D&DLS issue 65

D&DLS Bulletin Derby & District Law Society www.derbylaw.net

November 2016

EWI Conference Report - see p.20

Also in this issue: Promotions at Flint Bishop • Family Law Sub-Committee

Gold Patrons of the Society: Severn Trent Searches

D&DLS Bulletin Derby & District Law Society

November 2016

Contents 3 - Contents

10 - CPD Training Programme 2017

20 - EWI Conference 2016

3 - Editorial

12 - Questions for Cashiering Providers

24 - Flood Risk

4 - List of Officers

13 - Law Society News

26 - Why should you make

5 - President’s Page

15 - SARPD Rule Change ‘Coming’

6 - Membership News

15 - Law Society News

28 - Law Society News

9 - Membership News

16 - He has his father’s nose...

29 - The University of Sheffield

9 - Sub-Committee News

18 - The Meeting of Experts

30 - Technology and Conveyancing

a will if you own property abroad?

Editorial Well – first Brexit and now Trump! If nothing else these two potentially seismic poll results suggest that politicians both here and in America – and possibly elsewhere too judging by responses in certain other European states – need to reconnect with and understand the views, aspirations and fears of their constituents, and not to be so arrogant as to believe that ‘they know best’.

Another example of this arrogance, somewhat closer to home for the legal profession, was the government’s reaction when the judiciary had the temerity to disagree with its assertion that the EU referendum result was all the authority they needed to proceed with Article 50. I seem to recall that when the people of the UK voted to join the European Community (as it was then known) in 1975 it still fell to Parliament to take the final decision, on the notunreasonable grounds that only

Published by: EAST PARK COMMUNICATIONS Ltd. Maritime House, Balls Road, Birkenhead, Wirral CH43 5RE Tel: 0151 651 2776 simon@epc.gb.com www.epc.gb.com

Parliament had the authority to change the status of the UK’s sovereignty; as Brexit has a similar but opposite effect, is this any different in principle?

But how often do we see the unedifying sight of politicians bridling when the judiciary exercise that independence which underpins the very democracy which allows them to serve as MPs in the first place when the decision goes against them? Anyone remember Labour fulminating against judgements made under the Human Rights Act – introduced by that same Labour government – when the courts ruled against them? After an awkward silence on the subject we eventually got a somewhat less than robust defence of judicial independence from the Lord Chancellor, but by then the media had had a field-day at the expense of those who dispense justice, which will no doubt have influenced those who take their views ready-formed from the popular press, and not for the

better; the damage had been done.

Advertising Simon Castell

Accounts Tony Kay

Managing Editor Peter Ball

Published November 2016

Design David Coffey, East Park Studio

Enough of the soap-box, but I fear that the uncertainties which have surrounded the practice of law in recent times will not have been eased by recent events. I cannot help but note Andy Cash’s sign-off in his article on p5 – ‘May you live in interesting times’!

The timing of this issue means that unfortunately there is relatively little local activity to either report on or publicise – it’s too late to re-advertise the Junior Lawyers’ Xmas Party on Dec 2nd as the booking deadline was November 15th, it is too early to publish the results of the Annual Quiz on November 24th and it is far too early to give out details of the Annual Dinner on April 28th next year. However there are some interesting articles nonetheless, which I hope will be relevant to at least some members, remembering that in such a wide church as

© East Park Communications Ltd.

the law not every article will coincide with every member’s area of practice. If you use expert witnesses, do conveyancing or advise owners of foreign property on the need to make a Will there is something for you in this issue. If you do not, apologies – perhaps next time!

What there is is news from Flints on promotions, and also on their involvement with charity ‘Kids in the Middle’; if you and/or your firm have any news worthy of wider circulation, please let me know – you do not need to have your own PR agency, just drop me an email.

As this will be the last Bulletin before the Festive Season can I join President Andy and the Officers and Committee of the Society in wishing you and yours the very best for Xmas and the New Year – speak to you again in 2017.

Peter Ball Administrator

Legal Notice © East Park Communications Ltd. None of the editorial or photographs may be reproduced without prior written permission from the publishers. East Park Communications Ltd 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 East Park Communications Ltd. Correct at time of going to press.

www.derbylaw.net

3

Officers and Committee Members for 2015 Officers

President* Andy Cash Cartwrigt KIng, Derby Tel: 01332 346111 e-mail andy.cash@ cartwrightking.co.uk Vice-President* Simon Stevens Eddowes Waldron 01332 348484 sws@ewlaw.co.uk Deputy Vice-President* Ben Lawson Geldards LLP, Derby Tel: 01332 331631 Honorary Secretary* Fiona Apthorpe Geldards LLP, Derby Tel: 01332 378335 Fiona.Apthorpe@geldards.com Honorary Treasurer* Susan Woodall Astle Paterson, Burton Tel: 01283 531366 suewoodall@astlepaterson.co.uk Immediate Past President* Diana Copestake Freeth Cartwright LLP Tel: 0845 2725674 diana.copestake@freeths.co.uk

(* = Ex-Officio) Parliamentary Liaison Officer Julie Skill, Elliot Mather LLP Chesterfield Tel: 01246 231288; julie.skill@elliotmather.co.uk Public Relations Officer (+)

Vacant Derby Junior Lawyers Laura Sephton Freeth Cartwright LLP Tel: 01332 361000 Laura.sephton@freeths.co.uk Constituency Council Representative, Derbyshire (+) Michael Williams Tel: 01298 24185 mwilliams@bemerton.co.uk

(+) attend Committee by invitation

4

Other Committee Members Scott Atkins Derby School of Law Tel: 01332 593445 S.Atkins@derby.ac.uk Tina Attenborough Attenborough Law, Derby Tel: 01332 558508 tina@attenboroughlaw.co.uk Janie Berry Derby City Council 01332 643616 janie.berry@derby.gov.uk Andrew Cochrane Flint Bishop, Derby Tel: 01332 340211 Via nikki.rennie@flintbishop.co.uk Lionel Conner Samble Burton & Worth, Burton Tel: 01283 565731 lionelc@sbw.cc Paul Hackney Geldards LLP, Derby Tel: 01332 331631 paul.hackney@geldards.com David Hardy Tel: 01332 842008 david.hardy1630@gmail.com Elizabeth Haysom Derwent Law 01332 780718 elizabeth@derwentlaw.co.uk Sue Jennings Tel: (M) 07946 609436 robskelding@squarise.co.uk Karen Reynolds Freeth Cartwright LLP 01332 361000 karen.reynolds@freeths.co.uk Lewis Rose, OBE Flint Bishop, Derby Tel: 01332 226127 lmrose@flintbishop.co.uk Manesha Ruparel legal@manesha.com Martin Salt Maclaren Warner, Ilkeston Tel: 0115 9304994 martin.salt@maclarenwarner.co.uk Mike Simpson Simpsons Solicitors, Derby 01332 424500 mike.simpson@ simpsonslawuk.com Stephen Woolley Geldards LLP, Derby Tel: 01332 378335 stephen.woolley@geldards.com

www.derbylaw.net

Solicitors’ Benevolent Assoc. area representative Peter Lord 9 Larkhill, Swanwick DE55 1DD Tel: 01773 541753 Administrator / Bulletin Editor Peter Ball, The Old Barn Hatton Fields, Sutton Lane Hilton, Derbys. DE65 5GQ Tel/Fax: 01283 815030 e-mail: admin@derbylaw.net Sub-Committees (Secretary in italics) Contentious Business Stephen Woolley Paul Hackney Mary Honeyben David Hardy Karen Reynolds Gary Adamson (01332 347300) Rebecca Carr (01332 221722) Katy Fugle (01332 367051) Steven Savage (01246 220737) Compliance Officers’ Group (COG) Vacant Criminal Litigation Simon Stevens Andy Cash Quentin Robbins Andrew Oldroyd (01332 225225) Nick Wright (01332 364751) Education & Training Sue Jennings, & all Sub-Committee Secretaries Employment and Business Law Sue Jennings Family Law Fiona Apthorpe Diana Copestake Ben Lawson Manesha Ruparel Julie Skill Vince Beckworth (01332372311) Melanie Bridgen (01283 2264440 Claire Dean (01335 345454) Liz Doherty-Astle (01332 592523) David Guthrie (01332 293293) Liz Guyler (01773 749955) Nick Herbert (01332 293293) Janine Hobday (01332340221) Ruth Jones (01332346084) Gareth Protheroe (01332 340211)

Natalie Yeung (01332 331631) Finance Andy Cash Simon Stevens Ben Lawson Sue Woodall Fiona Apthorpe Di Copestake Private Client Martin Salt Claire Rudkin (01332) 340211 Nikki Spencer (0115) 932 4101 Christine Hinkley (01332) 836666 Kim Kirk (01332) 600005 Tim Dysterre-Clark (01332) 600005 Kirsten Wood (01332) 340211 Rachael Francis (01332) 340211 Julie Cook (01332) 340211 Dervla McLaughlin (0115) 932 4101 Property Law Vacant, Sue Woodall, Adrian Crowther (01332 340211), Rachel Bale (01283 561531), Natalia Delgado (01246 231288), Sally Gill (01246 231288), Stephen Gordon (01246 270112), Michael Taylor (01773 822333), Hugh Walford (01773 823999), Elizabeth Wallis (01629 812613), Andrew Cross (01629 582308), Charlotte Rosser (01332 291431).

