDRAISE FOR LAWYERS IN NEED AND THEIR DEPENDENTS. IT HAS TAKEN PLACE EVERY YEAR SINCE THAT DATE AND, SINCE 1987 ALONE, HAS RAISED MORE THAN £500,000 FOR THE SIX LEGAL CHARITIES IT SUPPORTS, NAMELY: -

SBA The Solicitors' Charity;

-

Barristers' Benevolent Association;

-

CILEx Benevolent Fund;

-

Institute of Barristers' Clerks Benevolent Fund;

-

United Law Clerks' Society;

-

LawCare.

In recent years, the LCGP has been run by a stand-alone committee (an independent unincorporated association) consisting of representatives from the Society and from the various branches of the legal profession - judges, barristers, solicitors, legal executives and barristers' clerks. With effect from 21st January 2015, however, it has now come back under the Society's umbrella, such that the Society will be responsible for hosting and running it, going forward.

This year, the event will be held on Wednesday 10th June 2015 – once again, in the stunning location of the North Lawns of Lincoln’s Inn. 2015 is the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta - the great charter of liberties which established a new relationship between the king and his subjects – and, given that this historic document was signed at Runnymede on 15th June, the LCGP falls squarely within "Magna Carta Week". For that reason, it is entirely fitting that the Magna Carta should be the theme of this year's event.

As the LCGP is effectively under new management, we have decided to change the feel of the event slightly, by moving away from champagne and offering Pimms and Elderflower cordial instead

The Clapham Omnibus 16

(although it will still be possible to purchase white and red wine as well, for those who so wish). In our view, this is more consistent with a summer garden party theme, and will help ring the changes.

As before, various firms in the vicinity of Lincoln's Inn (namely Farrers, CollyerBristow and Hunters) have kindly agreed to provide trainees to help sell tickets and also to assist at the event, for which we are very grateful.

Prices this year are as follows: Individual tickets: £15 Corporate package: £150 (which will include: a table, 2 jugs of Pimms, 2 jugs of Elderflower cordial and two trays of canapés) Jugs of Pimms: £20 Trays of canapés: £45 Corporate packages must be pre-booked through the Society's Administrator, Susie Hust.

Individual tickets can be purchased either on the door, or via Susie directly.

We have the enthusiastic support of all our beneficiary charities and, with a new group involved in the management, we hope to rejuvenate the event, whilst still retaining the

core message. In that regard, I am pleased to report that the Law Society has come forward as an active supporter this year and the President, Andrew Caplin, will be the guest of honour (and is even mentioning the event in the President's column of the Gazette, in order to give it maximum coverage). The City of London Law Society and the Worshipful Company of Solicitors have also promised their support, by advertising the event to their respective members and encouraging attendance.

We would like to encourage the profession, as a whole, to get behind the LCGP, given that none of us knows when we might be in need of charitable assistance. In particular, we want to reinvigorate interest from the legal community (i.e. solicitors, barristers and legal executives) in Holborn and Westminster, and to galvanise support from senior members of the judiciary and to encourage them all to attend. We therefore need your help.

I do hope that all our membership will wish to support this event wholeheartedly, and will attend in droves, with numerous guests. This is a most worthwhile cause and I would like to see the LCGP thriving and profitable once more, so that the various legal charities can be properly supported.

For enquiries contact admin@cwhls.org.uk

News

Document security in an increasingly mobile world The workflow, life and trail of a document are more mobile than ever. With legislation increasing the digitisation of document management across soliciting, paralegal, insolvency, civil rights, banking, commercial, corporate, environmental, property and finance sectors, the legal sector is having to evolve and become increasingly sophisticated.

In a recent KYOCERA survey of over 500 people within the UK legal industry, almost half of respondents cited security as their biggest concern when it comes to technology. This was deemed more important even than cost cutting (45%) and looks set to continue as new techniques such as mobile and cloud gain in popularity within the workplace.

Increased digitisation and mobility should not, however, compromise the security of data and documents.

In order to maintain document security, legal organisations should consider deploying a Managed Document Service (MDS) - which is a packaged solution that creates a controlled print, copy and document environment. A properly deployed MDS will strengthen a law firm’s ability to control risk.

As well as helping to avoid losing valuable data and preventing unauthorised access, it can also ensure confidential documents don’t end up in the wrong hands, limit device access to particular users and departments and clearly identify key users.

MDS usually combine hardware, software, servicing and elements of strategic

consultancy. Reputable partners provide services that incorporate the most up-todate and sophisticated security measures, including encryption and compliance with BSI standards for the legal admissibility of electronic information in court.

Another emerging area, which presents both opportunity and challenge in terms of document security, is cloud. Although doubts persist over the security of cloudbased services, cloud propositions are proving increasingly difficult for law firms to resist. Firms should familiarise themselves with the Information Commissioner’s Office guidance on the use of cloud computing to make sure their MDS deployment complies with the Data Protection Act 1998.

Whilst technologies such as MDS and cloud are addressing document security concerns within the legal sector, it’s clear to see that doubts persist. When asked about the biggest challenges in future, the respondents to the KYOCERA survey opted for security (38%), closely followed by keeping costs down (37%) and dealing with fees (35%). This suggests that legal firms welcome the influx of new technologies but are still unsure of how they will impact business.

by ROB ATTRYDE, KYOCERA Document Solutions UK, Marketing Communications Manager

TheClapham ClaphamOmnibus Omnibus 17 The

Residential Conveyancing

STAGES OF THE RESIDENTIAL CONVEYANCING PROCESS Members of the Law Society’s Conveyancing Quality Scheme will be required to comply with the Law Society’s Conveyancing Protocol which sets out the Law Society’s preferred practice in residential conveyancing transactions. This article should be read in light of the Protocol where it is adopted.

Offer and Memorandum of Sale In a standard transaction involving a marketed property, the agent will forward a memorandum of sale to both parties’ solicitors once an offer has been accepted by the Seller. This will set out the parties’ and lawyers’ contact details, the price and any other items that have been discussed. The memorandum is not legally binding. The terms should reviewed with the client to see if they are correct.

Confirmation of Instructions and Deduction of Title On receipt of the memorandum, the solicitors will confirm instructions following which title will be deduced by the Seller’s solicitor. The title, a draft contract and Property Information Forms will be issued by the Seller’s solicitor to the Buyer’s solicitor.

If the Property is leasehold, the Seller’s solicitor should apply for a management pack from the managing agent as soon as possible and forward this to the Buyer’s solicitor.

Copies of all documents should be forwarded to the parties by their solicitors for information and the clients should be kept informed as to progress throughout the transaction.

Investigation of Title On receipt of the contract and title papers, the Buyer’s solicitor will apply for searches. The standard searches should include Local Authority, Drainage and Environmental. Other searches may be required dependant on the location and nature of the Property. At this time the Buyer should also consider requesting a survey.

The Buyer’s solicitor will then review the title documents, the contract, survey and the searches and will raise any necessary additional enquiries about the Property, its legal status and will make any necessary amendments to the contract.

The Seller’s solicitor will respond to these enquiries and will comment on the contract amendments with a view to agreeing the contract.

At this stage, the mortgage offer from the Buyer’s Lender would be expected together with requests from the Lender to check any particular matters. Mortgage offers will tend to be subject to receipt of a satisfactory valuation which should also be reviewed by the Buyer’s solicitor. If the Buyer requires a mortgage, the offer should be in hand before exchange of contracts.

18 Clapham The Clapham Omnibus The Omnibus 18

It is common for a Buyer’s solicitor to act for both Buyer and Lender and in which case the solicitor will supply the Lender with a Certificate of Title confirming that the Property has good and marketable title. However, in some cases the Lender will have their own legal representation and the Buyer’s solicitor will have to comply with all requirements of the Lender’s solicitor.

Once replies to enquiries have been supplied and are satisfactory and the contract is agreed, the Buyer’s solicitor prepares and forwards to the Buyer a written Report on Title on the Property. The Report would highlight the legal status of the Property, title defects and other issues and would be accompanied by the Contract for signature. At the same time the Seller will sign their part of the Contract in readiness for exchange.

If the Buyer is satisfied with the Report on Title and to proceed to exchange, they will send their solicitors the deposit, usually being 10% of the Purchase Price.

If the Buyer is selling a property at the same time as buying, they may be able to use the deposit paid by their purchaser towards their onward purchase provided that the contract confirms that the deposit is to be held as stakeholder and can be used on any onward purchase.

