The Inner Temple Yearbook 2013-2014

THE INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK ����–���� Treasurer: Simon Thorley ��

apexhotels.co.uk

Apex temple court hotel

Apex Temple CourT HoTel **** luxury

1-2 Serjeants’ Inn, Fleet Street, london eC4y 1ll located in the historic Inner Temple, a fusion of contemporary design and innovative technology with luxurious guest rooms and public areas reflecting Apex’s unique style.

• 184 luxury bedrooms & suites • Chambers Bar & restaurant • executive lounge • Gym Central Reservations 0845 365 0000 (outside UK) +44 (0) 131 441 0440 london.reservations@apexhotels.co.uk APEX HOTELS loNDoN | eDINBurGH | DuNDee

FROM THE EDITOR’S DESK INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

From the Editor’s Desk

Inner Temple Yearbook 2013-2014 Treasurer:

Simon Thorley �� Reader:

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Tomlinson Sub-Treasurer:

Patrick Maddams Treasury Office:

Inner Temple, London EC4Y 7HL 020 7797 8250 Yearbook@innertemple.org.uk www.innertemple.org.uk Master of the Yearbook:

Sally Smith �� Editor:

Minka Braun Assistant Editor:

Henrietta Amodio Yearbook Manager:

Edward Harper Desk Editor:

Emma Hynes

E&T Editorial Team:

Paul Clark and Fiona Fulton Photographs:

Garlinda Birkbeck; Chris Christodoulou; Alex Harvey-Brown; MPP Image Creation; Barbara Neumann and the Inn’s own Design:

Jon Ashby at Cantate Communications, Cowcross Studios, 30 Cowcross Street, London EC1M 6DQ www.cantatecommunications.com Advertising:

John Good Ltd, Court Farm Barns, Medcroft Road, Tackley, Oxford OX5 3AL Printed by:

John Good Ltd, Progress Way, Binley, Coventry CV3 2NT Front Cover:

View from the Inner Temple Garden through the George II ornamental cast and wrought iron gate, made by Richard Ellis, circa 1730.

Photo: MPP Image Creation

S

ince joining the Inn, I have been an avid reader of the Yearbook.

My bookshelf is filled with wellthumbed issues from years gone by.

So, when I heard the Inn was looking for a new editor, I jumped at the chance. Once I agreed to do the job, however, terror set in!

Rereading previous editions, I was reminded of the high standards set by my predecessors and of the Yearbook’s importance to the Inner Temple family, in bringing together its members from Kentish Town, Kuala Lumpur and many places in between.

I should not have worried. My own shortcomings have been more than compensated for by the fantastic editorial team at the Inn; Henrietta Amodio, Edward Harper, Master Sally Smith and Emma Hynes, who work so hard to put the Yearbook together. Enormous support has, as ever, come from the entire team in Education & Training, headed by Fiona Fulton and Paul Clark, as well as the many members of the Inn; judges, practitioners, students and staff, who have been generous with their time in contributing articles or providing other invaluable help.

The first decision I had to make as Editor, was whether or not to reduce the width of the Yearbook. The decision to do so was made on grounds of cost and ensures we can continue to send the Yearbook to all members of the Inn, wherever they are, in one format or another.

The editorial team gave much thought to ensuring that the slimmed Yearbook retained its quality feel. I hope you enjoy the Yearbook’s new, more elegant shape.

As with previous years, the quality of articles submitted has been very high.

In addition to the interesting accounts from Pegasus Scholars on their travels, there are several thought-provoking articles of topical interest. As the renewed debate over retaining the Human Rights Act 1998 persists, we have included an edited version of a lecture given in Hall

by Justice Dyson Heydon, a former Justice of the High Court of Australia, entitled Are Bills Of Rights Really Necessary In The Common Law World?

Several articles remind us of the Inn’s rich history. In Saints and Rebels, Celia Pilkington, the Inn’s Archivist, explains the role of Inner Templars in the reformation and the religious conflict leading up to the Civil War. Not all members of the Inn have been to our credit. In Beauty and the Beast, Frank Wright recounts the fascinating tale of Thomas Sutherst, a former member of the Inn and social climber, who married his daughter into the aristocracy and was expelled from the Inn for his role in having his son-in-law, the 6th Marquis Townsend, certified as a lunatic so as to prevent him from abandoning his wife to stay in Brighton with a clergyman with whom he was infatuated.

I have had enormous fun working on the Yearbook. I very much hope you enjoy reading it.

Minka Braun

1

2

INNER TEMPLE

Contents From the Editor’s Desk Minka Braun

From the Treasurer Master Treasurer

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Sub-Treasurer

32

�� Years of P���

34

Master Lawrence

1 4

INNER TEMPLE EVENT

Read not Dead: Gorboduc Lloyd Evans

6

36

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Master Connell

INNER TEMPLE EVENT

Angelic Symphony

Master Campbell

38

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

Legal Academics: Forgotten Players or Interlopers?

40

Master Beatson

INNER TEMPLE EVENT

Garden Opera: La Traviata

Farewell to James Vivian Master of the Temple

44

9

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Master Harrison The Greatest Knight The Rt Hon Lord Judge

10 12

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Master Sheldon The Rise of Litigants in Person

46 48

Judith March, Samantha Ridley, Master Cobb

Seasonal Step Change Andrea Brunsendorf

52

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Master Brehan The Oral History Project Master Christie

Totally Tremendous Top Ten Trial Tips

16

Master Morley

Summer Party: The Party on the Green

54 55 60

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

Fraud by Bankers: The Remedies

18

Saints and Rebels

23

Master Hirst

Celia Pilkington

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

Stopping People Doing Things Can Sometimes Be a Good Idea Sir Robin Jacob

28 INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

Are Bills of Rights

Really Necessary in the Common Law World?

Justice Dyson Heydon

62

CONTENTS INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Early Days at the Bar Master Clothier

66

INNER TEMPLE EDUCATION & TRAINING

Education & Training Section Advocacy Training Council Master Green

Visit of Professor the Hon George Hampel �� ��

Celia Pilkington

132

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

68 92

Extradition Deportation and Human Rights

134

93

Inner Temple Golfing Society

138

Tears, Drama and Meeting Minutes: an Indexing Experience

140

Master Fitzgerald

Alastair Hodge

Master Leonard

INNER TEMPLE PEGASUS SCHOLARSHIP

Pegasus Scholars Abroad

Timeline

94

Kate Faulkner

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Master Hugh Smith Malaysian Inner Temple Alumni Association Church dates The Inner Temple Library Temple Family Picnic Beauty and the Beast Frank Wright

109 110 112

Weddings at the Temple Church

143 144 146 147

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Master Tiley Islam and English Law

116 118

Human Trafficking Report

120

Master of the Temple Nick Griffin QC

Rod Cunliffe

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

Should Decisions of the Foreign Secretary be Justiciable?

122

The Martin John Burr Silver Cabinets

126

The Inn’s Candelabra

130

Louise Christian

Master Cryan

Richard Parsons

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

New Benchers Masters of the Bench Chairmen of Bench Committees People Finder Temple Music Foundation Dates

148 150 152 156 158 160

KEY INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE INNER TEMPLE PEGASUS SCHOLARSHIP INNER TEMPLE EVENT INNER TEMPLE EDUCATION & TRAINING

3

4

INNER TEMPLE

From the Treasurer To follow…

I

am now halfway through my year as Treasurer and still have my head above water – or at least I think I have – and my admiration for the workings of the Inn knows no bounds. It is thus a pleasure for me to write the preface for this year’s Yearbook and to put on record why the Inn is the great place it is.

The Inn is a complex amalgam of many parts; an educational establishment, a leading legal library, a property company, an events management organisation and a collegiate institution. It thrives because of the dedication of its staff and their willingness, no matter which department they work for, to pull together for the common good of the Inn with great humour, courtesy and efficiency. I cannot thank them enough for the support I have received and ask forgiveness for not mentioning everyone (or indeed anyone) by name but I have been restricted in the number of words I can use!

After last year with the Jubilee and the Olympics, I felt that 2013 was likely to be a quiet year. I was soon proved wrong. One of the educational high spots of the year is the Reader’s Lecture series, which this year has a human rights theme. The first lecture was by Justice Dyson Heydon of the High Court of Australia in the presence, amongst others, of the Chief Justice of Singapore, Sundaresh Menon.

Justice Heydon posed the question: Are Bills of Right really necessary in the common law world?, and I believe saw force in the observation that there is no need in countries whose democratic status would naturally respect human rights, and no point in counties that do not. This was a view that plainly was not shared by the next two speakers, Louise Christian, a solicitor and great supporter of those whose human rights are threatened, and Edward Fitzgerald QC, counsel for Abu

Qatada in the recent long running extradition litigation.

Stimulating stuff, which is to be followed in the autumn by lectures by the new UK judge on the ECHR, Paul Mahony, and by Lord Reed, a Justice of the UK Supreme Court.

I have also been fortunate to attend training weekends at Cumberland Lodge, Highgate House and Wotton House.

The quality of the speakers and trainers at these events is phenomenal. They all give freely of their time and expertise and play a major part in ensuring that the Inn produces advocates of excellence. We are intensely grateful to them.

Many conference organisers would give their eye teeth (and a lot of money) to obtain the speakers that we have had. It was a particular pleasure for us to be able to welcome Professor George Hampel AM QC, the pioneer of the Hampel method of advocacy training, to Wotton House.

As you have probably gathered from this, I have found the interface with the students this year thoroughly enlightening. They are a frighteningly bright and focused group of people and I cannot help but feel that the future of the profession is safe in their hands.

I am a firm believer in communication and it has been my pleasure to welcome to the Inn a number of distinguished people, including the Chief Justice of Bhutan, Justice Breyer of the US Supreme Court, the High Commissioner for Singapore, the Romanian Ambassador, and Justice Imman of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. One thing that is clear from these meetings is the very high regard in which the legal system in this country is held and the appreciation of, and respect for, the part played by the Inns in this. I am greatly looking forward to flying the Inn’s flag in Kuala Lumpur, Singapore and Bhutan during August.

FROM THE TREASURER INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Whilst all has been going well in the Inn, we are deeply conscious of the pressures being placed on our members practising at the criminal and family law Bars as a result of the Minister of Justice’s recent proposals. I hope that the representations by the Inn and others have had the effect of making him at least stop and think. It is depressing that a legal system, which has built up the enormous goodwill and respect that it has both in this country and overseas, is being threatened by a short-term need to cut costs. Reputations take time to be generated but can be lost in an instant.

This is not an issue that is well served by the current trend for short-termism – as the forthcoming 800th anniversary of Magna Carta shows.

The Inn is a great collegiate institution and a centre of legal excellence, a place of good fellowship and of corporate well-being. Looking back, it comes as no surprise that, together with Middle Temple, we raised the staggering sum of over £750,000 for the ‘repristination’ of the Harrison & Harrison organ in the Temple Church. Those of us that were privileged to be in the Church for the service of rededication of the organ in the presence of Her Majesty The Queen and Prince Philip retain very happy memories of the occasion.

Indeed, I think that even the Master of the Temple has now recovered from the stress of being told on the afternoon of the service that the Bishop of London, who as Dean of the Chapel Royal has oversight over the church, and was due

to rededicate the organ, was stuck at Gatwick. Such is the diversity of the Inn that Master Murphy-O’Connor (Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, the former Archbishop of Westminster) was on hand to step into the breach!

Notwithstanding the foul winter and spring, the Garden has been at its most magnificent this summer, yet another department of the Inn that serves us magnificently. It was a pleasure for us to host the Garden Opera performance of Verdi’s La Traviata (on the first reasonable summer evening) and the ‘Party on the Green’ garden party on a glorious evening for over 500 guests – the Inn at its best.

At Trinity Call, I had the privilege of Calling 114 of the Inn’s students to the Bar. This is a ceremony that Treasurers have been presiding over for many hundreds of years. Indeed I am told by the Archivist that I am the 416th Treasurer in an unbroken line of succession since 1505 and that students were being Called to the Bar by the Inn for a number of years before that. So, we must have been doing something right over the years – and I have no doubt that through the combined efforts of the Benchers, barristers, students and staff, the Inn and the profession will continue to thrive.

I thank you all for the support you have given me. It has been a privilege to be Treasurer in 2013.

Master Treasurer

Treasurers past, present and future meet for a special dinner following the visit of HM The Queen

“After last year with the Jubilee and the Olympics, 2013 was likely to be a quiet year. I was soon proved wrong.”

5

6

INNER TEMPLE EVENT

Angelic Symphony: The Organ of the Temple Church by the Sub-Treasurer

A

s a young boy growing up in north London, I daily passed the organ works of Fredrick Rothwell & Sons, on my way to school in Harrow Weald.

There, in the school chapel of the Salvatorian Fathers, I learnt to play its Rothwell organ, under the guidance of a music master who had studied with the great Herbert Howells. It, not he, was a two-manual, small pedalboard affair, but it coped adequately with hymns and the occasional speech day processionals. One particular memory was learning to play the American National Anthem when J F Kennedy died in 1963.

Rothwell’s career as an innovative organ builder had been greatly encouraged by his friend Sir Henry Walford Davies, organist of the Temple Church from 1898 to 1923. The Rothwell ‘jelly bag’ reservoir was never patented, but many of his innovations found their way into Temple’s Father Smith organ when Walford Davies commissioned Rothwell to give it a good overhaul in 1910. The Smith organ had been built in 1683, following the now famous Battle of the Organs when Inner and Middle Temple each had their favourite builder. We won, although the tradition of each Inn employing its own organist continued for much longer.

ANGELIC SYMPHONY INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

On 10 May 1941, at the height of the Blitz, much of the Temple Church was badly damaged and the Father Smith organ was destroyed. Peace in 1945 was followed by the biggest reconstruction programme London had ever seen.

But craftsmen, not least organ builders and materials, were scarce. How to replace our organ?

Fortunately, some would say miraculously, the Temple was given a new one by Lord Glentanar. He wished to dispose of his grand Harrison & Harrison four-manual monster, built in 1927, from his stately ballroom in the highlands. The story of how the Scottish laird met the Temple’s organist on a platform at King’s Cross station and arranged the gift there and then, predates by several decades Harry Potter’s equally magical encounters on platform 9¾ .

The Harrison organ (the firm still flourishes in Durham to this day) was reinstalled in the Temple Church in 1954 and has presided over baptisms, weddings, memorials, services and concerts ever since.

However, it was beginning to show its age after 80 years of uninterrupted service, to say nothing of its transplant to London. Thus the two Inns decided in 2009 that a major restoration was in order, and we were fortunate that Harrison

All this would come at a price, and a fund-raising campaign was launched by the Inner and Middle Temple, under the joint chairmanship of our Master Anthony May and Master Blair of Middle Temple. They quickly assembled a team to supervise this challenging task, which included the indefatigable fund raising skills of Penny Jonas. Thanks to the generosity of many supporters both from the Inns and without, the target of £750,000 was raised in full. Donations large and small flooded in, along with the proceeds from fund raising events, which ranged from concerts and Christmas fairs, to a sponsored cycling night ride from London to Dunwich. Many of the families who held memorial services for their loved ones in the Temple Church were also generous in giving their collections to the appeal, for which we remain very grateful.

The result – a splendid, magnificent, regilded and happy organ that has promised it will give loyal service for another 50 years. Its official rededication took place on 7 May this year, when we were hugely honoured by the presence of Her Majesty The Queen and Master HRH The Duke of Edinburgh at a special service of choral evensong to celebrate its official return to use.

“splendid, magnificent, regilded” & Harrison were still around to undertake this major task, at once historic, musical and needing not a little engineering skill. The organ had 3,474 pipes, all of which had to be removed, cleaned, repaired and ‘voiced’. Alas the old practice of washing the pipes in beer has ceased. Bellows needed new leathers, draw stops rearranged, and woodwork checked, following years of low humidity caused by the Church’s central heating.

You can hear the organ’s vast musical range for yourself with a showing of the silent movie Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, accompanied by the organ virtuoso David Briggs on 8 October. He might have welcomed the addition of the ‘jelly bag’ reservoir to give an additional frisson at the film’s grizzly climax.

The Sub-Treasurer is a member of the Royal College of Organists and served on its Executive Committee from 2001–2005.

The Sub-Treasurer

The Restored Organ

Pipe Voicing

7

INNER TEMPLE EVENT

Organ Rededication Ceremony with �� The Queen

HM the Queen meets the Organ Appeal Chairmen, Treasurers, Sub-Treasurer and Under Treasurer

8

HM the Queen meets Master May and Penny Jonas

FAREWELL TO JAMES VIVIAN INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Farewell to

James Vıvian by the Master of the Temple

J

ames Vivian arrived at the Temple Church in 1997, straight from his organ scholarship at King’s College, Cambridge. He was invited by Stephen Layton, then our newly appointed Director of Music, to assist with chorister rehearsals and services. James leaves us, 16 years later, as a Director of Music and Organist to whom we owe an enormous debt of gratitude, to become the organist at St George’s Chapel, Windsor. It speaks volumes for his achievement here that he is moving on to such a prestigious post. Our loss is Windsor’s gain.

In 1998, Stephen Layton told the Inns that James was without question the man they should appoint as Sub Organist. With Stephen and James together in harness, youthful energy and drive were once more in charge of the Church’s music, as they were when E J Hopkins was appointed (aged 25) in 1843 and George Thalben-Ball (aged 27) in 1923. Stephen and James transformed our music in those early years, Stephen generally conducting the choir and James dazzling us from the organ-loft with his virtuoso skills and profound musicianship.

By the time Stephen left in 2006, James was more than ready to take the helm; and for the last seven years, he has worked tirelessly to recruit, encourage and train boy choristers as talented as any in London. Just as important has been the steady stream of lay clerks from Oxbridge, some of the choral foundations’ finest singers, who come to London to build their musical career and enjoy singing here for James whenever they can. We can hardly complain when they leave.

Iestyn Davies sang here as counter tenor until he starred as Apollo in the English National Opera’s Death in Venice – and became, overnight, one of the most sought-after countertenors in the world. It remains to be seen how often we will now be able to call on Gareth John, who has just won the Kathleen Ferrier Prize; and we have many other rising stars in our back rows. It is a tribute to James that such wonderful soloists want to sing as choirmen here.

During his time as Director of Music, the choir and James have recorded and broadcast widely from the Church: in particular, the choir’s CDs have won high praise from the international music press. James has proposed, arranged and conducted some memorable concerts in the Church and in Middle Temple Hall. Dido and Aeneas in 2008 with the Temple Players – once more starring several of our choirmen – was a triumph. More recently, the choristers appeared at the Aldeburgh Festival. James’ most recent production was Walton’s Henry V, performed this year in Church with the Aurora Orchestra on Shakespeare’s birthday; it lifted the spirits of everyone there. And in May, he conducted our choral evensong for Her Majesty The Queen. His appointment to Windsor had been confirmed the day before; we wonder if that was a particularly warm smile Her Majesty gave him when he was presented to her after the service.

Her Majesty and the Duke of Edinburgh were here to celebrate the refurbishment of the Church’s organ. An unsung hero throughout that long process was James himself, who drew up and oversaw the specifications and the budget for the work. James took a daily interest in the work, and his partnership and shared vision with Andrew Scott, Harrison’s head voicer, has ensured that the organ is now one of the finest in London. Accolades from visiting organists have been pouring in; for as long as the Glen Tanar organ lasts, so long will James’ legacy to the Temple endure.

Hopkins stayed at the Temple for 55 years, Thalben-Ball for 58. Sadly, we say goodbye to James, Ann Elise and little Emilia after the mere twinkling of a Temple eye. They go with our great gratitude, our love and our best wishes for the happiest of futures.

Master of the Temple

James Vivian and his wife, Ann Elise Smoot, meet HM The Queen

9

10

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Master Harrison

by Master Hallett

P

eter Harrison first came into my life in the late 1980s when he was a tenant in another set of chambers.

I was part of a close-knit group of Six Pump Court tenants. Our group did the same kind of publicly funded work and shared the same taste in music and the same sense of humour. We were well aware that there were barristers in other sets of chambers who envied us and wanted to join us. But, in those days, transfers between chambers were not as common as today and raised a question mark over the motives of the person seeking a transfer. We were somewhat concerned, therefore, when we heard of this young barrister, who had won a place at a good set of chambers doing privately paid planning work, who wanted to give it all up to join us.

We need not have worried. We soon discovered that Peter was a true professional. For him, the Bar was about more than money: the Bar was about serving society.

Peter passed the Six Pump Court recruitment tests and soon became as much, if not more, a part of the team as those of us who had been at Six Pump Court for decades.

He became one of the most successful and popular members chambers ever produced. We loved him and his sense of mischief, his enthusiasm and his talent.

My path went in a slightly different direction when I was appointed a judge, but Peter remained a dear friend and I kept track of him. I was delighted to see his career flourish.

I also knew that he was doing excellent work teaching advocacy to students at Inner Temple. He gave up hours of his spare time to help others join the profession he loved. He was a natural. He could offer constructive criticism to a new advocate without ever crushing their spirit. He was always supportive and instructive.

More people fell for his very considerable charms: his fellow trainers, his students and the staff of the Education & Training Department. The department is comprised of a bunch of extraordinarily talented people – they too are a close-knit bunch. Like Six Pump Court, they took Peter to their hearts. He was one of the most successful and popular trainers they had.

When a member of the department suggested he be elected a Bencher, I needed no persuading. With the support of Donald Cryan and others, he sailed in. He continued to make a huge contribution to our training programme: for example, he was responsible for the Intervarsity Debating Competition hosted annually by the Inn. As a former Treasurer I may be biased, but I truly believe that the Inner Temple boasts the best Education & Training Department of the four Inns. Without the dedication and support of our army of volunteers, particularly those of Peter's calibre, that would not be possible.

Recently, Peter had become Deputy Master of the Silver and I know that Donald Cryan, as Master of the Silver, was looking forward to working with him on our glorious silver collection. Donald had so much time for Peter’s abilities that he was planning to hand over the Master-ship sooner rather than later.

It was, therefore, wonderfully fitting that Peter’s two interests at the Inn – silver and training – should come together in a memorial to him. Colleagues at the Inn and at Six Pump Court have clubbed together to buy and inscribe a George V jubilee silver salver. It will be inscribed “The Harrison Plate. The Inner Temple Inter Varsity Debating Competition.”

The Inn’s silver collection goes back centuries, and Peter’s salver will take pride of place amongst it.

Peter has left his mark upon us all and upon an ancient institution with a proud history, in which Peter has played a significant part. When we are all long gone, students will be competing for the Harrison Plate and his memory will live on.

It will be a glorious memorial to a glorious man – one who achieved so much in the time he had with us and who left an indelible mark on all our lives.

Master Hallett

Finance for Barristers Raising the bar in professional finance solutions

Located in the heart of the city, we offer boys an outward-looking, forward-thinking education that prepares them for life.

In today’s changing financial environment, ensuring that you have access to the right financial backing is essential.

At LDF Professions we have developed our Barrister funding products in order to provide the best possible finance solution, covering a wide range of professional funding and equipment requirements.

Academic, Music and Sport Scholarships are available at 11+, 13+ and 16+.

Our Unsecured Practice Loan product can be utilised to fund almost any purpose, including: • • • • • •

Please contact the school for further information or to book a place at an Open Afternoon.

Aged Debt Tax & VAT Liability Pension Contributions Capital Expenditure IT & Software Vehicles

To find out more information on our products and services, contact LDF today on:

01244 527300

info@ldf.co.uk | www.ldf.co.uk/professions

 020 7489 0291  admissions@clsb.org.uk www.clsb.org.uk

LDF Professions is a trading name of Leasedirect Finance Limited | Reg No. 2029122 | Part of the Investec group of companies InnerTemple 2013

InnerTempleYB2013.indd 1

7/5/2013 8:47:42 AM

LEGAL HUB FROM SWEET & MAXWELL Legal Hub provides you with a range of legal information and resources that make your job easier.

The Expert Witness Directory Find the expert witness with the exact specialism you need using the only directory with complete free-to-view user access. The directory is trusted across the profession thanks to the reliability and dependability of all our listed experts.

Visit legalhub.co.uk The Bar Directory Have you submitted your entry to become part of the most comprehensive list of Barristers available? Be sure not to miss the opportunity to be part of the 2014 Bar Directory.

For more information and to discuss which entry package best suits your needs please contact us.

EMAIL hub@legalhub.co.uk CALL 0800 15 77 812

11

12

INNER TEMPLE

The Greatest Knight In anticipation of the 800th anniversary of the sealing of Magna Carta in 1215, the Rt Hon Lord Judge remembers one of the central figures at the time of the charter, William Marshall, whose effigy lies in the Temple Church

THE GREATEST KNIGHT INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Introduction

by the Master of the Temple

O

n 12 June, before the Amity Dinner with Middle Temple, Choral Evensong was sung in the Temple Church to celebrate both the amity between the Inns and the sealing of Magna Carta on 15 June 1215.

Giving the address, the Lord Chief Justice bid us to let our imaginations fly as he told the story of 1214–15, of the Temple’s part in the vital – and fraught – negotiations that led to Runnymede and of William Marshal, 1st Earl of Pembroke, loyalist, mediator and hero of the hour. William Marshal would reissue the charter in 1216 and 1217 under his own seal, and so ensure its survival. It was not hard to envision him pacing the Round where now, nearly eight centuries later, his effigy still lies.

Magna Carta

by the Rt Hon Lord Judge “39. No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land.”

“40. To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice.”

On 15 June 1215, two sides in a forgotten English Civil War met at Runnymede by the banks of the Thames to see if they could, at long last, negotiate a peace. A document was prepared, but it was never signed. It was simply sealed.

Although it is dated 15 June, its terms were probably not concluded until 19 June. No one called it the Great Charter, or Magna Carta. It was just another charter.

“King John had not the slightest intention of abiding by any of it. The Pope killed it off. That was meant to be that… And yet this document, or more accurately, the ideas symbolised by this document have become deep rooted in our way of life.”

13

INNER TEMPLE THE GREATEST KNIGHT

As a peacekeeping settlement, its prospects were negligible. It was no more destined for success than the Munich Agreement of 1938 which was supposed to bring “peace in our time”. Like hundreds of charters before it, it was destined for oblivion. Do we remember the charter of Henry I? Do we remember the charter of King Stephen?

What is more, within a few weeks it was declared null and void by Pope Innocent III, who, King of England or not, had been acknowledged by John as his feudal lord. (Can I be naughty, and wonder what the Euro-sceptics would have made of that?) Pope Innocent abolished the charter itself.

All the obligations and safeguards contained in it were declared invalid for all future times. The rebel barons were excommunicated, a condition which our secular age cannot begin to comprehend, but which would have penetrated even the thickest of baron’s skulls as a lock on the door to eternal salvation. King John had not the slightest intention of abiding by any of it. The Pope killed it off. That was meant to be that.

And yet this document, or, more accurately, the ideas symbolised by this document, have become deep-rooted in our way of life. They have travelled to what in 1215 were unknown worlds. They have had a direct influence, and continue to resonate in countries far, far away from these shores. The United States of America and Canada, Australia and New Zealand were undiscovered lands, but Magna Carta is a document which is common to them and it is common to us. Through it, the common law has penetrated the world. The ideas derived from it have underpinned all the great declarations of human rights. It is a universal document, continuing to have a universal impact.

There are many myths about Magna Carta. Magna Carta did not give us the right to trial by jury, but in the concept of trial by one’s peers, one’s equals, it provided the foundation for trial by jury. Magna Carta did not offer statements about personal liberty or fair trials, but in the promise that justice would not be delayed or denied, it underpinned the right of the individual not to be kept in custody indefinitely without trial, and carried the consequence that a hearing or trial would always be required. Magna Carta did not create parliamentary sovereignty, but it underlined that the subject’s allegiance did not constitute an absolute and

unconditional obedience to the king. And this implied that the king himself was subject to the law, and that if he failed to abide by that understanding, he was not entitled to claim an obligation of loyalty. Magna Carta was the banner with which the divine right of kings was contested in 17th Century England, when the foundations for our democracy were laid.

The Pilgrim Fathers took it with them to the new colony in North America. This was the banner carried into battle by the then colonists in what was to become the United States of America, protesting in the 18th Century when Parliament sought to impose taxation without representation. On these foundations that great democracy was built.

To this day, all our rulers are subject to the law: presidents and prime ministers, whoever we are, we all are. What has all that to do with the Temple Church? The short answer is that many of the key moments in the two years leading up to the sealing of the Charter took place here, here in what was then a very new building, consecrated in 1185. In 1213, the king had two London headquarters: to the east, the Tower, and to the west, the Temple. It was from here that in 1213 he went to the old St Paul’s Cathedral to confirm that the Pope was his feudal lord. It was from here in November 1214 that he guaranteed the freedom of the English Church, which became the very first clause in the Charter a few months later.

It was here in January 1215 that the barons met with the king. Please try and imagine it. By now deadly, equally treacherous enemies, tramping up and down, trying to do a deal, each side trying to secure what it saw as its rights. And the crisis of 7,000 French troops here in England, and the City about to open its gates to them; it was indeed a time of national emergency. Is it any wonder that the Master of the Temple was rather frightened? But history was being made in that tramping up and down, the march of history not just of this country, but of the world. And from the Temple in May, yet another Charter issued which guaranteed the City of London the right freely to elect its own Lord Mayor, a concession born out of the king’s weakness, and offered unreservedly. And so on to Runnymede, and after Runnymede and the nullification of the Charter, what then?

And, I am sorry to have taken so long to get here: one of the ultimate saviours of the Great Charter is buried here.

“Magna Carta was the banner with which the divine right of kings was contested in 17th Century England, when the foundations for our democracy were laid.”

14

THE GREATEST KNIGHT INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

“William Marshal, Earl of Pembroke, is not a name anyone can conjure with today. Yet he is one of our major heroic historic figures. In the Charter his name is the first mentioned of the non-clerical men noted in the Charter as advising the King.”

William Marshal, Earl of Pembroke, is not a name anyone can conjure with today. Yet he is one of our major heroic historic figures. In the Charter, his name is the first mentioned of the non-clerical men noted in the Charter as advising the king. And indeed he did. He was a rare creature, trusted for his integrity by the barons as well as the King. Fortunately for history, King John died in 1216, leaving a small boy as his heir.

William Marshal was elected regent. Within a short time, he had reissued new versions of the Charter. He did this in 1216 and 1217. And then, 70 years old or so, he returned to the field of battle and drove the French out of England. And just before he died shortly afterwards, he became a Templar.

Gradually, but very quickly bearing in mind there were no newspapers or television or telephones or emails or Twitter or Facebook, the requirements of the King for tax were negotiated in Parliament by his confirmation of the great Charter, and the Charter became embedded in the consciousness of people. Over the next couple of hundred years, these confirmations followed on numerous occasions.

And yet as early as 1226, we have the records of a case in which a group of knights from Lincolnshire criticised the high sheriff for the way in which he was administering justice, behaving “contrary to their liberty which they ought to hold by the Charter of the Lord King”. In other words, this was a direct appeal to the Charter as the guardian of law and liberty, and gradually, whatever its actual terms might have been, becoming an iconic symbol of cherished freedoms.

William Marshal is buried in this church. In May 1219, at his funeral, the Archbishop of Canterbury described him as “the greatest knight that ever lived”. We are proud to call this church the cradle of the common law. As you leave, you will find his effigy. Pause to acknowledge the debt which we all, and many generations all over the world, owe to him for infusing life into what otherwise would have been just one more piece of vellum.

We are in a church. We know that, as a medieval man with a deep faith, Marshall died hoping to find eternal salvation. If any one of you here with a faith of his or her own offer a short prayer for the repose of his immortal soul, he would have appreciated it.

The Rt Hon Lord Judge

15

16

INNER TEMPLE

Totally Tremendous Top Ten Trial Tips

by Master Morley, author of The Devil’s Advocate

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

On reading your case papers, now prepare your ideal closing speech long before you get anywhere near court. It should be your map of what to do at trial, and will guide your case preparation.

Bounce your ideas off others in the Robing Room. See if you make sense, if your argument is attractive, if your pitch is flawed. The Robing Room is an unending university of training and ideas for thoughtful advocates.

It’s not about you – it’s all about the case. You don’t matter – all that matters is how well you put the argument. Noisy, tub-thumping, look-at-me advocates are usually tiresome – and if tiresome, are unpersuasive; when to be persuasive is the whole point of your job.

Questions should be short, with one point at a time. Long convoluted questions confuse the witness, the judge, and the client, and will really please your opponent.

In cross-examination, when you have got what you need for your closing speech, stop. Save your comment for your speech, not for the witness.

So, do not blunder about asking unnecessary questions, or putting conclusions, risking the witness giving you damaging answers, for no forensic purpose.

85 degrees to the perpendicular, leaning toward your tribunal, with a straight back, not hunched, is the optimum angle of persuasion – no kidding.

Never, ever, ever, be rude to your judge – act always with clear-eyed honour, fearlessly and square-jawed, but tempered with deference and politeness – our judges are really rather good, so be respectful – and remember, the judge is in charge, you are not, and if you are annoying, you may be ignored, and if ignored, you cannot be persuasive.

8

When making submissions, do not gabble, offer an early overview of your point, and watch the judge’s pen. Think how best you can make your submission easily written, which will have the effect of making your presentation clearer.

9

Treat your opponent with courtesy and respect – always. Do not seek to bamboozle and weasel and obfuscate. If you say you will do it, do it. Do not reverse what you promise just to score a point.

Remember, we are colleagues, not gladiators, and our Bar is envied internationally as a place where advocates assist each other, get along, and thereby improve the efficiency of the trial process. Don’t blow 400 years by being sharp.

10

To return to where I began, to the closing speech; this is the advocate’s moment to shine. Seize it. When you deliver your speech, make sure you prepare it in great detail – maybe write it out, though don’t read it out. This is your time to persuade – so, don’t wing it – ask for time – prepare it, practise it, refine it, bounce some of it off friends, craft it, weave it, nurture it, and then… deliver it! – with clarity, care, and brighteyed panache. A good closing can turn the world on its head.

Master Morley

PLOUM sofa. Design: Ronan & Erwan Bouroullec.

Catalogue: www.ligne-roset.com

Ligne Roset Westend 23/25 Mortimer Street London W1T 3JE • www.ligne-roset-westend.co.uk Ligne Roset City 37/39 Commercial Rd London E1 1LF • www.ligne-roset-city.co.uk

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

Fraudulent Bankers: The Remedies Extracts from a lecture

by Master Hirst

T

here is nothing new about bank fraud. Banks have always been a target for the fraudster – for the very simple reason that they have cash – lots of it, which is exactly what the fraudster wants to lays his – or her – hands on.

It used to be bank robbery – immortalised on the silver screen by Bonnie and Clyde in the days of the American Wild West and in England by the more gentlemanly Lavender Hill Mob. That prolific real 20th-Century robber Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks, and reputedly answered: “Because that’s where the money is.”

However, what I think is comparatively new is the concept of the fraudulent bank and the fraudulent banker.

Fraudulent financiers and entrepreneurs, yes – exemplified by South Sea Bubble in 1720, Melmotte in Trollope’s The Way We Live Now in the 19th Century, and in real life by Robert Maxwell in the 20th Century and Madoff in the 21st – but not the fraudulent bank. That seems almost unthinkable – at least amongst the major world banks, which were seen as honest, albeit often aggressive. Bank fraud meant fraud on bankers, not by bankers.

It doesn’t need me to say that it has all changed in the last few years – during the world recession, things seem to have gone from bad to worse, proving the accuracy of Warren Buffett’s famous observation: “After all, you only find out who is swimming naked when the tide goes out. ”I am afraid that post-BCCI and the collapse of Lehman Brothers, all that has changed: the crookery in BCCI is well known – it is perhaps less well known that in Lehman’s, it turned out that client funds – supposed to be segregated and ringfenced – had been routinely used to support the bank’s own trading operations.

18

And so it goes on: just reviewing news reports over the last few months, I read: • “Former Allied Irish directors charged over fraud inquiry.” – The Times, 24 July 2012 • The LIBOR scandal emerged last summer – involving Barclays Bank at the forefront – a bank originally founded on Quaker principles and a pillar of East Anglian respectability. It is pretty clear that many other leading banks are also implicated – including Royal Bank of Scotland.

• HSBC – the great Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank – is found to have been assisting money laundering by drug cartels in Mexico on a massive scale.

• And although it might have been thought that things could scarcely get worse, they did: on 6 August 2012, the New York State Department of Financial Services threatened to revoke the banking licence of Standard Chartered Bank, that most respectable of British banks and a pillar of the establishment with strong links in Asia, alleging that the bank had "programmatically engaged" – in deceptive and fraudulent conduct in order to move at least $250 billion through its New York branch on behalf of Iranian financial institutions.

Even allowing for a very considerable degree of hyperbole and political one-upmanship in that statement from NYSD, the bankers’ fall from respectability to disgrace in the space of only a few years has been quite astonishing.

It is now an industry beset with very serious allegations of impropriety, indeed – not just in the fringe but at the heart of the business. The result is that it is now quite possible

FRAUDULENT BANKERS: THE REMEDIES INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

“Bank fraud meant fraud on bankers, not by bankers.”

to speak in one sentence of fraud by bankers and fraud on bankers.

It is not for me to opine on the ‘structural’ reforms that are needed for the banks. I think it is a fair bet that the regulators will react by trying to close the metaphorical stable door with regulatory controls – after the horses have bolted.

But whether that regulation – or I predict over-regulation – will be effective, time alone will tell. It is worth observing that the scandals of the past years reflect badly not just on the financial institutions concerned, but also on the regulators who have failed so spectacularly in their supervision.

Others look to a return to a more traditional form of banking. They recall the legendary Captain Mainwaring, the Dad’s Army manager of the Walmington-on-Sea branch of Swallow Bank. It is the picture of a respectable, if wholly unimaginative, manager. David Davis, a senior Conservative politician, who wrote in The Daily Telegraph: “Not so long ago, our high-street banks were places that depositors could put their money for a safe, if unglamorous return. Bank managers were often mocked for their dullness – it was not for nothing that Captain Mainwaring in the comedy series Dad’s Army was a bank manager.

Yet these decent, ordinary people delivered a rock-solid support for the community in their lending and saving systems.”

And Jonathan Ford wrote in the Financial Times: “Bankers should emulate Captain Mainwaring.”

19

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

Criminal sanctions

T

he public are demanding retribution and they will probably get it.The LIBOR scandal has already resulted in huge financial penalties for Barclays: a $451 million fine imposed by the British and US regulators. It is clear that other banks were involved, and we can expect regulators on both sides of the Atlantic to inflict further massive financial penalties on the institutions involved – not just British. Standard Chartered Bank has been been inflicted with a huge financial penalty by the New York State banking regulator: it has agreed to pay $340 million – and other States seem to be queuing up to inflict additional fines.

Not to be outdone by British and US regulators, on 25 July 2012, the European Commission made the following announcement: “In the recent LIBOR scandal, serious concerns have been raised about false submissions of banks’ estimated interbank lending rates. Any actual or attempted manipulation of

The leading case is The King v De Berenger & Others. On 21 February 1814, a uniformed man posing as Colonel du Bourg, aide-de-camp to Lord Cathcart, arrived at the Ship Inn at Dover, England, bearing news that Napoleon I of France had been killed and the Bourbons were victorious. Requesting that this information be relayed on to the Admiralty in London via semaphore telegraph, the so-called ‘Colonel du Bourg’ proceeded on towards London, stopping at each inn on the way to spread the good news. At about noon, confirmation for the news of peace arrived in the form of another coach, which circulated throughout London, bearing three French officers who distributed leaflets celebrating the Bourbon victory.

Government stocks soared. It became clear that over £1 million of stock had been purchased the previous week: a huge sum almost 200 years ago.

De Berenger and seven other conspirators were tried on an indictment for conspiracy. The indictment was that for the previous two years there had been an open and public war between the king and his people and “the then ruler of

“It is worth observing that the scandals of the past years reflect badly not just on the financial institutions concerned, but also on the regulators who have failed so spectacularly in their supervision.”