Professional/Regulatory Purposes Subsumed into the Full Committee – working groups to be convened according to the subject at hand.

Sole Practitioners’ Group (SPG) Tina Attenborough

(Last updated 19th September 2016)

President’s Page I think we could safely describe the last three months as eventful on any number of levels. So into the lift; Ground floor; Local affairs move on and I would take this opportunity to thank Martin Salt for agreeing to take on the role of Society Treasurer from Sue Woodall who deserves a big vote of thanks for all her efforts over the past years. I also look forward to working with Claire Rudkin who has stepped up to take on Martin’s role as Chair of the Private Client Sub Committee. Sadly my in - box has not been filled with members proposing ideas for or involvement in other committees, but there is still time…

Derby Junior Lawyers continue to push forward with a number of plans which promote not just DJL but the Society generally. I wish them every success and although I can’t get a pass for their Christmas Happening I hope many of you will be able to make it.

I also hope that by the time you read this we have enjoyed a knowledgeable evening of Fun at the Annual Quiz.

Mezzanine;

concern to some members. The Rule of Law is the most fundamental element of our civil society, and an independent judiciary is vital to the Rule of Law. I have been disappointed, if not perhaps surprised, by the number of leaders and politicians I have met who appear to have only a very limited appreciation of the importance of the independence of our courts. I think the rise of the internet and digital media mean we are all going to have to work hard to resist attacks on basic rights and privileges.

Which leaves me wondering about events across the pond and how President-Elect Trump will affect what we do and/or the world in which we do it. As he is the most powerful man in the world with the passwords to ensure mutual destruction, I will content myself by saying how much I have enjoyed hearing his speeches and look forward to seeing his plans unfold…

The roof; As this is the last Bulletin to come out in 2016, may I be the first to wish you and yours the very best for the forthcoming Festive Season and for 2017 – as ever, I am reminded of the old Chinese saying – “May you live in interesting times”.

Andy Cash President, 2016-17

I have been privileged to take the Society’s gong to Northampton Law Society’s Annual Dinner and Awards Dinner. I was joined by Presidents and representatives from five other societies from Birmingham to Lincoln. I could see the range of approaches to local Law Societies working; Birmingham running the corporate route while at least one other is seriously thinking of re-forming as a “dinner club”.

With Mrs C I attended the High Sheriff’s Legal Service at the Cathedral.

This was a very well-attended event with five High Sheriffs and four High Court Judges including the very impressive Lady Cheema Grub, a most able lawyer from Derby who is making an impressive name for herself in the senior judiciary and also finds time to attend local events and particularly support the Law School. It was also the last service to be attended by Judge Orrell, marking [very nearly] the end of his tenure as Presiding Civil Judge in Derby. Whilst we look forward to working with his successor Judge Bellamy, Judge Orrell will be much missed. Our Vice-President, Simon Stevens attended, flying the flag for our Higher Court Advocates who welcome His Honour Judge Bennett, himself a solicitor advocate.

Another opportunity to say farewell to Judge Orrell presented itself at the Past Presidents’ Dinner, organised by our retiring Administrator Peter Ball. Judge Nirmal Shant our new Presiding Criminal Judge was present and is taking a keen interest in the activities of the Society.

Top Floor Penthouse; Chancery Lane continue their efforts to achieve Governance changes, against inevitable resistance. We are most grateful to Michael Williams, our Council Representative for the insights and feedback he provides.

He would be delighted to hear from any member with views or opinions to help inform his work. We are now circulating CEO Catherine Dixon’s weekly updates by email and again feedback would be welcome.

Anderson Partnership Solicitors require an experienced, Conveyancing Assistant.

The applicant must have the ability to manage both Commercial and Residential matters from initial instructions through to completion with minimum supervision.

The applicant will be client care focussed, hard working, enthusiastic and possess good IT skills.

Salary negotiable and flexibility with hours by agreement.

Email applications, attaching personal statement and curriculum vitae, together with details of current salary to; ashley@andersonslaw.co.uk

Brexit remains close to the top of the agenda, and the recent attacks on the Judiciary for merely doing their job caused understandable

www.derbylaw.net

5

Membership News

Flint Bishop announces eleven promotions Following an internal career development process involving training sessions arranged both internally and with external partners such as the University of Derby Business School, Flint Bishop have appointed three solicitors to the partnership and two new Senior Associates and six new Associates within the firm.

The new partners

Andrew Perry will now be Partner and Head of the Construction and Engineering department. Prior to becoming a Solicitor, Andrew qualified and worked as a mechanical design and project engineer.

Emma Tice will now become one of the firm’s Employment law Partners.

Raj Sumal joined the business in September 2015 having left DAC Beachcroft in Birmingham, and will now become a Defendant Personal Injury Partner.

Senior Associates

Jo Milward-Hyde has caseload of litigation, property, debt recovery and insolvency matters , and has been with the firm for 20 years, having completed her CILEx in 2006.

6

www.derbylaw.net

Julie Sims is responsible for Flints Direct, a conveyancing ‘at a distance’ service.

Associates

Schools and Commercial Employment Lawyer - Andrew Nicklin Ashbourne based Conveyancing Lawyer - Jane Pearson Wills, Tax, Trusts and Probate Specialist - Jo Robinson Specialist Schools Employment Lawyer - Natalie Spink Defendant Personal Injury Lawyer - Paul Bayliss Defendant Personal Injury Lawyer - Philip Thompson

Andrew Cochrane, Senior Partner said “I’m delighted to welcome our three new Partners to the firm, as well as two Senior Associates and six Associates. Each of the applicants showed their continued commitment and passion to the business and all of them should be incredibly proud. “

Pictured above are (l-r):

TOP - Andrew Perry, Emma Tice, Raj Sumal MIDDLE - Jo Milward-Hyde, Julie Sims BOTTOM - Andrew Nicklin, Jane Pearson, Jo Robinson,

Natalie Spink, Paul Bayliss, Philip Thompson

Membership News Flint Bishop’s Family Law Team partners with children’s charity Flint Bishop’s Family Law Team is working in partnership with Kids in the Middle, a charity which seeks to help parents reduce conflict, promote communication and encourage co-parenting to provide their children with safe and loving homes.

The project, Voices in the Middle, seeks to give young people who have experienced parental separation a platform to promote their views and to equip them with useful support and information.

http://voicesinthemiddle.org.uk/ is a website targeted towards young people, giving practical advice and useful links. It has three messages: you are not alone, it’s not your fault and it’s OK to get help if you want it.It enables young people to communicate

with others in similar situations so that they know they are not alone. The website promotes services for children offered by organisations collaborating with Kids in the Middle, including specialist family lawyers and mediators.

Flint Bishop, which is based in Derby and Ashbourne, joins other law firms from around the country including; Mishcon De Reya, Irwin Mitchell and Birketts, in supporting the charity and promoting its services.

Head of Family Law, Kirpal Bidmead has been recognised by the leading directory Legal 500 as being “Highly knowledgeable, experienced and exceptionally customerfocused” as well as being “noted for her expertise in children cases and mandates involving complex financial issues.”

Kirpal comments “As a solicitor who has

specialised in family law for over 20 years, I have seen the emotional turmoil that couples go through when separating. I try to remind parents that their children’s needs, wishes and feelings should be the paramount consideration. Children should not be pressured into taking sides, keeping their parents’ secrets or blaming themselves for the separation. They should not be used as pawns or left feeling isolated.”

Separation can have a devastating impact on children. Every effort should be made to help both parents and children through the separation process with access to comprehensive counselling, practical and legal support.