In some circumstances, e.g. if there is a chain of transactions, it will be possible to agree a lesser deposit. If a deposit of less than 10% is paid, advice should be given to parties in respect of potential default within the chain and the position with regards to the balance of the 10% which may become payable to a Seller following default.

Once exchange is imminent, completion dates would be finalised. There is no guarantee that the preferred date will be possible as it will need to be agreed between both parties and any third parties involved in the chain.

Prior to exchange a bankruptcy/company search should be carried out against the Seller to ensure that they are able to proceed.

Exchange of Contracts Once the Buyer has been reported to, deposit funds have cleared and a completion date is agreed, exchange of contracts will be possible. At the point of exchange, the contract becomes legally binding and the deposit is paid to the Seller’s solicitor.

If for any reason either party does not complete the purchase/sale on the agreed date, the defaulting party will be in breach of contract and potentially financially liable to the other party. The time by which completion must take place is stated in the contract and will usually be 1 or 2pm. If completion does not take place by the specified time, interest becomes payable on the balance outstanding which is payable at the rate specified in the contract.

Lenders will not usually guarantee a time by which mortgage funds will be available on the day of completion meaning that it can be beneficial to ask Lenders to transfer mortgage funds the day prior to completion if they will allow this.

It is important to be clear on exchange whether the ‘risk’ in the Property has passed

to the Buyer or remains with the Seller and who has the obligation to insure the Property.

Clients should be informed accordingly in the Report on Title.

Between exchange and completion, the Buyer’s solicitor must ensure that funds are requested from the Lender and Buyer as required.

The Buyer’s solicitor must also prepare and agree the draft Transfer with the other side.

Once agreed this will need to be executed as appropriate with any Mortgage Deed.

The Buyer’s solicitor will also need to request pre-completion searches, usually to include OS1 or OS2 searches and any further Bankruptcy searches or company searches.

The OS searches will confirm whether any amendments to the title have been made since title was deduced and will effectively freeze the title for 6 weeks in favour of the Buyer or Lender in order to allow their solicitor to register the Transfer and any Mortgage Deed.

The Buyer’s solicitor will raise requisitions on title which will contain, amongst other things, the sum required to complete and any undertakings to redeem existing mortgages.

If the Property is leasehold, the Seller’s solicitor should prepare a completion statement showing any apportionments of service charge and ground rent.

If there is a mortgage registered against the title to the Property, the Seller’s solicitor will need to obtain a redemption figure from the Lender so that the above mentioned undertaking can be given.

Completion On the completion date, once the Buyer’s solicitor is in funds to complete, funds will be sent to the Seller’s solicitor by same day telegraphic transfer. On receipt of funds, completion will take place and the Seller’s solicitor will authorise the estate agent to release the keys to the Buyer.

At Completion, the Seller’s solicitor will arrange for any existing mortgage to be redeemed and will usually settle any estate agent’s commission from the proceeds of sale.

Post Completion Following completion the Buyer’s solicitor will pay any SDLT due and submit a return to HMRC within the 30 day time limit. If this time limit is not complied with, penalties and interest may be payable.

In addition, the Buyer’s solicitor will register the relevant documents (Transfer/Lease/Mortgage Deed) at the Land Registry within the OS search priority period.

If the Property is leasehold, there may be additional requirements to be complied with arising from the Lease i.e. service of Notice of Transfer/Charge on the Landlord.

Residential Conveyancing

ACCELERATING YOUR HIGHWAYS ENQUIRIES FOR COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS Argyll Environmental (Part of Landmark Information Group) in association with PSG For every commercial transaction it is critical to investigate the precise extent to the adoption status of roads surrounding a site.

You may believe that the footpath in front of the building is indeed publically owned and adopted but in fact it actually isn’t. These are the scenarios that slow down transactions.

It’s therefore imperative that the purchaser is aware if the site or property abuts a public highway and to what extent the roads, footpaths and verges are adopted. Failure to identify developments where adoption procedures have not been dealt with adequately, can cause delays to the transaction as well as pose a risk to the purchaser’s future plans for the site.

For example, if you were to imagine a typical scenario where a purchaser is looking to buy a property and the surrounding land which abuts a neighbouring property and there is a shared access onto the land. As part of the due diligence the purchaser’s solicitor would need to identify the exact status of the access and the ownership of the area. Is it publicly adopted by the local authority, therefore they are responsible for

maintenance and granting access or is it privately owned? In order for the transaction to proceed the status of the access way would need to be confirmed. At this point the purchaser may need to purchase this additional piece of land, negotiate shared access or at least a regular payment towards repairs. This will undoubtedly add time and complexity to the transaction, which is not what either party want.

So how can you solve it?

Argyll Environmental (Part of Landmark Information Group) have recently launched their SiteSolutions Highways report. Prior to the release of this report, the only way for a solicitor to obtain this information, would have been to contact the local authority and request the information directly. However, on a 20 day wait, it’s probably not the best use of time. The Argyll SiteSolutions Highways report, available from PSG, will be delivered between 3-5 working days and will not only include the adoption status of the roads, footpaths and verges but it will also consider what impact proposed changes to on-street

parking, waiting and loading restrictions and road improvement schemes could have on the transaction. As well as including existing, proposed and amended rights of way.

For more information on this or any of the other products and services available from PSG: Email: chandrasharma@propertysearchgroup.co.uk Visit: www.psgconnect.co.uk/londoncentral or telephone 01689 896171

The TheClapham ClaphamOmnibus Omnibus 19

Residential Conveyancing

SPEED, EFFICIENCY AND TRANSPARENCY AN OVERHAUL FOR CONVEYANCERS Veyo, the comprehensive home conveyancing portal which will offer an efficient, secure and transparent way of managing the conveyancing process has been developed by The Law Society and global IT solutions specialist, Mastek UK, and is scheduled to launch soon.

Looking at research from a national survey into the consumer experience of buying and selling a home, Elliott Vigar, CEO of Veyo, highlights what customers are looking for in this increasingly competitive market and how the portal will help conveyancers meet their demands.

A key finding from the report was that the single most popular change homebuyers would like to see to improve the home buying process is a faster service.

Interestingly, this was more popular than lower fees or reduced stamp duty.

One in ten consider home buying to be the most stressful life event they have ever experienced, placing it above a redundancy and having a baby for the first time. Understandably home buying is incredibly stressful, there is a huge sum of money at stake. But the waiting aspect of buying a home was revealed as the greatest stress point. Our survey revealed an average conveyancing time in England and Wales of 11.3 weeks. In our digital era, this is simply not good enough for homebuyers.

As a result, a quarter of the 2000 respondents, who were recruited through an independent research panel, are willing to pay more for a speedier service. With only 35% of the respondents stating that they are unlikely to pay more, the remaining 40% were undecided. This strongly suggests that this is not an overly price sensitive market and that conveyancers or solicitors who are able to demonstrate their speed and efficiency will have a competitive edge.

SPEEDY EFFICIENCY The obvious way to improve speed is to use more process managements and integration of IT. Veyo brings together all the processes, checks and documentation prepared and undertaken by solicitors and licensed conveyancers in the sale and purchase of residential properties. The system will enable greater efficiency for conveyancers and offer an improved

20 The Clapham Omnibus

service overall. It will allow professionals to better communicate with each other, clients and other parties and satisfy due diligence obligations more quickly.

Veyo is built around the Law Society protocol which means that users can rest assured that preferred practice is being followed. Veyo will enhance risk management as audit trails, anti-money laundering and identity checks will be embedded in the system.

Many consumers in the survey also vented their frustrations about poor levels of service and poor communication. Most consumers have limited knowledge of the conveyancing process, with over a third of respondents feeling they only had basic knowledge or no idea at all about the process. In particular, consumers find the negotiation, reviewing vital documents and responding to enquiries as the most onerous part.

Therefore it is unsurprising that the third most popular change consumers would like to see to serve them better in the future is improved communication and greater transparency with advice up-front, enabling them to feel more in control.

A UNIQUE SERVICE IMPROVING TRANSPARENCY What makes Veyo so unique is that it is a system which has been designed for conveyancers but it also meets the needs of all parties involved in the transaction process. All documentation for each transaction will be kept online, in one place, on the user-friendly system that will track activity and progress and issue automatic diary reminders of actions needing to be carried out.