20

such key benchmarks can have a serious impact on market integrity, and could result in significant losses to consumers and investors, or distort the real economy. The European Commission has today acted to address this kind of market manipulation, by adopting amendments to the proposals for a Regulation and a Directive on insider dealing and market manipulation, including criminal sanctions, initially tabled on 20 October 2011 (see IP/11/1217 and IP/11/1218).

Today’s amendments will clearly prohibit the manipulation of benchmarks, including LIBOR and EURIBOR, and make such manipulation a criminal offence.”

That will only be for the future. The common law is well ahead of the game: after all, rigging markets is nothing new.

It is long established that a conspiracy to rig the market is a common law conspiracy to defraud.

France, to wit, Napoleon Bonaparte and the people of France, And that the defendants had contrived by false reports rumours and arts to induce that N Bonaparte had been killed and peace would soon been made with France”.

Put simply, the defendants had deliberately spread a false rumour about the death of Napoleon to push up the price of government bonds. They were convicted, and the chief conspirators were sentenced to 12 months of prison time, a fine of £1,000 each, and an hour in the public pillory – a humiliation which regrettably no longer exists in England and Wales.

FRAUDULENT BANKERS: THE REMEDIES INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

The defendants unsuccessfully challenged their convictions. Lord Ellenborough said that: “A public mischief is stated as the object of this conspiracy; the conspiracy is by false rumours to raise the price of the public funds and securities; and the crime lies in the act of conspiracy and combination to effect that purpose, and would have been complete, although it had not been pursued to its consequences, or the parties had not been able to carry it into effect. The purpose itself is mischievous: it strikes at the price of a vendible commodity in the market, and if it gives it a fictitious price, by means of false rumours, it is a fraud levelled against all the public, for it is against all such as may possibly have anything to do with the funds on that particular day.”

De Berenger was followed in Scott v Brown Doering McNab & Co, a civil case. Brown Doering were stockbrokers to a company called the Steam Loop Co Ltd. They conspired with the promoters to create a false market in the company’s shares by placing contrived orders for shares in order to create fiction of a real market for the shares. Claims by parties involved in the conspiracy to recover funds advanced failed on the ancient maxim ‘ex turpi causa action non oritur’: actions founded on illegal acts fail. Following Berenger, Lord Justice Lopes said: “I can see no substantial distinction between false rumours and false and fictitious acts; the price of the shares in this case was artificial, and the premium unreal and nominal, to the knowledge of all parties concerned, put forward to induce the public to take shares, with which otherwise they would have had nothing to do.”

Agreeing, Lord Justice A L Smith said: “If two or more persons agree to cheat and defraud others by means of deceit and fraud, there can be no doubt that each and all are indictable for a criminal conspiracy at common law. It has been held that it is a criminal conspiracy for two or more to agree by false rumours to endeavour to raise the price of the public funds on a particular day: Rex v Berenger. It has also been held in Reg v Aspinall that an agreement by two or more to cheat and defraud by means of false pretences those who might buy shares in a company was an indictable conspiracy.”

De Berenger and Scott v Brown Doering have been repeatedly cited in England and in other common law jurisdictions, including the Supreme Court of the United States.

I see no material distinction between creating a false market in bonds and shares by spreading false rumours and or false impressions, and deliberately reporting false interest rates with a view to affecting a major market index, such as LIBOR. The maximum sentence for conspiracy to defraud is ten years on indictment.

It seems that a charge could also be made in the English jurisdiction, under s2 of the Fraud Act 2006: “Section 1 of the Act provides that a person is guilty of fraud if he is in breach of any of the sections listed in subsection (2) which provide for different ways of committing the offence, including section 2 fraud by false representation.”

I think it highly likely that there will be prosecutions of individuals involved in London – particularly the traders whose involvement is recorded in emails sent at the time.

There may also be extradition tussles with the US. The tension between the US and the UK over LIBOR and Standard Chartered is already palpable.

Scott was a civil case. So it provides a good basis for a civil claim for damages for conspiracy against those involved in trying to manipulate LIBOR (including the banks who will be vicariously liable). But at least in England you have to prove loss – and that may be rather harder. Assume it turns out that traders in banks generally were trying to push the market up or down to suit their particular trade – what difference would it really have made if, as seems likely, the market was being rigged both ways? The position will be very different in the United States. First, damages are assessed by juries, so there is no reasoned analysis. Second, juries can award punitive damages – and we all know how vicious they can be.

So part of the battle will be over jurisdiction. Defendants will be determined to try and have the cases decided in a jurisdiction other than the US, but the US is likely to prove tenacious. Banks can expect to be engulfed in litigation for several years to come. It may be that these challenges – existential in some cases – will be the most powerful driver to a return to more traditional values.

But we need to guard against ruining banks and their shareholders. It is not as if most banks’ balance sheets are looking too flushed at the moment. The main sufferers if there are ruinous fines will be depositors, shareholders, and businesses and consumers who wish to borrow money to fund new projects, whether it be a new factory or a new home. I suggest that punishments should be aimed at the truly guilty parties: the directors and employees responsible for what has gone wrong. That is much more likely to drive up standards.

Master Hirst Inner Temple Hall, 5 November 2012

21

The Searcys collection of stunning venues with catering and event management to match

30 Euston Square

Conferences | Meetings | Banquets

40|30 The Gherkin

Private dining | Weddings | Receptions

Vintners’ Hall

Banquets | Receptions | Conferences

30 Pavilion Road

Weddings | Banquets | Receptions

Searcys Champagne Bars

Champagne parties | Private dining | Receptions

St Pancras Grand

London Transport Museum

30 Pavilion Road

The Pump Room and Assembly Rooms, Bath

Champagne parties | Private dining | Receptions

Receptions | Conferences | Meetings

Weddings | Banquets | Receptions

Conferences | Wedding | Banquets

The Inner Temple

{10-11} Carlton House Terrace

Garden parties | Banquets | Weddings

The Grand Ballroom at Montcalm Events | Meetings | Private dining

Blenheim Palace

Weddings | Conferences | Banquets

Receptions | Conferences | Meetings

Barbican Centre

Conferences | Receptions | Banquets

Birmingham Repertory Theatre Banquets | Restaurant | Theatre dining | Auditorium

0207 101 0220 | events@searcys.co.uk

www.searcys.co.uk

SAINTS AND REBELS INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Saints and Rebels

The Archivist, Celia Pilkington, recounts the role of the Inn during the religious turmoils of the 16th and 17th Centuries

23

INNER TEMPLE

A

lthough today’s barristers are not known for their regular attendance at the Temple Church, it seems that during the 16th and 17th Centuries, the flames of faith burned more brightly amongst some members of this Inn. The lengthy curriculum of legal training left many apprentice barristers with ample time to reflect upon their beliefs. The first recorded member of Inner Temple to die for his faith was John Bradford, one-time paymaster at the Siege of Montreuil in 1544, who was admitted to this Inn in 1547, where a fellow student swiftly recruited him to the Protestant faith. Bradford abandoned his legal studies and withdrew to St Catherine’s College, Cambridge, where he read theology. Such was his devotion to his new religion, he acquired the nickname ‘Holy Bradford’, later taking holy orders and becoming Chaplain in Ordinary to Edward VI. The new Catholic regime of Mary I brought an early end to his life, when his association with the old faith ensured that he perished in the flames during the martyrdoms at Smithfield in 1555. Thomas Fuller, the churchman and historian, wrote

the rebellion, due to the lack of support in southern England, resulted in the mass executions of over 300 men and women including eight of their leaders. The Earl of Westmorland escaped to Flanders, where he lived off a small pittance given to him by the King of Spain, his vast inheritance was confiscated and he never saw his wife and five children again.

The unhappy Earl continued to plot and intrigue against Elizabeth. He joined the Duke of Parma in 1588 during the Armada campaign and he served in the Spanish army as a colonel in the Spanish refugee regiment. He died virtually penniless in Flanders in 1601.

The rising in the North and the continuing threat of plots against Elizabeth persuaded the authorities to root out all suspected Catholics. In 1577, the Lord Keeper, Nicholas Bacon, made a survey of the religious conformity of the Inns of Court. He was shocked to learn that 180 members were Catholics, which implied that one member in five was a papist, largely to be found in Gray’s and the Inner Temple. All suspects were examined by the ecclesiastical commissioners,

“In 1577, the Lord Keeper, Nicholas Bacon, made a survey of the religious conformity of the Inns of Court. He was shocked to learn that 180 members – as many as one in five – were Catholics, which implied that one member in five was a papist. These were largely to be found in Gray’s and the Inner Temple.”

24

that he endured the flame “as a fresh gale of wind in a hot summer’s day” confirming by his death the truth of that doctrine he had so diligently and powerfully preached during his life. His name is commemorated at the Marian Martyrs’ Monument in Smithfield.

Elizabeth I’s accession and the subsequent Elizabethan Church settlement left many conservative Catholics, especially in the North of England, dissatisfied with the Protestant slant of the settlement. The Inn can claim a link to the great popular rebellion of 1569, which led to the Elizabethan distrust of English Catholics, as one of the leaders of this rebellion, Charles Neville, the sixth Earl of Westmorland, became a member of the Inn in 1561. In the late autumn of 1569, Westmorland formed a pact with Thomas Percy, 7th Earl of Northumberland, and together they led the insurrection known as ‘the rising in the north’. Their aim was to restore Catholicism and to release Mary, Queen of Scots, from her imprisonment. Supported by the large numbers of the resentful Catholic northern population, the two Earls led a small body of armed horsemen to Durham, where the townspeople joyfully assisted them in dismantling the communion tables. All the English translations of the Bible were destroyed, along with every copy of the Reformation prayer book that could be found. On 30 November 1569, the old mass was sung in Durham Cathedral, and for the next ten days, masses were sung every morning. The revolt rapidly spread to many other northern towns. Masses were held in local churches, and the uprising soon attracted a following of over 6,000 people. However, the subsequent defeat of

who wished to know “whether they and every of them have orderly upon Sondaies and hollydais gone to their parysh churche or other place of comon prayer and their abyden the heringe of devyne S’vice without some reasonable cause and where they have so gon to s’vice”.

Thomas Greenwood, one of those questioned, stated that “he hath seldom gon to the church by reason of the multitude of causes sins he was a practitioner. But he saith his prayers pryvatly in his chamber.” The examination found that 104 suspected papists had ceased to practise their faith and had since demonstrated their adherence to Protestantism.

For some Catholics, exile was preferable to conversion.

In 1568, the Missionary College at Douai was founded in France. It attracted disaffected Catholics from England who were keen to train as priests and become storm troopers in the fight against English Protestantism. The Inns of Court were a fertile recruiting ground for these new radicalised Catholics and were considered by the missionaries as an ideal forcing-house for religious insurrection. There was a “large, virtually unsupervised student population whose gardens and walks were a recognised rendezvous, ideally suited for clandestine conference and discussion”. It was also helpful that the Inns of Court were beyond the jurisdiction of the City Justices. In 1580, George Gilbert’s Catholic mission was established in Chancery Lane. Here, young men sheltering priests would meet in secret and introduce potential converts to the undercover priests.

SAINTS AND REBELS INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

One such recruit was the Cornishman and Catholic historian Nicholas Roscarrock, who entered the Inner Temple as a student member in 1571. In 1579, he visited Douai, and upon his return became a keen member of George Gilbert’s Catholic mission. In 1581, Roscarrock’s house was raided, and the missionary priest Ralph Sherwin was found preaching there. Both Sherwin and Roscarrock were taken to the Tower, where Sherwin was executed and Roscarrock was racked and imprisoned for five years. Undeterred, he continued to refuse to attend church and was imprisoned several more times.

During one such stay, he befriended a fellow Catholic, Lord William Howard, the younger son of the Duke of Norfolk.

Their enduring friendship is commemorated by the Langdale Rosary, now in the Victoria and Albert Museum.

The Howards granted Roscarrock a lifetime annuity, and the remainder of his life was spent at Naworth Castle in Cumberland.

Francis Throckmorton joined the Inner Temple in 1576. In 1580, he also journeyed to Douai. The friendships he formed there persuaded him to become intermediary between the Catholics on the continent and the supporters of Mary, Queen of Scots. He soon contrived a plot to overthrow the Queen and replace her with Mary, thereby returning England to Catholicism. When the evidence was found to incriminate him, he was taken to the Tower, where he was racked three times. Having confessed his involvement, he was executed at Tyburn Abbey in 1584.

The Temple can also claim a direct link to the Gunpowder Plot. The Middle Temple in particular had admitted the Winter brothers, Thomas and Robert in 1590, who were both tried alongside Guy Fawkes and executed with him. The Treshams, a family of noted Catholics, had been associated with the Inner Temple for several generations. Thomas Tresham, whose son Francis was one of the plotters, was prosecuted for sheltering the Jesuit priest Edmund Campion, and he spent many years in detention in the Fleet Prison. Resentment at his father’s harsh treatment may have persuaded Francis to join the conspiracy to assassinate James I. It is believed that Francis Tresham was the author of the message sent to Lord Monteagle, his brother-in-law, discouraging him from attending Parliament on the day of the planned atrocity. It was this letter that alerted the authorities to the existence of the plot. Francis was betrayed by Guy Fawkes under torture.

He died of natural causes in the Tower of London in 1605.

Such are the vagaries of this country that, in the later 17th Century, where once George Gilbert had founded his Catholic mission, Chancery Lane became a focus for those attracted by political intrigue and dissent. The Green Ribbon Club founded in 1673 by, amongst others, the Earl of Shaftesbury, marked the beginning of systemised political organisation in England. It also served as an intelligence gathering body for the Whig faction. Its members were opposed to both Catholicism and to the Stuart brand of absolute monarchy, and they were determined to prevent

“The Temple can also claim a direct link to the Gunpowder Plot. The Middle Temple in particular had admitted the Winter brothers, Thomas and Robert in 1590, who were both tried alongside Guy Fawkes and executed with him.”

Martyrs at Smithfield. Image © Look and Learn Ltd

25

26

INNER TEMPLE

The Rebellion of the Earls of Northumberland and Westmoreland. Image © Bridgeman Art Library

James, Duke of York, from becoming king. Meetings took place in the King’s Head Tavern on the corner of Fleet Street and Chancery Lane. Political debates fuelled by much ale and tobacco proved a magnet for some of the lawyers at the Inns of Court. Members of the Green Ribbon Club, aside from wearing green ribbons, liked to dress in armour fashioned from green silk, which they regarded as proof against assault.

Any man so attired was “safe as a house for it was impossible to strike him for laughing”.

One such member was John Ayloff, admitted to this Inn in 1664. The Royalist pamphleteer Sir Roger L’Estrange said of him: “There are few more daring men for a desperate exploit.” Ayloff wrote angry political verses calling for the destruction of the Stuart monarchy and the foundation of an English republic. Along with other Green Ribbon members, he helped to organise the great Pope-burning processions of 1680 and 1681.

When the dissolution of the Oxford Parliament prevented the Whigs from excluding James from the throne by parliamentary means, the Earl of Shaftesbury decided that armed revolt was the only solution. The result was the bungled Rye House Plot of 1683. Planning meetings took

place in the chambers of Robert West, a member of the Middle Temple. Ayloff enthusiastically joined the plotters who planned to kill the king and James, Duke of York, as they returned from Newmarket past the Rye House in Hertfordshire. The plotters hoped that these assassinations would trigger popular uprisings throughout England. The plot failed, as the king and the Duke of York returned early to London due to a fire in the town of Newmarket. The conspirators were hunted down and punished. Ayloff escaped to Holland, but was eventually captured and imprisoned. He attempted suicide by stabbing himself with a penknife and was prevented from cheating the hangman by a keen-eyed prison warder.

He was hanged outside Temple Gate on 30 October 1685. Another member of the Rye House cabal, Richard Nelthorpe, a member of Gray’s Inn, was hanged, drawn and quartered outside Gray’s Inn Gate. Their deaths served as a warning to any lawyers contemplating plots against the Crown.

Celia Pilkington

Short Break Holidays for discerning travellers

Kirker Holidays provides carefully crafted tailor-made holidays to over 140 destinations in 40 countries - including 70 classic cities and 250 relaxing rural locations throughout Europe and beyond.

The Kirker Concierge can arrange opera and ballet tickets, pre-book museums, galleries and private guided tours, and reserve a table for a delicious dinner at a recommended restaurant.

Our team of expert consultants will advise and create the perfect short break in your chosen destination - please call 020 7593 2283.

Prices are per person and include flights (Eurostar for Paris), return transfers or car hire, accommodation with breakfast and Kirker Guide Notes to restaurants, museums and sightseeing.

Venice

Berlin

Tuscany

Londra Palace **** Deluxe

De Rome ***** Deluxe

Le Fontanelle ***** Deluxe

The Londra has welcomed Kirker guests for 25 years and is small, luxurious and perfectly located overlooking San Giorgio. The 53 bedrooms are amongst the finest in the city and all Kirker rooms have lagoon views.

4 nights for the price of 3 all year - price from £849, saving £145

A member of Rocco Forte Hotels, the De Rome is located in the heart of Berlin. It has 146 bedrooms, a restaurant serving Italian cuisine, and the ‘Bebel’ bar with its excellent views over the famous Bebelplatz.

Includes Doge’s Palace, Accademia or Guggenheim tickets and water taxi transfers.

3 nights for the price of 2 all year for stays including a Sunday night - price from £736, saving £158

The Luberon

Standing on a hillside overlooking one of the most peaceful and unspoilt valleys in Chianti, this delightful hotel is in one of the most serene environments that we have come across and is the perfect place to unwind and to experience exceptional service. The botanical gardens offer plenty of space and with just 25 spacious and comfortable bedrooms, the property never feels crowded. There is a super gastronomic restaurant and an alfresco restaurant serving light lunches. Additional facilities include indoor and outdoor swimming pools.

The hotel is located just 15 miles north of Siena and 70 miles from Florence.

5 nights for the price of 4 all year - price from £1,398, saving £235

Madrid

Couvent des Minimes **** Deluxe

A member of Relais & Chateaux, this beautifully restored 17th Century convent nestles on a hillside amongst lavender fields and orchards in the heart of the peaceful Luberon region of South West France. Facilities include a superb restaurant, a small but delightful L’Occitaine spa, summer swimming pool in the terraced gardens, an indoor pool and a tennis court. Plenty of activities can be arranged including mountain biking, horse riding and golf.

4 nights for the price of 3 all year - price from £843, saving £146

Paris

Villa Real ***** Enjoying a wonderful location overlooking the Plaza de las Cortes, opposite the Parliament building and the famous Thyssen museum, the Villa Real has a chic, intimate air and a collection of Roman mosaics and statues worthy of a provincial museum. Its 115 rooms are furnished in a traditional and elegant style and the stylish bar and restaurant, ‘East 47’, offers contemporary cuisine in a casual and fashionable atmosphere.

3 night price from £687 Includes tickets to the Prado Museum, Thyssen or Reina Sofia

Raphael ***** Superior

This famous hotel, located on the Avenue Kleber, just a few yards from the Arc de Triomphe, is one of the few remaining privately-owned luxury hotels in Paris.The 75 bedrooms are classically furnished, many with antiques and silks or hand-painted panels.The long, impressive panelled lobby has beautiful paintings including an original Turner, the cocktail bar is one of the most fashionable in Paris and the beautiful roof garden offers a sensational 360 degree panorama of the city.

3 night price from £848 Includes a Seine cruise, metro tickets and 2 day Museum Pass with entrance to over 60 museums including the Louvre and Musée d’Orsay

Cultural Tours & Music Holidays Our programme of Cultural Tours & Music Holidays has been created to provide discerning travellers with a range of carefully crafted escorted itineraries. Key subjects covered include Art, History, Architecture, Archaeology, Gardens and Music and tours typically consist of between 12 and 22 like-minded travellers.

The Palaces & Galleries of St Petersburg 6 Night Escorted Holidays |10 April, 8 May, 4 Sept, 25 Sept & 16 Oct 2014

Our six night tours to the city created by Peter the Great at the far end of the Baltic provide one of the most culturally stimulating holidays imaginable.

Visits include the Hermitage and a selection of Imperial residences including Pavlovsk, Catherine Palace and the glittering palace at Peterhof.We also visit the Russian Museum with its unmatched collection of icons.This tour is based at the 4* superior Hotel Petro Palace.

-M

AD

E HOL I

R

D

AV

FO

EL

ice adv 6 e rt e xp ce 198 n i s

LERS

O

YS

TA I L

Speak to an expert or request a brochure:

D A

R

Price from £1,998 per person for six nights including flights, Russian visas, accommodation with breakfast, five dinners, two lunches, a full programme of sightseeing and the services of the Kirker Tour Lecturer.

IS

CE

RNING

T

R

020 7593 2283

quote code XIT

www.kirkerholidays.com

28

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

Notes from a lecture by the Rt Hon Professor Sir Robin Jacob, a retired Lord Justice of Appeal and Professor of Intellectual Property Law at University College London

STOPPING PEOPLE DOING THINGS CAN SOMETIMES BE A GOOD IDEA INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

T

he most amazing nonsense is talked about intellectual property law these days. If I can teach you anything, it is what this subject is really about, and what is needed to approach it: a balanced and rational approach.

It boils down to something very simple: intellectual property (IP) rights are rights to stop other people doing things.

This is called an exclusive right, but I find that a very unhappy term. A better term is that it is a right to exclude others. Patents, copyrights, trademarks, design laws: none of these rights allow you to do anything. They are rights to keep others out, a right to stop other people.

You will hear about IP driving innovation. Actually, intellectual property rights may or may not be valuable; most of them are not. An IP right is only valuable insofar as what it protects is valuable.

The media and politicians encourage hype about IP rights. We hear ‘taking forward innovation’ and ‘inspiring creativity’, whenever a change in IP law is proposed by politicians, or governments, or the European Commission.

For example, design rights for furniture and jewellery last for 25 years from the date they are first put on the market.

After that, they can be copied. People can take inspiration from them, copy them and come up with new designs. The government proposes to change this to 70 years from the year of death of the author. In practice, that means a Century on average.

During a Public Bill Committee meeting last summer, Iain Wright MP said: “The repeal will make such designs consistent with the approach across most UK copyright law, whereby artistic works have copyright protection for the lifetime of the creator plus 70 years. The approach seems sensible and provides a degree of consistency and therefore simplicity. The measure which we support will help industries such as the British furniture and jewellery sectors.”

said: “It is good that authors should be remunerated, and the least exceptional way of remunerating them is by a monopoly.

Yet monopoly is an evil; for the sake of the good, we must submit to the evil, but the evil ought not to last a day longer than is necessary for the purpose of securing the good…A monopoly of 60 years produces twice as much evil as a monopoly of 30 years, and thrice as much evil as a monopoly of 20 years. But it is by no means the fact that a posthumous monopoly of 60 years gives to an author thrice as much pleasure and thrice as strong a motive as a posthumous monopoly of 20 years.”

I find that unanswerable, but the voice of reason in intellectual property these days is rather silent, or is not listened to. The voices of those with strong interests in no competition are heard loudest. In the 1990s, the term of copyright went from 50 to 70 years from the year of death of the creator, almost without comment. Last year, the term of copyright in sound recordings went the same way. Some might wonder if the Beatles and Cliff Richard aren’t rich enough already?

With regard to patents, the debate often goes irrationally the other way. There is much complaint these days, particularly about patents for medicines. They say: here are these wicked profiteering pharmaceutical companies extorting the poor by charging so much for their patented medicines.

These medicines cost billions to research and test, and have very limited protection, in practice a maximum of about 10 years. On average, 17 per cent of the turnover of a pharma company is spent on research on the next generation of medicines – not profits, turnover.

There is nothing new about complaints concerning patents. Jeremy Bentham said, in the late 1700s: “So long as men are governed by unexamined prejudices and led

“Patents, copyrights, trademarks, design laws: none of these rights allow you to do anything. They are rights to keep others out, a right to stop other people.”

Julian Smith MP added: “Will honourable gentleman congratulate Sir Terence Conran, who has articulated the problems experienced by the UK furniture and manufacturing design industry, and accept that the clause will make a massive difference to the UK economy”. Mr Wright replied: “Anything that can boost manufacturing, particularly furniture manufacturing, should be welcome.”

What about the students who are trying to design furniture now? Are they supposed to start with a completely clean sheet as though no chair had ever been designed before, to get no inspiration from anything? Is it really right that people who make the Charles Eames chair should now still be raking in royalties, even though Eames has been dead for years? Copyright undoubtedly has got out of hand.

I am not against IP. It is a really important branch of the law for all creators of all different kinds. Unless this subject is approached rationally, it will either be over-powerful or, on the other hand, rejected altogether.

There is nothing new in any of this. In 1841, there was a proposal to increase the term of copyright from 28 years from publication or until the death of the author, whichever is the longer, to 60 years from death of the author. Lord McCauley

away by sounds, it is natural for them to regard Patents as unfavourable to the encrease of wealth. So soon as they obtain clear ideas to annex to these sounds, it is impossible for them to do otherwise than recognise them to be favourable to that encrease: and that in so essential a degree, that the security given to property cannot be said to be compleat without it.”

Jeremy may not have been entirely disinterested, because his younger brother Sam was an inventor, and a patentee of an important patent of 1793. Sam Bentham, a man called Marc Isambard Brunel and Henry Maudslay were the key figures exploiting Bentham’s inventions. They set up the Portsmouth block mills to make pulley blocks for ships. Bentham’s patent ensured no rivalry, and that there were enough pulley blocks to keep Nelson’s ships in perfect working order at Copenhagen, the Nile and Trafalgar. Perhaps the patent system helped beat Napoleon.

29

INNER TEMPLE

“I am not against IP. It is a really important branch of the law for all creators of all different kinds. Unless this subject is approached rationally, it will either be over-powerful or, on the other hand, rejected altogether.”

30

Another anti-patent man, Michael Polanyi, said in 1944: “Floods of patents are issued… the validity of which is uncertain. At the meeting of the British Association, held in 1931, we heard patents described as ‘lottery tickets’ Manufacturers can never tell whether they are infringing on some patent and becoming liable to heavy damages.

‘A bad patents system’, writes Nature [magazine, in 1932 on the Patents and Design Act 1932]…‘is a fetter on the hands of industry and an instrument of blackmail.’”

Irrationality about patents goes on and on, and that includes ignorant courts. The most recent example from the Court of Justice of the European Communities (CJEU) regards article 6(2)(c) of the Biotech Directive.

The CJEU said: “Uses of human embryos for industrial or commercial purposes cannot be patented.” You might think that what they said was that one cannot patent taking embryos and using them for commercial purposes.

But according to the CJEU, it goes much further than that.

Oliver Brüstle, a famous scientist, used a stem cell that had been obtained from a single human embryo to make an invention, called neural precursor cells, with potential to treat all sorts of neurological diseases. You may think this sort of invention is a good idea. The European Court did not. It said: “The context of the aim of the directive… shows that the European Union legislature intended to exclude any possibility of patentability, where the respect for human dignity could thereby be affected.”

Then it said: “An invention must be regarded as unpatentable, even if the claims of the patent do not concern the use of human embryos, where the implementation of the invention requires the destruction of human embryos. In that case too, the view must be taken that there is use of human embryos within the meaning of article 6(2)(c) of the directive. The fact that destruction may occur at a stage long before the implementation of the invention, as in the case of the production of embryonic stem cells from a lineage of stem cells the mere production of which implied the destruction of human embryos is, in that regard, irrelevant.”

According to the CJEU, the fact that all the research was utterly lawful is irrelevant. They say that you cannot have a patent if your invention, at some point, involved the use of a single human embryo in accordance with law. That, they say, is “contrary to human dignity”. It is a very curious concept: all the acts are lawful and the research may lead to cures for a whole range of serious human ailments. Why is that undignified?

Only this year, I asked one of UCL’s scientists, Professor Pete Coffey, to talk about his work, using stem cells ultimately derived from human embryos as a possible cure for macular degeneration. There are seven million blind people in Europe, and another seven million in the United States. Partly funded by a pharmaceutical company, his work was and is showing real signs of progress. Some patients had responded; their degeneration had reversed. Would you put hundreds of millions into this if, as soon as it was established as safe, copyists could come and take it away? No, you would not.

That is what the Court of Justice did by its ignorant and prejudiced decision. It has put back European research in this area for years. Is anyone campaigning to change the directive? No. Those going into contract law may be concerned with IP licensing agreements. This is a subject full of pitfalls: many arbitrations concern such agreements which have gone wrong.

Those going into crime may think IP is not for them, but there are IP crimes too. Both trademark infringement and deliberate copyright infringement are criminal offences. But IP is an inevitably technical branch of the law, and those of you who are going to do crime, make sure you understand what you are doing, or find somebody else who does.

IP can even concern family lawyers. You can have huge questions of valuation of IP owned by one of the warring parties. What are they worth? Supposing J R R Tolkien had got divorced?

Wherever you are in the law, IP can turn up. You may not understand all this ridiculously complicated branch of the law, but keep your sense about it when you get there.

Rt Hon Professor Sir Robin Jacob Inner Temple Hall, 8 October 2012

Prosecution or Defence?

Whether you’re prosecuting a more adventurous style or defending the traditional, T&G makes an excellent case.

T&G was founded on dynamic tension.

Thresher was the moderniser, Glenny the traditionalist. Embracing this has seen the firm thrive for well over 300 years.

The classic Gentleman’s Wardrobe contains both Thresher and Glenny items: some chosen to raise no eyebrows, others with the opposite aim.

INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK readers can now indulge either impulse at an

introductory 25% discount

1 Middle Temple Lane, London EC4Y 9AA Tel +44 (0) 207 353 3676 www.thresherandglenny.com

Wiles Greenworld is your local solution for all office supplies: stationery, computer consumables, design supplies, furniture, printed stationery, catering and cleaning supplies, audio visual equipment, managed print service, free recycling, confidential shredding,

Wiles Greenworld 020 8758 7700 www.wilesgreenworld.co.uk

environmental consultancy and personalised gifts.

Our customers benefit from: • A full range of products for the legal sector available next day - free of charge • •

Over 75 years experience working within the legal sector Knowledgeable, helpful and passionate staff offering high service levels

• • • • •

Reduced costs on all your office supplies and increased efficiency Options of own brand, branded or green office supplies 83% of all our suppliers are ISO14001 accredited All our papers are from sustainable source - FSC or PEFC Bespoke stock held in our warehouse - called off and delivered free of charge with your stationery orders

We also offer a free recycling service within the London area, collecting when we deliver using our own vans and drivers from our locally stocked warehouse, an environmental consultancy to encourage green office management, as well as a confidential shredding service. Our proactive account management saves you money and reduces the impact on the environment. This type of innovative thinking has resulted in us earning 2nd place in the Sunday Times Best Green companies.

“We are Inner Temple’s supplier of choice for all their office supplies” Contact Correen Jacobs on Mobile: 07714 209284 or Email: Correen.jacobs@wilesgreenworld.co.uk Wiles Greenworld

Wiles Greenworld AWARDED 2nd PLACE

2nd Greenest Company 2 0 11 In The UK

Inner Temple Advert 10.11.11.indd 1

01/08/2013 11:48

31

32

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Master Campbell To follow…

L

ord Campbell of Alloway, who has died aged 96, began a distinguished legal career in Colditz, defending British officers facing Wehrmacht courts martial for attempting to escape or “baiting” their guards.

Called to the Bar just before the war, Lieutenant Alan ‘Black’ Campbell was in constant demand as inmates tested their captors to the limit; Peter Tunstall, most persistent of the “goon-baiters”, was court-martialled five times. To Campbell’s relief – and that of the defendants – the Wehrmacht conducted the proceedings in Leipzig punctiliously.

At Tunstall’s third court martial, for disrupting a German inspection by throwing a water-bomb from an upper window, Campbell got him off with a month in solitary. At the fourth, on the more serious charge of jabbing a guard with his finger when refused a bath, he secured an acquittal.

When Campbell was not allowed to appear, he was permitted to engage a civilian lawyer, Dr Naumann, who practised in Colditz village. Inmates’ faith in Naumann – based on his having been a POW in Britain during the First World War and his ability to achieve tolerable sentences – offset their conviction that he was overcharging.

Campbell handled most of the cases involving inmates in British uniform, going over their stories with them meticulously in one of the castle’s dormitories. The most serious, in August 1944, involved 13 Czechs who had enlisted with the RAF and were charged with taking up arms for an enemy. The trial, before German’s highest tribunal, never took place as the war neared its end, but three other RAF Czechs were executed.

He also framed the defence of an American, Colonel Schaefer, brought to Colditz after obstructing an officer trying to post a notice at another camp, which warned: “Escaping is no longer a game.” After his court martial, Schaefer came back to Colditz under sentence of death; he appealed to Hitler, but it was the Führer who had ordered his execution. Held in solitary confinement, he was saved by the end of the war.

Halfway through his time at Colditz, Campbell and 11 persistent escapers were sent to the supposedly even more secure Oflag IXA at Schloss Spangenberg. On his arrival the senior British officer asked him: “Are you intending to escape?”

“Maybe,” Campbell replied. “Please do not,” the officer then told him, “We are comfortable here and do not wish to lose our privileges, our parcels, our walks. That is an order.” “I may disobey it.” responded Campbell. And he did.

Campbell teamed up with Captain Jimmy Yule of the Royal Signals, in the adjoining cell; they took a door off its hinges so their neighbours could get out and play cards with them.

But when he and Yule tried to break out, they were captured crossing the castle moat. They were then returned to Colditz.

Campbell the barrister achieved political prominence because of Edward Heath’s Industrial Relations Act. He featured in a number of high-profile cases before the Industrial Relations Court, before the unions began ignoring the judgments it handed down.

Created a life peer by Margaret Thatcher in 1981, Campbell spoke with authority in the Lords as her Government finally passed reforms that stuck; his contributions were always measured, as when he warned that banning strikes in essential services would only work if arbitration were mandatory.

He was also a leading opponent of the War Crimes Bill, passed only after John Major’s Government invoked the Parliament Act to override the Lords’ veto. Murder was murder in any country, he argued, but the jurisdiction to try it was sovereign.

Campbell told the Lords he had been “among the uninvited guests of the Third Reich.” He saw no reason to reopen issues arising from his captivity; in 1984 he urged Lord Kimberley to stop pressing for an inquiry into claims that the Treasury had pocketed deductions from officer POWs’ pay, saying it would be “wholly inappropriate” 35 years after the event for payments to be made except on grounds of hardship.

MASTER CAMPBELL INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

His most moving contribution came during a 1998 debate on reforming the law on treason. He told the House: “I think the last person who was hanged in the Tower was a stool pigeon at Colditz. That was for treason. I am not going to mention his name. Those of us who were there were delighted to hear the result”.

Alan Robertson Campbell was born on 24 May 1917, the son of John Kenneth Campbell, and educated at Aldenham, the École des Sciences Politiques in Paris and Trinity Hall, Cambridge. He was called to the Bar at the Inner Temple in 1939, becoming a Bencher in 1972.

Commissioned into the Royal Artillery, he joined the British Expeditionary Force. Captured in May 1940 as it fell back on Dunkirk, he proved a thorn in the Germans’ side in a series of camps before arriving in Colditz in June 1941.

After the castle was liberated, Campbell practised on the Western Circuit, taking Silk in 1965. He appeared in high-profile child custody and abuse cases, and represented defendants in an ‘Angry Brigade’ bomb trial and the fraud trial resulting from the collapse of Rolls Razor. But increasingly he specialised in employment and trade union law.

However he was not always pitched against the unions; in 1969 he represented the National Union of Railwaymen against a member whom it had barred from seeking its presidency. Nor was he a union-basher; when Dr David Owen proposed mandatory postal ballots for union elections, Campbell said they should first be given the opportunity to regulate themselves.

When Barbara Castle published In Place of Strife, Campbell argued that giving the Government the right to interfere in industrial relations was not the answer; an independent Industrial Court would be better. And when after the 1970 election Heath produced his Bill, Campbell predicted it would strengthen responsible trade unionism.

unionists would not work with him; and attempted to have a May Day strike by the AUEW banned as ‘political’.

After little more than two years, and now under a Labour Government committed to repealing the Act, the NIRC heard its last case on July 25 1974. It was Campbell who paid tribute to the court and its staff on behalf of the Bar. In 1976 Campbell was appointed a Recorder, a post he held until 1989. He continued to take briefs, appearing for Private Eye when it was accused of libelling Cecil Parkinson, and for the mother of an eight-year-old violent deaf boy sent to a mental hospital where he was the only non-adult. He also chaired, in 1976, a Society of Conservative Lawyers group that advocated incorporating the European Convention of Human Rights into UK law and setting up an Administrative Court to protect the citizen.

Arriving in the Lords, Campbell called for hospital pickets to be prevented from barring medical supplies and advocated ‘cooling-off periods’ before strikes. When in 1983 Eddie Shah’s Warrington printing plant was besieged by pickets from the National Graphical Association, Campbell spoke of, “a political dispute launched against Parliament by a handful of trade union officials, with the apparent support of the Opposition and the TUC”.

He was a prominent supporter of Clause 28, passed in 1988 to prohibit the promotion of homosexuality by local councils and in schools. Campbell insisted the clause was designed not to harass homosexuals but to curb attacks on family life. But he did press ministers for assurances that homosexuals were prevented from serving as prison chaplains.

Campbell served on the Lords’ Committee for Privileges (for 18 years) and Ecclesiastical Committee, the Select Committee on Murder and Life Imprisonment and the Joint Committee on Human Rights.

From 1998 to 2004 he was president of the Colditz

“Campbell handled most of the cases involving inmates in British uniform, going over their stories with them meticulously in one of the castle’s dormitories.”

The temperature began to rise as the Bill made its way through Parliament; Campbell was retained by five members of the Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers, disciplined for not joining a protest strike against the legislation.

In June 1972, with the National Industrial Relations Court (NIRC) in place, he was retained by the owners of a Hackney cold store picketed by dockers for not employing registered dock labour. Campbell asked the Court to sit in secret as the workers feared intimidation; it refused, but granted an order to end the blacking – which was ignored.

Campbell then went to the Chancery Division, seeking a remedy under the pre-existing law, which the dockers had said they would obey. But Mr Justice Megarry said the dockers could not choose which courts to obey, and sent the case back to the NIRC. The picketing went on for eight months, the company eventually dropping its case.

In between criminal cases at Winchester crown court, Campbell appeared regularly before the NIRC. He secured an undertaking from the Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers (AUEW) to halt disruption at a factory from which it was trying to oust another union; represented a lighterage firm forced to pay a man to do nothing because trade

Association. At various times he was Vice-President of the Association de Juristes Franco-Britanniques, patron of the Inns of Court School of Law Conservatives, and a member of the British Council’s law advisory committee and the management committee of the UK Association for European Law. He was awarded the Emergency Reserve Decoration in 1996.

He wrote several textbooks: Restrictive Trade Practices and Monopolies (with Lord Wilberforce); Restrictive Trading Agreements in the Common Market (1964); Common Market Law (1969–75); The Industrial Relations Act (1971); EC Competition Law (1980); and Trade Unions and the Individual (1980).

Alan Campbell was thrice married: first, in 1947, to Diana Watson-Smyth (they divorced in 1953); secondly, in 1957, to Vivien de Kantzow, who died in 2010; and thirdly, in 2011, to Dorothea Berwick, daughter of Colonel Edward and Lady Elizabeth Berwick. She survives him with a daughter of his first marriage.

Lord Campbell of Alloway, born 24 May 1917, died 30 June 2013.

Courtesy of The Telegraph

33

INNER TEMPLE

�� Years of P���

Master Lawrence, a criminal practitioner of over �� years’ experience, examines the importance of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 within the criminal justice system

N

o single criminal justice measure over the past 30 years has done more to raise the standards of criminal justice in England and Wales than PACE, the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.

Introduced by Master Britten, who was Home Secretary during the Thatcher Government, its purpose was to strike a more effective balance between the liberties of the citizen and the powers of the police. It set out, in codes of practice, clear rules governing the police when they enter and search private premises, seize evidence, and arrest, detain and interview suspects. These rules have, to a significant extent, prevented the police from riding roughshod over our rights.