Voices in the Middle is playing an invaluable role in giving young people a platform, an outlet and a voice. I greatly admire the project’s objectives and will do all that I can to support them.”

Sub-Committee news The Family Committee met on 10 October 2016.

1.

MATTERS ARISING

1.1 Membership/Attendance As requested by the main Committee of Derby & District Law Society enquiries had been sent out to Members of the Sub-Committee to ensure that all were fully paid up Members of Derby & District Law Society. The main Committee is keen to emphasise the benefits to local practitioners of being members of the main Derby and District Law Society Committee and the main Committee felt very strongly that membership of Sub-Committees when not a Member of the main Law Society ought to be the exception rather than the rule. Any who are not therefore currently Members of Derby & District Law Society will need to join the main society. In the meantime it was reported that the meeting was very well attended….almost standing room only!

1.2 Court User Meetings Fiona has had a positive response from DJ Davies and DJ Bond who would like to meet us. Agreed agenda items: • Availability (or not) of Wifi at court • The First Appointment on paper trial and how this is progressing • Adjournment fees • Part 25 • Speed of turnaround of orders • The need or otherwise for Form A with consent orders

2. AGENDA ITEMS 2.1 HHJ Orrell HHJ Orrell is retiring shortly, believed to be end of November. It was previously resolved and agreed that we have a collection as we did for District Judge Stark. We have so far raised c £30 but we really need more practitioners to contribute. Judge Orrell has been a good friend to the profession.

Contributions to Fiona please ASAP. Fiona will arrange a date for everyone to attend court.

2.2 Gossip You had to be there…………!! If you weren’t we were probably talking about you!

3. PERMANENT AGENDA ITEMS 3.1 Database A reminder that the database of Family Practitioners is a very useful method of communicating information to family lawyers locally.

Could everybody please double check that Members of their Family Team are included.

If you are not included please let Fiona have your email address.

3.2 Training and Education We have made enquiries of one or two local Counsel’s Chambers to see if they will be interested in putting on courses for us. No

5 are doing a series of course through the University and Geldards are hosting a talk

by St Mary’s with a Christmas drinks do afterwards. Suggestions for topics would be appreciated.

3.3 Local Family Justice Board The Derby Family Local Justice Council was originally set up in 2005. It was subsequently resurrected as the Local Family Justice Board.

Many Committee Members are Members and if you want to be on the LFJB’s mailing list and be sent information about training events etc please contact Joanne.eaton1@hmc.gsi.gov.uk 3.4 Rights of Audience A timely reminder that experienced Legal Executives can apply to the FPC locally for rights of audience on a generic basis rather than having to apply individually on a case by case basis. There is a Protocol in force.

Anyone who wants to take advantage of this should contact the Court direct.

3.5 Court User Groups Nothing to report save as above.

4. DATE OF NEXT MEETING The remaining scheduled meeting is Thursday 15 December.

Fiona M K Apthorpe Secretary

www.derbylaw.net

9

DERBY & DISTRICT LAW SOCIETY CPD TRAINING PROGRAMME 2017

Area

Course Title

2017

CPD Hours

Date

2017

Level*

Venue

2017

Book Via**

2017

Wills, Probate

EU Succession Regulations Explained

3

02/03/2017

Intermediate

Derby

CLT

Residential Property

Unregistered Conveyancing a Necessary Competence for Property Lawyers

3

16/03/2017

Update

Derby

CLT

Wills, Probate

Advising & Planning with the Residence Nil-Rate Band

3

07/04/2017

Introduction

Burton upon Trent

CLT

Civil Litigation

Litigation Drafting - a Comprehensive Guide

6

14/06/2017

Foundation

Derby

CLT

Family

Family Law Update 2017

6

21/09/2017

Update

Chesterfield

CLT

Commercial Property

Commercial Property Update 2017

5

28/09/2017

Update

Derby

CLT

Residential Property

Conveyancing Update 2017

5

19/10/2017

Update

Derby

CLT

Family

Business Assets in Divorce Masterclass

6

tbc

Intermediate

tbc

CLT

Details of dates and venues where not shown, and of further courses, will be added in due course KEY * **

**

**

Intro =Introduction; Inter = Intermediate; Adv = Advanced; U = Update For further enquiries regarding booking or administration of CLT courses please contact CLT COURSE ADMINISTRATOR on 0121 355 0900 For enquiries/bookings for D&DLS Direct courses, or comments or suggestions for future courses please contact PETER BALL on 01283 815030.

FOR D&DLS COURSES, PLEASE POST-DATE YOUR CHEQUE TO D&DLS WITH THE DATE OF THE COURSE

Blue indicates new/amended information, or an addition to the programme D&DLS Members qualify for significant discounts on the above & other CPD courses & will receive details of CLT courses personally 4-6 weeks beforehand. FOR D&DLS Direct EVENTS SEE D&DLS Bulletin FOR DETAILS AND BOOKING FORM.

10

www.derbylaw.net

10 questions to ask your outsourced cashiering provider Outsourcing is a strategy increasingly adopted by law firms eager to operate more efficiently and focus on their priorities of fee earning and business management.

But, before engaging an outsourcing provider, careful screening is recommended.

To help you, we’ve compiled 10 top questions…

1. Who will manage my account?

As you’ll be working together closely, will a dedicated individual be handling your dayto-day tasks and is there an assigned deputy for absence cover? Also, who heads up the team? Over time, you’ll need to interact with your cashier, deputy and supervisor so chat over the phone or meet face-to-face to decide if you’ll get on well.

2. Do you have a proven track record in my industry?

Specialist suppliers to the legal profession are well versed in how you work and the challenges you face. Check credentials, ask about service level agreements and request reference sites. Speak with a handful of these existing customers for honest feedback about service quality and overall satisfaction to assist your purchase decision.

3. What’s the status of your financial health and ownership?

This is potentially the beginning of a longterm partnership. Probe into the supplier’s profitability, stability and longevity. You might want to review their balance sheet at Companies House as a starting point.

Successful, independently owned, longstanding businesses are preferable for obvious reasons.

4. What are the costs to outsource?

Secure detailed pricing up-front to avoid any nasty surprises from hidden costs later on. Do any add-on fees apply for various outsourced service components? What happens if your business changes? Will the service scale up or down alongside you?

Finally, weigh up the final pricing structure against the in-house alternative – employing staff and purchasing software – to get the total pricing picture.

12

www.derbylaw.net

5. What are your security measures?

Enquire about encryption, firewalls, password protection, physical data centre anti-intrusion systems, regularity of software updates and back-up procedures.

In the rare event of a security breach, what’s the provider’s response plan? How will they handle incidents and rectify any ensuing data or financial losses? Seek minimum ISO 27001 standards and a business continuity plan.

6. How quickly can I get up and running?

How long will it take to set up and configure your database in order to make the switchover to outsourced support? Likewise, for the supporting software package (if provided), what time period’s required for granting access and delivering end-user training? Along the way, is there a migration plan to ensure a smooth transition? Allow up to 6 weeks.

7. What are my minimum contract terms and how do I terminate?

Life happens, circumstances alter and cancellation can become a necessity.

What’s your escape strategy and who owns your data? Read the standard contract small print so you know exactly how long you’re committing yourself to at the outset.

Your provider should act as custodians of your data so ensure you’re offered transitional assistance with data provided in an appropriate format for your retention if the relationship comes to an end.

8. What happens if I have a problem out of hours or receive notification of a compliance visit?

The norm is 9am-5pm support with 24/7 system access for your accounts

and matter data. If you’re informed of a compliance visit from a governing body, however, can you contact your provider for assistance preparing reports and other documentation? And, are they available during the visit itself should any queries arise? Any self-respecting provider should be willing and able to provide this type of back up, even if it’s over-and-above the normal call of duty.

9. What other outsourcing services do you offer?

Some providers will have an extended range of offerings so you can take advantage of optimum outsourced support, for example payroll and pension management. If they offer software too, better still. ‘One-stop-shop’ provision takes convenience to a new league because you have one point of contact for everything.

10. Why should I outsource anyway?

If you’ve got retiring, resigning or longterm absent employees, and if you’re just a tiny bit curious what positive impact outsourcing may have on your business, then begin your enquiries. Outsourcing isn’t always the answer but imagine the possibilities if it is.

Julian Bryan joined Quill Pinpoint as Managing Director in 2012 and is also the Chair of the Legal Software Suppliers Association. Quill is the UK’s largest outsourced legal cashiering provider with 35 years’ experience supplying outsourced services and software to the legal profession. To contact the Quill team, call 0161 236 2910, email info@ quill.co.uk or visit www.quill.co.uk/ cashiering.