Consumers will be able to go online to review documents such as search results, check the progress of their home purchase or sale, and even view the status of other buyers and sellers in their housing chain.

Elliott Vigar, CEO of Veyo

A mobile responsive website will offer instant updates and access to information on their house sale or purchase via a smartphone or tablet.

We have long been aware of homebuyers’ misgivings about the conveyancing market. The independent research clearly reveals what the customers want and the important areas for those in the profession to modernize and innovate in order to raise the standard.

Just under half of respondents said they were not sure or unlikely to offer repeat business to their solicitor or conveyancer. And with 36% of the respondents planning to move in the next three years, this is a huge amount of repeat business lost.

The industry has widely accepted and is talking about the need to change and finally we are coming up with the answers. Whilst many conveyancers have started to put some infrastructure in place to streamline the system there has yet to be a service for the entire endto-end conveyancing process - until now! There is an appetite for change amongst homebuyers. They are frustrated with the system and we believe they will be championing a product that will make the conveyancing process faster, more efficient and more transparent.

For access to the market research report for free please email info@veyo.co.uk

Residential Conveyancing

ARE ALL LEGAL INDEMNITY POLICIES EQUAL? In today’s legal indemnity insurance market it would be logical to assume that all title insurers offer the same level of insurance cover for the same types of risks.

However, in reality this is not always the case due to differing policy limitations.

Unfortunately, conveyancers and their clients’ only find out what these limitations really meant when it is too late…usually when a claim is rejected.

For example, when an Insured applying for planning permission or other consents to carry out works to a property, he or she may put themselves in danger of invalidating an existing indemnity policy which is covering previous works carried out to their property.

Many insurers will automatically void all claims that arise as a direct result of such applications without exception.

It is clear from above two examples (and there are more), that all Legal Indemnity insurance policies are NOT equal. Whilst, policy costs remain one of the factors a conveyancer needs to consider, it is by no means the most important factor. Surely the most important factor for any conveyancer is ensuring that their client’s legal indemnity needs are fully matched with right policy.

Policy duration and transferability is also often overlooked. For example, many chancel policies are limited in time which is usually to 25 years or the duration of the named Insured’s ownership and/or excludes all successors in title. Depending on your client’s needs, this may or may not be adequate or appropriate.

At Guaranteed Conveyancing Solutions (GCS), not only do we truly believe in comprehensive cover terms as standard across the whole of our policy range, we also believe in simple wordings which is why our policies are one of the most easy to understand.

For example, GCS makes it clear in our wordings that new works ‘can’ be carried out to the property provided that the lack of consent/s for the existing works is not drawn to the local authority’s attention and provided that the new work is not reliant on or in the same area as the work/s covered by the policy. Additionally, GCS’s no search chancel policies all provide cover in perpetuity and covers all successors in title.

About the author: Sandy Atkinson has over 14 years of experience underwriting legal indemnity insurance policies and is the Head of Underwriting at Guaranteed Conveyancing Solutions.

The Clapham Omnibus 21

Residential Conveyancing

TOP 10 QUESTIONS TO ASK YOUR SEARCH PROVIDER SEARCHFLOW’S LATEST CONVEYANCER SENTIMENT SURVEY REVEALED THAT 48% OF CONVEYANCERS CITE PROFITABILITY AS THEIR MAIN CONCERN FOR THIS YEAR WHEN CONSIDERING THEIR OWN BUSINESS. BUT IN THE CUT AND THRUST OF A BUSY LEGAL PRACTICE IT CAN SOMETIMES BE HARD TO SEE THE WOOD FROM THE TREES. TAKING A STEP BACK AND EXAMINING BUSINESS PRACTICES, THEN THINKING ABOUT WAYS TO INTRODUCE MORE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT WAYS OF WORKING CAN BE ONE WAY TO BOOST THAT ALL - IMPORTANT BOTTOM LINE. “Implementing a lean business practice into a law firm will certainly help its profitability,” comments SearchFlow Head of Marketing, Adam Bullion. “These don’t have to be enormous changes, but reviewing standard business practices can reveal some sticking points which could be improved and save firms valuable time and money.”

One of the ways conveyancers can improve efficiencies is through the partnership with a search provider which understands their business. Bullion explains, “The search process is a big part of the conveyancing operation, so finding the best search provider for your firm is essential. Not only will this help profitability, but it will also benefit relationships with customers through the quick delivery of accurate results.”

However, the market place is crowded with search providers. With strong competition, and little apparent clear differentiation between each provider, it may be difficult to decide which one to choose.

SearchFlow has put together a list of top 10 questions conveyancers should ask their search provider to ensure they get the right level of expertise, speedy service, flexibility and convenience that makes lawyers’ lives easier:

1. Are you able to place search orders in three simple steps?

Ensure that it is a simple process to reduce time wasting. And ensure that risk screening takes place, identifying areas of risk and recommending search types, so you don’t have to search again to find missing or incorrect information.

2. Do you offer state-of-the-art mapping tools?

A map should offer aerial views to make it easier to find difficult properties. This

22 Clapham The Clapham Omnibus The Omnibus 22

reduces processing time, as well as ensuring that the correct properly location is plotted.

up-to-date. Ensuring data is comprehensive will help to avoid defects. Searches should be Search Code Compliant.

3. Are you a member of a search code compliant regulatory body?

8. How proactive are you?

Lenders accept searches from search providers if they are part of a regulatory body such as CoPSO. This also offers protection for anyone who relies on the information from the property search reports, as well as ensuring a quality standard throughout the products and services on offer. Membership of a regulatory body gives consumers and property professionals confidence in the data provided.

4. Do you have extended coverage for negligence or omissions?

How much additional cover do you offer?

This gives you reassurance and the confidence to know that you can take out additional, comprehensive cover whenever necessary.

5. How do you add value to specific areas of my business?

Can your search provider go the extra mile and offer you more than just search?

This can take away the administrative burden from you, freeing up your time so you can focus on responding and servicing your customers more efficiently.

6. Are you an NLIS channel?

This is an electronic connection to all local authorities that reduces waiting time and is regulated, again, offering you peace of mind.

7. Are searches accurate, comprehensive and up-to-date?

Ask whether or not the provider uses database information (derived data) or if the information is real-time and fully

Your search provider should work with you to ensure an easy set-up and provide ongoing support. Will they notify you about change of delivery dates, changes in legislation, Law Society guidance notes and proposed changes within the industry? They should be able to support you and keep you up-to-date with the conveyancing market.

9. Do you employ a dedicated personal search team?

They should be able to provide an efficient personal search service, obtaining data from source. This should therefore give you a fast turnaround time and is a convenient way to deliver against your service-level agreements.

10. Do you share performance analysis?

Your search provider should be able to share with you the volume of searches performed, how many have been manually intervened, insight around resolution times, and reasons for delays.

Your search provider should be able to answer these questions with ease. If they’re able to confirm each of these points, it will enable you to maintain a search process that is as stress-free and simple as possible, while helping you run an efficient conveyancing operation.

Call 01732 523952 if you would like to speak to SearchFlow about the services they offer.

Fas st track k y ur care you ee er in A ADR witth a CIArb C Qu ualificatiion The Cha artere ed Institute of Arbitrattors (CIArb) is a lead ding pro ofess sional membership org ganis sation re epre esenting the intere estts of alternative disp pute practitio oners worldwide.

Upcom ming courses for 2015: 16 – 19 and 23 March Commercial Mediation Training

30 – 31 March Acceleratted Route towards Fellowship p (Inter nternational Arbitration))

21 April Introducttion to Domestic Arbitration

23 April Avoiding Conflict in Business

Our Path hways programme – ranging from Intrroductory Certificate, A Advanced Certifica ate and Diploma will giv ve you the e spec cialist c a s knowledge o edge a and d sskills s you need to get ahead in ADR, whilst also qualifying you for membership of CIArb.

12 May y Introducttion to Alternative Dispute Resolution ution

13 May y Expert W Witness

Do you u have a dispute?

Contac ct W Waj aj Khan at CIArb DAS S Becom me a CIArb Member Contac ct CIArb Member Service es

The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, Arbitrators 12 Bloomssbury Square, London, WC1A 2LP P,, UK P T: + +44 (0 0)20 7421 7439 Registered Ch harity: 803725

F: +44 (0)20 ( 7404 4023

E: education@ciarb.org

W: www w.ciarb.org

Junior Lawyers Division

The trainee minimum salary: its origin, abolition and why we must demand it back.