But there was strong and prolonged opposition to the proposed introduction of one measure – the tape recording of interviews with suspects. Those who were not practising in the London criminal courts in the years before PACE can have little idea of just how open the criminal justice system was to abuse of power by the police, or how little control over such abuse the courts felt able to exercise. Tape recording has proved to be both a protection for the innocent and the instrument of genuine guilty pleas.

Gone are the ‘verbals’, the regular invention, by interrogating officers, of admissions of guilt. Gone are the cases against guilty defendants that foundered because the police preferred to invent improbable admissions of guilt, which they swore they had recorded contemporaneously in

their notebooks, rather than go out and find proper evidence.

Gone are the cases that collapsed because juries simply did not believe that an armed robber who had just served a ten year prison sentence, with a string of similar convictions behind him, but very little evidence against him in that particular case, would say to an arresting detective: “Okay, guv, you’ve got me bang to rights. I’m guilty!” Gone are the police officers, who, under cross-examination, would give conflicting evidence about the circumstances in which the confessions were made, thus proving to the jury that one of them was lying. Gone are the notebook entries in the wrong date sequence, or written on different quality paper that could only have come from a different notebook, or secured by staples carelessly inserted the wrong way round! Gone too is the constant attack by counsel on the integrity of the young police officers who were in fact telling the truth and, yet, were subjected to relentless challenge after challenge, in case after case, because attacks on the police over the ‘verbals’ were so often successful.

Today, although evidence is sometimes admitted from police interviews of suspects where there was no tape recorder, and breaches of the PACE rules can lead to the exclusion of evidence, there are few challenges about what was actually said at a police interview, or how such evidence was obtained. After all, if the defendant really does tell the interviewing officer that he is guilty, or admits other

“Those who were not practising in the London criminal courts in the years before PACE can have little idea of just how open the criminal justice system was to abuse of power by the police, or how little control over such abuse the courts felt able to exercise.”

34

30 YEARS OF PACE INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

incriminating details, the tape recorder provides positive proof. Everyone in court can now concentrate on the actual evidence supporting guilt or innocence. So the guilty more often plead guilty than they did 30 years ago, the level of professionalism in the detective branch of the police has been raised and, with it, public respect and inevitably the morale of the whole police force.

Tape recording was not the only improvement in the criminal justice process brought in by PACE. There were many others. For example, before PACE the Judges’ Rules gave some protection to a defendant that evidence unfairly produced would not be used against him. But the rules were vague, it was not always clear when that protection applied, and they were treated as optional by the police. Often they were totally ignored by judges. Under section 78 of PACE, any issue on the admissibility of evidence is resolved by the judge having to exercise his discretion formally, reasonably, and in accordance with a long line of precedent laid down by the superior courts. This section is raised in a high number of trials of serious crime and, because its application is usually the subject of strong challenge, it is thought to be one of the most important measures introduced by PACE.

Over the years, there have been official reviews of the working of PACE, its codes of practice have increased in number, and there have been hundreds of amendments.

The digital revolution has led to changes in the process of interviewing and the storage of data. The spread of terrorism has affected stop and search powers and the rules about identification and the evidence of witnesses. The proliferation of child and matrimonial abuse cases has resulted in changes to the rules concerning the detention and treatment of vulnerable witnesses. The retention of DNA samples of acquitted defendants has attracted the attention of the European Court of Human Rights and has caused a highly charged parliamentary debate. All this has been necessary to ensure that PACE remains, in the jargon of the moment, ‘fit for purpose’, and that it accords with the changing times and developing perceptions about the meaning of justice in our society.

There have also been serious concerns. Many have feared that the original object of PACE, to balance the liberty of the individual against the powers of the police, has been steadily slewed against the individual suspected of crime. Others have been concerned that the codes are too inflexible: in one recent case, because the breaches were so many and serious, a man who had not only confessed to a second murder but who had taken the police to where he had left the body, had to be acquitted.

So furiously have our times been changing, that a perpetual storm of criminal law statutes has rained down upon us. Many have had to be repealed and amended almost before they could take effect. But through it all, PACE has stood, almost impervious; it survives as an enduring pillar of our liberties, as well as one of the greatest protections against injustice in England and Wales – and in other countries where our system of criminal justice is followed.

Master Lawrence

35

INNER TEMPLE EVENT

Read not Dead: Gorboduc Lloyd Evans reviews the Inner Temple’s semi-staged collaboration with Shakespeare’s Globe

I

n April 2013, Inner Temple commemorated the birth of English tragedy. Gorboduc, the earliest drama written in blank verse, was first staged by “the Gentlemen of Thynner Temple in London”, during the Christmas celebrations of 1561. It was later presented for Elizabeth I, in Whitehall, at the instigation of her ambitious courtier, Robert Dudley.

Oliver Senton directed the 2013 production, which was performed by members of the Inn in collaboration with Shakespeare’s Globe as part of the ‘Read Not Dead’ series which revives neglected dramas.

The play’s authors, Thomas Norton and Thomas Sackville, were members of the Inn. Both were poets and literary dabblers whose real interests lay elsewhere. Thomas Norton (1532–1584) was a firebrand polemicist and pamphleteer who became one of Elizabeth’s most enthusiastic spycatchers. His fondness for torturing Catholics earned him the nickname ‘rackmaster-general’. Thomas Sackville (1536–1608) was a cousin of Anne Boleyn who enjoyed a glittering public career. In his youth, he dashed off verses full of jangling rhymes and clunky alliteration. “ The lively green, the lusty leas, forlorn, The sturdy trees so shattered with the showers.”

His greatest poetic legacy is the phrase ‘knocking at death’s door’, which appears in his sonnet Old Age, published in 1563.

Sackville made a fortune from speculating in property and ironworks. He used his political influence to forbid soldiers below the rank of colonel from adorning their uniforms with costly silk or velvet.

Instead, they were obliged to invest in armour and weaponry, whose production supplied Sackville with handsome dividends. This, in effect, was a consummate piece of political corruption, and it’s no surprise to learn that he became Lord Treasurer in 1599. He was created first Earl of Dorset by James I in 1604.

“Though the events of the play are violent and chaotic, their presentation has been softened and burnished to suit a sophisticated audience.”

36

READ NOT DEAD INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Gorboduc is the sole production of the Norton–Sackville writing partnership. The play’s language is simple and direct. It lacks the gnarled and slangy archaisms favoured by Shakespeare, and it has none of the creamy gobbets of Latin that Marlowe uses to enrich his works. Everything is plainly intelligible at first hearing: “ No issue now remains, the heir unknown The people are in arms and mutinies.”

The manner is courtly, discursive and restrained. And though the events of the play are violent and chaotic, their presentation has been softened and burnished to suit a sophisticated audience. The original narrative comes from the Historiae Regum Britanniae written by Geoffrey of Monmouth in the 12th Century. It’s a division-the-kingdom tale, a bit like King Lear, and its convulsive plot has provoked much scholarly speculation about the role of politics in Elizabeth’s court.

Gorboduc, king of Britain, proposes to abdicate before his death. He splits his realm into two parts, on either side of the river Humber, and gives one half to each of his sons. His hope is to school the princes in the skills of good governance and to teach them the virtues of unity and concord. His scheme backfires spectacularly. The younger son, Porrox, prompted by a flattering adviser, murders his brother, Ferrex.

Their mother, Videna, who dotes on the older boy, avenges Ferrex’s death by killing Porrox. The people rise up to avenge Porrox, and the ensuing bloodshed engulfs the king and queen. Their deaths leave the succession uncertain. A clique of noblemen brings the slaughter to a halt but, with the kingdom weakened, a Scottish prince, Fergus, mobilises an army to the throne. His intervention unleashes 50 years of civil war.

How much propaganda does this contain? A modern conceit has grown up that politics formed no part of Elizabethan drama and that the Tudor court was too despotic and paranoid to allow political views to be aired in public.

One notable exception to this argument is the famous performance of Shakespeare’s Richard II by the Chamberlain’s Men in 1601, on the eve of Essex’s attempted coup. Elizabeth herself was perfectly aware of the play’s significance. “I am Richard II, know ye not that?” she is recorded as saying.

Photos: Alex Harvey-Brown, Globe Education

Gorboduc lends weight to the view that dramatic productions in Elizabeth’s day were saturated with political resonances. The plot of Gorboduc – which examines the perils of dynastic ambiguity – seems to convey a pretty unequivocal message to the inexperienced young queen. Marry early, produce an heir, and settle the hereditary line. A secondary argument warns against scheming opportunists, particularly those with Scottish names (such as Mary), who are likely to put personal ambition before the interests of the nation.

It’s perhaps no coincidence that Robert Dudley arranged for the play to transfer from Inner Temple to Elizabeth’s court.

It may not be too fanciful to read it as a diplomatic marriage proposal from Dudley; and because his amorous offer is made obliquely, and is couched in the pageantry of a distant and semi-mythical narrative, it has the advantage of deniability.

Those watching Oliver Senton’s production were impressed by the skill of the actors who performed in rudimentary costumes and headdresses. An accompaniment of violins and flutes added an authentic Elizabethan flavour.

The five acts were punctuated by a dumb show which outlined the forthcoming action. But, of course, the play lacked the vibrancy and physical immediacy that we associate with Elizabethan drama. Very little action takes place onstage. And the play features nothing that might please the groundlings: no harlots or clowns, no ghosts or witches, no shipwrecks or thunderstorms, no tavern shanties and no drunken dialogue full of ribald innuendo.

The script was re-issued in 1570, which suggests that it was read, and probably performed, after its debut. Marlowe and Shakespeare would almost certainly have absorbed the play and taken careful note of its possibilities. By throwing in heavy doses of lust, violence and vulgarity, these playwrights were able to transform the traditions of the courtly Elizabethan pageant into the world-class popular theatre of the 1590s and 1600s. But without the seed planted by Sackville and Norton, the great flowering of English drama might never have happened.

Lloyd Evans Theatre critic, The Spectator

37

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Master Connell

by Master Cazalet

M

ichael Connell was a much gifted man. He pursued, with conspicuous success, a wide variety of interests, which brought him an everincreasing circle of friends. This was well demonstrated by his early life when, having won a scholarship to Harrow, not only was he captain of many sports teams, but he also became head of school, obtaining an exhibition to Oxford.

He became a Harrow governor, and then a distinguished chairman of its board. His love for his old school was well illustrated when, much later, he was sitting as a judge.

A dissatisfied litigant-in-person, as he finally left court, suddenly hurled abuse at counsel, and then turning to the judge shouted: “…and I suppose you are one of those Old Etonians.” To which Michael immediately answered: “I have never been so insulted in my life.”

they had ever heard. Furthermore, Master Hugh Griffiths was to say of Michael, after he had appeared before him in a long civil dispute, that Michael was his “beau ideal of an advocate”. This was high praise indeed, coming from one of the great advocates of the day. No more need be said.

Brought together by their mutual interest in horses, Michael met Annie, the most important person in his life.

They were married in 1965 and shared 47 extremely happy years together. They had four children, Sean, Jonathan, Lisa and Simon, and now 11 delightful grandchildren. A close-knit family, they had many adventurous holidays together. With Annie’s wholehearted support, they acquired a fine house and estate at Steane Park, Brackley. This proved to be a superb base for the family and their fortunate guests. There was stabling for at least a dozen horses, from which they together

“His intuitive understanding of human nature, his rapid grasp of complex detail as well as his natural gift for advocacy, combined with sound judgement and absolute integrity, inspired confidence in professional and lay clients alike.”

38

He was born on 6 August 1939. His father, having built the estate-agency business of Connells into a national concern, hoped that Michael, his only son of three children, would follow him into Connells. But Michael, when up at Brasenose reading law, instead decided to go to the Bar. Whilst at Oxford, Michael, in the sporting field, established himself as a first class point-to-point steeplechase jockey. As a student member of the Inner Temple, he was fortunate in that the keen eye of Mr (as he then was) Robin Dunn, of Queen Elizabeth Building, alighted upon him, seeing him as just the sort of man for both chambers and the Pegasus Club.

Michael was Called to the Bar in 1962 and duly secured a tenancy in Queen Elizabeth Building (QEB). From the mid1960s, he was much sought after by solicitors in London and the Midlands, developing a broad and successful practice, ranging from family disputes to crime, major planning enquiries and the then new field of employment law. He was also much in demand as counsel in any dispute, disciplinary or otherwise, relating to horse racing.

His intuitive understanding of human nature, his rapid grasp of complex detail as well as his natural gift for advocacy, combined with sound judgment and absolute integrity, inspired confidence in professional and lay clients alike. He was always fair, practical and courteous, but was also well able to be decisive and to use the power of words to maximum effect. His strong sense of humour was never far below the surface.

I give but two examples of the many accolades he received for his court appearances. In the notorious ‘Fairley the Fox’ trial of 1985, many of those present said that Michael’s closing defence speech was one of the finest that

ran in recent years, a successful training yard and stud.

Over a period of 20 years, Michael rode regularly in the two annual Pegasus Club Members’ Races in lively competition against Richard Scott, Sandy Temple, Michael Turner, and me. We each won the race several times. It was enormous fun and although we often had a shrewd idea of who might win, none of us ever had as much as even a surreptitious bet. Michael and I would frequently find ourselves competing, not only against each other in court during the week, but also often race riding against each other on Saturdays. We never had a cross word.

In 1981, Michael took silk and his practice went from strength to strength. While still a Recorder, he was nominated to sit as a deputy High Court judge in both the Queen’s Bench and Family Divisions – a double recognition of his broad-based practice.

During his short 18 month tenure as head of chambers at QEB, Michael took immense trouble in encouraging and advising the younger members of chambers. He also helped the clerks to introduce various modernising procedures. His was always an open door.

Following his appointment in 1991 to the Family Division as a High Court judge, Michael soon established himself as one of the best judges in the determination of matrimonial disputes. With his balanced and calm approach, he was well able to defuse the high emotional feelings so often inherent in these cases. He also sat at times as an auxiliary High Court judge in the Court of Appeal. He presided over one of the first major child sex abuse cases. It lasted six months, and his judgment was generally acknowledged as masterly. He later confided that these six months were one of the most unpleasant periods of his life.

MASTER CONNELL INNER TEMPLE

In the 1993 Grand National, two false starts caused such turmoil that the race was declared void. Given the international status of the race, a full enquiry was clearly necessary. Michael was the obvious choice for the job and, after a detailed hearing, a press comment ran as follows: “Having read the Connell Report…the only parties whom he has chosen not to blame seem to be the horses.” His full findings were followed and necessary alterations made.

It was in 2002 that Michael stepped down from the Bench to universal expressions of regret and praise. Master Butler-Sloss, president of the Family Division, said in the course of her valedictory address: “I am losing one of my best and soundest judges. He knows how to deal with people and invariably gets it right.”

After retirement, Michael developed further his numerous extra-curricular activities. He became deputy senior steward of the Jockey Club for four years and went on to play a crucial part representing the Jockey Club on the newly established British Horseracing Authority.

Apart from his equestrian life, Michael loved, in particular, golf, cricket and rugby. A keen golfer, in 2000 he won the Bar Golfing Society Annual Tournament off a handicap of 15. He was captain of both the Bar and Inner Temple golfing societies. He was an active and valued member of disciplinary committees of the MCC and British Boxing Board. In his later life, he and Annie, with a group of friends, travelled the globe to see the English Test Team in

action and to play golf on some of the great courses.

He even became a connoisseur of claret, and was made a member of the distinguished Aquitaine Club.

Ever a lively companion, Michael was a great supporter of the Inn. He was a superb after dinner speaker, whether impromptu or on notice. For more than 20 years, he was a much loved master of the Grafton Hunt, only retiring upon elevation to the Bench.

Michael died on 30 January 2013, having fought courageously against leukaemia. More than 850 people from all walks of life came to his service of thanksgiving including some 200 Grafton farmers and supporters. What a testament these numbers are to the overall deep affection and respect in which he was universally held.

Into his remarkably varied life, Michael did indeed bring the gift of friendship and loyalty, not least for those who worked with or for him. His multitude of friends have now lost the inexpressible comfort of having him as an understanding and experienced confidant, who would always find time to give advice about anything from personal anxieties to forensic problems, knowing that his shrewd judgment would guide them wisely into the future.

His loss is profound. His beloved family and so many others feel it every day.

Master Cazalet

Helping your practice to grow Saffery Champness is an independent top 20 firm of chartered accountants. We provide financial planning and advice for both new and established chambers and barristers, including: • • • •

Accounts preparation and self assessment returns Tax advice and planning Personal financial planning Planning for retirement

For an initial free consultation on how we can help to build a secure future for you, your practice and your family, please contact Peter Horsman or Tim Gaspard, quoting ‘Inner Temple Yearbook’: T: 020 7841 4000 E: peter.horsman@saffery.com E: tim.gaspard@saffery.com www.saffery.com

Inner Temple Yearbook advert 2013_v03.indd 1

06/08/2013 10:56:20

39

40

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

Legal Academics: Forgotten Players or Interlopers?

Notes on a Lecture

by Master Beatson

LEGAL ACADEMICS: FORGOTTEN PLAYERS OR INTERLOPERS? INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

T

he relationship between legal academics and judges has been much explored. In summer 2012, the new president of our Supreme Court gave a lecture called Judges and Professors: Ships Passing in the Night. Even so, the topic is not stale.

In this lecture, I will sketch out the limits of academic contribution. Then, I pick up two threads in some of the recent contributions: first, citation, and second, that the gap between academic lawyers and the bench will widen in the future.

Terms of engagement and limits

In civil law systems, the writings of so-called ‘jurists’ are recognised to be sources of law. In our common law system, legal writing is not. Indeed until the 1960s, the general convention, widely described as ‘better read when dead’, precluded even the citation of living authors.

Over the last 50 years, there has been increasing recognition of the influence of academic lawyers in the development of both the common law and our understanding of statute law. The topic of influence does not lend itself to bullet-point, black-and-white analyses. As Lord Goff said, the common law is, “a mosaic, and a mosaic which is kaleidoscopic in the sense that it is in a constant state of change, in minute particulars”. Is the role of an academic lawyer that of a player, an observer, or an interloper? If he is a player or an observer, what are the terms of engagement?

Lord Goff saw academia as fulfilling the function in our system that codes in civil law systems have. In The Spiliada, he described jurists as “pilgrims” who are, along with judges, “on the endless road to unattainable perfection”. He characterises academic lawyers as players, rather than observers; they are certainly not interlopers. But Lord Goff unequivocally

One such limit is that, since the devil tends to be in the detail, it is not obvious that academic work, focused as it is on principles and abstract formulation, will assist practitioners in advising in individual cases. Moreover, of particular relevance to judges, Lord Rodger thought that there was no rational basis for believing that important principles of law could always be fashioned in that way.

Sometimes academics point out the danger of general principles. Sir William Wade identified the dangers of the procedural dichotomy between public and private law proceedings, articulated in 1983 by Lord Diplock in O’Reilly v Mackman. That dichotomy was stated and then extinguished out of existence slowly.

Wade expressed doubts about this to Lord Diplock and later to Lord Woolf. He wrote that Lord Diplock’s desire to restate the law in his own terms, notwithstanding his brilliance, “had left a legacy of rigid statements”. This seemed to Wade to “contain the seeds of much future trouble”.

The move from ‘better read when dead’

There were three main reasons for the old relationship, in which academic work was largely ignored. The first was the late development of academic law in England and Wales.

The academic legal community was small until after the 1963 Lord Robbins report and subsequent expansion of universities.

The second reason was that the majority of the profession, particularly at the Bar and hence the judiciary, had not studied law at university. They were not familiar with the works of the academics; they relied on books written by practitioners.

The third reason is that, although a few individuals had some influence, until the mid 1960s, British academic lawyers generally lacked status and prestige, both with practitioners

“It is said that living authors might write with the express desire to influence the outcome of a case. However, it is the court’s role to assess the merits of arguments, not motives. The fact that an article or a note is written with an eye to influencing the court is neither here nor there.” considered that in the development of legal principle, the dominant power in the common law should be that of the judge exercising a professional reaction to an individual situation. Perhaps he also accorded greater importance to books and articles as part of a possibly Knut-like strategy to see off the ever-increasing incursions of statute and subordinate legislation, and to preserve the power of the judges to develop the common law.

Almost as if to warn academics about hubris as a result of what Lord Goff had said, in his first article, Savigny in the Strand, Lord Rodger made serious points about the limits of academic contributions to the shaping of the common law and the court.

and judges, and with academics in other disciplines. Legal academics were giants in the 19th Century: Anson, A V Dicey, Sir Henry Maine and Sir Frederick Pollock. But those who came after them generally saw their role as rationalising the words of the judges, rather than guiding them.

That is not the case now. One of the harshest assessments of academics by a judge is from the apex of the Australian judicial pyramid. In a lecture at the Inner Temple in 2012, Justice Dyson Heydon AC said that many modern academic lawyers, “are concerned to fillet the law, to deride the attempts of judges to expound it, and even to try and explode it. The function of some academic lawyers lies almost exclusively in defaming judges”.

41

42

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

What led to the change of attitude? First, it was accepted that academic writing could show what the law was. The thin edge of the wedge may have been the acceptance that academic writings could be relied on to show whether a rule of law, however erroneous, had been generally accepted by the profession.

More substantially, after the Second World War, an increasing proportion of those who went to the Bar had read law at university. Practitioners who have done so are more likely to be familiar with the academic literature. They might be inclined to deploy it where appropriate in their written and oral submissions. Another cause of change is that a number of English judges had been academics, mostly before going into full-time practice, but in recent years going directly onto the bench.

The reasons given to justify the earlier convention against citation of the works of living authors have long been discredited. It has been said that academic views are not formed on the anvil of adversarial argument, which, in the words of Mr Justice Megarry, is a “purifying ordeal”, and as such, academics may yield to preconceptions. That assumes that it is not possible to subject academic views to a purifying ordeal by questioning the advocate. It also assumes that judges are immune to the sin of yielding to preconceptions themselves. Such a view takes no account of the vigour of debate between academics, practitioners and judges. While judges cannot question the proponents, they can evaluate the cogency of the respective arguments.

Another bad reason for caution about the writing of living academics is that they may change their mind. But as Professor Reid of Edinburgh University said: “An ill-considered opinion does not become more persuasive merely because the author dies without having had time to see sense and recant.” More importantly, judges can tolerate changes of view. Lord Walker said: “It is of the nature of the common law to develop slowly, and attempts at dramatic simplification may turn out to have been premature and indeed mistaken.” As Lord Neuberger has noted, judges, and even courts of final appeal, can change their minds.

It is said that living authors might write with the express desire to influence the outcome of a case. However, it is the court’s role to assess the merits of arguments, not motives.

The fact that an article or a note is written with an eye to influencing the court is neither here nor there.

Citation: its significance and its absence

For an academic, positive citation is really good for morale.

But what you see in a judgment can be misleading. Citation may exaggerate the influence of academic writing. A textbook may be cited to provide contextual or historical background. It may be that the book simply confirms a view that the judges always held. They may have discovered the article at a late stage, and inserted it.

Failure to cite academic work is sometimes unfortunate and even discourteous, but sometimes the failure is understandable. Sir William Wade’s note on the 1974 Court of Appeal decision in Hoffmann-la Roche v Secretary of State for Trade and Industry was only discovered by Lord Wilberforce after the hearing of the appeal in the Lords, but before judgment was written. Lord Wilberforce wrote to Sir William. He said his own opinion corresponded exactly with the note; it did so to such an extent that, as he said, “I will certainly be charged with pillaging your ideas.” Sir William replied saying there was no one in the world with whom he would be more honoured to agree. The two men may have agreed, but their views did not prevail. Lord Wilberforce’s speech was a dissent, and it did not refer to Sir William’s note. Sir William, however, later wrote a note on the House of Lords’ decision: “There is much to be said for Lord Wilberforce’s view.”

There are good reasons for caution in the use of academic work. Judges are not called on to rationalise the law of England, but to decide the case. Judgment should provide lower courts with clarity as to what has been decided, and practitioners with the ability to advise. Moreover, as Lord Rodger stated, parties will want the judge’s own views as a result of listening to the arguments rather than “views which he or she has taken, second-hand and pre-packaged, from some academic author.”

LEGAL ACADEMICS: FORGOTTEN PLAYERS OR INTERLOPERS? INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

A passing phase?

Will the last 40 years have been seen to be a passing phase, the high watermark of the influence of academic lawyers?

There are indications that might suggest that academics will have less influence.

First, the proportion of our senior judges who have a law degree from a United Kingdom university may drop as the proportion of non-law graduates in the profession rises.

Further, a smaller proportion of top academics are involved in doctrinal law. This signal chimes with the view of Judge Richard Posner, as to the position in the United States, who thinks that law schools there have received a wave of refugees from fields such as economics and philosophy, who are more interested in those subjects.

There has also been the growth of socio-legal and other non-doctrinal scholarship. I commend to you a book, Cricket and the Law: the Man in White Is Always Right. It has a chapter entitled Lord Denning: Cricket, Law and the Meaning of Life. For those more practically inclined, it has Leg Before Wicket: Causation and the Rule of Law. One can see why

Anson’s Law of Contract is just boring.

While these new forms are undoubtedly important, they do not provide a reason for undervaluing doctrinal work, and seeking to distance academics from it. Doing so is as deplorable as distancing top medical academics from the work of the hospitals and the treatment of the sick.

I do not underestimate the difficulties that practitioners face, particularly those who work in the publicly funded world. The economic and regulatory pressures make it even more difficult to maintain the standards of a learned profession. However, if our common law system is to survive in a more complex, specialised but cash-strapped world, courts need to have all the assistance they can get.

Although practitioners have the greatest pressures that they have ever had, part of the responsibility for maintaining a link between academic work and practice rests with them.

That is the reason we must not allow what is happening in this race for the bottom: to squeeze out the contribution, as bit players, that academics can make.

Master Beatson Inner Temple Hall, 12 November ����

“Will the last forty years have been seen to be a passing phase, the high water mark of the influence of academic lawyers? There are indications that might suggest that academics will have less influence.”

43

INNER TEMPLE EVENT

Garden Opera: �a �raviata

Following a successful open air performance in the Great Garden, Master Simon Brown delights in the beauty of Verdi’s opera

S

“

44

ummer afternoon – summer afternoon; to me those have always been the two most beautiful words in the English language,” according to great 19th Century Anglophile and writer Henry James. If he had been with us under the gleaming white canopy on the green baize lawn in the Great Garden of the Inner Temple on the balmy evening of Thursday 20 June 2013 listening, with a chilled glass of sweet Prosecco in his writer’s hand, to the heart-rendering coloratura of the tragic Violetta soaring up into the open skies above the canopy of the majestic plane trees, then I would venture to suggest that ‘Garden Opera’ would surely have ranked alongside, if not surpassed them, having all the hallmarks of the civilised life he so eloquently espoused.

Garden Opera is a small touring company without equal in Britain and the genius of Peter Bridges, whose mission is to bring opera to all wherever they are, and to enthuse and involve the young. Five instrumentalists driven by the beat of Peter upon the piano accompanied the six stars on the quaint box stage in this outdoor performance in English of La Traviata – The Strayed Woman: VIOLETTA: Claire Surman FLORA: Sian Jones ALFREDO: Adam Tunnicliffe FATHER (GEORGIO) GERMONT: Stephen Svanholm GASTON: Alexander Anderson-Hall THE BARON: Darron Moore The production, stage and education director was Saffron Van Zwanenberg who is, like Claire, a first-class and distinguished alumni of the world famous Royal College of Music here in London. Whilst Saffron has also sung at Garsington, the London Handel Society and the Aldeburgh Festival, Claire has appeared at Glyndebourne and as Donna Elvira in the Welsh National Opera production of Don

“For the Sake of an Angel, God Gave Us a Daughter”

Giovanni in 2011. Both are top-class performers and so they were on the night, yet not so as to overwhelm the others in the strong cast, something which can happen when the balance of voices and orchestra is not maintained, or a weak voiced tenor Alfredo cannot match the full-blown singing required by the score from the soprano, Violetta.

Verdi’s tunes and ensembles in La Traviata are legendary – all the great divas have played Violetta and the great three tenors, Carreras, Domingo and Pavarotti, have starred as Alfredo – and linger in the brain long after the performance. Adam and Claire did not suffer in comparison with the audience’s high expectations of performers in their roles, with their wonderfully balanced and tuneful, yet emotional, singing.

The pivotal performance in La Traviata is that of Father (Georgio) Germont in act two. His baritone must carry weight and menacing authority, yet has to be exquisitely lyrical and sinuously persuasive for the audience to believe the unbelievable plot and be carried away with emotional and tearful anguish. His duet with Violetta, Pura siccome un angelo – As pure as an an angel, God gave us a daughter, ebbs and flows like a tumultuous deep sea. He eventually persuades the distraught Violetta to forsake the one she loves for the honour of his family in the heartrending aria Dite alla giovine sì bella e pura, - Tell the young girl, so beautiful and pure. The depth and height of the contrasting voices help create a powerful range of emotional argument of unfathomable depth with a meaningful conclusion. So, too, does the Great Garden – a vital element of the whole evening’s experience, with the floral colourful backdrop of Shakespeare’s The Wars in the Roses so cleverly composed

by Andrea Brunsendorf. During this, in a gesture of gratitude for her kindness and sacrifice, Giorgio kisses Violetta’s forehead before leaving her alone, sadly weeping. We are left with the paradox that Georgio has gained a daughter but probably about to lose his son, unless his persuasive tongue can do otherwise. The thought crossed the mind that opera and advocacy have many common features such as timing, gesturing, balance, pitch, eloquence, nuance, argument and sounds – not just soft and loud but deep and high. That is why opera singers are used by the best CPD trainers in their teaching of advocacy, and judges and juries think “now that is music to my ears, I agree with that”, when listening to a

GARDEN OPERA: LA TRAVIATA INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

good advocate persuading his case to them.

Claire and Stephen worked their magic in the open air before us – no easy task in itself – and we eagerly awaited the monumental confrontation between father and son. Georgio’s aria, Di provenza il mar, il suol chi dal cor ti cancellò? - Who erased the sea, the land of Provence from your heart? is one of the most beguiling songs for the baritone voice. Like the hackneyed My Way, as sung by Sinatra, it is seemingly simple and effortless to the wannabe karaoke performer and yet, because of that and like a good plea in mitigation, incredibly difficult to perform with any credibility. One mistake and the magic bubble is burst.

Georgio approached his wretched son and a hush descended. Some concerned that he was a late replacement; others, because they were so immersed in the tense onstage situation, drew breath in anticipation. The soft chords of the orchestra gently swayed about in the atmosphere, wobbling here and there as per the score, and you could sense, but not hear, the outdoor air being sucked into Stephen’s cavernous lungs. His plea began quietly and melodically, exhaling perfectly pitched notes and expressing the lyrics with clear meaningful phrasing and diction, before swelling up to its calculated and demanding crescendo. We had been transfixed, transported from the sea and soil of Provence through a myriad of places, until we reached the gods; the climax that Dio m’esaudi – God Has Heard Me. The audience’s hush transformed into exultant applause. The

performance was triumphantly validated, and we travelled enrapt to the Parisian ‘demi-monde’ merriment before the weepy tragic finale.

The shouts of ‘bravo’ from the middle of the Great Garden at 9pm at night would have seemed bizarre to those on the top deck of one of the double-decker buses passing along the Embankment, like boats on the river, and those in planes, like geese gliding above and along the Thames, on their route to Heathrow. However, to those in the Great Garden who could hear, see and sense and to those looking on from their balconies in Temple Gardens listening to the soaring sounds, it was the spontaneous natural reaction to such musical, theatrical and artistic evening excellence displayed by Garden Opera and an expression of gratitude to those in the Inn who produced such a memorable and successful evening. Thank you.

Garden Opera: the two most beautiful words in the English language? Certainly, they are a perfect juxtaposition of two of the highest forms of art and, intriguingly, an ideal match for advocates too. But what about putting the 19th Century to one side and going 21st online and search for the divine using three key words: ‘Great – Garden – Opera’.

Your search engine will, for sure, come up with La Traviata by Garden Opera in the Great Garden of the Inner Temple on 20 June 2013, under www.someenchantedevening.com.

Master Simon Brown

Background photograph: Barbara Neumann

45

46

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Master Sheldon

by Master Woolf

The Sub-Treasurer, Mrs Sheldon and Master Sheldon

I

do not know whether Mark Sheldon was aware that his death would be marked by two institutions, to which he was deeply attached flying their flags at half-mast. If he was aware, I am confident that it would have caused him quiet amusement, although both institutions would regard it as an act of respect that was richly deserved in view of what Mark achieved during his life.

The first of these institutions is our own Inner Temple. The Inn has a long-standing tradition of marking the passing of its Benchers in this manner. Normally members of the Inn are either students, barristers or judges, and the senior members are Benchers. You will note that membership is not open to solicitors. Others can be made Honorary Benchers and Mark as a solicitor became a Bencher in this way. But the Inn does not readily make individuals who are not members of the Inn Honorary Benchers. Honorary Benchers are few in number and it is a singular mark of distinction for any individual to be granted this honour. In Mark’s case, the honour was of particular significance. This is because, extraordinarily, in the past it would have been regarded as unacceptable to make a solicitor an Honorary Bencher, as this involved encouraging barristers and solicitors to mix socially, which was then regarded as capable of being unprofessional conduct. Making Mark a Bencher gave him the right to play a full part in the social life of the Inn. But even now, Mark is one of the few solicitors who have been made an Honorary Bencher. So the dipping of the Inn’s flag not only signified the sadness of the Inn at losing an admired and beloved colleague, but also the harmony which now happily exists between the two sides of the profession, a situation Mark strongly promoted.

Mark was born on 6 February 1931 in Bury, Lancashire.

He came from an engineering and not a legal family. After attending Strand Grammar School in Manchester and Wycliffe College and completing his National Service, Mark attended Corpus Christi College, Oxford University. It was at Corpus that he obtained a degree in jurisprudence, a choice he was later to regret because he would have preferred not to delay studying history until his retirement.

After graduating, he was articled at Linklaters and Paines.

His articles resulted in an offer of partnership conditional on his agreeing to specialise in tax. So began in 1959 a partnership which continued until he retired in 1994, having been senior partner from 1988 to 1991 and joint senior partner from 1991 to 1993. I do not know whether Linklaters has a flag and a mast on which to fly it, but certainly if they do they should have also flown it at half-mast in honour of Mark, because during his period of partnership he was at least in part responsible for Linklaters’ dramatic growth into one of the great global law firms. It was his influence that resulted in their establishing a New York office in 1972, which he headed successfully. Other, what are now called magic circle, firms followed Linklaters’ example. Mark was naturally proud of his leadership role which contributed to the internationalisation

of the leading UK law firms. It also meant his area of practice ceased to be so specialised and instead he obtained experience of general financial and commercial legal work. His experience was also broadened by his assiduous efforts on behalf of the Law Society where, having held various offices, he reached the pinnacle of the solicitors’ side of the profession, being appointed the President of the Law Society (1992).

The corporate life of the Inn very much appealed to Mark. He was the most gregarious of individuals. He enjoyed good conversation and the friendship of colleagues to the full. He often attended the great social occasions in the Inn, frequently adding to the enjoyment of the occasion for his fellow Benchers by being accompanied by his elegant wife, Catherine. However, Mark’s contribution to the Inner Temple was not confined to the social side of life at the Inn. He may have been admitted as an Honorary Bencher, but he very soon became a fully engaged member. His advice was regularly sought by his fellow Benchers. In addition, he became an active member of the Education Committee. Nothing gave Mark more satisfaction than assisting young lawyers and ensuring that the many institutions with which he was associated were run efficiently and effectively.

After he returned to London from New York, his partners must have realised how important a contribution Mark was capable of making to the legal world in general because the different areas in which he was involved grew rapidly.

The range of his commitments became extraordinary. His wisdom, intelligence and great experience meant that he had demands from all sides. It is not possible to give anything like an exhaustive account of the bodies he served. However, the following selection will give a taste of their breadth: He was a long-serving director and member of the Audit & Compliance Committee of Coutts Bank; a member of the Senior Salaries Review Body from 1994, where among the salaries for which he was responsible were those of the judiciary; he was a member of the Bank of England’s Financial Law Panel; the Council of Justice; the Advisory Council of the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies at Oxford; the Independent Chairman of the Working Party on Names & Voting Rights for the Corporation of Lloyds. He was chairman of the Corpus Association from 1983 to 1989. He was an energetic member of the Oxford Centre for Legal Practice and the Society of Public Teachers of Law. He was also one of the founding figures responsible for establishing the Personal Support Unit at the Royal Courts of Justice (the brainchild of Lady Copisarow).

He was a member of the Collyear Committee of the Council of the Bar from 1998–2000 and the Independent Chairman of the Bar Council’s Working Party on Barristers’ Rights to Conduct Litigation from 1999–2000.

Reflecting his love of music, which was not confined to his being addicted to Gilbert and Sullivan, and his desire to help aspiring talent, he became a governor of the Yehudi Menuhin School of Music.

MASTER SHELDON INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

It is not surprising that Corpus also wished to recognise his distinction and in 1995 he proudly became an Honorary Fellow of the College. The College, sharing the tradition of this Inn I understand, also flew its flag at half-mast in honour of Mark after his death.

Mark’s many activities meant that he was a well-known figure in the legal world abroad. Thus, he became an honorary member of the Canadian Bar Association. Indeed, it was many years ago, at an American Bar Association meeting in Paris on a panel which Mark was chairing, that I came to know him personally. It was on a subject with which, until that time, he had no acquaintance but I was thought to have some knowledge: judicial review. During a chat in chambers, Mark was able rapidly to grasp the essence of the subject and in due course he chaired the panel in a masterly fashion. After that, I had no doubt of his ability to absorb new concepts and his meticulous preparation.

Fortunately, notwithstanding his distinction and huge experience, he retained a light touch and a sense of humour.

I remember him appearing on behalf of his profession at the valedictory meeting of the Court of Appeal to say goodbye to Lord Donaldson, the Master of the Rolls. As sometimes happens, there was speculation as to who his successor would be, though it was generally thought that it would be either Lord Justice Thomas Bingham, Lord Justice Richard Scott or myself. The packed court was reduced to loud laughter by Mark’s assurance that it would be some odd “Tom, Dick or Harry.”

The immense demands on his time did not prevent him from enjoying life to the full. To an extent to which his

friends could but guess, this was only possible because he was so ably supported by his wife, Catherine, whom he married in 1971. She was ever the most elegant, charming, and loving and devoted companion for Mark. Fortunately, Catherine had been a nurse and she was able to support Mark when, in his later life, his health deteriorated. This progressively reduced his mobility even after he had a hip replacement, requiring him to reside for a period in a convalescent home. (Reports indicate he was a hugely popular patient, the centre of the liveliest conversation that his fellow patients had enjoyed for many a year.)

Despite his ever increasing physical problems, Mark was not prepared to give up. He retained his judgment and sharpness of wit and zest for life to the end. Days before his death he insisted on undergoing an operation for the replacement of both his knees. This was, even for Mark, an ambition that was too courageous. While he survived the operative treatment, unfortunately the stress proved too much, and he died peacefully with his family around him on 3 May 2013. Fortunately, prior to his death he was able to welcome his granddaughter Anna into the family.

He is deeply mourned by Catherine, their daughter, Alice, and son, Edward. His wit, sense of fun, vivacity, gregariousness and companionship mean that he will be also sorely missed by his fellow Benchers.

Mark’s life will be celebrated at a Service of Thanksgiving to be held on Wednesday 9 October, at 5.45pm at the Temple Church.

Master Woolf

Inner Temple Overnight Accommodation Our two beautifully decorated overnight accommodation rooms, the Boswell and Chaucer each have an en suite bathroom, comfortable bed and historic views waiting just for you.

Available seven nights a week for only £140 per night, a calm night in either of these rooms will leave you relaxed and revived for the next day.