Law Society News Impact of courts and tribunal fees should urgently be revisited by ministers The impact of successive court and tribunal fee increases on access to justice must be assessed by ministers before they reject proposals from legal experts for fee reductions or reversals, the Law Society urged today, following the government’s response to the Justice Select Committee (JSC) report on fee increases.

Law Society president Robert Bourns said: ‘Punitive courts and tribunals fee increases are denying justice to citizens and businesses. The government must heed the views of experts from the legal profession and beyond and urgently assess the impact of fee increases on access to justice.

‘Recent fee increases should be reversed pending a proper assessment of their effect on access to justice.

‘Our justice system is a public service that

underpins democratic society. While it is not unreasonable to ask people to contribute to the costs of the courts they use, each of us should be able to assert and protect our rights in those courts should the need arise.

‘For this to hold true for everyone regardless of wealth, the principle of equal access to justice must prevail over generating income when it comes to setting court and tribunal fees.

‘There is a growing imbalance created by fee increases that places the courts out of reach for many small businesses and all but the wealthiest individuals in society. This puts those on lower incomes at an unfair disadvantage in a justice system that increasingly favours the better resourced.’

Immigration tribunal fee increases of more than 500 per cent will have a chilling effect on people’s ability to pursue appeals. This represents a serious denial of justice, particularly in an area where administrative decisions are frequently incorrect and there is a high success rate on appeal.

Ministry of Justice figures show that employment tribunal cases have fallen by 70 per cent since fees increased. The government says that when deciding to increase immigration and asylum tribunal fees it ‘does not mean that we have not taken the impact of employment tribunals and other fees into account’, but ministers have yet to publish a long overdue review of the impact of employment fee increases so it is not clear what correlation has been drawn between the two areas.

Robert Bourns concluded: ‘Solicitors, who support people through court cases that have profound effects on their lives, are absolutely clear that court fee increases severely limit access to justice, pricing ordinary people and many businesses out of the courts.

‘The court fee increases that have now been adopted were opposed by 90 per cent of respondents to the government consultation, making a mockery of the consultation process, and further questioned by the Justice Select Committee.’

www.derbylaw.net

13

SARPD rule change “coming” Costs management conferences have become more “disputatious” following the Court of Appeal’s SARPD ruling earlier this year, barrister Stephen Innes of 4 New Square has reported, but he said that “the grapevine seems to be suggesting that there will be a rule change in the autumn” to avoid its effect.

The SARPD judgment said that while the court can only approve estimated costs, not incurred costs, the court can comment on incurred costs. It followed that, if a budget was simply agreed, the opportunity to seek court comments on incurred costs had not been taken and the effect was the same as if those incurred costs had been agreed.

In an interview with the LexisNexis Dispute Resolution website about what developments in costs he expected in the rest of 2016, Mr Innes predicted that the “hot topic” would probably be assignment of conditional fee agreements, “as a Court of Appeal decision is badly needed to consider the correctness or otherwise of Jenkins v Young Brothers Transport Limited [2006] EWHC 151 (QB)”.

An appeal that was eagerly awaited because of the number of cases it affected, and because of the time that has been taken for the appeal to be heard, he continued, was Bird v Acorn Group in the Court of Appeal on 19 and 20 October 2016. This concerns what costs are to be allowed under the fixed costs regime in CPR part 45 in circumstances where the court has dispensed with allocation but listed a disposal hearing. Has the case been ‘listed for trial’?

He said: “This last is a plea rather than a realistic expectation of a development. At the beginning of 2015, Dyson MR rejected the recommendations as to revised guideline hourly rates. Whatever the merits of that decision, the 2010 guideline rates are becoming increasingly out of date and really could do with updating, not least because, in my view, if they could be said to reflect current rates they could potentially be a useful tool at costs management conferences.”

New training for lawyers to improve courtroom experience for vulnerable witnesses Solicitor advocates and barristers who question vulnerable witnesses in court during criminal trials are set to undergo a bespoke training programme, the Law Society and Bar Council announced today.

rolled out across England and Wales from December, was developed by a crossprofessional working group comprising experienced members of the legal profession led by His Honour Judge Rook QC.

The Advocacy and the Vulnerable Training Programme will help solicitor advocates and barristers strike the balance between advancing a client’s case effectively in court whilst ensuring vulnerable witnesses are not subjected to undue stress.

The Law Society and Bar Council will deliver this training to their members by 2018 and it is expected it will become mandatory for publicly-funded advocates who are instructed in serious sexual offence cases involving vulnerable witnesses. The training will also include techniques used to question defendants.

‘Victims and witnesses who feel secure in the courtroom are more likely to communicate vital evidence effectively’, said Law Society president Robert Bourns.

The training programme, which will be

Robert Bourns explained: ‘Witnesses are fundamental to the criminal justice system.

Giving evidence can be a traumatic and

intimidating experience and the pressure and unfamiliarity of court proceedings for witnesses cannot be underestimated.

‘While significant progress has been made over the past two decades to support vulnerable witnesses during a trial, more can be done. That is why the Law Society is committed to supporting a consistent level of high quality advocacy.

Stress can affect the ability of a witness to tell their story in a courtroom. This training programme ensures that solicitor advocates and barristers play their part in helping witnesses so they are best able to communicate their evidence. We look forward to working with the Bar Council to develop and deliver this training.’

www.derbylaw.net

15

He has his father’s nose…

“You have your dad’s eye’s”, “your mums smile”, “and your grandfather’s ears”… We’ve all heard comments such as these; but do they have any basis in fact when attempting to assert paternity? As a leading DNA testing company dealing with hundreds of paternity cases every year, these types of comments often are posed to us. These are generally by associated adults (parents and grandparents) who wish to emphasise a connection with a particular child. But can physical resemblances or indeed personality similarities be a reliable indicator of a biological relationship or is it just a case of “seeing what we want to see”?

Upon the arrival of a new born baby or seeing a young child out with a parent, family and friends will often instinctively mention resemblances between parent and child. This deeply engrained “social mirror” enables parents to rely upon the resemblances seen by others as a reassurance of parenthood. It leads to varying degrees of parental investment: the expenditure and resources parents invest in their offspring to ensure their survival and success, which can often be at the cost of their own reproductive success.

First to note is that this is not a new approach to the paternity issue. Questions of “likeness” amongst kin were considered by Pythagoras, Plato and Aristotle; the latter first noted bilateral heredity (that characteristics can come from mother and father) and interestingly, that characteristics could also skip a generation.

These likenesses between parent and offspring help to reaffirm parental certainty, the degree to which you believe you and your child to be biologically related.

In general, mothers are more certain of paternity than are fathers. Before the advent of paternity testing (historically using blood typing through to today’s sophisticated and highly accurate DNA testing),

16

www.derbylaw.net

alleged fathers could only rely upon the social mirror to establish paternity, which of course is fraught with potential arguments and doubts. Mothers, in general, are keen to affirm the social mirror, whereas fathers are programmed to question it.

In order to establish parenthood using the social mirror, fathers must rely upon the faithfulness of the mother. As a result, fathers tend to place credence upon the physical likenesses and behavioural similarities that they believe they share with their child to affirm their biological relationship. These claimed resemblances impact the father’s parental investment decisions, as he is more likely to invest in a child to whom he believes he is genetically related or with whom he shares similar characteristics.

Mothers are less dependent on physical cues as an indicator of biological relatedness as in general, they do not need to be convinced of maternity. Instead, mothers tend to notice psychological similarities with their child such as likenesses in personality and are inclined to use family resemblances to their own evolutionary advantage. They may for example, use the presumed likenesses and similarities between alleged father and child to reinforce discussions surrounding paternal certainty. These claimed resemblances then serve to persuade the father of parenthood, which in turn ensures paternal investment for the child, thus increasing both the child’s chances of success (vs. peers) and the mother’s reproductive success. Unfortunately, this also has undesirable consequences for the male who has been cuckolded into raising another man’s child since it has the effect of reducing or indeed eradicating, their own genes from the gene pool.

This issue has never been more alive than it is today,

as there has been a shift from social affirmation to social non-affirmation largely as a result of the use of social media. For example, comments posted on Facebook make the social non-affirmation very public, whereas before the advent of social media it was more likely contained to a close group of friends or family. This public display of clues to either paternity or non-paternity has the effect of raising the stakes for mother, alleged father, rival males and associated social destabilisers (who may have a variety of motives). To gain certainty and quell rumours, individuals often turn to a DNA test as the only means of delivering parental certainty.