With grave concerns about the impact of the abolishment of the trainee minimum salary on social mobility, the Junior Lawyers Division (JLD) announced in January that they will revive and prioritise the campaign to bring it back. The JLD are currently working closely with the Law Society on this with a view to introducing an optional recommended minimum salary in July this year.

The minimum salary for trainees, which was £18,590.00 for training contracts in Central London and £16,650.00 for training contracts outside London, was abolished on 1st August last year by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). Since the abolishment, employers are required only to pay the national minimum wage, currently £6.31 per hour, to trainees. To give this some context, selffunded trainee solicitors often will be paying back the costs of their LPC from the start of their training contract, where the LPC course cost averages £11,500.00. This means a repayment of between £200 and £400 a month.

This leaves around £400 per month for rent, bills and the cost of living let alone other student loans and debt.

Given the JLD’s laudable efforts to oppose this abolition, culminating in this new campaign towards a recommended trainee salary, it seems to appropriate to reflect on the reasoning behind the introduction of the trainee salary, its abolition and why the minimum trainee salary must be reinstated.

The minimum trainee salary was established in 1982 in order to encourage talented graduates, irrespective of their financial background, to enter the profession and more generally to protect trainees from exploitation. Traditionally, of course, becoming a lawyer in the UK was a profession for the privileged and well-connected elite and the minimum trainee salary was one attempt among many to try to work toward a more diverse pool of entrants to the legal profession, the success of which should not be underestimated. During its existence, the minimum salary has been reviewed and amended; with responsibility being moved from the Law Society to the SRA in 2007.

On 16th May 2012, following a consultation where the SRA reviewed their role in the setting of a minimum salary for trainee solicitors, the minimum salary was scrapped.

The consultation from which the SRA made their decision sought responses from a wide variety of stakeholders including academics, paralegals, trainees, LPC students, solicitors and others. A key focus of the responses

South London JLD Update We have been busy since the last edition of Clapham Omnibus, with committee members taking part in various events such as the Law Fairs, the Law Society Careers Day earlier this month, and our Christmas SLJLD event at the Roof Gardens in Kensington.

The Careers Day was an opportunity to provide some information about a career in law to school pupils aged 15-18 from backgrounds not traditionally associated with legal careers. Sej Lamba, one of our committee members who volunteered on the day, commented that “it is always rewarding to support The Law Society’s initiatives and

focused on equality and diversity, with a strong majority view that the SRA has a remit with setting a minimum standard because of its obligation to “encourage a independent, strong, diverse and effective legal profession”. In fact, the consultation process revealed that 70% of respondents felt that the removal of a trainee minimum salary would reduce access to the profession, particularly for people from low income backgrounds.

There was also some concern about the detrimental impact that the removal of the trainee salary would have for women and ethnic minorities. However, the SRA found that increasing equality and diversity in the legal profession was not effectively addressed by the setting of a minimum salary, where the minimum salary is one of many factors affecting an individual’s ability to enter the legal profession, and so this objective should be pursued in other ways. Even ignoring that the SRA’s conclusion here appears contrary to the consultation responses, their reasoning here is circular; if a minimum salary is one of many factors affecting an individual’s ability to enter the legal profession, this should not prohibit it from becoming a factor that is taken into account.

The consultation also revealed that a minority of stakeholders were in favour of deregulation as it was thought that this might open up the market and create more opportunities for those currently unable to obtain training contracts. Interestingly, the SRA did agree with this minority finding. If, for a moment, we accept that the abolition of the minimum salary will create more opportunities, it is important to also consider who such purported opportunities are for. It must be that new opportunities at minimum wage are for those that can afford it, as it evidenced on the facts that individuals entirely self-funded could not afford to work for the minimum wage. By its own terms then, deregulation does the exact opposite of encouraging ‘an independent, strong, diverse and effective legal profession’.

The abolition of the trainee minimum wage has wider ramifications. Many of the firms concerned about the trainee minimum salary are small individual client and advise students at the early stages of their legal journey.

We enjoyed the event very much and hope the students left with a greater appreciation of routes into law.”

One of our national committee representatives, Hannah Lyons, attended the recent national committee meeting in January 2015, which focused in particular on the questions surrounding the trainee minimum salary. Our chair, Hannah Mantle, has also met with the President of the Law Society, Andrew Caplen, and other JLD national executive and local members, to discuss the minimum salary and other issues relevant to junior lawyers.

We are looking forward to the upcoming return of our other national committee representative, Rachel Cooper, from her current secondment to the Joint Office of the UK Law Societies in Brussels, Belgium where she worked on

legal aid firms. In the wake of the pernicious and continuing cuts to legal aid, civil justice reforms and the changing nature of businesses that can now provide legal advice, it is becoming an increasing challenge for traditional law firms to maintain a competitive position.

However, the difficulties that law firms currently face do not justify scrapping the trainee minimum salary, sending the legal profession back 25 years to its elitist roots. If law firms cannot afford trainees, then the fight must be to prevent further legal aid cuts and to limit the extent of the civil justice reforms, not open the door to exploitation and social exclusion. Of course, the deeper and lasting impact of discouraging, and in some case barring, the most talented individuals from pursuing careers in particular areas of law because they cannot afford to do so has worrying consequences in terms of the people for whom they act in obtaining access to justice.

The legal profession needs to be diverse and representative of society, in terms of sex, ethnicity, sexuality, disability and class, from paralegals and trainee solicitors to the judiciary. Trainee minimum salary is an important, direct and necessary factor in facilitating this and we must continue to campaign for its reinstitution.

by LOUISE TAYLOR, Trainee Solicitor and Social media/events rep for the SLLSJLD, Anthony Gold EU Law Reform in the fields of Taxation, Company Law, Financial Services and IP. With our new committee now firmly established, we are looking forward to the year ahead. Details of our upcoming seminar on the topic of Equality and Diversity will be posted soon and we hope to have our new website up and running next month.

In the meantime, we are always happy to welcome new members whether you are a law student, trainee, paralegal or solicitor up to five years’ PQE. Membership is free for junior lawyers studying or working in South London.

Please contact us at sllsjuniorlawyers@gmail.com to join or for further information about membership. Keep updated of our events and activities by following us on Twitter - @SouthLondonJLD, or on LinkedIn.

The Clapham Omnibus 25

Spotlight on...

Introducing - June Venters QC, founder of South London-based law firm Venters Solicitors and a guest in our spotlight feature on top partners in South London firms.

Throughout her career, June Venters QC has undertaken work in the fields of Crime, Public Law, Child Care, and Family Law, focusing now on the most serious cases, within those fields of law including Serious Fraud.

She has been regarded by clients and fellow practitioners alike as a ‘leader’ in her field and her appointment to Queens Counsel recognizes such regard, particularly since she is the first female practicing solicitor ever to achieve such recognition.

She has a high media profile and has appeared regularly on television and radio. In 1996 the BBC broadcast a documentary about her working life entitled ‘’Law Women’’. Since then, her views and re-actions have been sought within the media and on programmes.

By Beverly Sowah (previously conducted interview with Gerald Shamash).

You became the first solicitor QC in 2006, do you think there are still barriers to career progression specific to being a woman?

It depends. From my point of view, running my own practice since 1991, I don't see any difficulty in relation to my practice and the development of women in the profession. I promote that and in fact the partners at my firm are all women and that's not positive discrimination - that's just how it is. So I don't see it (discrimination) in my immediate environment and I don't think that I have been subjected to it personally in the profession.

However, I am aware that in different fields of law and in different elements of the profession, perhaps more associated with the larger firms in Central London there may be great difficulty for women to progress but I can't speak personally about that because I have not witnessed it.

Who or what influenced you to pursue a career in the law?

When I was growing up as a child, my mother was a secretary for a firm of solicitors just off Fleet Street. In those days she worked in what would be the equivalent of a family law department. As I grew into my teens I would often go into her office and would help her out with filing and so on and gradually I graduated to delivering briefs to the Temple. But my real claim to fame was when I was 14. Although I did not appreciate the significance at the time; I was asked to escort someone by black cab to the Old Bailey. It was only when I came home that evening, I was asked by my father if I had a nice day and what had I done - I realised the significance, it turned out I had escorted Charlie Kray to the Old Bailey for his trial. My father was not impressed, but as far as I was concerned he'd been charming, he could not have been nicer. I don't think it influenced me to go into the law, but it is a story I always tell because like other situations by of a process of osmosis, I think you absorb situations and you're not necessarily aware at the time of how they might impact you.