For more information please call 020 7797 8179

47

48

INNER TEMPLE

The Rise of the Litigants in Person

Three Perspectives on the Increasing Number of People Who Represent Themselves in Court

A View From the Personal Support Unit Judith March Director of the Personal Support Unit

T

he Personal Support Unit (PSU), whose trained volunteers offer practical and emotional support to litigants in person (LiPs) in civil and family court proceedings, was established in the Royal Courts 12 years ago and now has eight units across England and Wales: three in London and one in Manchester, Cardiff, Birmingham, Liverpool and Leeds. The demand is increasing rapidly. More than one in four civil cases with individual defendants in the County Courts now involves a litigant in person. From 2012 to 2013, our 250 trained volunteers, a mixture of postgraduate law students and core volunteers, who are often retired from some sort of professional career, gave free practical and emotional support to over 13,000 people.

Our clients face cases which could have devastating effects on their lives, including bankruptcy, eviction or disputes about contact with children. Their distress is often compounded by their personal circumstances. The people we help are disadvantaged at multiple levels, often by a serious health problem or disability. They are rarely at a greater disadvantage than when summoned to court without the benefit of access to a lawyer.

PSU volunteers do not provide legal advice but support people in a variety of practical ways, by assisting with form-

filling, directing them to relevant court offices, tidying and indexing papers, signposting to other agencies and sitting next to them in court. Clients tell us repeatedly they are calmer and better able to present their case clearly after a volunteer has helped them. The result is that they are more likely to achieve access to justice.

The support of the legal community is crucial to our success. Lord Neuberger, President of the Supreme Court, recently described our work as “invaluable, sometimes miraculous.” While Lord Judge, the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, has said: “This service enables the most disadvantaged in our society to play their part as active citizens in our legal system”.

We find more people are coming to the PSU for help in areas of law where there is now less support. In April and May 2013, there was an increase of more than 40 per cent (compared with the same months in 2012) in people involved in family proceedings who were helped at established PSUs. This is one example of the growing need for PSU help, as more people find themselves attempting to litigate with no other assistance.

The PSU adapts its service to the clients’ needs in different cities, depending on the extent of the network of law clinics and advice agencies available locally. As these agencies find themselves under increased pressure, for instance in Liverpool where free legal advice is scarce, the demand for our work is soaring in family cases especially.

Our task is to continue to find cost-effective ways of helping the vast number of litigants who require assistance and who would otherwise be alone at court, and to support the services already in place. Our aim is to increase the number of people we help to at least 15,000.

THE RISE OF THE LITIGANTS IN PERSON INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

A View From the Bar Samantha Ridley 1 King’s Bench Walk

F

or members of the Bar, dealing with litigants in person is fast becoming a weekly, if not daily, challenge at a time when the courts are overloaded with cases and court staff are (apparently) at an all-time low. What is clear is the way we conduct litigation will continue to be shaped and moulded around the challenges and demands that such opponents bring.

As a largely court-based practitioner in family law, my own experience centres on dealing with LiPs at court, but of course many practitioners will be dealing with LiPs throughout their cases in the course of pleadings and negotiations.

I would suggest that having an LiP as an opponent has four added layers of complexity.

The first is overcoming the distrustful and unco-operative approach of many LiPs. There is an expectation (and an overriding objective), that all litigants at court seek to narrow the issues amongst themselves and attempt to negotiate outside court. Certainly in family law, the operation of the entire court system is dependent on the co-operation, goodwill and valiant attempts of the parties to agree as much as possible outside court. Without that, the system would simply burst at the seams.

For LiPs, this may be the first time they have set foot in a court building. With their experience possibly being limited to watching episodes of Law and Order, they can be bewildered and deeply mistrustful of the barrister at court who wants to have a ‘chat’ before going in to see the judge. A lawyer who asks to see copies of the piles of documents the LiP has brought to the court as ‘evidence’ might be tricking him, and a lawyer who hands him a position statement at court is clearly up to no good and trying to steal an unfair advantage.

I have encountered LiPs who have been unwilling to provide me copies of their documents, or even tell me what they are. There are LiPs who have refused to speak to me or read my documents before going into court.

At a time when lots of cases float, may take hours to get before a judge and court time is very limited, the encouragement needed from a judge to get the co-operation of a LiP prior to the hearing is seldom available.

Those necessary negotiations lead to the second difficulty: negotiations with a LiP are a minefield for all practitioners. One must tread the very fine line between acting on instructions to seek a favourable outcome and making the LiP feel they are being bullied. That line is an incredibly difficult one to walk, particularly, for example, where a LiP is taking a wholly unrealistic approach and the practitioner needs to point this out, whilst refraining from providing legal advice. I pause here to point to the LiP who actually is very trusting, is willing to agree to proposals which the lawyer knows would be given no airtime at all in court and asks for legal advice: a problem in itself.

Ultimately, a LiP who refuses to enter into any constructive, amiable discussion outside court must be left alone, as the practitioner must remain very alert to the possibility of complaints.

Certainly for a family barrister, agreement between parents must be sought, if at all possible, especially on interim matters at directions hearings, when court time is limited.

On the other hand, we must not put undue pressure on the LiP. One common worry for us all is the risk of complaints, so easily made by disgruntled LiPs. Whilst in time they will be dealt with properly, complaints consume a great deal of time.

One approach may be to ensure that all discussions are very clearly recorded at court; but in trying to achieve the trust of the LiP in narrowing issues and negotiating, nothing is less likely to derail that process than the LiP seeing the lawyer write down every word they say as they speak.

The third layer of difficulty is dealing with one’s own client, who may be confused and perplexed as to why their (expensive) lawyer is spending all his time with the ‘enemy’ and appearing to be friendly towards them.

We are all familiar with the concept of explaining to clients why certain points they want to be made to the judge will not be relevant to his decision and may even exacerbate the situation. Whilst accepting that advice, with trepidation no doubt, it is incredibly difficult for clients to then have to sit through a hearing, during which their ex-partner tells the judge all about how awful they are and how badly they have behaved, whilst their own lawyer does not respond to those accusations. The judge, mindful of wanting to be fair and let the LiP feel heard, may make allowances for this and this leaves the lawyer in difficulty. Do we: (a) respond to all those irrelevant points, at the risk of incurring the wrath of the judge and creating an incredibly long and unfocused hearing; or (b) make it plain that those points are not relevant to the court’s decision on this day and, whilst not accepted, will not be responded to?

Undoubtedly, the correct approach is (b), but one’s client will often be left with a sour taste after the hearing and a feeling that the judge has a one-sided view of the case, with their barrister not having done anything for them.

This leads directly on to the fourth layer of difficulty.

Allowances are often made for LiPs, in terms of behaviour in court, submissions made and compliance with orders. Not only is a perception of unfairness created, but there is an unfairness arising from the very fact that the parties are not on an even footing. The rules of evidence and procedure exist entirely to avoid ambush and unfairness on both sides.

Understanding the basis of the LiP’s approach, an appreciation of how frightening the process is to a lay person and an understanding of their perceived view of the legal profession and litigation is helpful.

Taking the time to explain to the LiP, in a gentle way, the procedure of the day, when and in what order each party will speak in court, that he will have an opportunity to be heard and put his points to the judge is our first duty to the court, and will help in achieving a more effective hearing.

To end on a more positive note, there are countless LiPs who conduct themselves appropriately and properly throughout proceedings. With guides being published for their assistance, it is hoped that these instances will increase.

A gentle approach by the practitioner and an understanding of how the court procedure feels to a non-lawyer goes some way to achieving co-operation from a LiP.

“Clients tell us repeatedly they are calmer and better able to present their case clearly after a volunteer has helped them.”

49

INNER TEMPLE

A View From the Bench Master Cobb High Court Judge, Family Division

T

he extensive reforms of the legal aid system, brought about by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, included the removal from the scope of public funding legal aid for the vast majority of cases involving matrimonial breakdown. In all but exceptional cases including, for example, cases of proven domestic abuse and child abduction, legal aid was removed from ‘private’ family disputes, while legal aid remains available for parents responding to applications for orders sought by local authorities in family cases, such as care and supervision orders.

The inevitable consequence of this development has been a substantial rise in the number of litigants in person appearing in the family courts. Indeed, the Government forecast that more than half a million of those who previously benefited from legal aid across the board in civil disputes would be denied access to it from April 2012. The scope of reforms in family cases, it was said, would be likely to affect approximately 34,000 cases each year.

These reforms have posed a unique challenge for the judiciary. While LiPs are not a homogenous group, the majority of those who appear in the family courts are at a point of crisis in their lives, attempting to cope with the often traumatic fallout of a failed family relationship. While some are sensibly and appropriately diverted into dispute resolution out of the court system, regrettably there are many for whom mediation is neither appropriate nor possible. For those who utilise the courts, proceedings affecting their most private and family life are emotionally charged; tensions in the court room are palpably higher where the parties are required to represent themselves. The Ministry of Justice’s research paper (published after the conclusion of the legal aid consultation) and our experience bears this out; those who enter the family courts are more likely to have lower incomes and educational levels than those who receive representation, and are likely to be younger, adding to their stress and disadvantage.

Judicial experience further confirms that a significant minority of LiPs in family cases have specific indications of vulnerability – victims of violence, suffering from depression, a problem with alcohol/drug use or other mental illness; many are extremely young parents. In the Department for Constitutional Affairs Research series 2/05 entitled Litigants in Person. Unrepresented Litigants in First Instance Proceedings, Moorhead and Sefton estimated this, in 2005, at 20 per cent of injunction cases and 15 per cent of Children Act cases.

For many LiPs, the oral and procedural demands of the courtroom are overwhelming and the relative formality, even of the family court, intimidating; these problems subsume the additional challenges of understanding evidential

requirements, identifying legally relevant facts and dealing with forms. The trauma for the victim of domestic abuse facing his or her unrepresented abuser in court cannot be underestimated. The challenge for the judge is identifying the issue(s), and in cases concerning children maintaining a firm focus on the child’s welfare, indeed occasionally even safeguarding concerns, beneath the clamour of the adult grievances.

The effect of the legal aid reforms is being widely felt: cases involving litigants in person are taking longer; fewer cases settle (without the skills and objectivity of lawyers to advise); case management rules and directions are often ignored; the collation and presentation of evidence (both written and oral) is habitually chaotic. The alien environment of the court is exacerbated for those litigants (in large numbers in the family courts) for whom English is not the first language. The impact of delay of the court processes ultimately affects most cruelly the children, who are the subject of the proceedings. The demands on the family judge to manage and mitigate these powerful obstacles to efficient justice are not inconsiderable.

The legal aid reforms have swept in just as the family justice system is implementing its most ambitious reform programme, inspired and advocated by the Family Justice Review (2011), designed in large measure by Ryder J in a 2012 report entitled Judicial Proposals for the Modernisation of Family Justice and executed under the presidency of Sir James Munby. One of the key drivers for change has been the need to accelerate the process of family dispute resolution and reduce delay. Regrettably, the removal of publicly funded legal support for many litigants pulls in the opposite direction; as the Family Justice Review forecast, greater numbers of LiPs will become an “increasingly important weakness” in the system which is already under stress.

Guidance for the judiciary as a whole, and specialist guidance for the family judiciary in particular, has been widely disseminated in an endeavour to achieve fair, just, efficient and consistent management of cases involving LiPs. A distinguishing feature of family proceedings (children and non-children) is that they are essentially inquisitorial; family judges increasingly recognise the need in any case involving LiPs to assume the role as investigator/inquisitor. More and more we find ourselves the conduit of questioning and information-sharing at the hearing.

Inevitably, the legal aid reforms immediately affect the legal profession; the young family Bar has for years provided valuable, and I suggest cost-effective, representation in publicly funded private family law cases. The fear that young talented aspirant lawyers will be deterred from pursuing a career at the family Bar is borne out by the growing realisation that many publicly funded solicitors are struggling to maintain viable practices. With the removal of legal aid in family cases affecting the poorest and most vulnerable, the impact on access to justice is, many argue with force, all too obvious.

“The challenge for the judge is identifying the issue(s), and in cases concerning children maintaining a firm focus on the child’s welfare, indeed occasionally even safeguarding concerns, beneath the clamour of the adult grievances.”

50

296x86(1602)_Layout 1 01/08/2013 15:00 Page 4

Llangoed Hall

P erfect

For any Occasion This multi award-winning hotel Nestled in the Brecon Beacons Whisky and Waterfalls Package includes 2 night’s Bed & Breakfast Dinner included on the first evening.

BY APPOINTMENT TO HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN JEWELLERS AND SILVERSMITHS BENTLEY & SKINNER, LONDON

BY APPOINTMENT TO H.R.H. THE PRINCE OF WALES JEWELLERS AND SILVERSMITHS BENTLEY & SKINNER, LONDON

Fine Jewels

By Royal Appointment to Her Majesty the Queen and His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales, Bentley & Skinner have between them been buying and selling the loveliest jewellery since 1880.

£97.50 per person per night Prices are based on two people sharing a North Wing Room Lunches £25.00 Sunday Lunches £32.50 5 Course Dinners £55.00 7 Course Tasting Menus £85.00 Cream Teas £10.00 Welsh Teas £10.00 Full Afternoon Teas £18.50 Champagne Afternoon Teas £25.50

Specialising in fine antique jewels and beautiful engagement rings, Bentley & Skinner also provides an unparalleled range of services including valuations for insurance and probate, repairs, seal-engraving, pearl-stringing and bespoke jewellery commissions upon request.

Llyswen, Brecon, Powys LD3 0YP Telephone: 01874 754 525 Facsimile: 01874 754 545 Email: enquiries@llangoedhall.com Twitter: @llangoedhall1 & @ccmilne

www.llangoedhall.co.uk

55 PICCADILLY, LONDON W1J 0DX Tel: 020 7629 0651

www.bentley-skinner.co.uk

51

52

INNER TEMPLE

Seasonal Step Change

Head Gardener, Andrea Brunsendorf, describes how the display on the King’s Bench Walk steps have come to reflect the changing seasons in the Garden

It started with the idea to improve the rather grotty look of the steps at the end of King’s Bench Walk. The first attempt was something of a failure and was rapidly dismantled, but my imagination of what could be achieved there was not so easily defeated.

The first step on the road to improvement was to acquire some attractive pots, while at the same time acknowledging that in any season the pots need to have something in them.

Naturally spring offers a wonderful choice of colour and form for such a display. Using a wide variety of bulbs like crocus, daffodils and tulips, underplanting them with early favourites such as viola, bellis and aubrieta (while still retaining some of the winter structure of the conifers, sweet box, ferns and sorbus), the project really starts to develop.

SEASONAL STEP CHANGE INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Meanwhile, behind the scenes, there has been a steady and industrious programme to prepare the plants for the summer display. From nursing tender specimens through the winter, to raising annuals from seed, we ensure that the lilies, erigeron, persicaria, pelargonium, begonia, nasturtiums and plectranthus are all well rooted, well fed and raring to go, once the spring bulbs are over.

Photo: Barbara Neuman

Taking the early display away, bringing out the summer pots and arranging them can be a daunting prospect, but it is the most tremendous fun. As well as the whole garden team heaving pots to and fro, there is a great deal of standing back, making odd hand movements and trotting up and down the steps. After some hours of this,we are finally satisfied; the results could be said to refute the old adage that Rome can’t be built in a day – it can.

During the following weeks there are tweaks and additions as we sneak in some extra plants as summer progresses, ensuring that its lushness lasts until autumn, when the vibrancy of coleus, dahlia, silver plectranthus, golden rudbeckia and marigolds sees us through to the first frosts.

As the summer display matures, there has been another major operation in the yard and potting shed to prepare for the New Year, ready for the time when we remove the warm seasons’ growth and put in place the pots hiding treasures for the spring. And there is the occasional snowfall to provide an extra blanket, reminiscent of the icing on a Christmas cake.

It might seem a labour intensive, ephemeral adjunct to the Garden, but it is one which frequently makes people reach for the cameras on their mobile phones and provides an ever changing pleasure to all who pass up or down these handsome steps.

Andrea Brunsendorf

53

54

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Master Brehan

by Master Keene

D

aire Brehan, who died from cancer on 30 August 2012 at the age of 55, not long after her election as a Bencher of the Inner Temple, was a late arrival at the Bar of England and Wales. Born in Dublin, she had studied law at Trinity College in that city, where her tutors included two future Irish presidents, Mary Robinson and Mary McAleese. She showed early promise as a potential advocate, becoming the All-Ireland Debating Champion. But she then chose to use her talents on the stage as an actress and dancer, before helping, along with her first husband, to start a theatre company in Ireland.

Later she moved into broadcasting, at first in Ireland but then in England, where she worked for BBC Radio. She had a successful career as a broadcaster on Radio 4, presenting such programmes as You and Yours and The Afternoon Shift, and then became known worldwide as the presenter of Pick of the World on the BBC’s World Service. During her broadcasting career, she produced a number of legal advice programmes and publications to help the general public – in Ireland a programme called Brehan’s Law, providing legal advice for the layman, while in the UK she was responsible for an audio and a braille edition of The Young Citizen’s Guide to the Law. So it was not perhaps surprising that in the late 1990s she decided to practise the law as a career. She joined the Inner Temple and was Called to the Bar in 2002. She then took up practice at the Criminal Bar, mainly on the SouthEastern Circuit. Even at that time, life at the Criminal Bar was far from easy. She did a stint working as a barrister for HMRC, and supplemented her earnings at the Bar in other ways, acting as a witness trainer, teaching pilates, and becoming a qualified London tourist guide, in which connection she became a freeman of the City of London.

In 2005, she was called also to the Irish Bar. The Inner Temple was the beneficiary of her formidable energy in many ways. Unsurprisingly, she was an advocacy trainer; from 2004 onwards, she was a member of the Inn’s Bar Liaison Committee; and she served on a number of the Inn’s committees. Less formally, she used her BBC connections to get the Any Questions? programme in

November 2006 broadcast live from the Inner Temple Hall, and in the same year her sense of fun led her to organise a dinner and cabaret in Hall entitled Barlesque. But perhaps her most enduring contribution to the life of the Inn will be her role in the Oral History Archive, which she instigated and produced through a series of 15 interviews with members and residents of the Inn and which can now be found on the Inn’s website. Here will be found fascinating recollections of life in the Inn from just before, during and shortly after the Second World War. That enterprise of compiling an Oral History Archive was probably influenced by the fact that Daire had in the meantime become a resident of the Inn with a flat at 3 Hare Court. It did not take long before she concluded that those residing in the Inn needed both some mechanism for meeting socially and also a common voice with which to speak to the Inn and its various departments about matters of concern to residents. So she took the initiative by founding the Inner Temple Residents Association (ITRA), persuading Master Butler-Sloss to become the first chairman and me to be vice-chairman, while she became the secretary and did all the work. In due course, she became chairman for several years and was as active as ever in that role. Amongst other things, she produced virtually single-handed a loose-leaf directory of local services and shops for the Inn’s residents, a quite invaluable piece of work. Her delight in the Inn and all its activities led her, in what she knew were her final months of life, to seek to become a Bencher, even though she was a junior of only some 10 years’ Call, and her successful election as such was a source of great pride and comfort to her in those last difficult and painful times. She was supported throughout those months by her two daughters from her first marriage and by Dave Marsden, an old Irish friend and actor, whom she had married in 2009.

With Daire Brehan’s death, the Inn has lost one of its more colourful characters. Feisty and outspoken, stylish, and full of vitality and sparkle, she will long be remembered with great affection by her many friends and colleagues.

Master Keene

ORAL HISTORY PROJECT INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Oral History Project

by Master Christie

T

he Inner Temple has a long and interesting history reflected in its membership, its estate, the many significant events that have taken place in the Inn, and the Inn’s place in the legal, cultural and social system of this country. But it is also a living institution in which many people work, interacting with the public and the profession, in a vibrant and evolving way. The purpose of the oral history project is to capture the collective memories of some of those connected to the Inn at a moment in time, and to preserve them in a permanent recorded and transcribed form for future generations.

Oral history is much more than just another means of uncovering facts about the past. It is a creative, interactive methodology that forces us to get to grips with many layers of meaning and interpretation contained within people’s memories. At its simplest, it is an interaction between two people: a researcher (the interviewer) who asks the questions and narrator (the interviewee) who does his or her best to answer them. But as those who partook in this year’s project discovered, it is a much more complex process than that.

The Inner Temple’s oral history project was begun in 2011 by the late Master Brehan, who conducted interviews with sixteen Benchers, former members of staff, residents and student members of the Inn. Excerpts from some of those interviews can be heard on the Inn’s website. For this second phase of the project the researchers were all volunteer student or full members of the Inn. The narrators were selected from a cross-section of the Inn’s community and responded positively to a request to give up their time to be interviewed. The names of all those who carried out the interviewing together with their subjects are listed below.

We are greatly indebted to them all.

T

here are a number of elements that make oral history sources intrinsically different from other historical sources. They are:

• Orality: The rhythms and cadences, repetitions and intonations, the use of particular speech forms such as anecdotes or reported speech, the use of dialect, as well as volume, time and speed.

• Narrative: The way in which people make and use stories to interpret the world; the way in which we translate knowing into telling. The narrator’s story is arranged and dramatised in a narrative form with a variety of elements such as reported speech, diversions, commentary and reflection.

• Performance: As a means of verbal communication, oral history is in part a physical thing; we form facial expressions as we speak, gesticulate, move our head and arms, we modulate our voice, we present ourselves in a way appropriate to the performance required.

Thus, most narrators are aware that they are expected to perform and will rise to the occasion.

Narrator

Researcher

Master Lawrence

Admas Habteslasie

Master Mackay

James Lee, Academic Fellow

Master Schiemann

Amy Street

Master Brodie

James Lee

The Master of the Temple

Master Christie

Master Thorpe

Sam Main

Master Gloster

Hannah Glover

Master Owen Davies

Victoria Hajba

Master Hooper

Rebecca Wright

Master Hallett

Harini Iyengar

Mr David Humphries, barrister of this Inn

Lindy Jones

Geoff Sleeman, former gardener of the Inn

Caroline Daly

Ian le Grice, former assistant organist and chorister of the Temple Church

Alison Davies

Ian Ward, electrician at the Inn for 30 years

Celia Pilkington

Jane Wallace, barrister of this Inn

Sarah Black

Philip Monham, retired Senior Clerk at 11 KBW

Harini Iyengar

• Subjectivity: Oral history is not just about facts but about the narrator’s interpretation of those facts. It tells us not just about what people did, but what they wanted to do, what they believed they were doing, and what they now think they did.

• Memory: It follows that oral historians are dealing with memory sources, raising questions as to why a narrator remembers or forgets a particular thing or how they remember the way it was. Thus the interview is an event whereby, through the relationship between researcher and narrator, a memory narrative is actively created in the moment.

• Mutability: No two interviews with the same person will ever be the same. Words will change, stories will change, and performance and narrative structure will change, especially if the interviewer is replaced by another. The recorded interview thus has the feeling of an unfinished work in progress.

• Collaboration: Hence, oral history is a joint enterprise, a collaborative effort between respondents and researchers. In this way the historian is actively involved in the creation of his or her own source.

Master Christie

55

56

INNER TEMPLE

All interviewees received two days’ training from Sarah Lowry, a freelance oral historian working with the British Library. The first day’s training consisted of an introduction to oral history methodology, technique and, of course, getting to grips with the recording equipment. There was also discussion of ethical issues, such as what to do if an interviewee requests that part of their recording be deleted or not made accessible to the public. Each interviewer was then set a task of recording a short mock interview which was reviewed at a subsequent training day. On behalf of all interviewers I express thanks to Sarah for her clear and informative training and for using some of her personal recordings to demonstrate both good and not so good interview technique.

Looked at more closely, oral history is not only a dialogue (as opposed to a conversation) in real time between narrator and researcher, but also between the narrator and his or her external discourses or cultures. Whilst the researcher may ask the questions, it is the narrator who decides how to answer them – a process which is partly verbal and partly conducted within the narrator’s mind. This must be understood both in order to conduct a good interview and to make a meaningful interpretation of the result.

Use of interviewers who are themselves members of the Inn added another dynamic to the process. Such persons are more likely to have an understanding of the language, culture, history of the subject-matter and are likely to be more easily accepted by the narrator. However, some interviewees are less likely to open up to an ‘insider’ who may also assume knowledge and fall into conversation with them.

An ‘outsider’ may find that people open up to them better and may get fuller answers as knowledge is not assumed, but they may lack the same level of understanding as their subjects and be treated with suspicion.

However, asking questions as a barrister in court is a very different task from asking questions as an oral historian.

Clearly there should be no leading or closed questions, but whereas it is a general rule even in examination-in-chief that you should never ask a question to which you do not know the answer, in oral history almost the reverse is required. It is in the very discovery of what the narrator will say next that the magic of the live interview is revealed and a story that is unique and of real value to the archive is created.

The key to conducting a good interview, as well as thorough research, is respectful and intense listening, in a non-judgmental way, keeping the interviewer’s agenda as far as possible out of the frame. In other words the researcher should adopt the attitude “It’s all about you, not me!” The interviewer’s role therefore is to create an environment in which the narrator will feel safe to reveal the most honest and personal account of their history.

Readers interested in accessing any of the oral histories, in recorded or transcribed form, should contact the Inn’s archivist, Celia Pilkington.

It is hoped that further interviews will be conducted with others connected to the Inn in the years to come so that the archive will continue to expand. If you are interested in being involved in the project please contact Celia.

Master Christie

Oral History Highlights

Presented by Daire Brehan, later to be elected a Bencher

T

he Oral History Project was established by the late Master Brehan to preserve the very human memories and recollections of the Inn, not necessarily recorded in official histories. Below are a few passages from members and residents who have seen the Inn both change and stay the same during the last half century.

Starting Out

Daire Brehan: What accommodation there was available after the War left little to be desired, as the newly-weds Joseph and Elizabeth Butler-Sloss were to discover.

Master Butler-Sloss: We were married in 1958 and had nowhere to live, so we asked the Inn if they had anywhere. They had a flat where the bath was in the bedroom and nobody really wanted it. They promised to give us a partition between the bath and the bed.

Daire Brehan: Master Butler-Sloss confirms that the accommodation did improve after that, and she is of course still resident in the Inn today. In her recording for the archive, she took us back in time to the start of her career at the Bar and was able to contrast the difficulty of getting pupillage and tenancy today with her own experience in the 1950s.

Master Butler-Sloss: In those days it was easy to become a pupil because you paid, and it was easy to become a tenant because you paid.

Master Beldam: Personally I didn’t feel there was any difficulty paying about 100 guineas to be a pupil.

Daire Brehan: Roy Beldam sharing the young Elizabeth Havers’ experience of getting on the first rung of the ladder to the Bar. But just how long would it take to recoup that sort of initial outlay? Well, Master Beldam recalls for us the early days of his practice at the Criminal Bar.

ORAL HISTORY PROJECT INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Master Beldam: You would go to court sessions and sit in court and wait. Some people would arrive at court with a guinea, in which case you got what was called a ‘dock brief’, in which they would select you from the group of people who were waiting and say: “I’ll have him.” Then you would go and see him and represent him in his case for a guinea.

Daire Brehan: Why a guinea?

Master Beldam: Well, this was the traditional fee. All fees were marked in guineas. The barrister got the pound and the clerk got the shilling.

The other thing you might get if you were very lucky was a legal aid brief, for which you would be paid at least three pounds, five shillings and sixpence, and that was big money.

Introductions

Samantha Gould: I was very lucky to get in touch with Master Tonkin, shortly after he became a Bencher at Inner as he lives in the same village as my family. My mum happened to meet him in a field whilst taking the dog for a walk and mentioned that I fancied perhaps becoming a solicitor or a barrister. At the time I was only about 15, and my mother thought he could give me some direction. He agreed to let me

marshal him for a month or so, which was the river end at the bottom. Then they brilliant. This experience was definitely the turned round and walked back. This was start of my calling to be a barrister. understood to be their sort of lunchtime constitutional. They all did it, hundreds of Daire Brehan: them sometimes.

Adam Fellows, currently the president of The awkward part of the ritual for the the Inner Temple Student Association, barristers was walking up the slope in had an equally random encounter, which their nice shoes, so one day diggers helped him make his choice of Inn. arrived and started to dig up the turf Adam Fellows: there. Before long, they built that white What made this Inn stand out for me was, stone staircase. And that was in order when looking around the Inn, I spotted a to enable the barristers to walk down couple of barristers who were sitting on and start their promenade. By then, the the Pegasus Bar terrace. They asked me, bowler hats had gone, and now mostly “Are you lost?” I said, “Actually no, I’m people just go in and sit down. looking to become a member of an Inn – Daire Brehan: I just wanted to look around.”

The promenade isn’t the only thing The two gentlemen concerned that’s gone over the years. Henry also (unfortunately, I can’t remember their remembers how members of Hall were names) invited me to join them. And so, once called to dinner by a differently after several glasses of very nice wine, I bedecked member of staff. decided to join this Inn. Henry von Blumenthal: Daire Brehan: Bennett the porter was never seen So, having joined for the wine, he clearly without his frock coat and, if I remember stayed for the food and the education, correctly, a top hat. He could be seen of course, which today, as in yesteryear, every evening walking from where he includes guidance on how to behave lived at the bottom of Paper Buildings, in court. just by number one, walking up the steps and across the road. Shortly after that, he’d emerge with the horn, which he would blow for dinner.

Traditions

Henry von Blumenthal: Something that was quite striking was, once the gates to the Garden had been opened for lunch, all the barristers, who in those days wore bowler hats, would walk all together up and down across the lawn, from the slope at the top to

He once told me that he was always careful to blow the horn, because the previous porter, Pink, had been accepting the half-crown payment for blowing the horn and not actually blowing it, and somebody had complained.

57

58

INNER TEMPLE

Social Life

Mrs Langdon-Davis: After six o’clock when the barristers used to go home, (they didn’t work the hours they do now, funnily enough), the prams and roller skates used to come out and the children took over; there were lots of children. I think it was in some ways safer then, as, for instance, prams would be left out in Fountain Court with babies in them.

I can remember a friend of ours, the Darlings; he became Treasurer for a bit of Middle Temple, Gerald Darling, and their daughter was a contemporary of ours. I do remember that when she was a baby, she’d be left in her pram in Fountain Court with a notice on the pram simply saying: “Please do not feed Fiona.” I don’t think they would do that now.

Daire Brehan: While that tradition lives on only in memory, one which remains in place and has now been recorded for posterity is the Daire Brehan: silver count. Master Deby, previous Master But food is only one of a child’s needs of the silver for over 20 years, explained and, in the past, the Temple’s education the origins of the so called silver count. remit was extended to providing onsite Master Deby: nursery education for resident children, as The count, strictly speaking, is for the Elizabeth Butler-Sloss told me. purpose of the handing over from one Master Butler-Sloss: Treasurer to the next and to ensure It was started by Sue Darling in the that all the silver is accounted for. The Middle Temple and she asked the then Treasurer signs for whatever he has taken Master of the Temple with, a lady called and must deliver the pieces back to the Mrs Abrahams, who I didn’t really know, Inn at the end of his tenure as Treasurer. if they could use the vestry for a small That was the origin of it. group of children.

The Church

Daire Brehan: For over 450 years, the instantly recognisable Temple Church has stood in the Inn. Organist and Director of Music, James Vivian, shows off the church’s organ.

James Vivian: Some pipes are 32ft long and provide the base of the organ. And we also have some pipes that are only really the length of somebody’s fifth finger, and they produce tiny noises.

Mrs Langdon-Davis: The main thing I knew about it was the choir because that became world-famous after the Ernest Lough recording of Hear my Prayer, which was, I think, one of the highest selling classical records at the time; everybody in those days had it, and it was marvellous and that was how I knew about the Temple. I didn’t know about the lawyers; I knew about the music.

Daire Brehan: Well, Cynthia found out a great deal more about the Inn and is now one of our longest residing tenants, and she remembers back to the 1960s, a time when the Temple was an idyllic place to bring up children.

He said “Yes”, and we employed a very nice woman who was a Christian socialist called Mrs Willerbrock, who believed barristers were dreadful people. It was her duty to look after these darling children, who had the misfortune to have such terrible parents. She was the most wonderful nursery teacher.

Daire Brehan: But the legendry Mrs Willerbrock did have a sensitive side to her, and that, as Master Butler-Sloss explained, led to a clash with the other children who occupied the Temple Church rooms.

Master Butler-Sloss: We had a fracas with the choir boys. She was, as I said, a very devout Christian socialist, with a marked lack of sense of humour. And the choir boys found this out, and they left unsuitable messages for her with bad language.

She eventually came to me and, I think, to Rachel Waller, and said she couldn’t take this anymore. So we then moved to the Drill Hall of the Inns of Court Regiment in Lincoln’s Inn. It was terribly funny. Our difficulty was we couldn’t keep a straight face.

Daire Brehan: As well as laughing matters, there are also memories of momentous events in the Inn’s history, like Master MonierWilliams’ recollections of how he came to have Mahatma Gandhi posthumously reinstated as a member of hall.

Master Monier-Williams: I remember lunching, sometimes dining in Hall and looking at the bench and saying to myself: “I wonder if it’s possible to persuade those white-haired old men to bring Gandhi back post mortem? Because I think we should do it.”

There was no doubt in my mind he was a very, very brave man. And so the years passed by and I became a white-haired old man myself and the Treasurer and I said: “Well now is the time I can get Gandhi back in the Inn.” Daire Brehan: And he did, and he tells the tale in disc number one of the Inner Temple oral archive which, it is hoped, will grow with the years, with the help and co-operation of those of you willing to commit your past and, indeed, your present to disc for the benefit of future generations.

RICHARD KIHL LTD

Fine Wine Shippers and Brokers Established 1969

Suppliers to the Inner Temple

FINE WINE

LIST AVAILABLE ON REQUEST DO YOU HAVE WINE TO SELL?

Slaughden House, 140-144 High Street Aldeburgh, Suffolk, IP15 5AQ Tel: 01728 454455 Fax: 01728 454433 E-mail: sales@richardkihl.ltd.uk Website: www.richardkihl.ltd.uk

Nelson Catering Equipment, designers, suppliers & installers of bespoke catering kitchens for educational establishments, restaurants and event caterers.

T: 0800 731 3045

www.nelsoncatering.co.uk

59 kitchen ad - 85.5x145 v3.indd 1

13/08/2013 19:59

60

INNER TEMPLE  EVENT

Party on the Green: The Inner Temple Garden Party

PARTY ON THE GREEN: THE INNER TEMPLE GARDEN PARTY INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

61

62

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

Are Bills of Rights Really Necessary in the Common Law World?

Notes from a lecture by Justice Dyson Heydon, a former justice of the High Court of Australia

T

he point of executive government is to govern, and modern societies depend heavily on executive governments that govern forcefully. The lurking danger is that executive governments can move from forcefulness to tyranny. A primary protection against that movement is often thought to be a democratically elected legislature, to which the executive is responsible.

Some have lamented the influence of the masses on government, and not without reason: since the wars of the people have often proved to be much more terrible than the wars of the kings. For many, a Bill of Rights serves to protect minorities against tyranny.

As a matter of nomenclature, the instruments that answer to the description ‘Bill of Rights’ fall into several groups. This lecture concerns the category comprising of statutes that give courts power to decide what human rights exist, and whether other legislation is compatible with those rights. The leading instance in that category is the Human Rights Act of 1998.

The existing background in the United Kingdom is important. Both the residents and the governmental units are subject to the rule of law, a necessary element of which is an independent judiciary. The judiciaries of the United Kingdom administer complex bodies of substantive law, which confer many rights with great skill and fairness. The common law and its Scottish equivalent recognise and protect rights, including human rights.

Professor Brian Simpson summarised the English position in 1945 as follows: “Subject to certain limitations, which for most persons were not of the least importance, individuals could worship as they pleased, hold whatever meetings they pleased, participate in political activities as they wished, enjoy a very considerable freedom of expression of communication, and be wholly unthreatened by the grosser forms of interference

with personal liberty, such as officially sanctioned torture or prolonged detention without trial.”

To that list could be added the benefits to the public flowing from the gradual development of the welfare state and, since the 1960s, extensive protection against discrimination. All those achievements were the result of legislation or common law development, not of any Bill of Rights.

The Act, taken with its scheduled articles and devolution legislation, is a non-constitutional Bill of Rights. Unlike other Bills of Rights, it is simply an ordinary Act of Parliament, capable of amendment or repeal, although the aura of virtue that surrounds it might make this an extremely difficult thing to do from a political point of view.

Although the rights stated in the Convention already existed in the United Kingdom under the general law, at least to a very large extent, it was necessary to restate them in order for the main functions of the Act to be carried out.

The first of those functions relates to the court’s powers of statutory construction. Outside the gradual development of the common law, English and Scottish courts have not made any new law. They have concentrated on construing legislation independently of their personal opinions about what the legislation should have said. However, the authorities hold that section 3(1) of the Act gives the courts the role of amending legislation by giving it a meaning it does not have on its face, and this interpretive function granted by section 3(1) is, in part, anti-democratic. The power to substitute a right’s compatible meaning for the statutory meaning constrains legislative power.

A second central function is conferred by section 4(2).

This section provides that the court may declare that primary legislation is incompatible with a convention right, and section 10 gives a minister power to amend the legislation speedily by, in effect, delegated legislation.

ARE BILLS OF RIGHTS REALLY NECESSARY IN THE COMMON LAW WORLD? INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Another central function is that section 19 compels ministers who are in charge of a Bill to make a written statement as to whether it is compatible with the Convention rights, which tends to ensure that close attention is paid to human rights by the legislature.

Another key characteristic of the Act is that some rights, such as that conferred by Article 6(1), necessitate a twostage process. The first stage involves defining the rights.

The second involves imposing limits on them, in the light of what is seen as “necessary in a democratic society”, from the point of view of particular listed interests, called here interest/ necessity analysis.

Turning to justifications for the Act, many have been proffered, three of which have significant force. The first is that there is merit in setting out human rights goals as explicit objectives for the legislature and the executive. The second is

Second, the creation of legislative tasks on the courts in defining human rights may not be beyond judicial competence, but it strains it at least. Some of the Convention rights are abstract and unspecific. It is therefore necessary for courts to decide what the rights actually are. Those decisions are legislative in character. Applying interest/necessity analysis to work out the actual content of the right is even more radically legislative. The Convention is so vague that it invites judges to pour their personal views on controversial social and moral questions into the empty vessels of the words.

Further, the Convention directs attention to certain interests “in a democratic society”, but that is not any actual society. The Convention propounds an aspiration; it does not point to an existing reality. The search will encourage judges to look into their own hearts for what characteristics that ideal society might have.

“The Convention propounds an aspiration; it does not point to an existing reality. The search will encourage judges to look into their own hearts for what characteristics that ideal society might have.” that it was valuable to create the Joint Committee on Human Rights, ensuring the scrutiny of draft legislation, coupled with the ministerial duty to make a statement of compatibility.

Finally, a legislature may not have foreseen that its legislation might have adverse human rights consequences. One of the strengths of the common law system is that it permits a detailed consideration of the parties’ circumstances, which, quite independently of the Act, may affect the application or development of particular rules. The Act takes that facility and that experience and uses it to permit judicial suggestions for improvements in legislation by issuing declarations of incompatibility.

It is necessary also to consider potential problems, or questions, about the Act. The first is expense. There is the direct expense of funding the increased costs of the courts.

There is the expense of supplying a human rights bureaucracy.

Then there is the opportunity cost to society, in the human rights segment of the legal profession growing up. The assembling of evidence and arguments may increase the cost of litigation, and so may the attempts by people who are not parties to the litigation to intervene or to act as amicus curiae.

One might say that the Act has impermissibly delegated to the courts legislative decisions, which the legislature itself has failed to make. It is something that offends the separation of powers.

Critics say the courts capacity to define rights is inferior to that of the legislature. Legislators understand the practical expediencies of a particular problem and have access to opinion through public and private debate. Courts do not; courts operate on evidence. Legislators characteristically work towards compromises in the face of different aspects of public opinion. Courts cannot do that.

It is more legitimate for legislators to decide human rights issues than it is for courts to do so, because courts are not accountable to individual electors. Further, decisions about human rights often excite controversy. The role of courts is to still controversies, not exacerbate them. It is better for those storms to be weathered by the legislature.