The question of paternity may then spill over into the legal/social services sphere as a tactic in family disputes, where one or more party is trying to reduce their responsibilities or undermine another’s position with respect to parental investment or indeed, vice versa. “More or less” parental investment is a key driver in the resolution of the dispute and a DNA based paternity test becomes a crucial piece of evidence providing clarity where only doubt existed before.

The social mirror in the context of today’s society can be a dangerous weapon, but is one that can be effectively countered by use of an unequivocal paternity test from an accredited DNA testing company such as our own.

Ms Kate Donkin (Psychology Intern) and Dr Neil Sullivan, General Manager.

Both of Complement Genomics Ltd, trading as dadcheck®.

www.dadcheckgold.com sales@dadcheckgold.com 0191 543 6334

The real value of the meeting of experts “It is ORDERED that the experts of like discipline shall meet, and shall discuss matters relevant to their opinions in this matter, and shall produce a Joint Statement, setting out those matters on which they are agreed, and those matters on which they Chris Makin have failed to agree, with a summary of their reasons for disagreeing.”

A standard step in the proceedings? Yes, of course. Pure routine?

Absolutely not! A meeting of experts can make or break a case, and can destroy months of lawyers’ work in an afternoon. This is where your chosen expert shows his/her true mettle, and earns his fee.

If you are sharp-eyed (and which lawyer is not?) you will have noticed two things. Firstly, I am talking about meetings of experts, whereas the rules talk about discussions between experts – it isn’t necessary for a face to face meeting to occur. And secondly, the typical order above requires there only to be reasons for failure to agree. The Criminal Procedure Rules talk about reasons for agreement as well as disagreement, which is an interesting idea.

But we must be talking about the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR), so let us stay with CPR. So we have had exchange of witness statements, and then of expert reports, and a meeting has been ordered. What does the expert do then, poor thing? The answer is three words: preparation, preparation, preparation. For the expert this meeting is just as important as the trial. Why? Because the joint statement, setting out what has been agreed, and specifying why the experts have not agreed other issues, is intended to shorten the list of issues to be tried; if the experts are not in contention, what is the point of airing all the arguments again in open court?

Yet here we have a contradiction: although the experts might agree something, and although that may shorten the trial, “Where experts reach agreement on an issue during their discussions, the agreement shall not bind the parties unless the parties expressly agree to be bound by the agreement.” CPR 35.12(5).

Tricky, eh? The experts are ordered to set out in writing what they have agreed, yet the parties are not to be bound by it. Why? Because the experts can talk only within their own science (Foulks –v- Chard [1783]) and must not agree something which counsel may wish to argue. They are not there to “knock up a deal”. And this is where your truly experienced expert comes into his own, with a clear idea of what he may discuss and what must be left to counsel and the court. Examples: • if two opposing accountant experts disagree on the Bolam test – what the reasonably competent accountant should have done in particular circumstances – they can put into their joint statement what they believe that normal accountant should have done, but they cannot agree, or even agree to differ, on whether this particular accountant fell short. That is for the judge.

• Or if there is contention about the basis on which calculations, say of lost profit after a factory fire, are based, they can agree each other’s calculations “numbers as numbers”, but must not agree the amount of lost profit. In that circumstance, the furthest they could take it would be to agree a formula for calculating lost profit, which may be applied to the figures ultimately decided by the court.

18

www.derbylaw.net

But back to preparation.

An agenda ought to be agreed in advance. I have a pro forma agenda which I try to send to the other expert beforehand, and agree just as an outline. The court may specify the issues it wishes the experts to discuss (CPR 35.12(2)) and instructing solicitors may do likewise if they wish, but my experience after literally thousands of expert reports and scores of expert meetings is that this never happens: expert reports have been exchanged, the areas of disagreement have become clear, and those areas go straight into the agenda.

The pro forma also includes such basics as where and when we are to meet, who is to attend (lawyers? No thank you!), and who is to take the minutes. Actually, that isn’t a basic at all; it’s an important decision.

I remember one very difficult expert meeting where we reached that topic, and my opponent (a notorious defence expert, thankfully now retired) produced his manager and said he would take the minutes. I agreed, provided it was accepted that he was working for us both, and provided that I received a photocopy of his notes as soon as the meeting ended. Well, in the confusion to end a full day’s meeting, packing up the bankers’ boxes and so on, I didn’t get my photocopies. When I asked for them the next day, the manager said that he couldn’t release them until his boss had edited them (!!) and he had gone on a business trip to USA for two weeks. That two weeks took us to within 21 days of trial.

And when I eventually received the minutes, the common issues and my reasons for matters not agreed ran to 8 pages, and he had inserted 27 pages of new argument and figure-work! It didn’t do his client’s case any good, but it did prevent any chance of settling the case more than 21 days before trial and saving costs. Not nice!

When preparing, the experts should consider the medium they will use for discussion: teleconference? Emails? Skype? The old telephone? I usually prefer face to face – I can assess my opponent, and personalities will come into the discussion; also it is easy to recalculate something on screen there and then, and get a transcript – but costs of course must always be proportionate.

One standard item in my agenda is to confirm which reports each expert has written. I have even known meetings where one or the other discovers that there are more expert reports than they knew about. More often, and again a standard item, is to agree that each expert has seen the same documents. Even though each expert report ought to list all the documents on which that expert’s opinion relies, it is surprising how often the first half hour of an expert meeting has to be spent in photocopying documents which one expert has seen and the other has not.

The experts should agree to settle each issue one by one, sticking to the agenda, and not talking about everything at once and agreeing nothing – it happens!

Lots of things can go wrong at an experts’ meeting. Here are some examples passed to me by The Academy of Experts, where I am a fellow: • Experts agreed a joint statement, but there were a few typos.

One expert said he would edit the statement, but he was then “persuaded” by counsel to make some amendments, which were not noticed by the other expert when the statement was signed.

That expert then tried to withdraw his signature, without success.

• One expert typed the joint statement on a notebook belonging to

the other, and Properties showed that the other had produced it, so that he had difficulty challenging its accuracy.

• The Academy tell me that experts are frequently told that they must confer with their instructing solicitor before signing anything – very naughty!

• There are problems with telephone meetings in agreeing who is to take the minutes, and how.

• A number of experts still seem to have difficulty in understanding the purpose of an experts’ meeting, what they must agree and what must be recorded, particularly with the different requirements of the various procedure rules.

But of course the biggest clanger is Jones –v- Kaney [2011] UKSC 13, the Supreme Court case which saw an end to the expert witness’s immunity from suit in negligence. That was about an expert meeting, and the signing of the joint statement. Jones was a road accident victim; Kaney was a consultant clinical psychologist.

A meeting of clinical psychologists was held to agree the extent to which Mr Jones’s accident had brought on PTSD. The other expert was Dr El-Assra for the defence. The discussion took place by telephone, and Dr El-Assra produced the joint statement, which was damaging to Mr Jones’s claim. Miss Kaney signed it without, she said, even reading it. She said she was under pressure to sign. Mr Jones sued her for negligence, and won; the age-old protection for expert witness was lost.

Speaking personally, I am not at all concerned about my competence as an expert (and I carry negligence insurance of £5million!). Kaney performed about as badly as it is possible for an expert to perform, but we are not all like that. Moral: when choosing an expert, don’t forget that he will probably have to organise and attend a meeting of experts, so choose your expert carefully. It matters!

Biog: Chris Makin is one of only 30 or so chartered accountants to become an Accredited Forensic Accountant and Expert Witness – www.icaew.com/forensicaccreditation/register. He is also an accredited civil & commercial mediator and an accredited expert determiner. He has given expert evidence at least 70 times and worked on a vast range of cases over the last 23 years. For CV, war stories and much more, go to www.chrismakin.co.uk.

PROFESSIONAL COMMUNICATIONS FOR PROFESSIONALS

0151 651 2776 EAST PARK COMMUNICATIONS www.derbylaw.net

19

EWI Conference 2016 Insight and Controversy: Expert Witnesses Kick Off Autumn Conferring at the Cutting Edge Elizabeth Robson Taylor and Phillip Taylor MBE of Richmond Green Chambers review one of the highlights of the recent conference season... the 20th Annual Expert Witness Conference at Church House, Westminster.

For lawyers in England and Wales, autumn is the contemplative ‘season of mists and mellow fruitfulness’ that also heralds the advent of what is becoming known as “The Conference Season”, during which time there are conferences galore.