From then on, I continued to have an involvement with my mother’s firm. However, I was quite determined at that stage that I did not want to go into the law, instead I wanted to be a teacher.

I got myself into teacher's training college at the age of 18, but before I was due to commence I had a period of illness. When something like that happens it causes you to reflect and I ended up changing directions. I worked as a legal executive for a firm of solicitors in Fleet Street and that was where I thought my career would end. One Monday morning I was called into the partner’s office to be made redundant. The department was closing. I was given 9 months notice but I was dreadfully upset because I was so happy there. I asked if I could go for a walk to meet up with a friend of mine who had also been studying to be a legal executive but unlike me she was going to law school the following week to commence training to be a solicitor. I ended up in her office explaining how upset I was and her boss who I had never met before asked why I would not be joining my friend at law school.

I explained that I had to apply 3 years in advance so the possibility of doing that was not there. He rang the law school whilst I sat in a corner feeling sorry for myself and the conversation with the law school went along the lines of ''oh really''. Apparently the lady on the other end of the conversation informed him that there had been a cancellation and if I wanted to start I could start on Monday. So as you see, I didn't have a pre-prepared plan to become a solicitor I changed directions to become a legal executive believing that was where I would stop and I would continue as a legal executive but subsequently an opportunity arose and I took it, and from the moment I walked through the doors of the College of Law and I just knew I had found what I had clearly been looking for and I have never looked back.

That answers the question on what path you took to legal qualification…

That's the path I took. I left school with just O-levels, I then studied in the evening for A-levels whilst working. I got into

The Clapham Omnibus 26

teachers’ training college but didn't take that up and instead studied for the legal executive qualification. I went onto to do the fellowship exams as well, which also gave me additional qualifications. I did what was called in those days the old part 1 Law Society final examination because I didn't have a degree. I then went on to do the Law Society finals. From start to finish studying law took 8 years because I then had to do the 4 years Articles.

What is a typical day like at your firm and how do you manage your work life balance?

One of my best friends is my GP and he'll probably answer that in one word: badly. I think I work probably too many hours and don't have as well a balanced life as I should. Having said that, I don't work to live, I live to work. I enjoy my work and therefore it is me - it is a part of me. It doesn't mean to say I don't enjoy family life or I don't enjoy social life because I enjoy that very much as well.

But my work has been very much absorbing all of my life. My normal day consists of getting up at 6 o'clock. I will essentially drop my daughter to the station at 7 o'clock. I will then go onto the court I am in that day or either go to the office, meet a client or work from home. But my working day invariably has begun by half 7 - 8 am. It depends again on what I'm doing - if I am due in court or I have time limits that have to be observed it is not unusual for me to often work up until 2-3 in the morning and still be up at 6 - 6:30 am and off I go again. I have been very fortunate and I don't take it lightly that I have had good health and I know that can at any time change - but had I not had good health and the support of my husband who absolutely has been my backbone, I wouldn't be able to do what I do.

When I was awarded a Law Society award in 2010, I said then and I say now, anyone who has been considered to be successful can never say they did it alone - because you have to have people behind you that support you even if it's only emotionally. But if you don't have that it’s very unlikely that you would succeed - and my success is not just down to me but it is because of what I have had behind me.

What have been some of your highs and lows in the legal profession?

My lows I would say instantly have been the disintegration of legal aid and social justice. Seeing a profession that I entered in 1979 as a law student and qualified into in 1984, where those who could not afford justice where able to access it to public funds and to see all these years later people desperately in need of access to justice, in fact I can quote the Presidents comments that was reported in the Law Society's Gazette recently that the legal aid cuts are inhumane. I think that's a very good adjective.

That for me is my biggest low and watching my colleagues suffering, watching them work tirelessly for such punitive amount in reward - it's very upsetting. My high was qualifying, obviously being appointed to the bench as a recorder, my appointment as a QC was a high and setting up my own business. So I've had a lot of highs. June laughs at this.

What do you think are the challenges facing the legal profession in the next 12 months?

I think the challenges are immense. I think the approach to the legal profession and what has happened is entirely wrong. Just to illustrate what I mean by that and to give you some evidence; essentially it seems to me everything is put into little boxes and there's no joined up thinking. So for example, and this has been statistically published, if you reduce access to justice in a family case which means a wife perhaps or a spouse is unable to get expertise advise in relation to divorce, separation, financial separation, children - they don't have the funds to pay for it, they can't access legal support - that has an impact on the wider society. That will cause the NHS bill to go up because they become depressed, they become anxious, they become physically unwell they go to the GP - sometimes it goes further, they may have to access psychological services, equally it could

be a problem for housing because they become homeless, they have to be re-housed - it has so many ramifications. You can have a household that cannot afford to separate or divorce or cannot get the best advice on how best to achieve it, and they are living in an environment which is not conducive to the welfare of their children. That will impact on that child who will one day become an adult. That is the failure of this government to have joined up thinking. What they are doing is making a saving on legal aid but costing the public a pound on all the other elements. That shall be consequential of the failure to enable people to access justice.

What would you like to see changed in the legal profession in the next 5 years?

I would like to see a return to the availability of legal aid in relation to all the cases they have now withdrawn, such as the family cases, housing cases and so on. I'm not saying they should not be controlled, or there should not be accountability.

It is recognised that anyone working in legal aid doesn't earn anywhere near what one charges a private client and I'm not suggesting that should change either but at the moment there is no legal aid and that has to be returned - somehow there has be public funding.

What sets your firm apart from others?

It’s difficult to say, I would say from a factual point of view, the fact that I am the first woman solicitor QC that does make a difference in the sense that there is only one person in that position, and that sets us apart. We're a good firm, we have a good reputation but there are a lot of other good firms with a good reputation so ultimately, I think the fact that I am a QC, it is a factual distinction.

What are the qualities that make an effective lawyer in your opinion?

Without a doubt - integrity. That has to be in my view the most important quality. You have got to have integrity. Depending on what area of law you're in, certainly in the area I have chosen to specialise in, you have got to have commitment, you have to have sensitivity, you have to be measured and proportionate in your thinking. Times have changed particularly in the area of family law that I specialise in because when I first entered the profession it was much more adversarial then I believe it is now. There is much greater emphasis on mediation. I am a qualified senior mediator and very actively involved in mediation. I see the benefits of that and I have changed the way I practice to accommodate it because I think it is a better way of working. But essentially, I think integrity for me is the most important aspect and quality you need to have.

What are you reading at the moment?

For my sins, probably not a lot. If I admitted to flicking through the Hello magazine you would probably think ''my goodness me'' I always say to people that when you are dealing with cases that are perhaps emotionally charged, and you've had a very long day, putting on the television and watching something like Coronation Street or picking up Hello magazine, you'd be surprised how much that can help. But I'm not going to admit to reading it. And June laughs again.

What motto do you live by?

I heard someone say on the television; ‘’don't worry about if it will happen, worry about when it happens’’. I think that's quite a good motto - but that doesn't mean to say you don't need to be prepared - one thing I always say to everybody and one I would say to myself, ‘’you have to prepare, and if you fail to prepare, prepare to fail’’. That's my motto where my work is concerned.

Professional Practice

DX PROVIDES VITAL SUPPORT TO THE BAR’S NATIONAL PRO BONO CHARITY DX, a leading independent mail, parcels and logistics end-to-end network operator in the UK and Ireland, has helped the Bar Pro Bono Unit during the recent surge in demand for its services which saw a 51% increase in applications in 2014. The Bar Pro Bono Unit is the Bar’s national charity that matches members of the public in need of legal help with barristers who are willing to volunteer in deserving cases for those who are unable to obtain legal aid and cannot afford to pay.

The Bar Pro Bono Unit is the only charity that provides pro bono assistance nationwide in every area of law, through a network of over 3,500 barristers, from tribunals through to the Supreme Court.

The charity ensures that, in each case, the barrister providing assistance is able to offer the same expertise and experience as would be expected in a paying case.

DX Exchange has been integral to the Bar’s pro bono operation for the last 18 years. DX ensures that original hard copy documents for each case are transported

from the charity’s base in Chancery Lane to its volunteer barristers spread across England and Wales, and that they arrive on time, every time.