The third problem relates to section 3(1), the power of the courts to mould, out of an enactment which is set to contravene human rights, a better and purer enactment which does not contravene human rights. The trouble is that the purer enactment does not reflect the legislative will either.

63

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

“It is more legitimate for legislators to decide human rights issues than it is for courts to do so, because courts are not accountable to individual electors.”

Lord Irvine and the Rt Hon Jack Straw MP, who piloted the Act through the House of Commons, said that findings of incompatibility would be rare. They expected the courts to strive to read legislation as rights-compliant, and that has happened: only 19 declarations of incompatibility have been issued. Yet from every point of view, reading legislation to be rights-compliant is a much more radical outcome than a mere finding of incompatibility.

A fourth problem is that human rights analysis may excite some judges unduly. The diet provided by human rights work under the Act can be succulent. It can stimulate an appetite that grows on what it feeds on. But it is a diet that may diminish the judicial appetite for conventional work, because that conventional work can be seen as having a rather dreary banality. Worse, it may encourage judges to transfer the social, moral analysis commanded by

loss of sovereignty. It may be a small loss, and it may have countervailing advantages, but it is a real loss.

A sure guide to the protection of human rights is the adherence to the rule of law. It may even be that factors other than law are the most important. A social climate and moral traditions of the people favourable to human rights, the existence of a culture of tolerance and liberty, the desire to maintain civilised standards, and a forceful public opinion reflecting those things may be more effective than formal guarantees.

Sir Julian Elliston wrote in 1961 that in any country where a Bill of Rights is “likely to be respected it is probably not necessary, while in any country in which it is really necessary it is not likely to be respected”. The ordinary law usually provides protective provisions for many aspects of basic rights.

“Yet from every point of view, reading legislation to be rights-compliant is a much more radical outcome than a mere finding of incompatibility.”

64

the Act out of the human rights field, into other fields.

The fifth problem relates to section 2(1), which compels United Kingdom courts to apply European Court decisions, and those decisions search not for the original meaning of the Convention, but for an evaluative, living-tree interpretation. The fundamental difficulty is that European Court developments have made it harder for the intelligent, non-legal citizen to find out the law. We could have a statute enacted before 2000, which the courts before 2000 might have held has a particular meaning. The citizen might rely on that meaning after 2000, and the courts might then be forced to overrule the authorities and ascribe a different meaning. In that sense, we have both uncertainty and retrospectivity, which undercut the rule of law values underlying the Convention.

The sixth problem is that declarations of incompatibility are advisory in character. Neither side wants one. Where no one is arguing for or against a particular proposition, there are no actual rights in issue. It is a world in which advisory opinions are being sought. That is fundamentally antithetical to the common law system of adjudication, because the sharpness of a contest between two opposed parties is an immense asset to the courts in determining their decisions.

The final problem concerns the perhaps unimportant question of whether the United Kingdom lost sovereignty in signing and ratifying the Convention. Before the Act, no foreign court could make binding decisions about the United Kingdom’s compliance with human rights principles. Now the ultimate court of appeal for the United Kingdom is the European Court. Despite what Sir Nicholas Bratza has said, that is a foreign court. That legal obligation itself marks a

I conclude by asking five questions: 1) Is a Bill of Rights a particularly useful component in the matrix of factors that contribute to a stable civil society?

2) Has the Act significantly improved human rights protection?

3) Is there any fundamental right referred to in the Act that was not given reasonable protection in domestic law before 2000?

4) Are there any significant instances in which that right has been infringed in circumstances not permitting any recourse to the courts for remedy?

5) Is there any respect in which the Act will lead to significantly greater protection for a right, without raising the risk of limiting other rights?

If the answer is yes, and the prices to be paid are worth it, British citizens should be grateful for the Act. If the answer is no or, yes, but the prices to be paid are too high, then it would reveal that it was not necessary, either to enter the Convention, or to enact the Act. Justice Dyson Heydon Inner Temple Hall, 21 January 2013

In the legal profession, there’s only one thing more important than what you know.

Knowing the right people is often crucial but, when you have international clients or clients with international dealings, it can be of great advantage if your friends in high places are also in far-flung places.

As an International Bar Association member, working confidently across international borders presents no problems.

You are able to draw on the world’s most extensive expertise base to achieve the best possible outcome for both your client and your practice.

Independent Day School for Girls from 4 - 18 years

Queens’ Gate School offers girls a friendly, supportive environment, where individuality is nurtured, academic standards are high and where a broad based curriculum ensures a well rounded education.

Dates of Autumn Term Open Events can be found on our website and we hope that you will visit us to see what makes Queen’s Gate so unique.

For a prospectus, or to make a private visit to the School, please contact the Registrar Miss Janette Micklewright, on 020 7594 4982 or email, registrar@queensgate.org.uk

IBA membership offers the opportunity to meet, to interact with and to learn from like-minded lawyers and leading practitioners in many jurisdictions, right across the planet. Our membership roll runs to over 50,000 of the world’s top lawyers and over 200 Bar Associations and Law Societies worldwide.

Whatever your field of specialisation, we can provide you with instant access to a global network of fellow lawyers who are used to applying their local knowledge to the same or similar issues.

The IBA’s on-going series of conferences and specialist meetings provides the perfect forum for convivial and constructive networking. Many an international merger or acquisition has been conceived at an IBA meeting and there are more than a few lawyers who say that joining the IBA was probably one of their more astute career moves.

What is more, the ability to market their firm in the right international circles has proven invaluable in many cases.

With membership of the International Bar Association, you can be sure of having all the right friends in all the right places, worldwide.

Queen’s Gate Junior School 125-126 Queen’s Gate London SW7 5LJ Queen’s Gate Senior School 131-133 Queen’s Gate London SW7 5LE

To find out more about the IBA and the benefits that membership could bring to your firm please contact membership services on:

www.queensgate.org.uk

Tel: +44 (0)20 7842 0090 Fax: +44 (0)20 7842 0091 Email: member@int-bar.org or visit www.ibanet.org.

65 Untitled-13 1

17/06/2013 14:33

66

INNER TEMPLE

Early Days at the Bar

Extracts from the memoirs of the late Master Clothier

Chambers at Cook St.

Baucher had the only set of Law Reports in his room, so we had to intrude in order to consult them. Baucher had been a solicitor but, as was rare in those days, transferred to began my career at the Bar in January 1950, when I joined the Bar after the required period of one year’s quarantine, intended to rid him of any taint of favouritism amongst the a set of chambers headed by Albert Edward Baucher. In solicitors of the town. This meant that he could do no legal those days, an average set of chambers contained five or work for the whole of the year of quarantine. six members at the most. Each had his or her own desk, and He never could grasp that, whereas solicitors work in there was no question of sharing rooms. partnership, all barristers, like surgeons, work in isolation.

The chambers at number 3 Cook Street, Liverpool, He was therefore deeply shocked if any member of chambers employed one clerk and one female typist. The clerk was an old accepted a brief in a matter in which he was already engaged, fashioned Bar clerk who bought and maintained a vast ledger because, of course, a firm of solicitors could never act for both for each member of chambers. I remember being extremely pleased when he produced a ledger book for me and enscribed parties in the same litigation.

This meant that a distinct frost descended upon the my name in it in an elegant clerkly hand. Thereafter, he would relationship between Baucher and whichever member of record in it each item of work which I did. However, for the chambers had had the effrontery to accept instructions first few weeks after my pupillage ended, I received no brief or against him.

If you actually appeared in court against him instructions of any kind, which meant, of course, that I had no income at all: a very worrying and disheartening situation, which the frost grew considerably deeper. The ultimate insult was to appear in court against Baucher and win. I did this on one must be very like a young actor waiting to get a part. occasion, and the result was permafrost lasting many months.

The clerk would enter in each member’s ledger the date Baucher had a huge Austin motor car, which he and the words, “to Settling Statement of Claim” and on the occasionally drove (in the middle of the road) at a maximum right hand side, “£2 4s 6d”. The sum of £2 2s was in fact two speed of 30 mph, saying that there was no necessity for guineas, being the barrister’s fee (always expressed in guineas) anyone to drive any faster. To overtake him was another and the remaining 2s 6d, the clerk’s fee. All in all, the clerk cause of great offence. His amazing hearse-like vehicle had received about eight per cent of fees. The typist was paid the blinds with tassels in every window, although it was difficult customary stenographer’s salary and she also made the tea. to imagine what goings-on Baucher could possibly indulge in The four or five rooms of chambers all opened off the entrance hall, in which there burned a coal fire, the only heating behind this screen of privacy. He was, of course, a monument of Edwardian rectitude. of any kind. Naturally, the arrival of tea brought anyone who was free to stand in front of the hall fire to try to keep warm.

There was a great deal of legal gossip and exchange of ideas, which was really quite helpful. I remember well the perishing cold, and when working in chambers I wore a suede waistcoat under the waistcoat of my suit! As the Clean Air Act of 1954 was four years in the future, every morning the papers on one’s desk were covered with a layer of fine black grit, which had to be dusted off before you could start work. Collars and cuffs of shirts were black before lunchtime.

I

EARLY DAYS AT THE BAR INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

My First Brief Beginning at the Bar is a terrifying experience. It must be rather like someone who, having just left drama school, sits anxiously at home hoping that the telephone will ring and there will be an offer of a walk-on part.

In fact, I was luckier than that, because in Liverpool there was a kindly little Welsh solicitor, a sole practitioner, whose amiable hobby it was to discover someone who had just been Called to the Bar. He would rush round to their chambers with some sort of pretence at a brief. This enabled him to say, if the recipient was eventually successful or even great, “I gave him his first brief, you know”, thus showing that he had the ability to recognise talent before anyone else!

And so it was that this kind solicitor, John Owen, came round to my chambers in Cook Street, Liverpool, carrying in his hand a very flimsy brief with my name on it and suggesting inside that I might have to appear in the magistrates’ court for a client of his.

In truth, my first real brief was to defend a poor old down-and-out who had hurled a brick through a large plate glass window of a famous Liverpool shop selling pianos and organs. He did not want either a piano or an organ. What he wanted was to spend Christmas in prison because there it would be warm, he would have a bed and he would have a Christmas dinner. So far from using my eloquence to keep him out of prison, he and his solicitor both hoped that I would be so hopeless as to be unable to keep him at liberty!

I need not have worried. My client already had 73 previous convictions for minor offences of this sort and the judge, who fully understood the situation, kindly said that, “despite all that I had addressed to him”, he had no alternative but to send my client to prison for three months.

So everyone was happy, except possibly me, although I did get the brief fee.

Reproduced by kind permission of Lady Clothier and taken from the unpublished memoirs of her late husband, Sir Cecil Clothier ��� ��.

“Whereas solicitors work in partnership, all barristers, like surgeons, work in isolation.”

Citroen Wells Chartered Accountants Expert accounting services for chambers and barristers

67

INNER TEMPLE EDUCATION & TRAINING

Legal Education & Training Review

by Master Francis, Chairman of the Education & Training Committee

A

fter much anticipation and anxiety, the Legal Education and Training Review (LETR) report was published in June this year. The LETR was a joint project of the Bar Standards Board (BSB), the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and ILEX Professional Standards (IPS). Its remit was to conduct a fundamental, evidencebased review of education and training requirements across regulated and non-regulated legal services in England and Wales.

The report is addressed primarily to the commissioning regulators, and is written with a wealth of dense, technical language that will deter all but the most determined practitioners from reading all or indeed any of it. Indeed, there is a risk that differing interpretations may be read into the report according to the agenda of the interpreter. So, for those unable to read it, what are the messages in the report for the Bar? In my interpretation of the report I am indebted to Fiona Fulton, Head of Education & Training, for her advice and understanding.

The report does not recommend a radical overhaul of the existing education and training system. It states that “there is no evidence that the system, or any one professional regimen, is fundamentally ‘broken’. Indeed, there is substantial evidence of the strength of the system, both from domestic and international viewpoints.”

The report rejects the concept of a common professional training course for barristers and solicitors.

It notes that the gap between what some solicitors and barristers do has narrowed – mainly due to higher rights and public access – but it also acknowledges that reforms to the BPTC and LPC in recent years have increased the divergence of training. Whilst common training could help enhance quality in some areas, for example advocacy training for solicitors, the report notes that a move to common training would risk some loss of specialisation, particularly for the Bar. The report also states that it is not clear that common training would significantly reduce cost. Furthermore, the report is satisfied with the standard of training given to barristers through the BPTC and during pupillage.

With regards to the training provided by the Inns, the report acknowledges that the advocacy training provided for new practitioners is “very well regarded” and also describes the Inns’ pupil supervisor training as an example of effective training for workplace supervision.

We are particularly pleased to note that the Inner Temple’s Pegasus Access Scheme is remarked upon in the report as an example of good practice in improving diversity of access.

However, the report goes on to recommend a number of ways in which the quality, accessibility and flexibility of education and training should be enhanced to ensure the system remains fit for the future. For example, the report raises some concerns about existing Continuing Professional Development (CPD) schemes within the legal profession, stating that “a number of barriers to effective participation, including cost, the exclusion of useful, often informal, learning activity, and difficulties for sole practitioners, small groups and organisations employing members of different professions, were identified”. The report recommends that “models of CPD that require participants to plan, implement, evaluate and reflect annually on their training needs and their learning should be adopted where they are not already in place. This approach may, but need not, prescribe minimum hours.”

The report can be found at www.letr.org.uk. (Please see overleaf a summary of the key recommendations.)

The report is now being considered by the three regulators, and we await consultation on the recommendations the BSB wishes to implement. The Inn will need to be prepared to play its part in this consultation to ensure that the training it offers in future is aligned with any changes that result from this process.

The following pages outline what the Inn is already doing to support and train current and future members of the legal profession through outreach, scholarships, a wide variety of qualifying sessions, student schemes and societies, pupil and new practitioner advocacy and ethics training, and CPD. The provision of excellent education along with promotion of the positive aspects of professionalism remain the core functions of the Inn and we will continue to do everything we can to support our members in meeting the evolving needs of those training for the Bar. May I take this opportunity to thank the members of the Inn’s Education Committees and all the hard working staff of the Education & Training Department, without whose efforts these activities just would not happen. Finally, but certainly not least, may I thank the Inn’s members who volunteer to teach or assist with our education and outreach programmes – their significant pro bono contribution is a perfect example of the profession’s dedication to training future members of the legal profession.

Master Francis

“Indeed, there is substantial evidence of the strength of the system, both from domestic and international viewpoints.”

68

MEET THE EDUCATION & TRAINING TEAM INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Key LETR Recommendations: Quality • Strengthen requirements for education and training in legal ethics, values and professionalism, the development of management skills, communication skills, and equality and diversity; • Enhance consistency of education and training through a more robust system of learning outcomes and standards, and increased standardisation of assessment; • Place greater emphasis on assuring the continuing competence of legal service providers through a system of continuing professional development that will require practitioners more actively to plan and demonstrate the value of continuing learning; • Require regulators to gather and make available key data and information that will reduce information gaps, support decision-making by prospective entrants, consumers and employers, and increase the effective market regulation of legal services education and training (LSET).

Meet the Education & Training Team

Access and Mobility • Establish professional standards for internships and work experience; • Enhance quality and increase opportunities for career progression and mobility within paralegal work, by encouraging regulatory and representative bodies to collaborate in the development of a single voluntary system of certification/licensing for paralegal staff, based on a common set of paralegal outcomes and standards; • Provide higher quality and more accessible information on the range of legal careers and the realities of the legal services job market; • Work should proceed to develop higher apprenticeship qualifications at levels 5–7 as part of an additional non-graduate pathway into the regulated professions, but the quality and diversity effects of such pathways should be monitored.

Flexibility • Expect regulators to co-operate in setting outcomes for LSET to ensure equivalence of baseline standards; • Clarify systems for accreditation of prior learning and transfer between professional routes, and ensure that these do not create unnecessary barriers to progression; • Remove requirements in training regulations that unduly restrict the development of innovative and flexible pathways to qualification, including the more effective integration of classroomand workplace-learning.

The Education & Training Team

Education & Training Department Treasury Building, Inner Temple, London EC4Y 7HL Tel: 020 7797 8208 Fax: 020 7797 8212 Fiona Fulton Head of Education & Training 020 7797 8207 ffulton@innertemple.org.uk Francesca Ellis Education Co-ordinator and Assistant to HET 020 7797 8207 fellis@innertemple.org.uk Schools, Universities, Academics and Research Anthony Dursi Outreach and External Relations Manager 020 7797 8214 adursi@innertemple.org.uk Carys Nelkon Outreach Co-ordinator 020 7797 8262 cnelkon@innertemple.org.uk

Scholarships and BPTC Student Activities Eamonn O’Reilly Scholarships and Students Manager 020 7797 8210 eoreilly@innertemple.org.uk Paul Clark Scholarship and Students Co-ordinator 020 7797 8211 pclark@innertemple.org.uk Pupils, New Practitioners and Established Practitioners David Miller Professional Training Manager 020 7797 8209 dmiller@innertemple.org.uk Kerry Upham Education Co-ordinator 020 7797 8213 kupham@innertemple.org.uk Other Useful Contacts at the Inner Temple Membership Registrar 020 7797 8206 enquiries@innertemple.org.uk Membership and Records Assistant 020 7797 8241 enquiries@innertemple.org.uk

69

70

INNER TEMPLE EDUCATION & TRAINING

Outreach Activities W

hile the Bar is facing a period of unprecedented change, one thing remains constant and gives the profession great hope for the future: the sheer talent and determination of new entrants. The Outreach Sub-Committee, chaired by Master Dingemans, aims to ensure that the best and brightest students continue to consider a career at the Bar, while providing them with information and guidance to ensure that they are making a realistic career decision.

The Inns of Court are the first port of call for prospective barristers and create the candidate pool of pupils for chambers. Given this role, the Inn has worked to engage with school and university students to provide them with an accurate assessment of their chances of securing pupillage, at the same time as encouraging capable students to continue to aspire to the profession. Inner Temple has continued to build on its successful programmes including the Pegasus Access Scheme and the Academic Fellows Scheme.

The Inn continues to make significant efforts to ensure that our membership remains diverse and representative.

The Inner Temple is often ‘on the road’, working with a full range of universities across England and Wales through career presentations, law fairs and support of student law societies. Assistance from members of the Inn on the circuits has been particularly important for the success of our regional receptions, including those held in Durham, Cardiff and Portsmouth this year. We also continue to run the annual Dinner to the Universities and Question and Answer Open Days at the Inn, both of which are highly oversubscribed year on year.

The launch of the Pegasus Access Scheme last year was well received. The Inn’s research found that work experience was one of the main barriers of aspirants to the professions, yet work experience was the best source of inspiration. The Inn launched the scheme to provide capable students from under-represented backgrounds in the profession with formal mini-pupillage placements to support them in their journey to the Bar. This scheme is in partnership with 58 partner sets of chambers, representing one of the most broad and inclusive schemes of its kind.

The Inn’s Schools Project continues to thrive under the guidance of Master O’Toole. The Inn began the Schools Project in 2008, working with the National Education Trust,

Pathways to Law and the Social Mobility Foundation. The Schools Project comprises a number of events throughout the year for students from across the country. We are working with new partners this year on some one-off events including the University of Sussex’s Aiming for Law programme.

The Inn also works with academic tutors and career advisers, providing them with information on the Bar so they can encourage the most capable students to consider a career at the Bar. The Inn hosted three dinners for legal academics this year to cultivate the links between the Bar and those who teach aspiring entrants to the profession. The Inn launched its Academic Fellows Scheme in 2010 and has since appointed 12 junior ‘academics to watch’. This is the first full cohort of the scheme, with the first of four Academic Fellows putting up their hats at the end of this year when four new Fellows will be appointed. Building on the Inn’s long academic history, this programme will help to support academic research and provides academics with information about the modern Bar for their students.

It is important to the Committee that all of these programmes are properly evaluated to ensure they are making a sustained and positive impact. In addition to regular briefings we publish on our students, pupils and practitioners, the Inn commissioned a doctorate over three years to evaluate our work in this area and to assess professional intervention in social mobility. (An update article can be found on page 72.) This will not only add to the Inn’s research base but will make sure that the programmes undertaken make a positive impact and are cost-effective.

The Inn has worked again with the media, government and regulators, particularly on matters of equality and diversity at the Bar. As regulatory oversight of this area increases, it has become important for the Inn to express its position where it has relevant experience.

Without taking the Inn’s role into account, policy-makers might neglect an institution with centuries of relevant experience in education and training.

The Inner Temple is dependent on its members to carry out its activities. If you are willing to take part in any of the activities noted in the following sections, please do not hesitate to contact the Outreach Team.

OUTREACH ACTIVITIES INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Dinner to the Universities, Inner Temple Hall

71

INNER TEMPLE EDUCATION & TRAINING

Keele University PhD Update I

n September, I began working on a doctorate funded jointly by the Inner Temple and Keele University, supervised by an Academic Fellow of the Inn, Professor Andrew Francis at Keele. Over the course of the doctorate, I will be researching the role of professional organisations in encouraging social mobility in the professions, and particularly the role that the Inns of Court play in promoting social mobility at the Bar. The main part of the project involves evaluating the work of Inner Temple in respect of its access and social mobility initiatives, with particular attention to the exciting new project, the Pegasus Access Scheme.

Pegasus Access Scheme (PAS) is a co-ordinated work experience programme that aims to support university students from diverse backgrounds to consider a career at the Bar. These applicants come from backgrounds that are traditionally under-represented at the Bar, and the Scheme provides them with formal mini-pupillage placements at one of 58 partner chambers, giving them crucial insights into the profession and the opportunity to form networks to ensure that their backgrounds do not hamper their access to the profession through a lack of opportunity for relevant work experience. Previous research has shown the

many professions the intention was not explicitly to limit the diversity of those entering but to maintain high standards, the methods of ensuring these standards (such as requiring expensive qualifications) indirectly impacted most upon those from less financially secure backgrounds.

Despite subsequent changes which have allowed a greater cross section of applicants to succeed in entering the professions, including the Bar, research has shown that some barriers remain, and do so resiliently. Research has shown that although participation rates of women and minorities in pupillage compare favourably with other professions, participation by those from working-class backgrounds is lower among pupils than the university population. Moreover, other residual effects of social origin characteristics remain, with men earning more than women and those entering the profession at a younger age earning more than mature entrants. This suggests that social origin remains a crucial mediating factor in terms of access and progression within the Bar. Similarly, in the context of the solicitors’ profession, many firms had fixed ideas of the attributes which they wanted trainees to exhibit, even where these were not related to their academic or professional abilities. By appointing,

“PAS aims to provide one of these crucial elements for someone seeking access to the profession: a mini-pupillage and greater networks that they might not otherwise have in the profession.”

72

importance of work experience (and the differential ways in which access to those opportunities are experienced) in the context of those who want to be solicitors applying for training contracts. PAS aims to provide one of these crucial elements for someone seeking access to the profession: a mini-pupillage and greater networks that they might not otherwise have in the profession.

Social mobility is a key political concern in the United Kingdom and, consequently, also for the universities and firms upon which pressure is applied to demonstrate that they contribute towards improving social mobility, especially in light of the Milburn Report which criticised certain professions in this regard. Unsurprisingly, most respondents to a recent Legal Services Board (LSB) consultation were keen to support initiatives seeking to increase social mobility within the legal profession and recognised that these initiatives needed to be taken.

The academic literature on professions suggests that the historically low diversity in terms of socio-economic backgrounds needs to be understood within the context of the control over entry which professions exercised, in part to strengthen its social status and market position. Whilst in

as new trainees, people who shared the characteristics of those who were recruiting, cultural reproduction of disadvantage for certain groups was perpetuated.

Although statistically there is much greater diversity in terms of socio-demographic background among those qualifying and entering practice as solicitors and barristers, with significantly increased proportions of women and black and minority ethnic people entering the profession, there continue to be concerns regarding lower rates of retention and progression of people from those backgrounds. At the same time, understandable concern is expressed within the Bar about the large number of prospective barristers enrolling on BPTC programmes, at a time of a limited opportunity in terms of pupillages and a fragile confidence in the sustainability of some sectors of the profession. Whilst Inner Temple has been active for some time in promoting social mobility through a number of outreach programmes, such as Pathways to Law (a programme involving sixth form students coming to the Inn and attending talks and workshops), and also through running its own events at schools and universities, it has recently developed the unique Pegasus Access Scheme.

OUTREACH ACTIVITIES INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

PhD Candidate Elaine Freer (Keele University)

A crucial question for this research is whether those parts of the profession which are instigating programmes aimed at encouraging social mobility within the Bar are managing to deliver their own stated aims by opening up the possibility of a career at the Bar to a wider demographic of young people. This question will be explored by an evaluation of the schemes offered by Inner Temple. My study will evaluate it in terms of its contribution to the furtherance of social mobility at the Bar, and the capacity of professional organisations, such as the Inns of Court, to encourage access to the professions.

The current phase of the project involves the analysis of feedback forms from students who have participated in Pathways events and PAS, to establish which parts of those programmes they found the most useful, and why. Initial analysis of the evaluation data collected from Pathways students suggests that many were genuinely surprised by the diversity of the backgrounds of the barristers that they met, that the barristers were approachable and willing to share information, and the fact that academic ability and a commitment to hard work were said to be more important than social background. Many of the participants also felt that they had previously known and understood very little about the Bar and its workings, but that the information on offer had allowed them to make an informed decision, even if that decision was that a career at the Bar was not in fact something to which they were suited.

Beginning in September, I will be conducting interviews with Benchers, staff and representatives of participating chambers, and meeting with two focus groups, one formed from Pathways to Law participants (sixth form stage), and one from Pegasus Access Scheme participants (university stage). It is hoped that gathering data from such a diverse range of those who have helped to instigate and run the programmes, as well as those who have participated in them, will allow the identification of the most valuable aspects of such programmes. It will also provide a basis to analyse how they can be further improved to meet their aim of increasing access to the Bar by those from backgrounds which are traditionally underrepresented within the profession. Moreover, the analysis should provide the basis for consideration as to whether aspects of the Inner Temple initiatives may represent models of best practice for other organisations aiming to promote social mobility within their own professions.

Elaine Freer

Wildy & Sons Ltd Serving the Legal Profession since 1830 With our knowledgeable and professional staff, we have been supplying new and secondhand books to lawyers and students for many generations, both within the Inns of Court and throughout the world. e-mail: enquiries@wildy.com website: www.wildy.com Lincoln’s Inn Archway, London WC2A 2JD tel: 020 7242 5778 Caption???

16 Fleet Street, London EC4Y 1AU tel: 020 7353 4395 For the second time in four years, after winning in 2010, Wildy’s has won the BIALL Supplier of the Year Award given to the supplier rated the best in a survey of the BIALL membership (British & Irish Association of Law Librarians)

73

74

INNER TEMPLE EDUCATION & TRAINING

Outreach Activities Outreach Standing Events

Month

Law Fairs Across England and Wales

October–December 2013

Dinner for Legal Academics

November 2013

Midlands Circuit Reception – Nottingham

November 2013

Schools – Seminar for Year 12/13 and Students

November 2013

Schools – Pathways to Law Skills Workshops

November 2013

Academic Fellows Reception

November 2013

Western Circuit Reception – Southampton

February 2014

Dinner for Legal Academics

February 2014

Schools – Pathways to Law National Open Day

February 2014

Police Liaison Scheme Mock Trial

February 2014

Dinner to the Universities

March 2014

Northern Circuit Reception – Manchester

March 2014

Schools – Pathways to Law Open Day

April 2014

Dinner for Legal Academics

April 2014

Circuit Reception �����

April 2014

Dinner for Academic Fellows

May 2014

Question and Answer Day

June 2014

Police Liaison Scheme Reception

September 2014

Bristol Area Presentation

October 2014

Cambridge Area Presentation

October 2014

Oxford Area Presentation

October 2014

London Area Presentation

October 2014

For more information, contact: adursi@innertemple.org.uk

Schools Inner Temple Schools Project

T

he Inner Temple began a pioneering Schools Project in 2008 and now works with a range of organisations that raise the aspirations of young people. The aim of the project is to ensure that all students, regardless of their background, are aware of the opportunities available to them in the professions, including the modern Bar. This is part of the Inn’s programme aimed at challenging stereotypes and promoting social mobility in the profession.

The Inn is working with the National Education Trust, Pathways to Law and the Social Mobility Foundation. Pathways supports high achieving state school students with no family history of higher education into leading law faculties and the legal professions.

12 universities are currently taking part. As part of this programme, the Inn organises a full day of activities for students from coordinating universities.

The Schools Project consists of open days for school students from across the country and two afternoon skills workshops.

These events include talks from members on different areas of law, presentational skills sessions, debating tournaments and opportunities to interact informally with practising barristers.

The Inn also works with other charities on one-off events.

OUTREACH ACTIVITIES INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

University Students Regional Receptions

In addition to the four large university presentations run annually by the Inn, smaller receptions are organised on Circuit. The Inn has set up a small fund to support local members running their own events on Circuit. These receptions bring together local practitioners with university students to provide aspiring barristers with information in an informal atmosphere about careers at the Bar.

Dinner to the Universities Dinner to the Universities is an annual event for undergraduate students and those on the law conversion course who are interested in a career at the Bar. Students from a wide range of universities are invited to this black tie dinner at the Inn where they meet practising members and have the opportunity to ask questions about the Bar and the Inner Temple.

Question and Answer Day Question and Answer Day is run in conjunction with the Junior Bar Association. The full day event on a Sunday in May or June is advertised to undergraduate students at all universities in England and Wales offering a qualifying law degree. Information workshops are held on funding legal studies, writing legal CVs, the BPTC, life as a pupil, junior tenant and employed barrister, and pupillage interview tips.

University Presentations Four large career presentations are run annually in Oxford, Cambridge, Bristol and London. Each presentation includes a panel of speakers with a pupil, self employed barrister, employed barrister and a judge. During the subsequent receptions, university students have the opportunity to gain further one-to-one advice from members.

Law Fairs Over the Michaelmas term, the Inner Temple attends more than 20 law and careers fairs throughout England and Wales.

Hundreds of university students have had the opportunity to speak to members of staff from the Education & Training Department about pursuing a career at the Bar, Inner Temple’s scholarships and education programmes, and life at the Inn.

Tours and Lunches at the Inn The Education & Training Department offer tours of the Inn for hundreds of university students, and lunches for dozens of university law societies every year. The tours and lunches give potential members the opportunity to visit and explore the Inn with an experienced representative of the Education & Training Department who is able to provide a general overview of the Inn, useful information about becoming a member and what students can expect from their BPTC studies and beyond.

Academics

Dinners for Legal Academics The Inner Temple holds four small dinners during the academic year for legal academics from universities across England and Wales. Many of the attendees are undergraduate law tutors, careers advisers and lecturers.

Academic Fellows Scheme The Inn launched its Academic Fellows Scheme in 2010.

Four academics are elected each year to this honorary three year post. The goals of the scheme include forming stronger links with a range of higher education institutions across the UK and to recognise the high quality legal research of early to mid career legal academics.

Master Parsley hosts the Cardiff Regional Reception 2013

75

76

INNER TEMPLE EDUCATION & TRAINING

Inner Temple Scholarships T

he Inn very generously made a total of £1,428,000 available for scholarships this year. This is allocated between awards for the BPTC, the CPE/GDL, internships and a few very small awards for those with a minimally funded pupillage. £1,179,400 of the fund was intended to be used for BPTC awards. In fact, we had a number of deferred and declined awards in 2012. This enabled us to allocate a further £71,000 for the BPTC year, making a total of £1,250,400 available for distribution for the BPTC awards alone.

All our awards are made strictly on merit – that is, on the basis of our judgment of a candidate’s potential to succeed at the Bar. The top seven named awards are based on merit alone. All the other awards take need and resources into account in deciding the quantum of the award, once a candidate has reached the relevant ‘merit threshold’ to receive an award in the first place. This enables us to decide how much money to give to each successful candidate, thereby ensuring that the bulk of our funds is targeted at those who most need it.

This year, we received 359 applications for BPTC awards.

We have a policy of interviewing every applicant, which is not only very popular with the students but also ensures that every worthy candidate for a scholarship has an opportunity to shine.

After allowing for withdrawals, we interviewed 304 candidates. The interviews incorporate a legal problem – candidates are given an unreported case (either family, crime or civil) to read on the day of the interview. They are then asked questions by the panels to see how well they have grasped the issues in the case and the legal arguments involved. We have found this to be an excellent tool to help us assess the ability of each candidate in an entirely fair way.

For the BPTC awards, the interviews took place over two weekends in early March and the interviews were held by ten panels of four interviewers each. Seven of the panels were situated in the Treasury Building and three within rooms generously donated again by 1 Kings Bench Walk, for which the Inn is very grateful.

A total of 46 Benchers and members of Hall and 16 previous scholars volunteered to assist the Inn during these weekends. Although this involved an immense amount of hard work, our policy of conducting interviews for all those who have applied means that we can give everyone an equal chance to present their case to the panel. The students tell us that they very much value this opportunity.

“I was truly touched at the kindness and generosity of the award I received from Inner Temple.”

A total of 97 awards were made. These included the Peter Taylor and Stephen Chapman Scholarships, five Princess Royal Scholarships, 20 Major Scholarships and 70 Exhibition Awards for the BPTC. This meant that the average award was £12,890, and we were pleased to be able to make 51 awards of more than £14,400, 33 of which were in excess of £17,000.

The success of the policy of interviewing all applicants can be seen in the very sharp increase in the number of applications we have received. We are quite satisfied that this has not been at the expense of quality, as we have seen a steady increase, year on year, in the number of candidates achieving good merit grades.

Whilst this makes it even more difficult to strike the right balance between making meaningfully sized awards and assisting every deserving candidate, it is certainly encouraging for the future of both the Bar and the Inn. For those students who must undertake the GDL before they can commence the BPTC, the Inn also offers scholarship interviews to every applicant, and we are grateful once again to those members who generously donate their time in order to assist. The interviews took place in June, and we had a record year in terms of the strength of the applicants. We have now made awards to 25 of the 85 candidates – two Princess Royal Scholarships, three Major Scholarships and 20 Exhibitions. Successful candidates are guaranteed a matching award for the BPTC year so that they know that they will be supported for both years of the qualification process. This has also proved very popular amongst applicants.

In addition to funding the two main vocational courses, a small number of Benefactors’ Scholarships are available to assist with minimally funded pupillages. We also support a number of our young barristers to undertake internships, almost all of which take place overseas. This proves very beneficial both to those in receipt of the awards and the very deserving communities in which they work.

Scholarships play a vital role in widening access to our profession. For many candidates, a scholarship from the Inn can be a determining factor in whether they decide to pursue the BPTC course – a fact borne out by the diverse backgrounds of our scholars.

Of the 97 successful BPTC candidates this year, 25 per cent were over the age of 25; 12 per cent were from a non-white ethnic background; 39 per cent did not have an undergraduate law degree and 67 per cent were state educated.

“I am immensely grateful to Inner Temple for the Peter Taylor Scholarship. With the support of the award, I will be able to move to London to study the BPTC, which will allow me to begin building my life in the capital (and give my parents a well-deserved break from my saxophone playing). I would like to thank all of the kind people who spent so much time conducting the interviews and administering the scholarships. The selection process, based on a detailed discussion of very recent case law, was both rigorous and rewarding.”

Ajay Ratan, Peter Taylor Scholar

INNER TEMPLE SCHOLARSHIPS INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

“I find it difficult to put into words how much the scholarship I received means to me. I am from a working-class background with no family or contacts within the legal profession. I have worked hard to get to where I am today. I have now chosen to pursue a career where future prospects are uncertain and training costs a considerable amount. Inner Temple really has made the process just that little bit easier by offering such incredibly generous and, literally, life-changing scholarships.”

Lydia Carroll, BPTC Exhibition Award winner

“There are a number of hurdles to overcome in order to succeed at the Bar but, thanks to the generous scholarship from the Inner Temple, the financial burden was alleviated. Aside from the monetary value of the scholarship, I am delighted to have the vote of confidence of my Inn. The support and encouragement that the Inner Temple provides its scholars is invaluable, and it has made the process of entering the Bar less daunting.”

Sajid Suleman, BPTC Major Scholar and Duke of Edinburgh Entrance Award winner

Applications and Awards 2006–2013 Year

Applications

Awards

Percentage Successful

2006

249

87

35 per cent

2007

266

107

40 per cent

2008

205

98

47 per cent

2009

299

107

36 per cent

2010

371

119

32 per cent

2011

368

101

27 per cent

2012

376

102

27 per cent

2013

359

97

27 per cent

“The financial support of a Princess Royal Scholarship is vital for me to continue on the path to the Bar. I am therefore tremendously grateful to all involved in providing this extremely generous award.

However, perhaps as significant is the scholarship’s impact on my own confidence. It has become trite to point out that joining the Bar is a highly competitive process, but it is nevertheless true that the relentless requirement to succeed can be stifling. Even the smallest setback reawakens doubts that you can beat the odds. The strong backing of the Scholarship Committee has helped me to maintain my belief that I will do just that.”

Oscar Schonfeld, Princess Royal Scholar

77

78

INNER TEMPLE  EDUCATION & TRAINING

Inner Temple BPTC Scholarship Winners 2013 Peter Taylor Scholarship: Ajay Ratan Stephen Chapman Scholarship: Elizabeth Gallagher Princess Royal Scholarships: Michael Allin, Matteo Angelini, Samuel Campbell, Anda Scarlat, Oscar Schonfeld Major Scholarships: Joseph Bairstow, Georgina Dietrich, Sarah Docherty, Katherine Duncan, Charles Forrest, Charlotte Gilmartin, Samantha Godec, Thomas Hynes, Varsha Jagadesham, Howard Leithead, Andrew Marlow, Eve McFadzean, Daniel Milner, Emma Price, Naomi Scarano, Harry Smith, Matthew Stubbins, Sajid Suleman, Joseph Switalski, Matthew Westcott

Exhibitions: Sophie Akister, Chloe Ashley, Tayyiba Bajwa, Ella Batchelor, Callum Beamish, Robert Blake, Fiona Brittle, Lydia Carroll, Maya Chopra, Fiona Clancy, Frederick De Boise, Aaron Dinnes, Robert Donaldson, Ryan Donoghue, Ivanna Dorichenko, Michaela Dowe-Stephenson, Katie Drummond, Amelia Evans, Thomas Fairclough, Sophie Firth, Catherine Flint, Elizabeth Garcia, Matthew Gaunt, Sonya Geraets, Merrow Golden, Sepideh Golzari, James Groves, Rose Harvey, Benjamin Haseldine, Thomas Herbert, Liam Hunter, Hannah Hussain, Jane Irvine, Chloe Jackson, Kirsten Japp, Christopher Johnson, Lindy Jones, Christopher Kientzler, Hannah Knight, Matthew Lawson, James Lee, James Liptrot, Andrew Lomas, Sarah-Jane Loriot, James Mathieson, Christelle McCracken, Emile McHarsky-Todoroff, Benedict Newman, Arrin Nouri, Ricky O'Brien, Michelle Parkin, Darshan Patel, Daniel Pollitt, Julia Queen, Rebecca Reay, Nicholas Saunders, Chloe Shuffrey, Alexander Slater, Kenneth Spurling, Sam Stevens, Andrew Taylor, Dominic Thomas-James, Helen Towers, Luke Trim, Janel Weber, Alexander Whatley, Daniel Whitford, Stephanie Wickenden, Rebecca Wolloms, Hannah Wright

Inner Temple CPE Scholarship Winners 2013 Princess Royal Scholarships: George Molyneaux, Anzhela Yevgenyeva

Exhibitions: Gus Baker, Gideon Barth, Simon Bowen, Thomas Clarke, Harriet Dudbridge, Saskia Ellis, Eleanor Gerrans, David Green, Natasha Jackson, Abigail Langer, John Lawson, Joseph Lee, Edoardo Lupi, Sarah Parker, Imogen Proud, Andrew Rhodes, Jayed Sarker, Karen Sosa, Benjamin Waistell, Aidan Wills

Major Scholarships: Hannah Gibbs, Zachary Kell, Joanna Moore

The Sir Joseph Priestley Scholarships 2013 Name

Project

Grace Capel

The Refugee Advocacy and Support Project in Turkey

Anita Davies

The Human Rights and Democracy Centre in Nepal

Hannah Glover

Lawyers for Human Rights in South Africa

Mandisa Knights

SoA Leadership in Sierra Leone

Alice Richardson

Reprieve in the USA

Amy Shepherd

Reprieve in the USA

Andrew Stone

Reprieve in Pakistan

Inner Temple Internship Awards 2013 Name

Project

Jodie Anderson

Reprieve in the USA

Olivia Bliss

The Women's Legal Centre in South Africa

Charles Forrest

Advocates for Human Rights in the USA

Matthew Fraser

The EU Commission in Brussels

Daniel Heimler

The Office of the Prosecutor in The Hague

Katie Johnston

The EU Delegation to the UN in the USA

Holly Platt

Amicus in the USA

Claire Rogers

The Texas Defender Service in the USA

Philippa Woodrow

Asylum Access in Tanzania/Thailand

INNER TEMPLE SCHOLARSHIPS INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Ethnicity of Scholars

Age of Scholars

School Background of Scholars

Law Degree vs Conversion

“I feel privileged to have been awarded the Stephen Chapman Scholarship. I would wish to emphasise that the Inn’s scholarship programme is an effective and vital way to increase access to the Bar for students from under-represented backgrounds, such as myself.