For at least the last couple of decades, these annual events have become almost an essential part of a well-rounded, grounded - and well-informed professional life. So political animals generally gravitate to the various party conferences – Labour, Tory, LibDem, Green - take your pick. And for members of the Bar, there’s the mustgo-to Bar and Young Bar Conference in London.

A deep pool of talent The recent EWI Conference of 2016 marked the 20th anniversary of the EWI Conference, and very well attended it was. It was in effect a demonstration of its standing, its burgeoning influence and the pool of talent that sustains it. The roster of distinguished speakers consisted mainly of lawyers, (some transatlantic) legal advisers and members of the judiciary, including for example, Supreme Court Justice, Lord Kerr.

Amanda Stevens

I have heard countless cases in which the result has been heavily influenced by the evidence given by impartial, distinguished experts, either in written reports or in oral testimony.’

If you’re a keen conference goer, you’re the sort who inevitably appreciates the opportunities to tap into what’s happening now in your field… what’s happening next… what should be happening, but isn’t – and why and what you can do, or should do, or shouldn’t do about it. And generally you have opportunities to meet many of the main players in your areas of interest and participate (or not) in the usually sharp controversies of question and answer sessions.

However, there is one conference that often doesn’t turn up all that prominently in the purview of the typical reader of ‘The Barrister’ and that is the annual Expert Witness Institute (EWI) Conference. Held in the central but sequestered and leafy, rather collegiate-ish location of Church House in London – a stone’s throw from Parliament – this conference is where lawyers can garner important insights into the role and challenges facing the expert witness in court and where expert witnesses can meet and greet each other as well as the lawyers who instruct them.

This article is written in the hope and expectation that the profile of the EWI will be significantly raised. If you are a lawyer frequently (or even infrequently) engaged in trials requiring expert evidence, you need to know more about the EWI - and attendance at this conference does provide the ideal opportunity to do so, and it is a fun event.

20

www.derbylaw.net

Lord Kerr

Amiably chaired by EWI Governor Amanda Stevens, the Conference proceeded apace, with speaker after speaker imparting much useful, insightful and sometimes controversial comment on the future of the justice system in general and the varied role of the expert witness in particular.

Lord Kerr Lord Kerr and Dr John Sorabji, who can reasonably be referred to as the keynote speakers, made some memorable points.

‘It is a given’ remarked Kerr, ‘that the role of experts in our legal system is indispensable’, later adding that ‘the relationship between the decision maker and the expert witness can be a delicate and difficult one’!

He went on to say that ‘there are many spheres of legal activity where expert evidence has been pivotal to the outcome of contested and even compromised, litigation. In over twenty years as a judge,

He elaborated further on the complementary nature of the respective roles played by the expert and the tribunal of fact and (where possible) those roles must be clearly defined. Interestingly, he quoted Lord Phillips in a 1997 case in which he observed that ‘when the scientist gives evidence, it is important that he should not overstep the line which separates his province from that of the Jury.’

Finally, Kerr reminded judges and jurors as well as experts, of the need to combine humility and assertiveness. ‘Humility’ he said ‘will lead them to defer to each other when appropriate, while assertiveness should ensure they do so only when appropriate.’

Dr. John Sorabji – ‘EWI in an Era of Reform.’

Another significant speech was delivered

by John Sorabji, a regular friend to the Institute. As Senior Fellow UCL, Judicial Institute - and Principal Legal Adviser to the Lord Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls, Sorabji covered a number of important points.

‘There are plenty of challenges and opportunities for all experts ahead of us

Dr John Sorabji

Professor Stephen Mayson

-- we’re two years older than Google! And we are doing what we should be doing as an Institute.’

Sir Anthony also mentioned the increase in online teaching carried out by the EWI in such jurisdictions as Singapore and remarked about the fact that EWI membership has now ‘topped the thousand mark’, although the EWI still actively seeks new members particularly in forensic science as it grows.

because we’re still in an era of reform,’ he said, referring to the paper from the Lord Thomas and others, entitled ‘Transforming the Justice System.’ A document much discussed at all the recent legal conferences, it follows on from the ‘Reshaping Justice’ paper of two years ago on which Sorabji has acted as an adviser and commentator.

Sorabji also dealt with two further issues of contemporary note: the fixed costs regime and ‘hot tubbing’ – the latter being the hot topic du jour of last year’s EWI conference (and before).

It may have cooled down a bit since then, but it does refer to the use of concurrent evidence, which appeared in England and Wales around 2005, having originated as an import from Australia the same year. ‘It does not save costs’ warned Sorabji, even though, in the experience of most of the delegates, it does make the proceedings of the court easier to follow.

All the speakers who followed touched on a number of the core issues involved in identifying - and elaborating on - a number of pitfalls inherent in the role of expert witnesses and their relationship with the lawyers who instruct them. For example, Professor Stephen Mayson, of the Centre for Ethics and Law at the Faculty of Laws, University College London, spoke on the ever-changing face of the legal profession - in which practitioners must contend with national and global as well as local, competition… plus the new regulatory framework created by the Legal Services Act… and the relentless rise of the consumer – and more.

Having advised barristers’ chambers, law firms and government departments

worldwide, Mayson has also appeared as an expert witness himself on law firm management in proceedings before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. All this and the impact of alternative business structures has created tensions, but it’s not all bad out there. The market for legal services is huge and continually expanding with a total value of £30bn annually, which apparently is no more than a mere estimate.

‘Two years older than Google’ some words from EWI’s fourth Chair

Sir Anthony Hooper QC

What followed on from this cautionary yet optimistic message were some words from Sir Anthony Hooper QC, who is the EWI’s fourth Chair. In celebration of the EWI’s twentieth anniversary, he encouraged members to raise the profile of EWI for members present and future.

‘What a Year!’ he declared, ‘twenty years old

As a final point, Sir Anthony referred to the decision in Kennedy v. Cordia heard on 10th February 2016, a leading case heard recently in the Supreme Court. Regarded as pivotal, the case highlighted and examined the role of the expert, thus creating a singularly important statement on the role and duties of expert witnesses. As Sir Anthony reminded delegates, the primary duty of the expert is to the court, but there is also the duty to the client. Furthermore, the issue of impartiality should always be uppermost.

Eat the Frog First: a Plea from Across the Pond Make what you will of the whimsical title, but this speech was deadly serious and presented with verve and vigour by the transatlantic duo of Alan Anderson and his forensic accountant associate Carol Ludington. Having acquired degrees from Cornell University also a PhD from King’s College, London, Minnesotabased trial lawyer, Alan Anderson has been – among his lengthy list of credentials – included in The Best Lawyers in America in intellectual property litigation since 2010 and there are a number of other strings to his formidable bow.

Basically their presentation centered on the warning that ‘questions that fall within the purview of experts often are left until the end of preparations, or deferred entirely’ – and that ‘a reluctance to engage expert witnesses early in the dispute resolution process… often results in poor decisions or a less than desirable outcome.’ In other words, brief your expert witness sooner than later, or you might be in for a spot of bother. You have been warned.

Lawyerly debate Sadly, space limitations rather rule out further detailed descriptions here of many of the other conference speeches, some of which dealt with highly specialised topics. Suffice to say, however, that the EWI Conference as a whole

www.derbylaw.net

21

EWI Conference 2016 continued was distinguished in particular, by useful, organized, highly professional and high quality debate, lawyerly in tone and content because it was led largely by lawyers - and punctuated with question and answer sessions that were illuminating and challenging.

Alan Anderson and Carol Ludington

So later this year - only a few months hence - when autumn leaves drift past your window – and the start of the legal term looms - plan to take in a conference or two. The networking opportunities are first class and the food isn’t bad either, especially at the EWI Conference, which you really must make a note of in your Chambers diary.

In the august yet convivial precincts of Church House, there will be much that you can learn to your advantage, so do come next year!

Dr Andrew St. Clair Logan MB ChB FRCA FFPMRCA

Expert Psychiatric Reports DR TOM CARNWATH MA FRCPsych FRCGP is a Consultant Psychiatrist, with specialist accreditation in General Adult Psychiatry and Addiction Psychiatry. He has also trained as a GP. He has over twenty years experience as an independent expert witness, providing medico-legal reports for claimant and defendant, and frequently as a jointly instructed expert.

He typically provides reports in the following areas of practice: •

• •

• •

Personal injury, including post- traumatic stress.

Long-term effect of childhood abuse.

Criminal cases, especially involving drugs or alcohol.