Kuki Taylor, Fundraising and Communications Manager at the Bar Pro Bono Unit, comments: “We are very grateful to DX Exchange for its unwavering support and superior service, as it enables us to help those most in need of legal help.”

Paul Doble, Chief Sales & Marketing Officer at DX, adds: “The Bar Pro Bono Unit plays a hugely important role in ensuring everyone receives the legal representation that they deserve, irrespective of whether they have the funds to pay for this service.

We have been operating in the legal industry for the past 40 years and are in a unique position to provide the Bar Pro Bono Unit with the logistical support it needs to support its operations.”

The Clapham Omnibus 27

Professional Practice

QUOSTAR OFFERS LEGAL FIRMS FIVE CYBER SECURITY TIPS TO HELP GET SAFE ONLINE With brand new EU data protection regulations on the horizon and the news that cyber attacks now cost firms double what they did four years ago, cyber security is quickly taking on greater significance.

This is especially the case in the legal sector with its vast quantities of sensitive, private information, and clients that are increasingly requiring their lawyers to be available 24 x 7, wherever they are and on whatever device they have in front of them.

Robert Rutherford, CEO of business consultancy QuoStar has identified five essential preventive measures legal businesses should have in place to ensure that they don’t fall foul of cyber criminals, or regulators:

However, these are rarely controlled by the firm and plenty of companies are still not encrypting their centrally controlled devices, even where sensitive data is involved.

Two-factor authentication -

Most firms haven't really evaluated what their risks are. You simply can't protect what you haven't assessed. Firms need to evaluate every asset and service within their business, not simply IT hardware and systems. Once they have identified these they need assess the risks associated with that asset and how it could impact the firm. Using this information, the controls for those risks should be documented.

Many firms are still just using passwords to access IT platforms, both within the office and whilst working remotely. On their own, passwords aren’t secure. The threat landscape is too big to just rely on something as easy to crack as a password. Two-factor authentication has taken off recently in the banking sector in particular. The banks insist on it for a very good reason.

Risk assessment -

Business continuity plans - Staff training A tried and tested business continuity plan is essential for any firm. However, many companies still don’t have one, and many more don’t test it regularly or in earnest. This is one of the biggest and most worrying of all lapses in security.

Not having a plan to recover and operate after a significant event is negligent, verging on criminal. Regular backups are also essential.

Device control Lawyers now need to have access to company systems and processes any where and at any time. This is driving the increasing use of mobile devices such as laptops, tablets and smartphones.

The Clapham Omnibus 28

The largest weakness in most firms’ security is their people, both IT and users.

It's imperative that people understand the risk they pose and how to be more aware of the threats. It’s surprising how many firms can be breached by simple confidence tricks, for example pretending to be a new team member in IT and directing them to a web page to allow access. The risks around staff are serious, so educating them is essential.

Robert Rutherford concludes: “At the fundamental level, the threats haven't really changed all that much in the last 20 years. What has changed is the driving force behind the threats.

Previously, hackers would typically be doing it for interest and the challenge, however this has quickly evolved into the pursuit of money, particularly through extortion, blackmail and corporate espionage. This trend has brought the threats to the gate of every single business, especially those with sensitive data to protect, and that’s made the legal industry a prime target.”

About QuoStar: QuoStar is a rapid-growth, privately-held business consultancy and information technology firm headquartered in the United Kingdom. QuoStar delivers strategic and technical consultancy, IT Outsourcing and a comprehensive range of enterprise-class managed cloud services. The company’s client profile encompasses a broad range of industries and businesses with a turnover of up to £200M in the UK and overseas.

For further information, feel free to contact Robert Rutherford via http://www.quostar.com

Professional Practice

150TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE OPEN SPACES SOCIETY THIS YEAR IS THE 150TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE OPEN SPACES SOCIETY. FOUNDED IN 1865 AS THE COMMONS PRESERVATION SOCIETY IT IS BRITAIN’S OLDEST NATIONAL CONSERVATION BODY. IN ITS EARLY YEARS IT SAVED MANY COMMONS AND OTHER OPEN SPACES IN AND AROUND LONDON: HAMPSTEAD HEATH, EPPING FOREST AND WIMBLEDON COMMON FOR EXAMPLE. THEN IT EXTENDED ITS REMIT TO THE WHOLE OF ENGLAND AND WALES AND EMBRACED OPEN SPACES AND PUBLIC PATHS TOO. The open spaces and paths of Middlesex are especially important as green lungs in urban and suburban areas, and the

The Clapham Omnibus 30

society has had many successes there.

For instance, in 1893 it persuaded the local authority to remove obstructions from the lane between Twickenham and Teddington. It fought the construction of railways over common land and in 1878 stopped the Great Eastern Railway Company from taking three acres of Wood Green common, Hornsey. It won exchange land from the Great Western Railway Company at Drayton Green, Ealing, in 1897. It secured new clauses in the 1904 Acton Improvement Act to protect Acton Green. In 1948 it helped to rescue Grove Fields, Harrow, from development, and in 1985 it prevented Jubilee Gardens, Ealing, from being built on. Recently it has campaigned for the reopening of blocked paths across Harrow School playing-fields and Northwick Park golf-course.

Today the society still champions common land: as a statutory consultee it

scrutinises every application for works there. Its local representatives defend the public-path network and we advise our members in protecting commons, green spaces and paths, taking up hundreds of cases each year. We lobby parliament for better, tougher laws. We have no public funding; we depend on legacies and donations to support our vital work.

Web Tel Email

www.oss.org.uk 01491 573535 hq@oss.org.uk

Registered in England and Wales, limited company 7846516 Charity no 1144840

Professional Practice

LEAVING THEIR BELOVED FOUR-LEGGED FRIEND WITHOUT AN OWNER Some dog owners worry what might happen to their dog if they were to pass away first, leaving their beloved four-legged friend without an owner. Thankfully, Dogs Trust offers the Canine Care Card, a special free service that aims to give owners peace of mind, knowing that the charity will look after their dog if the worst should happen. Not only does this offer reassurance to dog owners, but it takes away an extra concern for friends and family during a distressing time.

Over the years, Dogs Trust has taken in hundreds of dogs across its 20 rehoming centres in the UK as part of the Canine Care Card scheme and helped them settle into happy new homes. One of these dogs was Poppy-Pie, a nine-year-old crossbreed who found herself looking for a home when her owner passed away earlier this year. Before coming to Dogs Trust, Poppy-Pie was looked after by her late owner’s carer and her dog walker. Both very much wanted to see Poppy-Pie find a loving new home but, sadly were not able to offer her a forever home themselves.

Dogs Trust never puts a healthy dog down, and works hard to match every dog with a responsible, loving home and after being taken in by Dogs Trust Snetterton, Poppy-Pie was soon settling in and making new friends. She loved being around the staff and was adored by everybody at the rehoming centre - she even spent time helping out on reception while waiting to find a new home. After three months at Dogs Trust, Poppy-Pie found a happy new home where she became part of a loving family.

Adrian Burder, Dogs Trust CEO says, “Thanks to Dogs Trust’s Canine Card Card scheme, dogs in need of a new home are given a lifeline meaning that Poppy-Pie and many dogs like her are able to get a second chance at happiness and bring joy to a new family. If you decide to become a Canine Care Cardholder, we will issue you with a wallet-sized card. It acts in a similar way to an organ donor card and notifies people of your wishes for your dogs, should anything happen to you. Dogs Trust also strongly recommends that you mention the care of your dog in your Will. That way, there can be no confusion about your wishes.”

The Clapham Omnibus 31

THEATRE and the LAW

ADVENTURES in THEATRELAND “Hollywood star to buy Shakespeare.”