It offers reassurance that one does indeed make the grade, and I can attest that it is a financial lifeline for individuals whose parents cannot fund their legal studies. I am extremely grateful for the opportunity to pursue a career as a barrister without having to take out a loan.”

Elizabeth Gallagher, Stephen Chapman Scholar

Pegasus Scholarships

Paris Bar Exchange

This Scholarship scheme offers barristers belonging to all four Inns of Court who are tenants or employed barristers up to five years' practice as a barrister (not including pupillage) the opportunity to travel abroad and work as lawyers in other common law jurisdictions and the European Union. Scholarships are awarded for placements of between 6 and 12 weeks. A host law firm assists the scholar to find accommodation and provides expenses. There are up to 12 scholarships annually to the following countries: Dubai, Bermuda, Hong Kong, New Zealand, Singapore, USA and countries of the EU. The Trust also welcomes the opportunity to support scholars in placements they have personally arranged. Further details may be obtained from the Scholarships and Students Manager (who is also Secretary to the Pegasus Scholarship Trust).

Closing date for applications: 30 November in each year.

The Bar of Paris with the Paris Bar School (EFB) offers a stage to up to four barristers who will be based in an avocat’s offices (preferably specialising in the barrister’s field of practice) for the month of September. As well as doing their stage with the avocat, they will participate in the EFB’s vocational courses, make court visits, meet young avocats and conduct a mock trial in the Palais de Justice before a French Judge. Candidates for the exchange programme (who must speak fluent French) should apply not later than the middle of May in each year by lettre de motivation in French to: His Honour Michael Brooke QC, c/o the Secretary to the Pegasus Trust, Inner Temple.

79

INNER TEMPLE EDUCATION & TRAINING

Student Training and Support D

uring 2012–2013, the Inn’s 442 full-time and parttime BPTC student members undertook a wide range of qualifying sessions including lectures from high profile speakers, advocacy training, student conference weekends with legal experts, presentational skills training and collegiate dining. Students also benefited from mentoring, mock interviews, police liaison and marshalling opportunities, as well as pupillage advice sessions.

Student Conference Weekends

Each year, the Inner Temple hosts three student conference weekends, two of which take place at Cumberland Lodge in Windsor Great Park and the other at Highgate House in Northamptonshire. These weekends each focus on particular areas of law and provide students with the opportunity to meet senior members of the Inn in a relaxed and informal atmosphere, as well as learn more about a particular legal topic, develop their advocacy skills and benefit from the advice of experienced practitioners.

The three conferences were attended by a total of 176 students, and each considered topics which are at the forefront of current affairs and closely relevant to those practising law at present: What the State Knows About Me – and Should I Care?, Trial by Jury and Stalking Law Reform.

The wealth of knowledge brought to the conferences by the wide range of experts in each field was impressive and hugely appreciated by the student members, barristers and judges alike. Thanks are due to all members and speakers who assisted with these conferences and, in particular, to Master Owen Davies, Eric Metcalfe, Master Birkett, Master Mark George, Master Judith Hughes, Paul Infield and Kathryn Arnot Drummond.

“Highgate House was a fantastic opportunity to meet some of the best advocates in the UK speaking about and demonstrating an issue at the heart of what they do: ‘Trial by Jury’. It combined the right balance of insight into the mind of a trial advocate, opportunities to show your advocacy prowess and, most importantly, lots of fun! Overall, it was a great weekend with an astonishing amount of food, interesting topics of debate and good company.”

80

Marcus Coates-Walker

Speakers at 2012–2013 Student Conference Weekends ‘What the State Knows About Me – and Should I Care?’

Nick Pickles – Director, Big Brother Watch Dr Lizzie Coles-Kemp – Senior Lecturer, Information Security Group, Royal Holloway Robert Marshall-Andrews �� – Carmelite Chambers Sir Denis O’Connor ��� ��� – Former Chief Inspector of Constabulary The Rt Hon Sir Paul Kennedy – the Interception of Communications Commissioner Master Laws (Chair) ‘Trial by Jury’ Master Cheryl Thomas – University College London Master Maddison Master Pascoe – Pump Court Chambers Master Birkett – 18 St John Street (Chair) ‘Stalking Law Reform’ Rt Hon Elfyn Llwyd – Chairman of the Independent Parliamentary Enquiry into Stalking Law Reform Alexis Bowater – Chief Executive, Network for Surviving Stalking Tim Lawson Cruttenden – Lawson-Cruttenden & Co Professor Carsten Maple – Pro-Vice-Chancellor, Research and Enterprise, University of Bedfordshire Kristiana Wrixon – Helpline Manager of the National Stalking Helpline Assistant Chief Constable Gary Shewan – Greater Manchester Police Paul Infield – Clerksroom (Chair)

“Cumberland Lodge was great fun and educational.

I found the advocacy exercises and the opportunity to be assessed by leading barristers and members of the Bench, especially helpful. I also enjoyed the opportunity to discuss with several Benchers of the Inn their views of the Bar and of practice.”

Jonathan Silverstein-Loeb

STUDENT TRAINING AND SUPPORT INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Speakers at the Trial by Jury Weekend

Mock Trial at Highgate House

Advocacy and Pupillage Applications Day

BPTC Advocacy Day

This year, the Inn hosted a new event: the Advocacy and Pupillage Applications Day. The event, aimed at student members who had completed the BPTC and were in search of pupillage, offered those attending the chance to practise their advocacy, take part in a mock pupillage interview and to have their pupillage applications and legal CVs reviewed.

Trainers included current pupils, new tenants and some more established practitioners. The support and advice offered at the session was greatly appreciated by those who attended.

Thanks are due to all trainers who assisted with this session, in particular Saul Herman who led the event.

“Excellent day. I really appreciate the help provided by the Inn. I feel I benefited enormously, especially from the application review and the advocacy exercise. My sincere thanks to those who give their time so willingly.”

“I must say that I found the day incredibly useful.

In particular, I feel that the mock interview feedback I received was instrumental in my obtaining pupillage. I cannot stress enough what a brilliant and useful event this was. I hope that the Inn continues to run it for a very long time.”

Two BPTC Advocacy Days were held this academic year.

Taught by the Inn’s advocacy trainers as well as new practitioners who had recently completed the advocacy training course, the event allowed BPTC students the chance to experience advocacy exercises first-hand in a supportive and informal environment as they began the BPTC. “It made me think about things from a different perspective. Exercises which helped us consider how we use our voice and think about posture really helped as, at the time, we were preparing for our advocacy examination.”

“The feedback and guidance was really helpful – especially suggestions as to how to improve the weak areas of my presentation.”

“Group leaders were very helpful and empathetic.

They gave excellent advice.”

“It was helpful to have feedback from experienced barristers, as tutors at university are not necessarily experienced advocates.”

“The application process was straightforward and Inner Temple was able to match me with a participating judge based on my CV and personal interests. This provided a very tailored and useful experience for me, and I highly recommend that students take advantage of this opportunity. It gives outstanding experience and is a very nice addition to pupillage applications.”

BPTC student Tim Bierer on the Marshalling Scheme

81

82

INNER TEMPLE EDUCATION & TRAINING

Presentational Skills Course

Taught by professionally trained actors and vocal coaches, and attended by 270 BPTC students, these two qualifying sessions gave students the opportunity to develop skills such as voice projection, posture and awareness of space.

Education Days

These two qualifying sessions are tailored especially for students studying at providers outside London. The dates are agreed in advance with the other Inns and the BPTC providers so that students can travel to London together. This year, a significant number of our 147 non-London students attended sessions on ethics, pupillage applications, pitfalls of the early years of practice, and observed a mock trial on clinical negligence. Students then joined our London based students at Lecture Nights following the Education Days.

Lecture Nights

The Inn’s prestigious Lecture Night series has continued to attract high-profile speakers including: • Professor Sir Robin Jacob on Stopping People Doing Things can Sometimes be a Good Thing • Master Beatson on Academics: Forgotten Players or Interlopers?

• Justice Dyson Heydon AC on Are Bills of Rights Really Necessary in the Common Law World?

• Louise Christian, Senior Consultant and Head of Public Law at Christian Khan Solicitors, on Should the Decisions of the Foreign Secretary be Justiciable?

• Master Fitzgerald on Extradition, Deportation and Human Rights

All the above lectures were accredited for one qualifying session and one CPD hour, and were all very well attended.

Speakers at the Stalking Law Reform Weekend

Dining Night Qualifying Sessions

Following on from the request by the Bar Standards Board that all qualifying sessions include an explicitly educational element, all Dining Night qualifying sessions in 2012–2013 were preceded or followed by the following lectures or debates: • Master Lawrence on How Can you Defend Someone you Know is Guilty?

• Master Soole on Fearlessness and Prudence • Master Hirst on Fraudulent Bankers: the Remedies?

A Napoleonic Connection • Master Floyd on Intellectual Property – The Future • Master Treasurer on War and the Law • Dr Andrew Scott, Academic Fellow, on The Design of the Public Interest Defence in Libel Law • Alexander McLean, Director General of the African Prisons Project onThe African Prisons Project • Master Scriven on Don't Believe All you Read • Dr Vanessa Davies, BSB Director, on Self-Regulation versus Statutory Regulation • Master Morley on The Challenges Facing the Special Tribunal for Lebanon • Subtreasurer on Can Ethics be Measured?

• Jenny Talbot OBE, Director, Care not Custody Programme at the Prison Reform Trust, on Care not Custody • Master Nice on War Crimes Trials – Successes in Themselves or Pointers to a New Idealism?

• Master Lawrence on Integrity • The Final of the Rawlinson Cup Debate (see page 87) • Master Simon on My Dark Secret

Playing Wıtness and Counsel

Each year, students are recruited to play witness and counsel on the Inn’s training courses for members wishing to become advocacy trainers. This is the perfect opportunity for students to practise their advocacy skills because the more mistakes they make, the better for the trainee teachers!

STUDENT TRAINING AND SUPPORT INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

From left to right: Master Pegden (Chairman of the Qualifying Sessions Committee), Lady Laws, Master Laws, Dr Alastair Niven (former Principal of Cumberland Lodge), Master Treasurer and Mrs Helen Niven

Local Qualifying Sessions

The number of the Inn’s student members studying at providers outside of London totalled 147 in 2012/2013.

The Education and Training Department schedules the vast majority of its educational events at weekends to allow those students who are not based in London as many opportunities to attend as their London counterparts. Students at nonLondon providers are also able to organise up to three qualifying sessions at their providers. Our approach has been to encourage students to organise the sessions themselves but to assist them with a small subsidy, and by putting them in touch with local members who would be willing to give lectures, host advocacy workshops or judge moots and debates. This year’s students and local barristers and judges have put tremendous effort into organising a wide range of local qualifying sessions.

This year, the four Inns agreed to collaborate on one joint Inns’ qualifying session at each of the non-London providers.

Each of these sessions was organised by one Inn and open to students of all four Inns. Feedback from these sessions has been positive, and the four Inns intend to collaborate in a similar way in the forthcoming academic year.

Schemes for Students

The Inner Temple organises four main schemes for students: the Police Liaison Scheme, the Mentoring Scheme, the Mock Interview Scheme and, for pupils also, the Marshalling Scheme. These schemes are designed to give students additional support throughout their BPTC course, to introduce them to other areas of the legal profession and to prepare them further for their future careers.

Mock Interview Scheme

Pupillage season isn’t a pleasant experience for anyone.

In 2011, I had a handful of first-round interviews; some I thought had gone well, some average and one was a complete disaster. None of them resulted in a second round interview.

In 2012, as I headed into my second season, I felt a little apprehensive to say the least. So, when a mock interview was offered by the Education and Training Department, I jumped at the chance.

I was allocated to a QC who had spent a number of years on the pupillage committee at a leading criminal set in London. The session lasted for 45 minutes: the first 20 were spent in full mock-interview acting mode and the remaining time was spent improving weak areas, identifying possible current affairs issues and discussing my interviewer's top tips.

Whilst the interview helped me gain a better understanding of the attributes panels look for, what really made the difference was that it calmed my nerves. This allowed me to convert first round interviews to second round interviews, and ultimately I received a pupillage offer from my preferred set.

This is an invaluable scheme – anyone who is given the chance to participate would be a fool not to do so.

Katie Lloyd

83

84

INNER TEMPLE EDUCATION & TRAINING

The Police Liaison Scheme S

etting off to spend a night shift shadowing officers from Holborn police station, I had very little idea what to expect. Whatever ill-formed expectations I might have had were soon shaken when I was presented with my uniform for the night: an MPS stab-proof vest.

Thankfully, the vest remained an unnecessary precaution though the unpredictability of the work soon became apparent. The evening began with us patrolling the streets close to the station. Simply being in the police car, seeing the officers checking passing vehicles on the inbuilt computer system, was an education in itself. Having reminded one lady to turn on her headlights (she was dashing to see her daughter’s newborn and had forgotten in her frenzied excitement), we were called to assist colleagues attending a collision in Camden. Kindly, the officers suggested that I observe from the comfort of the car whilst they braved the rain to navigate snaking traffic around assorted car parts littering the road.

Soon, we were called to respond to reports of a missing person who had disappeared from hospital following an operation. It was feared that our absconding lady still had a cannula in her hand. Having spoken to staff at the hospital, we dashed back to the station to check the police computer for any helpful information as to where she might have gone. Using the leads provided by this database, the lady was soon traced to a local hostel and it was for the officers, along with the paramedics, to coax her into the ambulance. Though something of a thankless task, she was soon safely en route back to the hospital and, before long, we were called to attend reports of a domestic assault.

Living out what must be a childhood fantasy for many, we sped to the address, lights flashing, sirens blaring.

The complainant had been assaulted by her boyfriend, who had then left the house when he knew the police had been called. Though by no means the most difficult witness, she was nonetheless distraught, and the officers

demonstrated remarkable tact and patience in trying to obtain a coherent account of her recollection.

Despite having read statements written by police officers – and having seen witnesses cross-examined as to omissions and inconsistencies within those statements – I had never seen first-hand how they are composed.

Watching this process of creating the statement that may eventually appear tied in pink or white, in circumstances so far removed from the relative civility of the Bar, was perhaps the most important and directly relevant experience of the evening.

After a short time, the suspect returned and, having escorted him back to the station, I watched as he was processed into custody ready to be interviewed.

Whilst I undoubtedly drew enormous benefit from the evening, it was also an opportunity for mutual learning. One of the officers was due to give evidence in court for the first time a few weeks later, and was anxious to learn from me the proper court procedures and etiquette, so as not to let her inexperience show (a feeling with which any pupil starting their second six will no doubt be familiar).

The evening ended with as much variety and unpredictability as it had begun: taking the police car to collect a late-night dinner from McDonald’s.

Despite the emphasis on PACE provisions in the criminal modules of the BPTC, this sterilised, academic approach cannot bring to stark reality the daily difficulties faced by police officers. There can be no substitute for first hand experience and I was amazed at how much I was able to see and learn over the course of a single shift. For all those fortunate to be offered a place on this scheme – whether intending to prosecute or defend, or even simply with a broader interest – this is an opportunity not to be missed.

Carolina Bracken

CALL TO THE BAR INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Call to the Bar This year, the Inner Temple Called approximately 450 students to the Bar at ceremonies attended by their families and friends.

85

86

INNER TEMPLE EDUCATION & TRAINING

Student Societies Drama Society

The past year has proved to be extremely successful for the Drama Society. The combination of enthusiasm and talent for drama of all kinds enabled the Society to perform three excellent shows.

The year began with an all-singing, all-dancing Christmas pantomime of Cinderella, complete with a live Inner Temple band. Both nights were a sell-out success, and the raucous peals of laughter which emanated from the Parliament Chamber were testament to the appeal of the show to all members of the audience. In the spring, the Drama Society collaborated with Shakespeare’s Globe to perform Gorboduc – a 16th-century play written by two Inner Templars (Thomas Norton and Thomas Sackville). This was the first play written in blank verse and the first English tragedy. It was a wonderful opportunity to work with such a renowned theatre company and we hope that this budding relationship with the Globe will continue for years to come. Our final show for the year was a performance of Pygmalion. We are proud of the strong acting talent that came to the fore in this witty play, where brazen cockney English met with cut-glass RP to the delight of our audience members.

Although we have had successful shows throughout the year, we are most proud of the Society’s increased profile amongst members of the Inn. We would like to take this opportunity to thank all those who have supported our endeavours this year – in particular, Master Pascoe, Master Christie, Rosy Gotelee in the Catering Department and the staff of the Education & Training Department.

Inner Temple Students’ Association

What a year this has been for ITSA. We have gained tremendous interest from Benchers, barristers, Bar and non-Bar students as well as ordinary members of the public.

We have received overwhelming support throughout the year, as demonstrated by the sheer volume of people who have turned up to all our events. ITSA’s website, Twitter and Facebook pages have all excited considerable interest, attracting a staggering 2,305 views.

As with every great success there is a starting point.

Following the election of the committee, ITSA announced the Christmas soirée, an opportunity to mingle with students in the Parliament Chamber over wine and nibbles. True to form, tickets sold out, resulting in a last-minute extension due to popular demand. January 2013 saw our biggest event – Burns Night in Hall. A sell-out crowd of 150 people paid tribute to Robert Burns with haggis, a ceilidh band, recitals of Burns’ poetry, ending with Benchers in a group dance, singing Auld Lang Syne. We also introduced ITSA Night, a chance to talk to barristers informally over wine and nibbles. Our last event, the Summer Masquerade Boat Party, was held on the embankment and was a phenomenal success.

Ann-Marie Mullings, President

Mavis Amonoo-Acquah, President

Debating Society The Inner Temple Debating Society has been privileged to enjoy a thoroughly successful 2012/2013. Inner Temple was victorious in this year’s London IV; the tournament was won in convincing fashion by the Society’s very able Belize Harrison and Rose Harvey. Inner Temple competed in the World University Debating Championships held in Berlin and placed among the top teams. The Debating Society also represented Inner Temple at the major debating tournaments in the university calendar including the Oxford IV, Cambridge IV, John Smith Memorial Mace, LSE IV, UCL IV and KCL IV. Our own Inner Temple IV, generously sponsored by Blackstone Chambers, was again well attended by the best teams in the country. This year’s IV was hard fought, with Thomas Hosking and Harish Natarajan of Oxford University eventually emerging as winners. Inner Temple debating continued its commitment to education by participating in the Inner Temple

Schools Project, an outreach programme that helps to teach schoolchildren from a variety of backgrounds about the law, advocacy and a career at the Bar. The Society also held weekly training sessions which focussed upon a different area of advocacy each week, followed by a chance for students to debate, with judging and feedback provided. Going forward, the Society hopes to grow even stronger. Next year will see the introduction of a formidable trophy for our IV, which will be named the Harrison Mace in honour of Master Harrison, who passed away in January of this year. Inner Temple Debating continues to be the banner debating society of the Inns of Court and the Society hopes to build on this momentum in the coming year.

Jonathan Gaydon, President

STUDENT SOCIETIES INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Mooting Society

Lawson Moot

The 2012–13 academic year has been another busy year for the Inner Temple Mooting Society.

The Intervarsity Moot was held on Sunday 3 February, kindly sponsored by Tanfield Chambers. Sharin Cockerton and Rose Harvey (President and Vice-President of the Intervarsity Moot) undertook the monumental task of organising the day with great success. Over 30 teams competed from across England and Ireland and, after a day of fantastic advocacy, Oxford Brookes emerged as victors, earning themselves mini pupillages at Tanfield Chambers and a subscription to the ICLR. In the afternoon of this event, Ben Brown (President of Mooting Training) and I ran a mooting workshop for those universities that were knocked out in the earlier part of the day. The workshop received fantastic feedback and we really enjoyed being able to help young, aspiring members of the Bar to develop their advocacy skills. Hopefully, this will become a permanent feature of the Intervarsity Moot in years to come.

Ben Brown has also run a series of mooting workshops for our current students throughout this academic year, which were well attended and received very positive feedback. This initiative was started under last year’s committee and was something I was very keen to develop further this year, hence the creation of a specific committee position for this aspect of the mooting calendar. We very much hope that this initiative will be continued in years to come with more regular workshops becoming commonplace.

The annual Lawson Moot also took place over the course of this academic year for our current students – for their ongoing dedication, thanks are due to Matthew Sellwood and Aliyah Sapsard (President and Vice-President of Internal Mooting). Clara Hamer took the victory in a close-cut final between herself, Jennifer Brenton, Georgina Bryan and James Evans.

Having won the Inter-Inn moot last year, we are currently in the process of finalising arrangements as the hosts of this year’s Inter-Inn Competition. The semi-finals and finals are due to take place in July 2013 and promise to showcase the best mooting talent from each of the four Inns of Court.

Finally, I would like to say a huge thank you to everyone on the Mooting Committee this year, to all members of the Inn who have kindly given their time to judge various competitions, and to our students who have made it all worthwhile.

As many Inner Templars will know, the Lawson Moot is a crucial part of student advocacy practice at the Inn. The competition was established in honour of Charles Lawson QC, an eminent practitioner, partial to sherry and golf, who was later appointed to the Old Bailey.

A great many students take part in the first stage and, over the course of the academic year, the number is whittled down to a final four for the last round. This always proves to be an enjoyable event, with a fascinating moot followed by a relaxed drinks ceremony.

The high regard in which the Lawson Moot is held is evident from the desire of senior members of the Bar to become involved in the competition. To compete in the Lawson Moot is to have the opportunity to perform in front of some of the most esteemed members of the Inn including QCs, recorders, district judges, Benchers and former Treasurers of the Inn. In the past couple of years, these have included, amongst many others, Master Brodie, Master Guthrie and Alastair Hodge who provides advocacy training around the world. The advice and feedback they provide is second to none and the experience of presenting a legal argument in front of such experienced barristers is a daunting but ultimately rewarding experience.

Although the competition demands rigorous legal research and argument, it also provides a taster for life at the young Bar. Not only is it an opportunity to meet other members of your cohort – those alongside whom you may undertake pupillage, bump into in the courtroom and participate in life at the Inn – but it is imbued with a sense of camaraderie within a context of absolute integrity and rigid legal practice.

One of the most pleasing aspects of the Lawson Moot is that it enables the youngest members of the Inn – those taking their first, tentative steps towards a career at the Bar – to mix with eminent practitioners – those with words of wisdom and, importantly, interesting stories to share. (“Oh dear”, declared one such QC at the start of a round of this year’s Lawson Moot, pulling his Blackberry out of his jacket pocket.

“It appears one of my clients might have just shot somebody.”

The client? A politician on a Caribbean island. Naturally.)

This year’s final, presided over by Master Brougham of South Square Chambers, revolved around article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights: the right to freedom of belief and the manifestation of that belief. This prompted a humorous and enjoyable discourse on the attitude of Richard Dawkins, between Master Brougham and the ultimate winner, Clara Hamer.

In a context where limited time and facts are available, the Lawson Moot, although taken seriously by all those involved, is often imbued with a certain degree of levity. The judge and the mooter, on many occasions, find themselves engaged in some serious legal grappling over a point which, ultimately, becomes redundant and results in laughter all round.

Aliyah Sapsard, Vice President of Internal Mooting

Emily McQuilkin, President

Rawlinson Cup 2013

The final of the annual Rawlinson Cup, named in fond memory of Lord Rawlinson of Ewell, was held on 20 May in Inner Temple Hall. The tournament gives the best speakers of the Inner Temple Debating Society a chance to showcase their advocacy and compete for the prestigious title of Rawlinson Cup winner. Andrew Lomas, Emile Simpson, Chris McGeever and Harper Marshall each delivered eloquent speeches in the final before a packed audience of students and Masters of the Bench. The motion for the final was This House will provide anonymity to offenders accused of high publicity crimes until proven guilty. Spectators were treated to an engaging and nuanced debate, judged by the President and Vice-President of the Junior Bar Association, as well as several esteemed Benchers. Chris McGeever emerged as the deserving winner in a closely fought final. He was awarded a bound book of poetry bestowed by Lady Rawlinson and a set of book tokens kindly donated by the Junior Bar Association. The Cup was presented to Mr McGeever by Master Reader. Inner Temple has a proud tradition of fostering and rewarding students who demonstrate commitment to persuasive advocacy and convincing argument. This year’s Rawlinson Cup was a testament to that tradition and to the rich endowment of quality advocates that the Inn is fortunate enough to call its own.

87

INNER TEMPLE EDUCATION & TRAINING

Compulsory Advocacy Training for Pupils

Each year the Inn commits to at least 40 days of advocacy training for pupils, new practitioners and established practitioners.

H

aving begun the first six months of pupillage, pupils must complete the following compulsory advocacy training in order to obtain a practising certificate:

• Pupils’ Advocacy Course provided by the Inns • Practice Management Course organised by the Inns • A minimum of 20 hours training in forensic accounts by the end of their first three years in practice (organised by the Bar Standards Board)

The Inner Temple Pupils’ Advocacy Course is made up of the following elements: • Three evenings at the Inn on trial preparation as well as civil and criminal case analysis • One Saturday at the Inn on Interlocutory Applications • One evening at a London Crown Court conducting a mock trial • A three-day residential weekend. This is the core element of the advocacy course during which pupils will participate in a LAMDA course, sessions on witness handling, speeches and pleas in mitigation. Pupils will be video-reviewed throughout the weekend to give them the opportunity to identify and correct any bad habits that may be affecting their overall advocacy performance.

New Practitioner Programme

In the first three years of practice, newly qualified practitioners are required to complete 45 hours of Continuing Professional Development (CPD) including at least nine hours of advocacy training and three hours of ethics training.

The Inner Temple New Practitioners’ Advocacy & Ethics Weekend

Residential weekends are held twice a year and each is accredited for 17 CPD hours including nine hours of advocacy training and three hours of ethics training. The weekends provide an opportunity for civil, criminal, family and employed barristers to cross examine an expert medical witness, an expert accountant witness or a case manager.

The programme also includes a discussion of ethical problems with real solicitors.

“The highlight of the course was certainly the residential weekend at Wotton House, Dorking.We spent the weekend being trained by many senior barristers who had kindly sacrificed their own weekends to remind us how one should really use advocacy skills in court. In small groups we examined witnesses, performed our speeches or made submissions before two advocacy trainers, following which we endured video playback where another barrister would critique the performance.

Old friendships were rekindled and new friendships were quickly formed as we progressed through the weekend with the energy, enthusiasm and (for some) frustration one may expect from the most junior members of the Bar.”

88

Harriet Holmes LAMDA training

Practice Management Course

The Practice Management Course assists pupils with how to run their practice. The course covers financial management, ethics and marketing and also includes a session from judges and new practitioners advising on a pupil’s first day in court, as well as a session with clerks and solicitors on how to manage a practice.

“The Pupil’s Advocacy Training Course was a success primarily due to the hard work and effort of the organisers and trainers. It was an absolute privilege for me to have been a part of this and I walked away with new friends and fond memories. I would like to thank every person who has contributed to the course’s success and especially the trainers and Benchers for giving up their own time to support us.”

Aysha Miah

COMPULSORY ADVOCACY TRAINING FOR PUPILS INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Advocacy training session

Wotton House

Continuing Professional Development �����

Past weekends have covered topics such as Vulnerable Witnesses, Serious Sexual Offences, Practical Guidance for Appellate Advocacy, and Employment Law. For further information on the above courses and on training to become an advocacy trainer, please email dmiller@innertemple.org.uk

On completion of the New Practitioners’ Programme, all practising barristers whether at the self-employed or Employed Bar are required to complete 12 hours of CPD each year. The Inner Temple provides several CPD courses and is increasing its provision in this area every year.

The Inner Temple Advocacy Master Class Series

This series comprises both criminal and civil evening sessions, each of which is accredited for three CPD hours. Participants will already have gained a fair amount of advocacy experience so the course has been designed to stimulate ideas to help participants build on their previous experience.

Recent course topics have included: • • • •

“Becoming one of the Inn’s trainers, quite rightly, involves rigorous training itself, but this should not deter potential volunteers, since delivering advocacy training is one of the most rewarding, not to mention objectively valuable, extra-curricular things we can do with our barristerial skills. Professionally, little surpasses assisting a discouraged and demoralised young advocate find his or her forensic feet. By way of recompense, you will work closely with some of the most eminent (and entertaining) members of the Inn; you will be refreshed by the enthusiasm and sheer talent of some of our most junior members; you will earn a sackful of CPD points.

You may even see Dorking.”

Dexter Dias QC

Examination of Expert Witnesses Cross Examination of Witnesses & Speeches Civil Advocacy – the Modern Approach Ethics for the Civil Bar

“The Inner Temple Master Classes are CPD classes with a difference – they are something to look forward to and enjoy rather than to groan about. I have found each year has offered quality guidance from high calibre members of the judiciary and Bar who give their time in a friendly and helpful way. Highly recommended.”

Marion Lonsdale

CPD Weekend

Each year, the Inner Temple holds a CPD Weekend for established practitioners. The weekend is often organised in conjunction with a Specialist Bar Association.

The weekend is typically split into a series of lectures by high profile speakers on the Saturday and optional practical advocacy exercises conducted by the Inn’s advocacy trainers on the Sunday morning. The weekend is usually accredited for six CPD hours on the Saturday and three CPD hours on the Sunday morning.

Video review

89

90

INNER TEMPLE EDUCATION & TRAINING

Junior Bar Association I

t has been an incredibly successful year for the ITJBA. We, as a committee, set out to ensure there were a number of affordable, lively and (sometimes) educational events for junior barristers practising across the legal spectrum. Not only would these events provide a social and networking function, but they would provide the junior Bar with a forum to discuss the current proposed changes to legal aid and regulation of the profession.

We started the year with our largest event – a Halloween quiz in a heavily decorated Hall with lashings of wine and sufficient sandwiches to keep everyone going until the 10th round. With a record turnout of over 100 junior barristers and with a great deal of positive feedback, we considered the event a triumph.

With an unexpected profit from tickets sales to the Halloween Quiz, the JBA hosted Christmas drinks with a free bar at Coco Momo in Holborn. We quickly filled our private room and soon dominated the upstairs bar as well. In the current climate, the pull of free drinks was clearly not lost on the committee!

Over the year, we have been keen to provide education and training with a steady supply of volunteers for student events. In particular, having been through the pupillage process in the not-so-distant past, we understood the importance of

Saul Herman, Leslie Thomas and Kathryn Arnot Drummond at the ITJBA Halloween Quiz

helping students gain public-speaking experience. As a result, we provided junior barristers as judges for the Rawlinson Cup debating competition and Lawson Moot. We were also in the privileged position of offering places on a tour of the Supreme Court followed by a talk by Lord Wilson. Needless to say, this event was popular with junior practitioners in a variety of practice areas and, again, the feedback was strong.

We ended with an event which I had long been determined to organise – a talk on Advocacy With Flair given by Master Laws, Master Davies and Master Robinson. The event came with CPD points and wine and, even now, I am reminded by those who attended of their favourite courtroom anecdotes as told by the speakers.

On a personal note, as I finish my year as President of the ITJBA, I would like to thank a fantastic committee (Saul Herman, Lauren Sales, Julia Townend, Matthew Carey, Denise Saunders and Benjamin Gray) for all their hard work. I would also like to thank the Education & Training and Catering Departments for their support of the ITJBA. It has been a privilege to be a part of one of the Inn’s Associations, and I am confident that the ITJBA will continue to go from strength to strength in the coming years.

Kathryn Arnot Drummond, President

Co-educational Boarding and Day (ages 13 – 18)

Achieving outstanding results IB or A levels in the Sixth Form Beautiful and safe location t: +44(0)1684 581 515 e: registrar@malverncollege.org.uk

www.malverncollege.org.uk

INAUGURAL INNER TEMPLE ACADEMIC FELLOWS INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Inaugural Inner Temple Academic Fellows I

n 2010, the Inn launched an innovative Academic Fellows scheme in order to improve and develop the relationships between the Inn and universities, and barristers and academics. Four Academic Fellows are elected on a competitive basis each year, to serve a term of three years as honorary members of the Inn: the Fellows are early or mid-career academics with an interest in the work of the Bar. The first four Fellows, elected in 2010, are Professor Andrew Francis of the University of Keele; Dr Catherine MacKenzie, Fellow of Selwyn College, Cambridge and University Lecturer, University of Cambridge; Dr Iyiola Solanke, senior lecturer at the University of Leeds; while I am a senior lecturer at the University of Birmingham.

In my career as an academic, the Inner Temple has been the most active Inn in terms of outreach and education, with a clear determination to increase the opportunities for students to learn about the Bar, and especially in improving access in the provinces. I was therefore delighted to be elected as a Fellow, and have taken part in the Inn’s Pathways to Law project. Through the scheme, we have been able to contribute to the Inn’s education and training work in various ways. Amongst our many activities, Professor Francis is supervising a doctorate on social mobility and diversity, which the Inn is jointly funding (see page 72). Dr MacKenzie, who is a member of the Bar, has spoken at a Cumberland Lodge weekend, while Dr Solanke has run various training sessions in Leeds. I delivered a qualifying session to BPTC students in Birmingham and acted as a contributor to a live web chat for prospective law students on the Guardian website. In the summer of 2013, I was able to

participate in the Inn’s Oral History Project, interviewing Lord Mackay of Clashfern for the Inn’s archives, which was a fascinating opportunity.

Each of us has given a lecture at the Inn: Professor Francis has spoken on access to the legal profession and Dr MacKenzie, on environmental law. The theme of the Inn’s 2012 lecture series was Academics and Practitioners: Friends or Foes? and, as part of that theme, Dr Solanke spoke on the relationship between academics and practitioners and I gave a lecture on the doctrine of precedent and the UK Supreme Court. Intelligent, searching questions were asked by those attending our lectures, which have enhanced our research. In addition, we have attended several Inn functions and dinners with other academics in order to promote the work of the Inn. At these various events, it has been a particular pleasure to meet and interact with new members of the Inn – not least our own former students.

We owe a debt of gratitude to the Education & Training Department, especially Fiona Fulton, Anthony Dursi and Master Francis, and the Sub-Treasurer. Furthermore, the Treasurers in our time have been unfailing and imaginative in their support, and we offer our thanks to them: Master Laws, Master Hallett, Master Hirst and Master Thorley.

In its first three years, the scheme has grown in reputation and is a greatly respected honour amongst legal scholars. It has been a privilege for us to serve as the inaugural Academic Fellows, and we shall continue to support the Inn’s important work howsoever we can.

James Lee

From left to right: Dr Paul Wragg (University of Leeds), Dr Jo Braithwaite (LSE), Master Francis, Master Hirst, Eddie Bruce-Jones (Birkbeck), Master Reader, Dr Ronan McCrea (UCL), James Lee (University of Birmingham), Dr Catherine McKenzie (University of Cambridge)

91

92

INNER TEMPLE

Advocacy Training Council Report of the Advocacy Training Council

by Master Green

T

he Advocacy Training Council (ATC) is responsible for providing leadership, guidance and co-ordination in the pursuit of excellence in advocacy. Drawing its membership primarily from the Inns and circuits, its committees also include the judiciary, BPTC providers, academia and the Bar Council. With its primary role being to oversee the development and delivery of advocacy training for the Bar of England and Wales, the ATC works to ensure that training – from the vocational stage through to the delivery of new practitioner and advanced advocacy training – is of the highest standards, helping to ensure advocates are effectively equipped in the defining skill of the profession.

Key functions of the ATC’s committees include monitoring and supporting the Inns and circuits in the delivery of their pupil and new practitioner advocacy programmes; assessing BPTC advocacy tutors for accreditation by the Bar Standards Board; ensuring standards for the training and grading of Inn, circuit and pupil advocacy tutors; undertaking research and development projects to support the delivery of advocacy training in specialist skills, and promoting the rule of law overseas through specialist ATC training programmes.

The council also has an important constitutional commitment to respond to requests from overseas jurisdictions in the development and expansion of their advocacy training programmes and has established an international reputation as a world leader in advocacy training, largely in the developing world. In keeping with the custom of barristers providing advocacy training for the English Bar without payment, overseas advocacy training is undertaken on a pro bono basis.

ATC International Committee members, together with senior advocacy trainers from across the Inns and circuits, have worked alongside colleagues in jurisdictions including India, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Nigeria, South Africa and the International Criminal Court and Tribunals in the Hague.

The ATC adopts a ‘seed corn’ approach, ensuring partners at the host Bar are equipped to continue to develop and enhance their own advocacy training programmes. The ATC has most recently assisted in an on-going advocacy tutortraining programme in Zimbabwe, delivered in partnership with South African colleagues and funded by the British Embassy in Harare.

A major and growing part of the work of the ATC is in relation to barriers to justice. The ATC is presently working on a range of projects which are designed to improve the way that the trial process works in relation to vulnerable persons.

The Advocacy Training Council’s Raising the Bar report of 2011 identified the need for better guidance and training for advocates in this field. In April 2013, the Attorney General launched a new website, the Advocate’s Gateway, a collaborative project that brings together the entirety of the legal profession, including academics, leading experts and researchers, the Law Society, Criminal Bar Association, registered intermediaries, the Ministry of Justice and more.

This is intended to act as a focal point for material relating to a vulnerable person in court. The Advocate’s Gateway is a free web resource and, as such, is a public interest platform, stimulating research into issues of real and pressing public importance.

Other projects working towards removing barriers to justice include the initiatives of the ATC Research and Development Committee. The committee is working on developing professional ethics, together with University College London, and is looking into the use of expert evidence in court, in collaboration with the Law Commission.

Its third project is to look at the use of interpreters in court, in conjunction with the University of Surrey. The aim of such projects is to raise standards in court, to develop toolkits and guidance for use in courts (by advocates and the judiciary) and to improve training in such areas.

The ATC recently held a lecture and workshop both led

by Professor the Hon George Hampel AM QC, the progenitor of the basic method used by the Inns and the ATC in its training programmes. The sessions enabled senior advocacy trainers of the Inns and circuits to review teaching practices and methods at an advanced level. In April, the ATC also launched a new website, which serves as a central point of information about its work and all matters relating to advocacy training and an invaluable calendar of advocacy training events, key on-going projects and annual reports.

In the next few months, the ATC and the Advocate’s Gateway will be hosting a series of CPD courses to provide practical training when dealing with the vulnerable in court, and will be hosting its first ATC Advocacy Training Conference for advocacy trainers from across the Inns, circuits and BPTC providers, to establish how to achieve best practice when teaching advocacy. If you are an advocacy trainer and are interested in hearing more about the ATC, information can be found on the ATC website; www.advocacytrainingcouncil.org.uk.

Master Green Chairman

ADVOCACY TRAINING COUNCIL INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Visit of Professor the Hon George Hampel �� ��

by Master Leonard

I

n June 2013, as a guest of the Advocacy Training Council (ATC), Professor the Hon George Hampel AM QC returned to London to lecture about the advocacy training programme that he has developed over the last 40 years. He was accompanied by two other very experienced trainers, his wife, Her Honour Judge Felicity Hampel SC, an adjunct professor in advocacy at Monash University, and the Hon Justice Ann Ainslee-Wallace, an adjunct professor at Melbourne University.