Criminal compensation.

Occupational stress.

• Psychiatric negligence and psychiatric effects of medical negligence.

• Cases for Employment Tribunal.

• Family and Childcare proceedings.

• Insurance and pension disputes.

• Mental capacity.

He aims to prepare reports within four to six weeks of receiving full instructions and documentation, depending on client availability. More urgent assessments can usually be arranged where essential.

He has regular clinics in Manchester and Darlington, but can see people elsewhere as required. He works frequently in Newcastle, Birmingham, London, Derby and Stoke-on-Trent

He normally charges £225 per hour, but other rates may apply in certain circumstances.

Contact: Julia Carnwath, PO Box 286, Nantwich, Cheshire CW5 9DN Tel: 01270314066 Mob: 07713248018 Email: dr@tomcarnwath.co.uk Website: www.tomcarnwath.co.uk

22

www.derbylaw.net

A Fellow of the Faculty of Pain Medicine of the Royal College of Anaesthetists (FFPMRCA) Dr. Logan provides services as a Pain Management Consultant at the Countess of Chester NHS Trust, Nuffield Health Chester; The Grosvenor Hospital, Chester and the Spire Hospital Warrington.

Throughout his illustrious career Dr. Logan has also achieved an impressive reputation for the services he provides as an Expert Witness in cases involving ‘pain’ relating to injuries received in an accident.

Dr Andrew St. Clair Logan MB ChB FRCA FFPMRCA Nuffield Health, The Grosvenor Hospital, Wrexham Road, Chester CH4 7QP

Tel - Mobile: 07791681278 Sharon (Secretary): 07763783601 email: painconsutant@aol.com Fax: 01244 851 278

PAUL JONES ASSOCIATES

Victoria Jenkins BSc, MSB, CBiol, MEWI, MCSFS Forensic Toxicologist able to assist with the following types of cases:

Drink Driving Cases

M

ost of my work involves child and family issues which frequently arise within the context of public or private law proceedings.

Typically, these concern child protection, dealing with attachment issues between siblings and parents, questions of permanency planning, fostering and adoption and contact and residence disputes. In 2004 I was appointed by BAAF as a panel member for the Independent Review Mechanism.

Having been involved in medico legal work for over 20 years I have vast experience in providing

psychological reports.

I can usually complete a case within 2 months for which I charge £165 per hour exclusive of VAT and disbursements. I charge for travelling time at half this rate.

I am on the Expert Witness register and have taken Bond Solon training for which I hold certificates.

The majority of my work is in the nature of care proceedings rather than personal injury and I frequently act as a single joint expert.

P.O. Box 54, Wallsend, Tyne & Wear NE28 7YR email: pauljonesassociates@blueyonder.co.uk Tel: 0191 263 0808

Accident and Emergency Expert Francis Morris • Medicolegal Reports •

• Post driving drinks (hip flask defence).

• Laced drinks.

• Effects of prescribed medication on breath and blood alcohol results.

• Effects of chemicals in the work place on breath and blood alcohol results.

• Failure to provide situations.

Toxicology Cases • The effect of controlled and/or prescribed drugs on driving ability, an individual’s demeanour and memory of events.

• The effect of controlled drugs on parenting skills.

• The beneficial effects of cannabis in certain medical conditions.

• The effects of date rape drugs and the length of time they remain detectable in biological samples.

• Medical negligence.

• Personal Injury due to intoxication.

• Toxicological aspects of murder, manslaughter, assault etc.

• Effect of alcohol/drugs on competency to sign legal documents.

• Interpretation of employee or prison inmate drug tests.

Free estimates and advice Fast turnaround of reports Tel: 0191 3781939 • Mob: 07890 030366 E: Victoria.Jenkins@live.co.uk

FINGERPRINT ANALYSIS Peter M Swann FAE FFS Independent Consultant to the Legal Profession A former Home Office Adviser with five decades experience in all aspects of finger print and crime work.

F

rancis Morris is a Consultant in Emergency Medicine (A & E) living and working Sheffield. He qualified in 1982 and has over 30 years experience in Accident and Emergency Medicine. He was the Clinical Director of the large Emergency Department and Major Trauma Centre from 1997 until 2016.

Mr Morris has been preparing clinical negligence reports for the past 24 years and has produced over 1,500 reports to date. He has the expertise to comment upon all aspects of management in the Accident and Emergency Department. For a full CV, normal terms and conditions and advice concerning the merits of a case contact: emergencymedicineexpert@gmail.com

• Regulatory body: General Medical Council No. 2594406

• Revalidation 2013 with a licence to practice until 2018

• Medical Protection Society No. 220988

Contact

A Fellow of the Academy of Experts, a Fellow of the Fingerprint Society, a Member of the International Association for Identification, a Member of the Forensic Science Society and included in the UK Register of Expert Witnesses.

Provides a full independent fingerprint service to legal profession, industry and other agencies.

Examination Development

Assessment Report

Briefing Expert Witness

Telephone: Wakefield 01924 264900 (Office) 01924 276986 (Home) Fax: 01924 265700 Email: peterswann@btconnect.com www.fingerprint-analysis.co.uk

E-mail: emergencymedicineexpert@gmail.com Telephone: Secretary: 0114 2715769 Website: www.accident-and-emergency-expert.co.uk Emergency Department, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Herries Rd, Sheffield S5 7AU

www.derbylaw.net

23

Flood risk – are you getting the full picture?

The risk of property flooding often crops up in conveyancing articles but, when we look at the pattern of conveyancing searches our clients are ordering, we notice that around 80% of orders we receive do not include a thorough flood assessment and details on insurability.

Law Society Practice Note The Practice Note on flood risk was updated recently (February 2016) and full details can be found on the Law Society website. The Practice Note highlights that different parties will have different appetites for risk, but that conveyancers should consider:

1. advising the client to establish the terms on which buildings insurance, including flood risk cover, is available; 2. advising the client to discuss the level of risk with a building surveyor or flood risk assessment consultant.

Ensuring that you have the full picture on flood Confusion about the thoroughness of information can arise because a number of different searches include details on property flooding.

The information provided ranges from basic flood screening as part of an automated environmental report, through to a full assessment, insurability and consultant opinion in some of the standalone flood reports and more comprehensive environmental reports.

Please see the table below for a summary of coverage in a number of different residential conveyancing searches: FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT

INSURABILITY STATEMENT

CONSULTANT OPINION

Landmark Homecheck Professional Flood

✓

✓

✓ (risk model)

Landmark RiskView Residential

✓

✓

✓ (risk model)

Argyll SiteSolutions Residence

✓

✓

✓ (fully manual)

Groundsure Homebuyers

✓

✓

✓ (risk model)

Groundsure Flood

✓

✓

✓ (risk model)

SEARCH

FLOOD SCREEN

Landmark Homecheck Pro Environmental

✓

Landmark Envirosearch Residential

✓

Groundsure HomeScreen

✓

Note: risk model opinions are automated, whereas a fully manual opinion denotes that the information is manually reviewed by a consultant.

Identifying the likelihood of risk The Geodesys website provides you with a search alert tool that screens properties and land for all conveyancing risks. If there is a likelihood of flooding, then suitable recommended searches will be highlighted within the Geodesys product list to aid conveyancers in their choice of search.

For further details on the different levels of residential and commercial flood information available please talk to Geodesys Customer Services on 0845 070 9109.

24

www.derbylaw.net

Why should you make a will if you own property abroad?

If you own any assets abroad or are considering investing in a holiday property in a foreign country, it is important that you think about making a will or reviewing your existing will to ensure that your wishes are carried out and your overseas assets pass to your intended beneficiaries. This is because, even if you have made a will under English law, it does not automatically guarantee that your overseas property will go to whoever you chose to inherit your property in your English will.

If the foreign property is located in an EU member state, such as France, the EU Succession Regulation which came into force on 17 August 2015 will apply to the succession of your estate in France.

The EU Succession Regulation is binding in all the EU member states excepting the UK, Ireland and Denmark. Although the Regulation does not apply in the UK, it affects the way that the conflict of laws rules in England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland interact with the rules of the EU member states where it does apply. The conflict of laws rules are the rules that each country has to decide which country’s law will govern who inherits your estate when you die.

The Regulation says that the law applicable to your succession will be the law of the member state in which you were habitually resident at the time of your death but gives you the option of expressly choosing the law of your nationality when you make a will.

For example, if you are an UK national and have made an English will, but you own a holiday cottage in France and your main place of residence at the time of your death is the UK, it is likely that English law will be applied to your succession in France. This will ensure that the freedom to leave your property to whoever you wish under English law is respected.