All the world’s a stage And all the men and women merely players, They have their exits and their entrances, And each man in his time plays many parts, Any mention of the Bard takes me back to the upper fourth, or was it the lower fifth, when I would be whacked with the strap, if I was not word perfect regurgitating the old geezer’s bon mots which in my case meant stinging hands just about every day of the week including Saturdays with Sunday being a day of rest. Those were the days of Educatttttttt……SHUN! Or if it’s not the strap that stings to mind, then it is the front page of the Liverpool Echo,

“Hollywood star to buy Shakespeare.”

by L.O.Luvie

has had prior rights in perpetuity. Quite frankly, I think it is only right that, My pain should be Bill’s gain. I don’t harbour grudges. But the grandees of the English theatre and fellow travellers were a touch sniffy about all this. After all who was this upstart of a yank, a Hollywood yank at that telling us, the custodians of the English language, how to commemorate our national treasure. But Sam, goddamit, soldiered on. After being a war hero, he was thanked for this efforts by being blacklisted for something or other, by the House of Un-American Activities in 1949, and had to do a quick moonlight flit to the UK. A few little difficulties with planning permission was not going to stand in Sam’s way. He raised $10 million and Royal support but sadly died before the actual opening of his magnificent obsession in 1997. What a guy! Sam OBE, I salute you. Should have been an honorary Knighthood. Sir Sam. For all those years when you were a lone voice in the wilderness! By the way, I’ll never forget Mark Rylance as Richard 11 at your wonderful Globe theatre. “Great Rylance. Shame about the play.” And all for the price of a cappuccino - A FIVER! Later, saw Rylance in the award winning Jerusalem, before it moved to Broadway transforming him into an A-Lister, without the hassle of first having to first appear on the silver screen. Clever that!

Reading on I discover that the Hollywood star in question, is sadly not Marilyn Monroe. On the contrary it is non other than Sam Wanamaker. Sam who? Apparently Sam was an actor, producer and a director, donchaknow?

Shakespeare it turns out is The New Shakespeare, a musty old music hall that had fallen on hard times. It was trying to pull in punters with revivals of Victorian melodramas, and it seemed that my father was just about the last Whilst on the subject of rich Americans person on Merseyside that still William Shakespeare investing in heritage stuff, wasn’t there had an enthusiasm for this dying a guy who bought London Bridge but when it was set genre. That being said, I vividly recall the pleasure of up outside his glitzy Vegas hotel it didn’t look seeing Mrs Ellen Woods’ East Lynne, and was anything like er….Tower Bridge? A wee bit apocryphal delighted that we could cheer the hero, boo the perhaps, or scoundrel maybe just a (dressed in black little short on with a thin black the Caveat moustache) and Emptor? I weep with the hope you dont heroine who cries think for a out upon seeing moment that I her drowned child am suggesting pulled from the that Sam pond, “Dead. really thought The new Globe The old Globe Dead. And he was buying never called me mother”. Not long after Sam took over, the theatre mysteriously burnt down, no doubt to Shakespeare's original Globe ......IN LIVERPOOL? Oh No. Perish the thought! the ghostly echo of “The Bells. The Bells”.

Fast forward a few years, and Sam Wanamaker crops up again. This time he is searching for the site of the Bard’s original Globe, can you believe, as he wants to build a replica. No one seems to be in favour of this perfectly reasonable proposition. After all I had the Stratford wonderkind beaten into me, so why shouldn’t the cause of my teen-age angst and swollen hands, have some lasting memorial, apart from my dysfunctional brain over which of course my shrink

The Clapham Omnibus 32

Things change, as they do. My daughter moved to the other side of London, and her godmother died.

Previously, we met up in Ealing. But now the journey seemed to be a tad on the long side. So, despite my life- long love of film, I thought it would be a good idea if father and grown up child could discover something completely different together. The experience of seeing a film has changed a lot over the years. Cinemas in the main are now half-full

impersonal shoeboxes, with very little ambience, unlike theatres which still retain the personal touch with smiling wannabees directing you to your seats, and of course those glorious Victorian décors. So if the performance is not up to scratch at least there are other features to distract you. We Londoners of course, are the envy of the world with Theatreland on our doorstep. Well, if you live in Covent garden, that is.

My cunning plan was so simple. We would meet at some swanky restaurant for a genteel meal prior to seeing a play. A play that I would choose of course.

Now just what could go wrong with that?

We got through 3 and a half hrs of Kevin Spacey’s black leather clad Richard 111 at the Old Vic. Phew!

No apparent air conditioning on a hot summer’s evening - AND SEATS IN THE GODS LORD HELP US?

Kevin Spacey as Richard lll

Oh Kev you should have checked out Larry’s 1950’s film version where he omitted most of the incomprehensible sub-plots and like in your days in Tinsel Town he always CUT TO THE CHASE. And then there was ENO’s award winning Mikado and Madam Butterfly both of which were scuttled at half time. As we de-camped the Coliseum I casually asked the obvious question. The reply was a nod in the direction of the neon sign opposite. Jeeves & Wooster. COMEDY? Of course!

I must confess I have never been a big fan of all that Jeeves stuff, but a few weeks later there we were in the front row of a packed Duke of York’s waiting for the curtain to go up. Both of us had a good laugh at an original clever and very funny production. Problem solved. The fruit of my loins has to get up at 5.15 to work in a challenging East End school. The last thing she needs is three and a half hours of Kev’s Dick the Third, brilliant though it was. Jeeves and Wooster carries on the tradition pioneered in The 39 Steps of making a virtue out of low production values - in other

THEATRE and the LAW OSCAR: I would love you if you were something else.

The most amusing experience I have recently had in the West End, is a toss - up between Noises Off and A Man and two Guvnors. They have both moved on, but for sure, given the way theatre economics work, they will be back, no doubt, by public demand.

There has been a refreshing influx of productions from our Celtic neighbour across the way. Three of the most marvellous female characters ever invented populated The Cripple of Innishmaan. With an eye on the box office it starred Daniel Radcliffe which drew a host of young admirers who clearly struggled with the nuances of the Irish accent. And then there was The Weir, which I liked so much I attended on about 10 occasions. It got so that I fully expected to get the same front row seat, A9, and even, just perhaps to get asked to play the role of honorary prompter. At Film Nite's friend Maria Aitken directed 39 Steps £10.00 a throw it was cheap at half the price, or equivalent to two words three actors playing 6 parts Haagen Daz theatre ice creams. It with quick costume changes that starred the marvellous Brian Cox, a invariably go wrong in a contrived Glaswegian who could pass muster as and amusing manner. The 39 steps a Connemara man any day of the now plays in more capitals than any week. My first encounter with the other franchised West End living legend was via the Michael production. It was originally of Mann film Manhunter where he course directed by that lovely friend played Hannibal Lector in a tad more of FILM NITE, Maria Aitken, and it sinister manner than the Welshman was ahead of its time, cleverly Anthony Hopkins in the later Silence adapting a much loved 1937 of the Lambs. Funny that? Hollywood Hitchcock film for the stage and has generally used English actors for keeping the original’s pace, wit the nasty. Yet here it was casting the and charm.

Sam Wanamaker nasty of nasties with two Celts from either side of the Irish Sea. Just what does that tell There was a time when a successful stage production you about California’s perception of This Sceptred would transfer to film. These days that process has Isle and its neighbours? been reversed. After The 39 Steps, came Brief Encounter, but despite some clever sequences And now for the McDonagh Phenomena concerning involving actors stepping into a film, the audiences two brothers from the Irish diaspora born and raised just weren’t showing. Furthermore, the casting of the in the Elephant & Castle. The story goes that their funny Peter Capaldi (The Thick of It) wasn’t able to turn the stage version of the black comedy The LadyKillers into a must-see show. Oh to have been a fly on the wall at the Red Lion, after Alec Guinness, Peter Sellars and the gang had wrapped for the day and popped over the road for a well- earned pint.

There was certainly genius abroad in those heady days of 1955 right here on Ealing’s very own doorstep.

And then there was Strangers on a Train - for some people their favourite Hitchcock film. Based upon Patricia Highsmith’s dark thriller of two people swapping murders, the stage version went back to the book. Interesting but overlong and dismally failing to learn from the film. Hitch, no matter how grim the material, always incorporated humour. That’s why he was a genius, and by the same token, it’s why the stage version is no longer around.

Managed to catch Let the Right One In on two occasions before it went. A Scottish stage version of the Scandinavian cult vampire film, it is an exhilaratingly original tale of a young female vampire with the ambivalent name of Elias who moves in next door to young misfit Oscar. The play has an underlying theme of gender identification and is peppered by elliptical dialogue, such as, ELIAS: But would you love me if I was a boy?

OSCAR: I would love you if you were a boy.

ELIAS: Would you love me if I was something else?