Before embarking on the lecture and workshop for the ATC, they joined the Inner Temple New Practitioner Advocacy and Ethics weekend. The advocates were well used to being trained in accordance with the Hampel method, but found it especially memorable to be taught by the man behind the method. The weekend also provided a rare opportunity for the Inn’s trainers to work alongside Professor Hampel and to learn new teaching skills. Although trainers are always aware of the strain that the advocates feel when performing a piece of advocacy for review, it was, for them, a novel experience to feel the same strain when conducting a review in his presence!

The workshop focused on advanced cross-examination.

It was originally designed for 18 trainers but, such was the demand, the course was restructured so as to allow 55 trainers the opportunity to take part. There was general agreement as to the value of requiring the trainers also to act as the advocates to be reviewed. Not only did it provide a useful opportunity to experience what it is like to be reviewed, but there were few who came away from the training without admitting that they had learnt something about the art of cross-examination. It demonstrated that there is a need to provide an opportunity to train even the most senior in our profession.

Professor Hampel is increasingly convinced that advocacy skills are not inherent but learned. He makes the unanswerable point that advocates need to train their skills in a similar way to any musician or sportsman. No pianist practises on the concert platform and no tennis player practises during a match on Centre Court at Wimbledon.

Why is it that advocates only practise at the expense of their client whilst appearing for them in court? What other skillbased professional would stop practising after four years in their chosen profession? He strongly believes in continuing professional training in advocacy. The Australian Advocacy Institute runs courses for Senior Counsel/Queen’s Counsel on specialist topics including appellate advocacy. In Australia, they are about to introduce the equivalent of QASA and have set up a series of remedial workshops to assist those who fail to qualify.

As we try to improve our training for new practitioners and grapple with the concept of extending advocacy training to more senior advocates, we can learn much from Professor Hampel’s wider experience. The use of case analysis as a training tool in every piece of advanced advocacy is striking.

It requires the advocate to explain what he or she hopes to achieve by way of rehearsing their closing submissions, and allows the trainer to assess whether the purpose was achieved.

Professor Hampel considers that training which is concentrated on a very specific area of advocacy is more constructive than covering a range of topics in a day or over a weekend. He proved his point to many who attended the advanced cross-examination workshop. Such a system for training will require much more co-operation between the Inns and direction from the ATC, to ensure that there are enough good trainers to run these courses and enough advocates to be trained to make them worthwhile and cost-effective.

The skill of the trainer will be paramount in achieving high-level training. As Professor Hampel put it, the margin for improvement decreases with the more experienced and accomplished advocate. Training is less likely to involve remedial change and more likely to involve different and equally effective methods for achieving the same result. To achieve that level of training requires well-trained people who themselves are very good advocates and who carry out training regularly. Some may doubt that trainers here would commit to teaching an average of 16 weekends a year, as our Australian trainers do. However, that commitment explains why their teaching was so skilful and looked so effortless.

We remain enormously grateful to Professor Hampel and his team for coming over to assist us and we look forward to working with him in the future. If you missed his lecture, you can view it by going to the ATC website: www.advocacytrainingcouncil.org.uk Master Leonard

93

94

INNER TEMPLE PEGASUS SCHOLARSHIP

NewYork

Hannah Ready, One Brick Court

I

joined One Brick Court, a specialist media and information law set, as a tenant in October 2011. From September to November 2012, a Pegasus Scholarship enabled me to work as an intern at the New York offices of Levine, Sullivan, Koch & Schulz LLP (LSKS).

In my view, one of the few negatives of qualifying as a barrister, as opposed to a solicitor, is the lack of opportunity to work abroad. However, a Pegasus Scholarship provided me the opportunity to do just that. From a practical perspective, I was interested in experiencing the day-to-day working life of a media law practitioner in another jurisdiction. From a more academic perspective, and particularly in the light of the debates as to reform currently underway in the United Kingdom, I wanted to learn more about American media law and what lessons, if any, could be learned in relation to shaping our own laws.

LSKS is a national law firm specialising in advising and defending media organisations, journalists and other ‘creative professionals’. Lawyers at the firm have been involved in most of the leading media cases in the past two decades involving defamation, product disparagement, invasion of privacy, and rights of publicity.

During my time in New York, I was exposed to a broad range of the firm’s work and had the opportunity to attend court on several occasions. A significant portion of my time was spent undertaking research tasks, which were also an effective mechanism by which to learn as much as possible about a range of practice areas.

It was particularly interesting to experience the broad protection that American law gives the media in relation to the publication of defamatory statements concerning ‘public figures’. I enjoyed debating the advantages and

NEW YORK INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

“It was particularly interesting to experience the broad protection that American law gives the media…” disadvantages of the American approach, and I now feel that I have a useful comparator with which to critique our own.

Another highlight was attending City and State Bar Media Law Committee meetings. These were voluntary committees made up of media lawyers working in New York, including lawyers working in-house at various news organisations. In providing the opportunity to discuss recent developments in the law and to share experiences of cases, these meetings seemed to me to be a useful and beneficial feature of the New York media law scene.

During my time in America, I was also kindly invited to visit the firm’s offices in Philadelphia and Washington, and had a brilliant time doing so. The lawyers at LSKS could not have been more welcoming or hospitable, and I am confident that we will stay in touch for many years to come.

As well as working at the firm, I explored and enjoyed all that New York has to offer, as well as spending a memorable few days in Connecticut admiring the autumnal foliage. After two months of living and working in the city, I no longer felt like a tourist. As well as providing the opportunity to learn about another legal system and to share my knowledge of our own, a Pegasus Scholarship gave me the rare opportunity to experience life as a real New Yorker.

Hannah Ready

95

INNER TEMPLE PEGASUS SCHOLARSHIP

Washington �� Nicholas Ostrowski, Six Pump Court

I

n winter 2012, the Pegasus Trust gave me the opportunity to spend six weeks in the United States learning about environmental and regulatory law.

I divided my time between a leading environmental litigation clinic in New York and a specialist environmental court in Vermont. I also observed oral hearings at the Supreme Court in Washington, DC.

Environmental Litigation Clinic

I arrived in New York two days after Hurricane Sandy hit.

Half of Manhattan was without power, and my new office at the Pace University Environmental Litigation Clinic (PUELC) was working from a back-up, and temperamental generator.

I spent two weeks here and am particularly grateful to the attorneys (Professors Coplan and Estrin and Bobby Kennedy Jr) who set me to work on a number of cases, while also taking the time to explain the basics of the US legal system.

I spent most of my time helping to prepare for a hearing in the Federal Court in relation to an appeal against an earlier decision, in which PUELC had received judgment for their clients (an environmental pressure group) in the amount of $5.7 million.

Getting to grips with the issues in this case gave me an insight not only into how much is at stake in financial terms in US environmental law, but also the emphasis that the US legal system places on written motions. The hearing, which was decided in the PUELC’s favour, was a model of brevity with all the issues being raised and aired in the written motions and counter-motions. This meant that the parties had a refreshingly non-confrontational approach to advocacy in the hearing and did not engage in lengthy adversarial exchanges.

“Oral argument in front of the Supreme Court has an element of theatre that I have not experienced anywhere else”.

96

Supreme Court

The brevity of oral submissions in the New York Federal Court does not mean that robust oral advocacy in the US is dead. In fact, quite the contrary is true, as I learned when I attended the US Supreme Court in Washington, DC. Oral argument in front of the Supreme Court has an element of theatre that I have not experienced anywhere else.

After queuing up from 5am, I attended oral argument in the case of Armarcion Henderson v United States. Having already had the good fortune to meet Justice Sotomayor while at the Environmental Litigation Clinic, it was fascinating to watch her interrupt the respondent’s counsel after he had been talking for precisely five seconds.

The intensely political nature of the court and the often partisan comments from the justices were very different to what I was used to in the UK. It was fascinating to watch advocates attempt to get their point across, despite sustained and trenchant judicial criticism and interruption, all within the strictly imposed 30-minute time limit.

Vermont Environment Court

My final four weeks were at the specialist Environmental Court in Vermont. Vermonters are justly proud of their superb landscape and environmental protections, with the Court (the oldest specialist environment court in America) having jurisdiction over planning, emissions, permits, discharges into rivers and a wide variety of other environmental issues.

Judges Walsh and Durkin were extremely welcoming and immediately set me to work with their law clerks, drafting judgments, motion judgments and doing general research.

What was particularly noticeable was that the judges’ specialist understanding of environmental and planning law meant that cases involving technical and expert evidence, which would surely have caused real problems in the general court system, were dealt with extremely efficiently.

Throughout my time in the US, the friendliness of the American legal fraternity was remarkable. I lost count of the number of times I was invited out for coffee, dinner and parties. I thoroughly recommend a Pegasus Scholarship to all junior members of the Bar. Nicholas Ostrowski

MUMBAI INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Mumbai

Eleanor Hutchinson, 1 Pump Court

B

etween December 2012 and February 2013, I undertook a Pegasus Scholarship in India. During this time, I worked at MZM Legal in Mumbai, having arranged the placement myself. I practise predominantly in criminal and prison law from 1 Pump Court Chambers in London, so I was keen to experience the criminal justice system in another jurisdiction. I also had some experience of studying Indian law during my degree at the School of Oriental and African Studies, but I had never seen Indian law in practice. It turned out to be a fascinating time to be there; a high-profile rape case in Delhi meant that the criminal justice system and women’s rights were being debated in the media on a daily basis.

I lived with a wonderful family in the Andheri suburb of Mumbai, where I was made to feel like I was part of the family. My daily commute to work through the hustle and bustle of Mumbai by rickshaw and then taxi was fascinating but extremely lengthy. The traffic in Mumbai is horrendous and, as a result, the working day only started after 10am but went on until 7 or 8pm, and we usually worked on Saturdays.

The office was based in the heart of the Fort area of Mumbai, minutes away from the High Court and just next to the Sessions Court. I visited the High Court on nearly a daily basis with advocates from MZM. It was extremely busy, with many cases listed in each court and crowds of people, much like the streets of Mumbai.

MZM legal is one of India’s leading full-service law firms, specialising in criminal defence and criminal compliance, but undertaking a broad range of cases. I worked on various different cases and cases in other areas of law, including an international extradition case and a large shipping contract dispute. I attended client conferences and meetings with associate lawyers, as well as writing an article for a local magazine along with some of the junior associates.

Everyone at MZM was hugely generous and supportive and I was quickly made to feel like I was part of the team.

The office was busy, energetic and vibrant with the advocates in court most days. The team arranged lots of social activities and networking opportunities, and our lunchtimes were spent exploring the culinary delights of Mumbai, whilst discussing the differences between our legal systems.

I had previously visited India as a backpacker, but I took the opportunity to explore the country further and spent time in Bengal and Goa. India is such a beautiful and diverse country, rich in colour, sounds, smells and sights.

I had an incredible time and learnt a great deal about our different legal systems. I am extremely grateful to the Pegasus Trust for giving me such an opportunity, and I would recommend it to everyone.

Eleanor Hutchinson

97

98

INNER TEMPLE  PEGASUS SCHOLARSHIP

Hong Kong

George McDonald, 4 New Square Chambers

B

efore I arrived in Hong Kong, I had been given the best possible recommendation: the previous Pegasus Scholar had enjoyed herself so much that she had relocated to Hong Kong. The exciting question therefore arose: would I pursue the same course?

To answer that question, I will first explain what my Pegasus Scholarship to Hong Kong entailed. Neil Kaplan QC kindly arranged the various elements of my experience, and I was very happy to follow his recommendations (as he has generously and successfully organised Pegasus Scholars for many years), but other options would be available if I decided to follow a different path.

I arrived at the beginning of October (which, as Neil had advised, was the perfect time), and commenced a one-month internship at the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre (HKIAC).

During my time at the HKIAC, I gained invaluable exposure to alternative dispute resolution in Asia, which has already assisted me in my practice back in England.

More importantly, the team at the HKIAC, led by Chiann Bao, welcomed me with open arms, and I remained in touch with them throughout my time in Hong Kong and I hope I will continue to do so in the future. I had the opportunity to be fully involved in all of the HKIAC’s work, including the notable Hong Kong International Arbitration Week, a series of events where I listened to, and had the chance to meet, the leading lights in international arbitration.

HONG KONG INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

From there, I spent my next month marshalling the irrepressible Honourable Mr Justice Stock VP, vice president of the Hong Kong Court of Appeal. While many senior judges can be somewhat intimidating to junior members of the Bar, Mr Justice Stock certainly breaks the mould. Not only did he give up a considerable amount of his time to involve me in all his cases, but he was excellent company – although be sure to watch out for his mischievous wit! I particularly benefitted from appreciating a high-level judge’s reaction to different written and oral advocacy styles.

My last stint was at King & Wood Mallesons, a highly regarded solicitors’ firm. I attended various hearings, and it was interesting to observe litigation in Hong Kong from the perspective of practising lawyers.

Notwithstanding the above, a Pegasus Scholarship to Hong Kong is by no means all about work. Hong Kong is a vibrant and interesting city, with a unique mix of Eastern and Western influences. The potential activities are endless, and in three months I only scraped the surface. The Independent has legitimately described Hong Kong as the culinary capital of Asia and, with its wonderful beaches and outdoor pursuits, it is an ideal location to spend three months. Although I am not generally a rambling enthusiast, the hiking in Hong Kong is spectacular.

I unreservedly recommend the Pegasus Scholarship to Hong Kong, but will the next scholar see me there like my predecessor?

I am already planning a trip back.

George McDonald

Photo: © chungking – Fotolia.com

99

100

INNER TEMPLE PEGASUS SCHOLARSHIP

New Zealand

Sian Reeves, Temple Garden Chambers

F

rom August to October 2012, I undertook a Pegasus Scholarship sponsored by Stout Street Chambers in Wellington, New Zealand. I am extremely grateful to the Pegasus Trust and to all the barristers at Stout Street for affording me such an amazing opportunity.

I practise from Temple Garden Chambers in London as a common law barrister, with a particular focus on personal injury, civil litigation, employment law and inquests. Having been in practice at the Bar for some three years, I was unsure in what direction and in which areas of law I wanted to develop my practice. I was also extremely conscious of the impending changes to the Junior common law Bar in light of the ‘Jackson Changes’. For me, the scholarship was an invaluable opportunity to see different areas of law in a foreign jurisdiction, combined with the opportunity to travel.

Stout Street Chambers specialises in commercial and civil litigation as well as public law. During my time in chambers, I saw a wide range of interesting cases spanning a number of different areas of law, including the high profile striking off the roll of an infamous barrister, a dispute involving the inadequacy of an insurance policy for a building that was badly damaged in the Christchurch earthquake and a host of cases involving the Resource Management Act (which promotes the sustainable management of natural and physical resources such as land, air and water). I had never heard of resource management prior to my time in New Zealand and was fascinated by the interaction

between law and culture, namely the balancing between the development of natural resources and its impact upon the Maori culture; an interaction that does not arise in English law.

Stout Street Chambers were generous hosts. They included me in all aspects of chambers’ life, including their weekly wine and cheese night on Fridays and the various dinners which they had during my time there. They also invited me to social events, including paragliding over the Kapiti Coast (an amazing experience which I will never forget). All the Pegasus Scholars in New Zealand were made to feel very welcome by Justice McGrath, who hosted a drinks reception for us at the Supreme Court. Justice McGrath also arranged for me to sit in on a case in the Supreme Court and took the time out to talk to me about it before it started.

Wellington is a beautiful city, and I loved every minute of living there. The fact that I could walk to work from my apartment on Cuba Street was amazing, and I had to pinch myself every time I looked out from the window of my gym to the beautiful view over the ocean. New Zealand is a spectacular country and, after my scholarship ended, I was fortunate enough to have just over three weeks to travel across the North and South Islands and fly to Australia and America before returning to the UK. I would not hesitate to recommend a Pegasus Scholarship in New Zealand, although be warned: you may not want to come back!

Sian Reeves

DUBAI INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Dubai

Timothy Killen, 2 Temple Gardens

I

have never once regretted embarking on my choice of career at the Bar; however, it has been not been without some envy that I have, on numerous occasions, waved off solicitor contemporaries of mine as they left for their overseas placements to work in glamorous jurisdictions in farflung regions of the globe. It was because of this that, when a colleague of mine in chambers told me of the Pegasus Scholarship scheme (he having been a scholar to the United States in the 1990s), I jumped at the chance to apply.

Having completed the interview, I was fortunate enough to be offered a placement in the emirate of Dubai. This was a region about which I knew precious little, but which conjured up images of deserts and camels, punctuated by buildings so tall their summits were lost in the clouds and clad with glass and chrome so polished that a second sun was to be found reflected in them. Remarkably, these imaginings were not far from reality! Granted, I did not see any camels within the bounds of the city during my three month placement, but a highlight of my stay was a trip to the Ghantoot Polo Club, situated on the road between the emirate’s capital of Abu Dhabi and my temporary home city of Dubai, where camel polo was the order of the day.

It wasn’t all trips to polo clubs, however. My working time in the first of my three months in Dubai was spent on placement at the court of the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) the English-speaking, common law court through which an increasing amount of international trade with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries is being litigated. Here I was given various projects to research and acted in a capacity similar to a judicial assistant, and saw how the administration of the court was run from day-to-day.

My time at the court was then followed by a one month placement within the (DIFC) court litigation department of Al Tamimi and Company, one of the largest and longest established local firms in Dubai. Here I acted in a capacity similar to in-house counsel, drafting applications and witness statements, and even getting the opportunity to appear in court when a last minute application came up. My time at Al Tamimi was a real education in the ways of both onshore (ie local Dubai courts) and DIFC litigation, and enabled me to get to grips with how the two jurisdictions interact and co-exist.

The final part of my placement was with former Pegasus Scholar and local legal celebrity, Philip Punwar, who had written the DIFC court’s equivalent of the White Book at his firm, Fulbright & Jaworski (now Norton Rose Fulbright).

Here I was given the opportunity to work on international commercial arbitration projects, which neatly rounded off my experience of all of the main areas of commercial work undertaken in Dubai.

The Pegasus Scholarship to Dubai is a placement I cannot recommend highly enough. The support and opportunities which I was given enabled me fully to immerse myself in the legal culture of the region, leaving me with memories and experiences I will carry with me, both in my professional and personal life, for many years to come.

Timothy Killen

101

INNER TEMPLE PEGASUS SCHOLARSHIP

Washington Katherine Cook, 1 Hare Court

I

n the autumn of 2012, I was fortunate enough to visit Washington, DC as a Pegasus Scholar. The timing could not have been better, as the US prepared itself for Obama’s fight to retain the White House. Less fortuitously, Hurricane Sandy also decided to put in an appearance.

However, not even a tropical storm could put a dampener on my scholarship programme.

This report would be incomplete if it did not include a huge thank you to those individuals at the American Inns of Court who coordinated my programme and worked extremely hard to ensure that it really was an ‘access all areas’ experience. I would also like to thank the placement hosts whose guidance enabled me to form a deeper understanding of the legal system which I was surveying. Everyone I met was unfailingly kind and eager to explain their work to me.

It is impossible to do justice in this short report to my Washington, DC experience. There were various ‘pinch yourself’ moments, including a day spent with Justice Breyer in the Supreme Court, hearing Supreme Court oral argument moots at Georgetown Law School, witnessing

particular interest in family proceedings (my area of practice) and I observed matrimonial cases, both on a trip to Philadelphia and in Virginia. The issues within the courtroom were, at first blush, no different to those at home.

However, the nuances in judicial approach, procedure and convention were interesting for their differences.

The jam-packed scholarship programme did not end at 6pm, and I was regularly hosted in the evenings by various Inns of Court meetings in the DC area, Virginia and Philadelphia. These events proved to be both informative (they typically involved a lecture or discursive event) and entertaining, providing an opportunity to meet local attorneys and exchange battle stories with them.

Just before I left Washington, DC, President Barack Obama secured re-election, and I found myself outside the White House at midnight on election night, surrounded by jubilant Democrats, chanting “four more years”. I only wish that I had the same extension on my time in Washington, DC. Katherine Cook

“I found myself outside the White House at midnight on election night, surrounded by jubilant Democrats, chanting “four more years”.”

102

frank conversations with top lawyers at the Pentagon and having discussions with an attorney in the White House Counsel’s office. I was also lucky to return to the Supreme Court as a guest of the American Inns of Court at their lavish ‘Celebration of Excellence’ dinner.

I spent a significant proportion of my placement on Capitol Hill. During this time, I gained a broad understanding of the legislative climate. For example, I visited the offices of both a congressman and senator, I spent a day with a lobbyist and I also visited a think tank. Election fever had engulfed the city, and my timetable included several electionbased events. I learnt about campaign legal advice and litigation with Republican election lawyers at the Republican National Committee headquarters and, with the shoe on the other foot, I shadowed electoral crime prosecutors at the Department of Justice. I also spent time with a grass-roots ‘Obama for America’ campaign team. This was a fascinating insight into American democracy in action.

In a different vein, I gained a broader understanding of the state and federal legal context by observing court hearings in both the DC area and in Virginia. I took a

WASHINGTON INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Will Young, Outer Temple Chambers

M

y 2012 Pegasus Scholarship placement involved a mixture of personal injury and common law as well as a political and constitutional element. This was the result of the timing of my placement in Washington, DC, which coincided with the run-up to the 2012 United States presidential election, and the fact that my co-scholar, Katherine Cook of 1 Hare Court, practised a completely different area of law from me (family law), whilst sharing a keen interest in US politics and constitutional law not entirely unconnected to our common love of The West Wing.

It was a very exciting time to be in the US, let alone in Washington, DC. We had meetings at a conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation, as well as at the Department of Justice’s Election Crimes division in relation to the question of voter fraud and identity card requirements, both very hot topics prior to the election, as well as meetings with staff counsel at the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Ethics Committee. We also met with the Judge Advocate General of the Army and spoke about the legal issues surrounding some high-profile court-martial cases then being litigated.

The relentless efforts and stellar contacts of the members of the organising committee at the American Inn of Court are reflected in the stunning range and the impressive level of access displayed in our placements. We met with, amongst others, the general counsel for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the legal advisor to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, an associate White House counsel, the chief judge of the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, and an associate justice of the US Supreme Court, as well as their respective law clerks. It was pretty much a US legal all-access pass, and was truly a once-in-a-lifetime experience. We were both incredibly grateful that so many busy and important people made the time to speak to us.

In addition to very interesting legal discussions with all of the above and more, we also received deluxe tourist treatment including tours of the US Capitol building, the Pentagon and the White House. Even without the legal aspect, this would have been a phenomenally interesting and exciting trip.

From a professional point of view, the Scholarship was absolutely fascinating. I saw criminal trials, depositions in a personal injury case, trials of a premises liability and a medical malpractice case, as well as numerous other trials and motions hearings. Often we were given the opportunity to talk to the judges involved afterwards. There were, of course, many similarities to our own UK system, from the shared common-law ancestry, including the vocabulary of plaintiffs, sheriffs and ‘voir dire’, some but not all of which we have ourselves jettisoned.

On the other hand, there were numerous differences, the most noticeable of which were the presence of jury trials and depositions in civil cases, and the more limited emphasis on oral advocacy (which is strictly time-limited) in appellate courts.

The Scholarship was a wonderfully enjoyable experience, as well as a great opportunity to see how a similar, but subtly different, system works in theory and in practice, and to step back and consider objectively the comparison with our own system. It is an experience that I would certainly recommend to others.

Will Young

103

104

INNER TEMPLE PEGASUS SCHOLARSHIP

New Zealand

Elena Elia, 23 Essex Street Chambers

I

had always suspected that my time spent on the Pegasus Scholarship in New Zealand would be a far cry from my regular trips to Woolwich Crown Court or Balham Youth Court. Never would I have imagined, however, that the legal systems would be so strikingly different.

I am a barrister at 23 Essex Street Chambers, specialising in criminal and regulatory law. Apart from the opportunity to travel and to experience a foreign jurisdiction, the Pegasus Scholarship provided a unique opportunity for me to broaden my skills, expertise and practice – something that is particularly important, some might agree, in these austere times at the Criminal Bar. I spent four months in New Zealand. First, I worked for almost three months in Meredith Connell, a private law firm in Auckland. Meredith Connell is unique from other law firms in that it holds the ‘Crown Warrant’, a currently uncontested warrant to prosecute all crime in the Auckland precinct.

At my own request, I was placed within the regulatory and commercial litigation group. This enabled me to gain experience in financial services regulatory work, as well as consumer law and general civil litigation; experience which, is hard to obtain in the UK once one has specialised.

I was privileged to be able to move around different teams. A firm favourite must be observing the Waitangi

Tribunal, which was hearing compensation claims made

by Mãori tribes regarding land that had been taken from their ancestors by crown agents in the 1840s, and deciding issues over the subsequent statutory settlement process.

Unassuming and inconspicuous, I sat in the public gallery next to some Mãori school students; I had presumed (naturally) they were there due to a budding interest in a legal career.

In the stiff surroundings of a courtroom, without prior notice to the somewhat naive English girl sitting beside them, and in direct succession to the final ‘unless I can assist further’ submission, they performed an extraordinarily energetic and powerful haka (most commonly known to be performed by the All Blacks). That experience will truly never be forgotten and is certainly something I would not see on a routine trip to Woolwich Crown Court.

Another valued experience during my time with Meredith Connell was attending a very high profile murder trial, known locally as ‘the Baby J J murder’, with Phil Hamlin, a partner of the firm. Not only was I able to work on and see an interesting case but also note the stark and fascinating differences between a criminal trial in New Zealand and England.

I was surprised to see just how different jury empanelling was. In New Zealand, the entire jury selection pool enters

Inset: The Tongariro Crossing – a live volcano which had erupted twice during my time in New Zealand

NEW ZEALAND INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

court and sits in the public gallery, awaiting their random selection. A vast proportion of those selected appeared to be able to excuse themselves, far more readily than in the English legal system. Further, both the prosecution and defence are able to object to a juror, without reason, simply by calling ‘challenge!’ in the court, obliging the juror to retreat to his seat in the public gallery. This had an extraordinary impact on cases.

Another difference, and something that has often been researched in the UK, was the defence’s right to make an opening speech following the Crown’s opening speech, before the calling of evidence. When done strictly in accordance with guidelines, this was extremely helpful to all parties in the trial, especially the jury, in being able to follow the case for the defence and cross examination from the very outset.

Yet a further difference was truly shocking to New Zealand practitioners. In the UK the prosecution will engage in a somewhat artificial role play with the officer in the case to produce the defendant’s interview, with prosecution counsel playing the part of the defendant, the New Zealand system plays video records of every interview (with necessary edits) to the court through headsets. In this way, the defendant’s demeanour during interview is assessed and intonation of questions and answers is clear.

I feel very fortunate to have been given such an opportunity to learn from a different legal system and to identify such differences. It has allowed me to make an evaluation of my own practice and jurisdiction.

I then spent over a month working at Crown Law, Wellington, where I appeared in the Court of Appeal, advised on mutual assistance requests on international fraud and on the prosecution of child pornography files. My time in Wellington was very enjoyable, and I was made to feel extremely welcome. Special mention and thanks must be made to everyone at the Supreme Court and particularly to Justice McGrath, who held an additional evening drinks reception for me at the Supreme Court with the other Supreme Court Justices and their clerks, as I had missed the earlier drinks reception whilst I was in Auckland.

All work and no play? Absolutely not. I explored the South Island in a camper van for a fortnight before getting down to business at Meredith Connell. I can honestly say that the South Island is one of the most beautiful places I have seen in the world. In every direction a beautiful backdrop looms. What astounded me, beyond the serenity of the landscape, was the fact that unlike most European hotspots, it is almost deserted. One could easily be forgiven for thinking they were the last living soul, at the end of the world, but for the constant and somewhat comforting presence of sheep and cattle. From tramping through Mount Cook, Milford Track, Queen Charlotte Track and Abel Tasman, sky-diving in Queenstown, climbing over a live volcano, wine tasting in Marlborough, dune boarding on the 90 Mile Beach and jet boating in the Bay of Islands, I had the most memorable experience, for which I have the Pegasus Trust to thank.

All in all, it has been an unrivalled learning curve, which I look forward to developing in my own practice.

Elena Elia

105

106

INNER TEMPLE PEGASUS SCHOLARSHIP

International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, in the Hague Kakoly Pandé, 2 Dr Johnson’s Buildings

ICTY IN THE HAGUE INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

I

was thrilled to have been awarded a Pegasus Scholarship to support me as a visiting professional to the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague in 2012. As a linguist and a former scholar of German and French legal systems, I had always been in search of ways to expand my horizons internationally.

The scholarship provided the very opportunity to explore the types of work that UK trained lawyers can do abroad and to challenge myself within a different work environment and culture, at a stage when I was beginning to feel more settled in my career.

Upon arrival at my desk in the prosecutor’s section at the ICTY, I was met by a coloured printout of a British Flag stuck to my desk in a room amongst a sea of other coloured flags to identify the nationalities of the interns. At the time, I found this quite endearing, but it became more significant over time as I realised how the mix of different cultures and nationalities within one room could impact upon the dynamic of the working environment. My room had interns from the USA, Belgium, Guatemala, Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia, of different

Croatia, reassuring them that justice was being done and that their voices as victims were being heard. From the perspective of client care, it was very impressive that the prosecution advocates and investigators personally spoke to every witness and took pains to give each story a sense of the greatest importance. My own experience of prosecuting criminal trials in the UK was starkly different, and I was affected by the difference that it could make to the cooperation of witnesses and smooth-running of a trial. However, I also learnt that proceedings take a very long time to come to court, and advocacy also takes a very long time. This was not just due to the multiple and simultaneous translations into BCS (Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian language), French, English and sometimes Arabic that would be taking place at each hearing, but also to the fact that almost everything would be objected to and subjected to legal argument. On one occasion, I sat in on the trial of Ratko Mladić, known as the ‘Butcher of Bosnia’, and his representative objected to the admitting of a piece of evidence which, on the face of it, appeared to be innocuous.

When the judge asked the advocate to specify his objection,

“despite their best efforts… the pain and anger is still raw.” ages and stages in their legal education or career, which provided a rich source of education and sometimes conflict!

Immediately, I was thrown into the deep end of trial preparation with the searching and collating of evidence, drafting of ‘motions’ or legal arguments, drafting of exhibit and evidence lists from the many, varied and archaic computer programmes and taking witness statements.

The prosecution team was at the beginning of the trial of Goran Hadžić, a former president of the Republic of Serbian Krajina. Hadzic was in office during the Croatian War of Independence and had recently been indicted with 14 counts of crimes against humanity. The charges included criminal involvement in the “deportation or forcible transfer of tens of thousands of Croat and other non-Serb civilians” from Croatian territory between June 1991 and December 1993, including 20,000 from Vukovar; the forced labour of detainees; the extermination or murder of hundreds of Croat and other non-Serb civilians in ten Croatian towns and villages including Vukovar; and the torture, beatings and killings of detainees, including 264 victims seized from Vukovar Hospital. Goran Hadžić had been a fugitive from justice for over a decade.

This trial was to be the last to take place at the tribunal and within the office of the prosecutor, and I felt a great sense of weight upon the shoulders of the team to ‘get it right’ and to bring the case to trial as smoothly and as efficiently as possible. A great deal of care was taken in speaking to witnesses who were being flown over from

he stated: “Well, your Honour, I thought that you would be able to help me with that. I just thought that I should object.”

This was sadly not the only instance of objecting for the sake of it or bad advocacy, and one would become painfully aware of the wheels of the court grinding to a halt due to the different abilities and cultures of advocacy.

What I was mostly struck by was the commitment of the tribunal to bring lawyers, researchers, academics and linguists from the three countries of the former Yugoslavia together, in order to achieve justice for everyone. On the whole, I saw the ground being laid for forgiveness and unity among the Bosnians, Serbians and Croatians, who worked together on the prosecutions or defence of their fellow countrymen or oppressors. However, when I asked my colleagues from Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia to talk to me about their experiences of the conflict, they would all say: “I will tell you about it when the others are not here, they will not like what I have to say.” Unfortunately, two decades on, despite their best efforts to work together, the pain and anger is still raw. I sincerely hope that the tribunal, apart from achieving justice for victims, at the end of its course, will enable this generation of people from the three countries to put the past to rest and look forward to helping their countries to prospering in their future.

Kakoly Pandé

107

INNER TEMPLE PEGASUS SCHOLARSHIP

NewYork & San Francisco Yuli Takatsuki, 5 Raymond Buildings

108

I

could not believe my luck when I found out I had been selected for a Pegasus Scholarship by the Inner Temple, which would send me to both New York City and San Francisco. During my time there, I had the privilege of working in the offices of one of the leading US litigation firms, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, which has particular specialisms in media and first amendment work. In the past 40 years, they have represented media organisations in the most important cases affecting free speech and their media group is widely recognised as one of the best in the country.

I could not have been in better hands, working under the supervision of Rob Balin (partner and co-chair of the firm’s media law practice), Ed Davis (partner, New York) and Tom Burke (partner, San Francisco). Besides being outstanding lawyers with a wealth of experience to learn from, they each made me feel immediately at home in the two cities and introduced me to some of the best food I had on the trip.

As a media law barrister in London, I was at first apprehensive that the law would be completely foreign to me, particularly as it had been drilled into me that attitudes to libel and free speech are notoriously different in the two jurisdictions. However, the biggest surprise of all was discovering how much overlap and commonality there was in the legal concepts and principles of the two countries.

Happily, I discovered, as my placement progressed, that I was able to contribute actively to the firm’s work through legal research, drafting and advising.

Furthermore, my US colleagues were just as interested as I was in learning about the similarities and differences between the two jurisdictions and I gave some presentations on UK law and procedure, which I hope they found useful.

Ultimately, this led to me co-authoring a chapter of a book with Rob Balin, discussing the differences between US and UK privacy law, entitled You Say Tomato…: a Comparison of English and US Privacy Law Principles, upon my return to the UK. There were many highlights to my time working at Davis Wright Tremaine. To name just a few, I have particularly fond memories of spending time with the Honourable Judge Oetken, a federal judge of the District Court of the Southern District of New York, who had recently issued a leading 65page libel judgment in a case brought by forensic art expert

Paul Biro against The New Yorker. Judge Oetken’s chambers – a huge corner office on the higher floors of a courthouse in Lower Manhattan – had the most breathtaking view of the Manhattan skyline and surrounding ocean that I have ever seen. Rather different to the view from the windows of the Royal Courts of Justice!

Further highlights included attending a hearing at the Californian Court of Appeal in Sacramento (a beautiful twohour drive from central San Francisco), to watch an important appeal concerning the extent to which the right of freedom of speech can be exercised on the grounds of a public library.

Whilst in New York, I was also heavily involved in drafting a petition to the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, requesting the urgent release of human rights lawyer Le Cong Dinh, who had been detained in Vietnam. Following our submission of the petition, Mr Dinh was released in February 2013. Another exciting highlight was meeting the lawyers who work on The Daily Show With Jon Stewart, one of my favourite television shows of all time, and then being invited to attend the filming as a VIP guest! There are so many other highlights, but not enough space here to recount them all.

Overall, I had an unforgettable time in the States. It was a fascinating legal experience that exposed me to an entirely different jurisdiction and work environment. I also feel that it has allowed me to significantly develop my professional network. I hope to be able to keep in touch and continue working with many of the inspiring people I met during my placement.

I would encourage any young barrister to apply for a Pegasus Scholarship, as it offers a marvellous opportunity to broaden your horizons. I am extremely grateful to both Davis Wright Tremaine LLP and the Pegasus Trust for providing me with such an educational and memorable experience.

Yuli Takatsuki

INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Inner Temple Library Facilities and Services

• Current Awareness blog for legal news, changes in legislation and new case law (www.innertemplelibrary.com)

The Library is open to all members of the Inner Temple and to members of the other Inns of Court. It is a reference Library, staffed by experienced information professionals, which offers users access to a wide range of print and electronic resources in a comfortable working environment.

• Quarterly electronic newsletter

The Library offers the following facilities and services:

• Range of guides available in the Library or for downloading from our website

• A quiet environment for study, with over 90 reader places • A reference library of over 70,000 volumes, including the most up-to-date editions of major practitioner texts • A comprehensive archive of old editions of practitioners’ works

• A Facebook page with information on Library services, news and events (www.facebook.com/innertemplelibrary) • Legal research FAQs on our website

• Equipment and software for users with hearing or visual impairment Details of the Library’s collections, services and contact details are on our website at www.innertemplelibrary.org.uk.

• Specialist Commonwealth & Scottish collections • An enquiry service (in person, by telephone and by email) • Tours for students and pupils, plus a virtual tour on our website • Photocopying facilities • A document supply service for barristers in chambers • Internet access to the catalogues of all four Inn Libraries • Free web access within the Library for legal research (including subscription-based services) • Computers available for word processing and access to email

Opening Hours The Library’s opening hours are as follows: During Legal Terms: Monday – Thursday 9.00am – 8.00pm and Friday 9.00am – 7.00pm; Saturday 10.00am – 5.00pm on one Saturday in four (on a rota with the other Inn Libraries).

Outside Legal Terms: The Library closes at Bank Holiday periods and for the second half of August. For the remainder of August and September the hours are Monday – Friday 9.00am – 5.30pm.

• Wi-Fi access • Assistance with online searching and legal research • AccessToLaw, a gateway site providing annotated links to selected UK, Commonwealth and worldwide legal websites (www.accesstolaw.com)

109

110

INNER TEMPLE EVENT

Temple Family Picnic in the Garden To follow…

TEMPLE FAMILY PICNIC IN THE GARDEN INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

111

112

INNER TEMPLE

Beauty and the Beast

by Frank Wright JP, ad eundem member of the Inn and a volunteer in the Archive Department and the Temple Church

T

homas Sutherst, son of an iron founder in north eastern England was born in 1852 and Called in 1877. He was expelled from the Inn in 1908.

In November 1906, the Benchers set up the Sutherst Committee in the following terms “that the conduct of Sutherst with regard to the Marquis Townshend, and his marriage with Sutherst’s daughter, and the financial arrangements conducted therewith, and the subsequent proceedings up to the termination of the Inquiry in Lunacy, require the further consideration of the Bench.”

The ‘conduct’ arose out of John James Townshend, 6th Marquis Townshend, being “desirous of finding a wife with money”. Born in 1866, he had inherited Raynham Hall, and succeeded to the title in 1899.

By the early 1900s he was impecunious and so arranged for advertisements in the American press stating that he wanted to marry a girl “of means”.

Eventually in August 1905 he married Gladys, born in 1884, daughter of Thomas Sutherst.

Perhaps the Marquis was not too disappointed with his bride. She was described as the most beautiful woman in England. Unfortunately the Marquis had no claim to any similar attractiveness. He was described by the New York Times as “under 5 feet tall, a large head rests heavily on the thinnest and frailest of bodies.

The forehead thrusts itself prominently forward over large, bulky eyes, illuminated by the lurid glow of pathetic languor.”

Before his marriage, Townshend had for some years been living with the Reverend Arthur Geoffrey Robins, a dubious clergyman, who had been appointed by the Marquis as Rector of Raynham St Mary’s, Norfolk, in 1900. Robins had been acting in a nebulous position as Townshend’s confidant, adviser and secretary.

The engagement with Gladys Sutherst was procured through the agency of one Dunne, a clerk in Somerset House.

At the engagement ceremony, Townshend, Robins, Sutherst and Dunne discussed the terms of a marriage brokerage contract. It was later said that during the negotiations, Robins and Dunne stated that Townshend wanted as much money as possible on marriage. Sutherst was asked to provide £30,000, but found that considerably difficult as an undischarged bankrupt in the incredible sum of £250,000. He claimed he could find £2,500 at the time of the wedding and would undertake to produce £27,000 later.

Sutherst and Robins then prepared three documents.