However, if you do nothing and die without a will, the English conflict of laws rules will be applied to your succession in France.

These rules say that the succession of immovable assets, such as land or residential property, is governed by the law where the assets are located. If your holiday property is located in France, French succession laws and, particularly, the French “forced heirship rules” will dictate the way in which your holiday property is inherited when you die.

Similarly, if you are an UK national and you make an English will but your habitual place of residence when you die is France, where you own a holiday cottage, the French succession rules will govern who inherits your entire estate. This situation can be avoided by including a choice of English law in your will, in which case France will apply English law to your whole estate.

Brexit will surely have an impact on how the UK is regarded by the other EU member states when they apply the EU Succession Regulation and the current choices available to UK nationals may end once the formal exit from the European Union by the UK has taken place.

26

www.derbylaw.net

An alternative when planning for the succession of your foreign property is to make a will in the country where the property is located and, therefore, exclude the foreign property from your English will. This has the advantage after your death of saving the time and expense of validating your English will in a foreign country and expediting the succession of your foreign property.

Before taking any steps mentioned in this article, you should take professional legal advice. This article is based on current regulations which may be subject to change.

Comment We hear very little when it comes to Succession Regulation, however it is a really important part of the EU regulations. No other law has been tasked with unifying succession laws across so many jurisdictions. As the UK did not opt into these regulations, they will not automatically become part of the law after Brexit. The only way to ensure final wishes are carried out is to have a valid will in every jurisdiction where assets are held. This shows further proof that Brexit means more than just immigration and trade.

Neil Fraser, Partner Fraser and Fraser

www.derbylaw.net

27

Lawyers volunteer millions of hours of free legal advice for the public good Every year lawyers across England and Wales volunteer nearly two million hours of free legal advice to some of the most vulnerable people in our society.

National Pro Bono Week, 7-11 November 2016, is a nationwide campaign of events to celebrate the free legal services provided by the legal profession to those who would otherwise be unable to get the legal advice they need. However, pro bono legal work is not a substitute for an effective system of publicly funded legal services. The Latin expression pro bono publico means for the public good.

On 7 November, to meet demand, the National Pro Bono Centre is launching an online matching service that will connect lawyers with organisations across England and Wales that provide pro bono services and need more legal experts.

Law Society of England and Wales president Robert Bourns said: ‘Solicitors provided an estimated 1.4 million hours of pro bono legal advice to individuals, charities and community groups in England and Wales in 2015. All this free advice is given on a voluntary basis, reflecting solicitors’ commitment to their

28

www.derbylaw.net

clients, the communities in which they live and work and to our wider society.

‘This National Pro Bono Week, the Law Society is launching our Pro Bono Charter and Manual - the go-to guide for solicitors wishing to begin or grow their pro bono work. I am immensely proud to belong to a profession that contributes its expertise voluntarily for the public good on such an unparalleled scale.’

Chairman of the Bar Council, Chantal-Aimée Doerries QC, said:

‘National Pro Bono Week is an important initiative. It recognises the valuable contribution legal professionals make by helping those in need of legal support. A belief in the need to ensure access to justice for all in society is part of the Bar’s DNA. This commitment is reflected in the Bar’s pro bono contribution.

More than 3600 barristers, including a third of all QC’s, have volunteered to represent individuals on a pro bono basis through the Bar Pro Bono Unit. This unit receives no public funding and depends on donations. Over half

of all practising barristers make a financial contribution to the Bar Pro Bono Unit. The Bar’s pro bono work isn’t limited to the unit.

Many barristers give freely of their time to help those in need of representation through many other initiatives such as the Free Representation Unit and the Employment Tribunal and Chancery Bar Litigant in Person Support schemes.

At the Bar Council we set up the Bar Pro Bono Board earlier this year as a hub for the profession to provide support for pro bono initiatives, to collate information about the Bar’s pro bono endeavours and to increase awareness about the profession’s commitment.’

President of the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEx) Martin Callan said:

‘The CILEx Pro Bono Trust has its own pro bono project through which our members provide pro bono support in deserving cases. National Pro Bono Week provides an important platform for all lawyers to collaborate and celebrate their working relationship.’

Shape your future with the University of Sheffield Shape your future. Maybe you’ve gained your qualifying law degree; perhaps you are a Fellow of CILEx, or have undertaken a graduate law conversion course. Whatever the situation, now’s the time to look at the next step in your career, the MA in Legal Practice (Legal Practice Course).

Our LPC trains you to Masters standard, allowing you to develop an excellent academic understanding in an area of law and practice whilst also providing you with the vocational qualification you need in order to go on to practise as a solicitor.

At the University of Sheffield we offer an emphasis on practice and commercial awareness, embedding these within different teaching and learning methods. All our LPC tutors are qualified solicitors, enabling us to ensure that the files you work on and the materials used reflect current practice.

Our well-regarded and established course sits within the Centre for Professional Legal Education here at the School of Law, where students benefit from the facilities and resources offered by the University voted number one for student experience - Times Higher Education Student Experience Survey 2014-2015. With 1:1 support on careers and employability offered for up to three years after completion of the course, we support your ambition of becoming a valued member of the legal profession.

We offer flexible study options for LPC students and you can choose from either full-time or part-time study. The full-time pathway is taught in two stages and lasts one year, starting in September and running until June. You can expect to have on average ten hours per week of formal contact time in workshops.

We also expect you to spend time on independent study preparing for workshops and assessments.

If you opt to take the course part-time you will study for both stages 1 and 2 over two years. You will be required to come in for just one day a week, allowing you the rest of the week to gain valuable work experience to enhance your CV and employability. The part-time course also runs from early September to June.

Our electives are also offered on a standalone basis for those wishing to learn a new area of practice, or to update their knowledge.

In joining us you’re not just a member of our School community; you become a member of our University student community in Sheffield. You can enjoy 24/7 library services, Wi-Fi across campus, practical help and careers advice, and an excellent range of clubs and societies to join as well as opportunities to engage with the local community through volunteering projects and student representation. With outstanding facilities to support your studies, Sheffield is a university like no other.

www.derbylaw.net

29

How Technology is Evolving the Conveyancing Market

By Adam Bullion, General Manager of Marketing - InfoTrack Recently, Apple announced the release of their latest iPhone, and as is seemingly tradition with these releases, there is often a controversial twist involving legacy standards and processes that shake up the status quo, ones that show Apple as a frontrunner of technology.

These moves have included the removal of CD and disk drives in Apple laptops; the changing of charging ports; and most recently, the universal audio jack has been replaced by lightning port, causing much heated debate amongst consumers.

However, all these decisions, whilst contentious, are geared towards Apples’ goal of driving the market forwards and making the consumer think differently.

So how do Apple and their strategic product plays apply to the conveyancing sector?

Technology does not distinguish between industries. There are many companies that create technology specifically for the legal

30

www.derbylaw.net

industry, and are working to push the limits of the legal process status quo, driving the market to invoke change.

However, it is not only the companies but also the early adopters of new tech that are needed to push changes in the market ahead, and within the legal world, law firms will find themselves benefitting from the risk/reward model that this offers. InfoTrack are one such technology thought-leader who, similarly to Apple, demonstrate an understanding of driving change in a market through a process of evolvement. InfoTrack are introducing solutions that encompass the process from searching through to SDLT submissions and AP1 transfers, and most recently, the introduction of electronic contract packs (eCOS). eCOS is a paperless solution that offers an electronic alternative for preparing and exchanging contract packs (including the TA6 and TA10 forms) between the buyer, seller and their solicitors. Electronic contract packs are a great example of the type of technology that consumers now

expect from their conveyancer during the selling process. These Contract Packs are lodged in InfoTrack’s portal and can be accessed from any device, at any time.

Utilising this technology avoids delays that are often a result of postage, making eCOS technology an appealing advance for the conveyancing process.

Unique to InfoTrack, the development of the eCOS is a strategic move to drive change in how conveyancing is conducted, and to encourage law firms to move from legacy based, manual processes to working predominantly in an electronic environment.

Companies who take a trail-blazing approach like InfoTrack and Apple, aim to make an impact and lasting contribution on a market. However, they are also aware that implementation can be a slow process of adoption which is why evolution, over revolution, is important. In the conveyancing world where faster, safer, smarter solutions are needed sooner rather than later, it is imperative that the profession are adopting technology from businesses who push the boundaries to drive the market forward.