Mark Rylance

parents were apparently away a lot with the result the John and Martin became addicted to watching films on television. Like the young turks of the French New Wave, these two disreputable truants learnt through watching. The elder, John, decided to make films whilst kid brother Martin in order to avoid any sibling rivralry, gravitated to the theatre, and at one point had more plays being staged than any other playwright, including Big Bill. Amongst John’s films are recent releases The Guard and Calvary with the larger than life, Brendan Gleeson, and Martin who has been called one of the most important living Irish playwrights, is responsible for The Cripple of

George Bernard Shaw

Innishmaan. So after all that, you may well wonder, just what is the point of skule? Another Irishman to watch is Enda Walsh whose prolific work ranges from the hit musical Once, to Steve McQueen’s harrowing Hunger.

Talking of skule again, I should point out that it is not yet a crime if you don’t actually like “Gulielmus filius Joannes Shakspere” - to give the old geezer his Latin birth name. In fact if you own up to it, you could be joining a most distinguished club that includes the likes of Leo Tolstoy, John Dryden, Voltaire, and that old veggie wag, George Bernard Shaw, who famously wrote of the Bard: “There is no eminent writer whom I can despise so entirely…and it would be positively a relief for me to dig him up and throw stones at him” If the cost of three courses for two at Rules, is beyond your budget then you may prefer as a pretheatre snack, a nice cuppa and petite fours at London’s oldest French patisserie, or at the other end of Shaftsbury Avenue you may be seduced into gazing at a neo-Byzantine evening sky and sit where Oscar & his side kick used to have their secret and not so secret assignations over tea and muffin.

And as for the £10.00 front row seats?

I’ll reveal all that and more next time. ……………………………..Last Scene of all, That ends this strange eventful history, Is second childishness, and mere oblivion, Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.

The Seven Ages of Man. As You Like It Act 11 SceneV11 William Shakespeare

The Clapham Omnibus 33

Book Reviews

THE SOLICITOR’S HANDBOOK 2015

by Andrew Hopper QC & Gregory TrevertonJones QC The Law Society Legal Handbooks ISBN: 978 1 78446 008 2 www.lawsociety.org.uk A COMPREHENSIVE LAW SOCIETY PUBLICATION WHICH REMAINS ESSENTIAL FOR ALL SOLICITORS IN PRACTICE An appreciation by Phillip Taylor MBE and Elizabeth Taylor of Richmond Green Chambers We have reviewed this excellent work on a few previous occasions and the new 2015 edition does not disappoint!

“The Solicitor’s Handbook” remains a book which all practitioners should own and is comparable with “The Bar Handbook” from LexisNexis which is the essential reference for Counsel.

reflect the significant regulatory changes in seven main areas covered on the back page, namely: referral fees; CFAs; entities; referrals; consumer credit; abolition of the Assigned Risks Pool; and the level of fines that can be imposed by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) following “Fuglers” and “Andersons”.

The 2015 Handbook remains in the capable hands of Andrew Hopper and Gregory Treverton-Jones since they embarked on this undertaking in 2007. If one reads the various Prefaces down the years, the reader can see how much change the legal profession has undergone recently and probably will continue to undergo with the regular regulatory changes so the word ‘revolution’ is apt to describe what engulfed the profession in 2007 as one period of upheaval has been followed by another: is the end in sight…doubtful!

As the authors say, “the effects of the revolution over the last seven years will continue to play out in the months and years ahead”… which is why you really do need this handbook to keep up with all the things those running the profession are doing to us.

It often surprises us that neither of these two works are actually sent to every relevant practitioners each year as part of the cost when we renew our subscriptions to practice. It would make sense to include this publication each time so that lawyers (and our regulators) know what is going on now we have entered the annual fee era which allows us to remain as practitioners with all sorts of threats if we don’t pay up!

They go on to say that this “is not to say that yet further revolution can be ruled out”! They continue with a most important point as we head for the general election in May 2015 and whatever could follow it: “The present Government has pursued an agenda that seeks to reduce regulatory burdens on professions and businesses.” We would probably use the word allegedly here!

But enough of this sensible suggestion… the 2015 edition has excelled itself with a wide range of updates to

They continue: “politically, we may see pressure for the abolition of the Legal Services Board, and consolidation

of legal regulation under one regulator.” This particular titbit of comment will be welcomed by the vast majority of practitioners judging by the comments we have heard at this year’s professional conferences where concerns over regulation remain high on the list of grievances even though lawyers are told that the regulatory touch is very light in practice: but they would say that, wouldn’t they!

This year’s handbook remains the prime publication for the legal professional and you cannot afford to be without it - it gives you a little bit of a comfort blanket if you ever need to find a passage through the regulatory maze that governs the conduct of today’s solicitors in practice.

Thank you Messrs Hopper and Treverton-Jones: we appreciate the work you have put in with this year’s handbook!

The law is stated as at 1st September 2014.

SELECTED WRITINGS OF JAMES FITZJAMES STEPHEN A GENERAL VIEW OF THE CRIMINAL LAW OF ENGLAND Edited by K J M Smith Oxford University Press ISBN: 978 0 19966 083 4 www.oup.com CRIMINAL LAW IN VICTORIAN ENGLAND: HOW MUCH HAS REALLY CHANGED? An appreciation by Phillip Taylor MBE and Elizabeth Taylor of Richmond Green Chambers From approximately 1856 onwards, James Fitzjames Stephen, a young lawyer in his late twenties, was becoming well known for his contributions, initially, to the ‘Saturday Review, soon to be acknowledged as ‘the great political and literary weekly of the period.’

Witty, erudite and sharply critical when criticism seemed in order, this noteworthy journal quickly became known as the ‘Saturday Reviler’, staffed by ‘young men with the proper confidence in their own infallibility.’

Fitzjames Stephen also contributed to other publications, including ‘Cambridge Essays’ and also delivered a number of papers to the Judridical Society. In 1862, a collection of his pieces for the ‘Saturday Review’ emerged as ‘Essays by a Barrister’.

In 1863, what is described as a ‘career enhancing book’, ‘A General View of the Criminal Law of England’ was published. Fitzjames Stephen was a prolific writer and thinker across a wide range of topics, from literature and religion to ethics and history, as well as, of course, the law. Writing on law, he was outspoken and analytical on law reform, the criminal defence of insanity, capital punishment, codification, criminal procedure and much, much more.

The Clapham Omnibus 34

Published by the Oxford University Press under the editorship of K J M Smith, this book is primarily an edited edition of Fitzjames Stephen’s ‘General View of the Criminal Law of England’ referred to in the editor’s acknowledgements as having benefited from the observations and suggestions of Professor Sir Christopher Ricks and Professor Patrick Polden.

To call this a treatise on the Victorian criminal justice system would oversimplify its scope and intent.

Stephen’s overall aim, it would appear, was to examine the workings of the criminal law as an institution within its particular place in the social and political landscape, with a view to having it recognized both by lawyers and lay persons, as a social science and indeed an important component of a liberal education.

Read though the book and you will not fail to notice that Stephen’s analysis throughout is objective, fearless and in places, pretty stern stuff. What is truly startling is that generally his commentaries remain as topical today and, in most cases, directly relevant to the twenty-first century reader, whether lawyer or not because the main issues have not really changed.

To cite only one example, Stephen offers, in the words of the editor, ‘a cryptic contrast between former and current (Victorian) punishment practices’. ‘There has been,’ he says, a ‘transition from almost barbarous severity to excessive lenity, both the lenity and serenity being tempered by a wide personal discretion reposed in the judges.’

The meaning of ‘lenity’ is open to some speculation. If it means ‘leniency’ which it almost undoubtedly does, this trenchant opinion would certainly resonate with any number of critics of the criminal justice system in place today. Equally relevant to the contemporary reader are Fitzjames Stephen’s observations on the relationship of

immorality and criminal responsibility and the appropriate role of capital punishment.

Taking this argument forward, there’s an interesting footnote here, which refers to Stephen’s criticism of the (criminal justice) system’s ‘utter want of system… its equivocation over whether punishment seeks to reform or punish, and the frequent lack of proportionality of punishment between different levels of criminality’. The editor notes that Stephen ‘inclines to a policy of greater deterrence of more serious offences by more demanding prison regimes.’

It is not difficult to conclude that Sir James (as he became) was the fortunate possessor of a fine legal mind and a cultivated sensibility, which, combined with the skills of a journalist, renders his observations readable and current to this day.

Those involved in, or interested in the English criminal justice system will find themselves both fascinated and enlightened by this careful and scholarly reappraisal of Fitzjames Stephen’s work.