The first was a settlement of £2,500 per annum on his future wife. This sum was described in the disciplinary proceedings as “largely in excess of what Townshend’s means rendered prudent”. The second document dealt with Sutherst’s settlement of £27,000 and the third with the employment of Robins for 14 years at a salary of £250. The committee referred to this term as “questionable”.

Before the marriage, Sutherst obtained Townshend’s signature to three copies of the first document. The remaining two were signed after the marriage. He was not told that he was signing three copies of the same document rather than three separate ones. Nothing was shown to Townshend’s solicitor and Sutherst did not advise it. Sutherst claimed that as he was a barrister, this was unnecessary.

The document relating to the provision of £27,000 by Sutherst was not for present payment to the Marquis, but as a loan at 4 per cent interest, chargeable on his life interest in the estate, to be paid at some indefinite date. The committee later commented that this second document most “certainly ought to have been laid before the solicitor”.

The marriage took place in secret, in August 1905, followed by a short honeymoon in Paris. Thomas and his new Lady Townsend returned in October they rented premises in Brook Street, Mayfair. But after only a few weeks, Townshend left to stay with Robins in Brighton, refusing to rejoin his wife. He wrote to Sutherst complaining that he had not revealed his bankruptcy and also had not recommended independent legal advice.

Having failed to persuade Townshend to return to London, Sutherst had recourse to a “stratagem”. Sutherst said that if Townshend returned he “hoped to be in a position to pay a sum of money”. He was assisted in this by his daughter, who appealed to Townshend to take up his seat in the House of Lords. The trick worked and Robins, Townshend and Dunne all appeared at the Hotel Victoria, Northumberland Avenue.

During the meeting a telephone call was received inviting the party to tea with Lady Townshend at Mayfair. There she announced that she and her husband had to go a reception at (curiously) the Bachelors’ Club. They duly went but had

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

not returned by the time of Robins’ planned train back to Brighton. It was agreed that Townshend would meet Robins at Victoria Station but Lady Townshend kept him away long enough to miss the train. The couple then went to their Mayfair house, in Brook Street, where Townshend was locked in a bedroom and the key kept by his wife. Special locks were put on the front and bedroom doors. A “strong male nurse” was hired so that Townshend became a prisoner. Sutherst later said that the object was to prevent Townshend from going back to Robins with whom he was infatuated.

In January 1906, two doctors were called in and certified him as of unsound mind. The doctors relied on statements made by Sutherst and his daughter alleging that Townshend was hysterical and in an abnormal mental state. This was sufficient to warrant the granting of a Reception Order by a magistrate. The order named Sutherst as the petitioner and Lady Townshend as the custodian. He was ordered to be detained in his own home which at that time was perfectly lawful and normal.

According to press reports the case was “celebrated, attracted great public interest and developed sensational as well as unpleasant testimony”. The judge stated that “if it were not so serious the matter might be compared to a comic opera.” It was also reported that the couple were most affectionate during the trial.

From time to time the judge and Sutherst clashed as when Sutherst tried to cross-examine one of the doctors who had examined Townshend. The judge said “I cannot allow it”.

Sutherst replied, “I was at the house”, to which the judge retorted, “so was the cook!”

The judge’s troubles were not limited to Sutherst’s interventions. When asked by counsel how long he proposed to sit that day he said he would sit “as long as the jury and counsel should desire. There were twenty one unhappy men in the jury box. Six or seven unhappy counsel and one unhappy judge and he would respect their convenience in that order.”

The judge commented particularly on barrister Sutherst’s failure to ensure that Townshend received independent legal advice. He also remarked on Sutherst’s signature on the

“He knew of the existence of the abominable marriage brokerage contract. He kept his daughter in the dark about it. The marriage might still be a happy one.”

By March 1906, the Dowager Marchioness had discovered what had happened. She applied for a judicial inquiry seeking his release through the Official Solicitor.

In July 1906, the judicial inquiry was held before Mr Justice Bucknill and a special jury of twenty one men, assisted by some seven or eight counsel, including two silks. Sutherst in robes, appeared for himself. The question for the jury was whether Townshend was, under the Lunacy Act 1890, “of unsound mind so as to be incapable of managing his affairs but capable of managing himself and not dangerous”. If the jury found in the latter case that he was incapable, he would be declared insane and subject to detention.

original petition of insanity, whereas in court he had said that he signed a mere form and never believed that Townshend was of unsound mind. The judge said, “Do you expect the jury to believe you now?”

Judicial disapproval was clear when he intervened to say that Sutherst’s daughter was, in effect, being sold.

“Your daughter was going to be married to a nobleman, according to your view, of mental weakness. You knew she was a mere girl and could not have known much of the world.

Why did you not say, ‘My dear, I don’t like this. There is something wrong here’?”

The sinking of the Lusitania May 1915, where Thomas Sutherst met his end

113

114

INNER TEMPLE

Title Title

The judge’s summing up took forty five minutes. (The jury were even quicker. They returned after eight minutes finding him not insane). He emphasised Sutherst’s status as a barrister.

“He is a member of my own profession, which prided itself on being composed of honest men. He must have known that it was his duty to advise Townshend to communicate with the family solicitor. His conduct reflected very little credit on him. He knew of the existence of the abominable marriage brokerage contract. He kept his daughter in the dark about it.

The marriage might still be a happy one. There was no earthly reason why it should not be.”

He gave a big hint to the Benchers, declaring that “the end of the Inquiry we hope will be the last heard of this extraordinary tale of greed, dishonesty and degradation – unless the Benchers should add a terminal note.” Which they did!

Sutherst was invited to attend, “for the purpose of giving To follow… any explanation which he may desire”. He supplied lengthy statements to the committee and appeared before them seven times. The Benchers did not give him an easy time. Sutherst gave the impression of a man floundering in deep water.

The final chapter began in November, 1906 when the Benchers appointed a disciplinary committee to ask certain questions. As he did not satisfy the committee it was recorded in the minutes of the Bench in April 1908, that he was guilty of “conduct unworthy of a barrister and should be disbarred and his name removed from the books of the Inn”. Sutherst wrote indicating he would appeal but there is no evidence of any such appeal.

Sutherst was drowned in the infamous sinking of the Lusitania by Imperial German Navy submarines off Ireland in May 1915.

In spite of Townshend’s apparent mental and physical frailty, his wife gave birth to a son in 1916 who in 1921 became the 7th Marquis. He died in 2010. On his birth he had inherited the courtesy title of Viscount Raynham.

On his death he had held a peerage for 94 years; one of the longest tenures ever recorded. He was also a man of great distinction in public life.

Lady Townshend, who died in 1959, also achieved distinction. She was Mayor of King’s Lynn in 1928-9, was a playwright, poet, novelist and a prolific writer of scripts for silent films.

The Reverend Robins disappeared to Australia in December 1908. He had been removed as a trustee of the Townshend estates in March 1908, following allegations of breach of trust in removing and selling heirlooms in 1904. Even before then there had been allegations: Sutherst had asserted that Robins was living in Brighton with his wife and children and a mistress.

F B Wright JP

Sold for £770,000 This wonderful painting by Sir Stanley Spencer was discovered on a routine visit by one of the valuation team. The owner was completely unaware of its significance and value.

If you would like to take advantage of a visit from one of the Valuation department please do get in touch.

Enquiries Mike Neill +44 (0) 20 7468 8340 mike.neill@bonhams.com

Bonhams 101 New Bond Street London W1S 1SR

Sir Stanley Spencer R.A. (1891-1959) Garden Path, Cookham Rise oil on canvas Sold in London, May 2013 for £770,000

International Auctioneers and Valuers - bonhams.com/valuations Prices shown include buyer’s premium. Details can be found at bonhams.com

116

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Master Tıley J

ohn Tiley was one of the world’s leading experts on tax law, a subject long neglected in English universities and one which made his name. He was a pioneer of tax law scholarship, and his influence, both academic and practical, was substantial.

His reputation was established by his magisterial Revenue Law, published in 1976 and written over two years, invariably with a Schubert LP playing in the background. So dominant was its influence that it spawned six further editions, the most recent in 2012 co-authored with Glen Loutzenhiser, Tiley’s former student. Between 1982 and 2000, it appeared as Butterworth’s UK Tax Guide, with Tiley as general editor, a work which continues as Tiley and Collison’s UK Tax Guide.

Appointed as Cambridge’s first Professor of the Law of Taxation in 1990, Tiley established the Faculty’s Centre for Tax Law in 2001, having secured, with characteristic acumen, generous support from the tax profession. Under his energetic leadership, and reflecting his conviction that the law of taxation should be an intellectual as well as a practical discipline, it has become an internationally recognised centre for tax research. His scholarly distinction was recognised by his election to the British Academy in 2008, and by the award of the Cambridge LLD degree in 1995.

Born in 1941, he was a scholar at Winchester, which he held in great affection. He went up to Lincoln College, Oxford, in 1959, where he subsequently became a lecturer in law. After three years teaching at the University of Birmingham, he was appointed in 1967 to a lectureship at Cambridge, and elected a Fellow of Queens’ College.

His academic interests were many, encompassing family law, the law of tort, succession, and the law of equity and, Oxonian as he was, he always maintained an interest in legal theory. But by the mid-1970s, his attention was increasingly focused on tax law.

Tiley’s scholarly interests were many. But if there were one topic of which he was the master, it was the legal approach to tax avoidance. Perhaps the highlights of his academic career were his seminal articles on the subject in the British Tax Review in the late 1980s. World-renowned, they frame a debate that continues still. He wrote passionately and continuously about whether the UK should implement a general anti-avoidance rule, and on the appropriate role of the courts in policing tax avoidance.

He was too worldly to believe that the enactment of a general anti-avoidance rule would be a panacea for tax avoidance; he had studied the difficulties encountered elsewhere. He knew well that tax avoidance can only be regulated with the engagement of the courts. In 2010, Tiley was appointed to a group of experts convened to study the implementation of a general anti-avoidance rule in the UK. Without doubt, he was the pre-eminent expert on tax avoidance on that panel. He had serious reservations as to what he regarded as the half-hearted attempt at a general anti-avoidance rule now in the process of being enacted.

Tiley’s retirement in 2008 was marked in Cambridge by the European Association of Tax Law Professors Conference, and the fourth Tax Law History Conference. These were major events, attended by leading tax scholars to celebrate a glittering academic career.

Tiley’s intellectual vigour remained undiminished by retirement. He continued to teach undergraduates for the Tax Law paper, which he had created. He prepared two editions of Revenue Law, secured a Leverhulme Research Fellowship between 2009 and 2011, organised two further conferences on the history of tax law, and edited the influential volumes which they generated. Although he stood down as academic editor of the Cambridge Tax Law series, which he initiated in 2004, he had already laid the foundations for its continuing success.

In retirement, he continued to organise the tax law workshops he began in 2002. Co-ordinated with HM Revenue and Customs, these attracted international experts to discuss current problems. Only Tiley would have had the international status to attract the leading academics, judges and administrators who attended. Although a drain on his time, they were recognised as the pinnacle of academic tax law discussion. At the time of his death, Tiley was arranging for their future funding.

Tiley maintained that legal academics should engage with the wider world. A frequent adviser to the UK Government, his influence was recognised by his appointment as CBE in 2003. Called to the Bar at the Inner Temple, of which he was an Honorary Bencher, he served as a Recorder between 1989 and 1999, willingly adjudicating matters far removed from his scholarly interests, principally in the area of family law. He was appointed an Honorary QC in 2009.

Tiley served as chair of the Cambridge Law Faculty between 1992 and 1995 during a decisive period in its history. He secured funding for the faculty’s impressive building, opened in 1995, and oversaw its design and construction. Less tangibly, he set in motion a transformation in the faculty’s culture, reflecting his vision that its new home could promote a more cohesive and intellectually vibrant community of scholars.

Tiley was a dedicated teacher who enjoyed the company of students and took pride in their achievements. A devoted Fellow of Queens’ College, he occupied several college roles, including senior bursar and vice-president. As Director of Studies in Law, and as a committed supervisor, he taught and mentored generations of Queens’ undergraduates, many of whom achieved distinction in the law. This desire to nurture talent was equally reflected in his attention to the academic careers of his junior colleagues. That so many fulfilled the promise he saw in them gave him much pleasure.

In 1964, Tiley married Jillinda Draper. She survives him with their children, Nicholas, Christopher and Mary.

Courtesy of The Times

CELEBRATE THE LIFE INNER TEMPLE

The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple mourns the loss of the following Masters of the Bench and members: William Stevenson Esq His Honour Judge Ian Britton His Honour Judge Dudley Bennett �� Michael Sherrard Esq ��� �� ���� Master Dyer Maitland Lincoln Esq Master Fuad ��� Mrs Barbara Greenrod Master Sumner

Struggling to make yourself heard?

Website: the-bba.com Email: susan@the-bba.com

Tel: 02072424761 VISION AND MISSION STATEMENT We exist to support, help and comfort those members of the Bar in England and Wales and their families and dependants who are in need, in distress or in difficulties. During the recent past we have helped barristers and their families in every circuit, often saving not only dignity but careers.

We help when there is a real catastrophe.

Confidentiality limits our disclosure of case histories but they include the effects of severe illness or injury, accidents and other unforeseen tragedies.

Our staff are experienced, kind and practical: our Association is a last safety net for those struck down, their partners and children, where there is no income, no capital, no family back up.

Let us give you a voice!

With over 10 years’ experience working closely with chambers, we understand the way you work.

We provide every marke�ng service: in-house marke�ng support a fully outsourced service

planning & communica�ons managing press, events & webinars

Add to your marke ng skills – not your headcount Find out more: call us now on 0771 434 5072 or email info@barmarketing.co.uk

www.barmarketing.co.uk

117

118

INNER TEMPLE

Islam and English Law

by Master Griffith-Jones, Master of the Temple

T

he Master of the Temple recalls the first lecture in the series, Islam and English Law, given by Dr Rowan Williams at the Royal Courts of Justice in 2008, and the subsequent public discussions held at the Temple Church.

Papers from the contributing speakers have been compiled into Islam and English Law: Rights Responsibilities and the Place of Shari’a, edited by Robin Griffith-Jones and published

by Cambridge University Press.

On 7 February 2008, The World at One broadcast an interview with Dr Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury.

He was heard answering the question whether in Britain the adoption of shari’a law really was necessary for community cohesion. “It seems,” he said, “unavoidable.” Those three words would bring down on the Archbishop a storm of criticism.

On that same evening the Archbishop lectured on Civil and Religious Law in England to an audience of 1,000 in the Royal Courts of Justice. Only at two points did he wonder whether in some areas of law, which “may include aspects of marital law, the regulation of financial transactions and authorised structures of mediation and conflict resolution”, it might be beneficial to have a supplementary and competing jurisdiction available for those who want it. This was in some ways a modest suggestion; the Arbitration Act 1996 already provided that a tribunal may decide an arbitrable dispute in accordance with the law chosen by the applicants. In the case of marital law, the Archbishop’s proposal was less straightforward, since the jurisdiction of the family courts for good reasons could not (and still cannot) be ousted.

For a week or more, the media attacked the Archbishop relentlessly. “What a Burkha!” cried The Sun’s headline on 8 February. Much of the anger, we might think, was directed at the Archbishop in displacement: what could no longer be said about Muslims can be said about an Archbishop who seemed to speak up for Muslims.

The Archbishop’s lecture was the first in a series of discussions, arranged by the Temple Church, of Islam and English Law. These were followed by a series of smaller, round-table conversations on family law chaired by Stephen Hockman QC. The topic on which all these discussions converged was the prevalence of Muslim marriages unregistered under English Law. The wife in such a contract is unprotected by English law if the marriage breaks down; she has no recourse to the courts.

The papers from the public discussions have now been published in Islam and English Law, designed to promote honesty, understanding and mutual respect (even and especially where there are intractable differences) between communities which too rarely meet. The book is, for the saddest of reasons, timely. The fear of Islam that fuelled the media in 2008 has, if anything, been heightened by Drummer Rigby’s murder. There are regular reports of radicalised young Muslims. A recent Panorama programme showed an undercover reporter seemingly sent home to a violent husband by a shari’a council. An Arbitration and Mediation Services (Equality) Bill, to control the claims and activities of such councils, is being piloted by Baroness Cox through the House of Lords. It was then with typical magnanimity that Dr Williams returned this month to discuss the book’s themes in the Temple Church.

Lord Williams began wryly. “There is an episode in Winnie the Pooh where Owl’s house is destroyed by a strong wind. As Pooh picks himself up from the wreckage he looks around and says, ‘Did I do that?’ I think perhaps the audience understands that I have a certain fellow-feeling with Winnie the Pooh.”

ISLAM AND ENGLISH LAW INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Dr Williams went on to speak of the role of associations in public life and of their relationship to the state’s law.

He acknowledged that “in some of what I wrote in 2008 I perhaps veered towards a slightly more ‘partnership of equals’ model than is realistic.” But he maintained resolutely that there are promising examples of partnership between the State, and the associations which compose society: in the partnership, for instance, between the state and the Church of England in the provision of public education.

But how can that model be extended, so that the state can comfortably work with Islamic associations on (for example) any part of marital law and on the protection of women in unregistered marriages? Alongside Dr Williams on the panel were Professors Elizabeth Cooke of the Law Commission and Maleiha Malik of King’s College London, who both spoke up for informal and local dialogue. Among the contributors to the conversation were Baroness Cox, who as a parliamentarian is looking to legislation; Mrs Amra Bone of the Birmingham Shari’a Council and Ms Khola Hasan of the Islamic Shari’a Council (the object of Panorama’s investigation), who want to make with the state’s help better

provision for the women who seek their help; and Baroness Butler-Sloss, formerly President of the Family Division, who as a judge asks for transparent principles and procedures within the councils, in conformity to the standards of English law, so that the courts can indeed avail themselves of such councils’ recommendations.

These immensely impressive women, it seemed clear, share a single agenda: to offer the full benefits and protection of English law to such Muslim women as lack it. There are different routes to this end, and depths of mutual ignorance and suspicion to be overcome. But the tone of this month’s conversation was consistently constructive and forwardlooking, as debate on these topics in 2008 was not. Among the most memorable elements in that furore five years ago was the generous calm of Archbishop Williams himself. When he suffered, he – like his Master – did not threaten (1 Peter 2.23). Perhaps the rest of us are learning gratefully from his example.

The Master of the Temple

“The papers from the public discussions have now been published in Islam and English Law, designed to promote honesty, understanding and mutual respect (even and especially where there are intractable differences) between communities which too rarely meet.”

Master of the Temple, Master Williams and Stephen Hockman QC

119

120

INNER TEMPLE

Human Trafficking Report

Launching its new report In the Dock, the Anti-Trafficking Monitoring Group examines the effectiveness of trafficking investigations and prosecutions in terms of law, policy and practice

by Nicholas Griffin ��

Nicholas Griffin QC

O

n 13 June 2013, at the Inner Temple, the AntiTrafficking Monitoring Group (ATMG) launched its report In the Dock: Examining the UK’s Criminal Justice Response to Trafficking. The ATMG monitors the UK’s compliance with its anti-trafficking obligations under a Council of Europe convention and an EU directive. In the Dock examines the effectiveness of trafficking investigations and prosecutions through the UK criminal justice system in terms of law, policy and practice.

In the words of Master Butler-Sloss, keynote speaker at the launch: “Human trafficking is modern-day slavery alive, very successful, very profitable and more widespread than in the days of Wilberforce.” Human trafficking is the second most profitable illegal enterprise in the world alongside drugs and armaments, and is worth a staggering $32 billion per year. It comes in many forms, including the sex industry and labour exploitation.

Master Butler-Sloss is co-chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Human Trafficking and a trustee of the Human Trafficking Foundation. Other speakers at the

Master Butler-Sloss, Co-chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Human Trafficking

launch brought additional expertise, with the event chaired

by Anti-Slavery International’s Klara Skrivankova. We heard also from Rachel Annison, the report’s author; Caroline Haughey, a barrister who has prosecuted trafficking cases; and Detective Sergeant Alastair Duncan of South Yorkshire Police, who has investigated such cases. There was a great deal of expertise in the audience too, with people attending from police forces, NGOs and from a number of different chambers. The event was well-attended by the media.

Modern slavery is a problem on a monumental scale.

Literally millions of men, women and children around the world today are slaves: people who are sold like objects, forced to work for little or no pay and are at the mercy of their ‘employers’.

It is deeply concerning to learn that the effects of trafficking are felt so keenly not only abroad but also on our own doorstep. The first annual report of the InterDepartmental Ministerial Group on Human Trafficking summarises the situation in the UK in this way:

HUMAN TRAFFICKING REPORT INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

“In 2011, 946 potential victims of human trafficking were referred to the National Referral Mechanism (NRM)…

The most prevalent exploitation type recorded through the NRM, for adults, was sexual exploitation; however it is recognised that the incidence of labour exploitation and criminal exploitation is increasing. The most prevalent type of exploitation reported for children was labour exploitation.”

One assessment suggests that there could be over 2,000 potential victims of human trafficking in the UK. Actual figures may be higher. Perhaps most depressing of all are the victims of child trafficking. They are brought to the UK for many purposes, including sexual exploitation, domestic servitude, benefit fraud, cannabis farming, street begging, theft and shoplifting.

In the Dock suggests that human trafficking is not a policy priority for the Government despite its commitment to make the UK a hostile environment for traffickers. The report points to the fact that there has been a steady increase in the number of potential trafficked persons identified but notes that the number of traffickers punished for trafficking offences has actually decreased. On the other hand, evidence suggests that many trafficked persons are prosecuted for crimes they were compelled to commit.

In this context, one must now also consider the recent decision of L, HVN, THN & T v R [2013]. The Court of Appeal there stated that when there is evidence that victims of trafficking have been involved in criminal activities, the investigation, decision to prosecute and any subsequent

proceedings must be approached with the greatest sensitivity.

This is because, “the criminality, or putting it another way, the culpability, of any victim of trafficking may be significantly diminished, and in some cases effectively extinguished, not merely because of age (always a relevant factor in the case of a child defendant) but because no realistic alternative was available to the exploited victim but to comply with the dominant force of another individual, or group of individuals”.

In the Dock recommends that a number of steps should now be taken including, the enactment of a unified piece of legislation rather than the current unhelpful situation of individual trafficking offences in different pieces of legislation. Master Butler-Sloss raised the possibility of an anti-slavery Bill at the launch: “A Bill would raise the profile of human trafficking and in consolidation there would be the opportunity to put offences found in several Acts into [one place] and the scope to simplify and improve the wording of those offences…” She suggested that this legislation might well be the defining issue by which the Government would be remembered. We will wait to see what follows.

The Inner Temple was a particularly appropriate venue for the launch of a report focusing on the law and on human rights. The launch took place here because of the generosity and assistance of the Inn. Special thanks in this regard go to the Sub-Treasurer and to the Head of Treasury Office.

Nicholas Griffin ��

Fingerprint Associates Limited roiding te sce stem it impara ngerprint adice One of the great strengths of the UK’s Criminal Justice System is the ability of the Defence to view and question the evidence of the Prosecution, and if your case is based around the identification of an individual trough a fingerprint, how can you be assured that the evidence offered is fair, unbiased and above all else, accurate?

Based in the United Kingdom, but with proven International Experience (Countries worked in over the past few years have included Hong Kong, South Africa, Nigeria and Jamaica), we have over 68 combined years fingerprint experience within the Company.

Fingerprint Services:

• Criminal Defence • Immigration Disputes • Civil Disputes • International Electoral Matters

• Fingerprint Chemical Development

Contact us now on: +44(0)7846 401211

Information@fingerprint-associates.co.uk www.fingerprint-associates.co.uk

121

122

INNER TEMPLE  LECTURE SERIES

Should the Decisions of the Foreign Secretary be Justiciable?

Extracts from a lecture

by Louise Christian

Photo: Chris Eason

SHOULD THE DECISIONS OF THE FOREIGN SECRETARY BE JUSTICIABLE? INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

I

dedicate this lecture to the memory of one of my legal heroes, the late Ronald Dworkin. His recent death is a huge loss to the academic and legal worlds on both sides of the Atlantic. As a young solicitor, his books inspired me to see the law not as an arid set of rules, but as the expression of human rights, integrity and human dignity.

In Is Democracy Possible Here?, Dworkin said: “We damage ourselves, not just our victim, when we ignore his humanity, because in denigrating his intrinsic value, we denigrate our own. We must take care not to define ‘emergency’ as simply ‘great danger’ or to suppose that any act that improves our own security, no matter how marginally, is for that reason justified. We must hold to a very different virtue; the old fashioned virtue of courage. Sacrificing selfrespect in the face of danger is a particularly shameful form of cowardice. We show courage in our domestic criminal law and practice; we increase the statistical risk that each of us will suffer from violent crime when we forbid preventive detention and insist on fair trials for everyone accused of crime. We must show parallel courage when the danger

making any finding. It is difficult to understand how it can be justified for relatives of British soldiers to challenge the adequacy of equipment such as snatch Land Rovers, but not the validity in international law of the cause for which our Government sent them to fight.

Back in the dark days of early 2002, when we had just learnt of the existence of Guantanamo Bay, I was approached by the mother of one of the first British detainees to be taken there, Feroz Abbasi. I began to feel very critical, not just of the US Government for the unlawful detention, but of the UK Government, for not doing enough to secure any access by him to a court. Letters to the US embassy went completely unanswered. Letters to the British Foreign Office, while they were at least answered, resulted in no expression of opinion about the legality of Mr Abbasi’s detention, let alone any action. In the background was the knowledge that our Government had brought in its own legislation to hold foreign nationals suspected of terrorism indefinitely without charge.

I challenged the British Government and the British courts. Judicial review proceedings were issued, challenging

“It is difficult to understand how it can be justified for relatives of British soldiers to challenge the adequacy of equipment such as snatch Land Rovers, but not the validity in international law of the cause for which our Government sent them to fight.” comes from abroad because our dignity is at stake in the same way.”

Sadly, that call for the courage to stand up for due process and the rule of law is being ignored by the US and by other states throughout the world. Despite signing an order in 2009 pledging to close down Guantanamo within a year, President Obama has entered his second term with it still open. There are other long-term detention facilities where detainees are not put on trial fairly, or at all, including Bagram in Afghanistan. The US has increased its use of drone attacks to carry out targeted assassinations. The practice of extraordinary rendition continues.

Inevitably, some of the most difficult decisions that courts face have entered into the sphere of foreign relations, and into the decision-making powers of the Foreign Secretary. This has raised the question of whether it is appropriate for there to be judicial scrutiny of this area, given an ancient principle of non-justiciability in relation to foreign policy and a general reluctance of the courts to intervene in related decisions.

It seems to me to be fundamentally objectionable that any individual rights should be subordinated to a form of special deference to the executive in the conduct of foreign affairs. I do not see why the court should grant any special immunity in this area.

In recent years, the European Court of Human Rights has decided in the cases of Al Skeini and Al Jedda that the UK Government does have responsibility for convention rights in the whole area in which our Government is the occupying power, and not just to those persons directly controlled by British troops. However, when challenges to the legality of going to war have been made, such as the cases brought in 2008 demanding an inquiry into the Iraq war by relatives of British soldiers killed in it, the courts have shied away from

the failure of the British Government to call for Mr Abbasi’s release. Fortunately, with the brilliant Nicholas Blake QC (now Mr Justice Blake), we were able to persuade the Court of Appeal to grant permission and to reserve the case to itself.

The case was ultimately unsuccessful, but the judgment was hugely influential throughout the world and, ultimately, caused the British Government to rethink its position. The court said that Mr Abbasi was detained in “a legal black hole” and described this as “objectionable”. As Lord Sumption put it in his lecture of May 2012 on Foreign Affairs in English Courts Since 9/11, “having held that it should not require the Foreign Secretary to make the representations that Mr Abbasi wanted, the court made the representations itself”.

British lawyers have been enormously important in opposing the unlawful detentions at Guantanamo Bay. Even the most eminent lawyers were not above campaigning. A watershed moment came in November 2003, when Lord Justice Steyn delivered a lecture at Lincoln’s Inn condemning, in no uncertain terms, the legal black hole at Guantanamo.

The efforts of lawyers and others did have an effect on our Government. We do not know exactly what negotiations took place, but British citizens were released in 2004 and 2005.

Some while later, a large number of the people who had been detained in Guantanamo issued civil proceedings against the Foreign Secretary, the Home Secretary and the Security Services. One was a client of mine, Martin Mubanga; he had been detained in March 2002 in Zambia, before being handed over to US forces for rendition to Guantanamo.

All the cases were settled by the British Government for undisclosed damages in November 2010. But before this happened, I had, on the advice of Michael Fordham QC, issued an application for summary judgment for “misfeasance of office” and negligence against the Government over the

123

124

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES Photo: David Sim

evidence we had obtained about the rendition from Zambia.

This evidence disclosed supports my views about the absurdity of putting the Foreign Secretary in a special box of immunity from judicial scrutiny. There had been extensive discussions at Cabinet Office level about British citizens detained abroad in the wake of 9/11 and Guantanamo. The Foreign Office and the security services were informed of Mr Mubanga’s case. He had both a British and a Zambian passport and was entitled to British consular protection. The documents show that there was a deliberate decision by the Foreign Office not to seek consular access. A Foreign Office memo said, “Mubanga is a dual national, but instructions from London were unequivocal; we should not accept responsibility or take custody of him.” This was subsequently reinforced by the message from No 10 that Mubanga should not be allowed to return to the UK. It was clear that if we requested consular access, thereby de facto acknowledging him as a UK national, he would have been handed over to us.

The memo concluded, “The handling of the Mubanga case placed us in an impossible position. … We need coordinated thinking to avoid such dilemmas arising again, other posts having to face the difficulties we’ve had to face, and any UK national having to go without the consular protection to which they’re entitled.”

I can think of no more convincing reasons than those for why the courts should intervene in such situations. The British government had potential control over Mr Mubanga’s fate and failed to discharge its duty to him, in breach of its own policy.

Despite the Government promising an inquiry, there has been no investigation. I asked the police to look into what happened to Mr Mubanga and was told last year that a panel had decided that, “It was not a case so serious that it needed to be looked at immediately”. Apparently ‘justice delayed is justice denied’ was not considered important.

There has been a more recent case, in which control was the crucial issue, finally decided by the Supreme Court in October last year: Mr Yunus Rahmatullah against the Foreign Secretary in an application for habeas corpus. Mr Rahmatullah, a Pakistani citizen, was originally detained by British forces in Iraq in February 2004. He was then transferred into the custody of US forces, in accordance with the terms of a memorandum of understanding dated 23 March 2003.

The memorandum of understanding had provided that the arrangement would be implemented in accordance with Geneva conventions 3 and 4, and that if the US failed to comply with these conventions, the detaining power, the UK, must take effective measures to correct the situation, or request the return of the transferred person. Clause 4 of

the memorandum gave the UK the unqualified right to the return of detained person in response. The Court of Appeal allowed the issue of a writ of habeas corpus. In response, the British Government wrote to the US Government, but did not mention its right under clause 4 of the memorandum of understanding to get the detained person returned. The US Government refused to do anything.

The Supreme Court, by a majority, dismissed appeals and cross appeals by both the British government and Mr Rahmatullah. A dissenting judgment from Lord Carnwath and Lady Hale would have accepted Mr Rahmatullah’s argument that the letter from the Foreign Secretary did not go far enough, in that it did not assert its right to demand his return.

They said, “We do not understand either… why the US Government should have had any diplomatic problem in expressing its position clearly, or still less why the court should acquiesce in that position. The US must have a view on whether the UK retains an interest in the matter. Either it accepts that the UK retains an interest as detaining authority under the 2003 MoU, or it does not. One way or the other it should address the issue. Where liberty is at stake, it is not the court’s job to speculate as to the political sensitivities, which may be in play.”

I am with Lord Carnwath and Lady Hale; enough of the deference, enough of the speculation about the sensitivity because it concerns foreign affairs. If fundamental, individual human rights are an issue, the British Government should do all in its power to enforce and uphold those rights. If the British courts are asked to scrutinise the behaviour of the Foreign Secretary, the only issue should be what power he or she has to secure a favourable outcome for the victim, and not anything about the courts keeping out of foreign affairs.

This is not an issue that is going to go away. Domestic and foreign politics are no longer separate worlds, and the conduct of our Government abroad impacts more and more on the rights of its citizens and residents, given modern communications and travel.

It is no coincidence that more obstacles are being put up by our Government. Proposals to shorten the time limit for judicial review, cuts in legal aid and proposals for closed material procedures will halt the forward march. However, we live in an increasingly international world and I hope that all young lawyers will come to see themselves as lawyers of the world.

Louise Christian Inner Temple Hall, 18 February 2013

INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

THE TEMPLE CHURCH CHRISTMAS FAIR Christmas Shopping in the Elegance of Middle Temple Hall

Thursday 5 December, 12noon-8.00pm Tickets: £8.00 on the door (refreshments included) Under 16s free if accompanied by an adult

Alison Opfermann Jewellery, Argent of London, Billy Ruffian Shoes, The Book People, CHH Design, Club Matters, Diva & Me, English Relics, Fiona Curzon Collections, Fox & Chave, Hardy Rose, Jean Brown Knitwear, Jelliefish, Jupp Fine Jewellery, Kutzi Socks, Lacorine Alpaca Designs, Leonard Jay Gentlemen’s Outfitters, Magna Carta Merchandise, Original Travel, Pampelonne, Racalia Olive Oil, Rhodes to Heaven Ltd, Rococo Chocolates, Rocking Pony, Silver Editions, Simply Salmon, Ski Exchange, Smash Porcelaine, Sports Channel Shop, Susie P Accessories, Tom the Cheeseman, Vishana Ltd, The Wiltshire Beekeeper and lots more.

Grand Raffle Tickets (£2.00) on sale before the day and at the Fair

125

126

INNER TEMPLE

The Martin John Burr Silver Cabinets Master Cryan, the Master of the Silver, charts the building of the new silver cabinets in Hall

THE MARTIN JOHN BURR SILVER CABINETS INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

I

t is not often in life that one is given the chance to have a leading role in changing the fabric, hopefully enhancing the fabric, of a building of national importance in a way which will endure for generations. Master Hallett, at the start of her year as Treasurer, threw me such a ball, and over the next couple of years I had a fascinating time running with it.

The task was to install in Hall a number of cabinets in which to display the best of the Inn’s silver. I had been Deputy Master of the Silver and was in the process of taking over from Master Deby, who for many years had wanted to make the silver more widely accessible. For a number of reasons, the right time had not come for him. So, there I was with a golden opportunity at the start of my time in the job. I had the great fortune to be able to work with Henrietta Amodio, Head of the Treasury Office. Together, we began to work out what we did not know about the task in hand, which was more or less everything.

IKEA do not sell heritage-standard display cases. Who does?

We telephoned the V&A, who were very helpful and gave us three names, and told us about their cabinets. Henrietta went to look at the cabinets in the V&A. I went with Master Scriven.

Henrietta and I went to the Goldsmith’s Hall in the City. They were very helpful. Master Scriven and I went to the Fitzwilliam Museum in Cambridge and I went to the Barber Surgeons’ Hall.

I felt I was beginning to get the hang of what was needed, but we were still faced with a bewildering series of choices.

What we had come to understand was that modern display cabinets, the type used in museums, have some remarkable qualities. They are extremely secure, and are commonly referred to as ‘bandit proof’. Even though they are made primarily of glass, it is toughened, 11.5 mm laminate glass and extraordinarily strong. With a large hammer, it would take so long to break in that the fuzz, even on a bad day, would be there to discourage the ‘bandits’ long before they were handling the hallmarks.

The intrinsic strength of the cabinets is not their only security feature. Each cabinet has a complex and highly sensitive alarm system. The standard locking system is virtually impenetrable.

As a result, when we met the Inn’s insurers with Master Glick, the Master of Insurance, we were pleased to find that they saw no need to increase our premium, even though the bulk of the Inn’s best pieces were going on general display rather than being locked behind a six-inch steel door in the bowels of the Treasury Building.

We also learnt, perhaps paradoxically, that putting it on display is by far the best way of preserving our silver. After the Inn had ceased to use it on a daily basis, various ways were devised of displaying it on special occasions, but doing so had some obvious and some less obvious disadvantages. One guest tried to walk off with a priceless snuffbox. After that, security considerations came more to the fore. But security was not the only problem. It is impossible to move silver about or leave it on open display without the risk of it being roughly handled, marked or even dropped. To those risks you have to add the detrimental impact of cleaning, not only finger marks, but also to deal with tarnishing from natural oxidization. Light, and ultraviolet light in particular, can also damage the lacquer that protected some of the more intricate objects.

“The deft craftsmanship ensured that the lower panels were remodelled to the exacting standards of the existing oak panelling in the Hall.”

127

INNER TEMPLE

The cabinets we looked at addressed most of those problems.

The glass contained a UV filter but, best of all, the seals on the cabinets created a more or less stable environment. Air exchange rates were a low as 0.02 of volume per day, and the humidity levels are controlled by replenishable silicon gel. Thus, damage by light etching, oxidization and humidity are almost eliminated and the life of the lacquer and silver generally greatly extended. The open appearance of the cabinets and the use of non-reflective jeweller’s glass give great accessibility, and the size of the cabinets means that nearly all of the Inn’s very best pieces can be seen without the need to move them to and from the vault and risk damage in the process.

Two more elements had to be considered: lighting and display systems. Were we to use fibre-optic lighting or LED light? Which would show our collection off to best effect?

How should the silver be displayed? On shelves or individual mounts? If on shelves, how were they to be supported – cantilevers or rods? How do a judge and administrator have the slightest idea? In the end there was nothing for it but for Henrietta, Master Deby and I to take an exotic, all-expensespaid trip to Perivale, where Reier, the German manufacturers of the cabinets we had chosen, had temporary showrooms.

(The showrooms were on the Western Avenue, just after Hanger Lane and before the old Hoover factory.) It was about the only warm afternoon last summer, but the effort proved remarkably worthwhile and answered a great many of our questions. Fortunately, all three of us agreed on all the key points.

Whilst the general mode of lighting and display were chosen, it was clear that the choice of the pieces to be displayed and their exact layout was not a matter for amateurs and so we asked the Inn’s silver consultant, Richard Parsons, to help select the best items for display and then, on the recommendation of Reier, John Ronayne was instructed to draw up a scheme. His work can be seen in our greatest modern museum collections, such as the new displays in the Wallace Collection and the new Antiquities Galleries in the Fitzwilliam Museum, as well as in the Barber Surgeons’ Hall.

That Hall is not dissimilar to our own.

So far, so good, but two potentially insuperable problems remained: the feasibility of installation and the overall cost.

They were not unrelated. The general plan was that after the removal of the central sections of each of the four panels, either side of the portrait of King George VI at the east end of Hall, the new cabinets would be fitted in and wall-mounted.

However, the chaotic post-war reconstruction of the Hall by Sir Edward Maufe, Sir Hubert Worthington and T W Sutcliffe was not adequately recorded. Consequently, it was not known what would be found once the panels were removed.

It could not be judged what depth of cavity lay behind the panels or whether that curse of 1950s construction, asbestos, would be present. Fortunately, Richard Snowdon, our Surveyor, and his team were able to devise a scheme for temporary removal of a panel, and together with Ian Ward, the Inn’s electrician, they established that there was not only

“Whilst the general mode of lighting and display were chosen, it was clear that the choice of the pieces to be displayed and their exact layout was not a matter for amateurs and so we asked the Inn’s silver consultant.”

128

THE MARTIN JOHN BURR SILVER CABINETS INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

“The cabinets are the most significant change to the fabric and appearance of the Hall since it was completed.” ample space for setting in and fixing the cabinets, but some far-sighted electrician half a century ago had set in some rather useful conduit.

The cost of fitting could be kept within bounds, but nevertheless the demands on the Inn are considerable, and the risk of this being seen as a ‘vanity project’ was real.

Three factors came to our aid. Thanks to the advice of the V&A, the competitive tenders enabled us to put forward a price which was significantly less than the first preliminary estimate. The Treasurers after Master Hallett, Master Hirst and Master Thorley and the Finance Committee saw the benefit to the marketability of Hall (encouraged by the Master of the House and Vicky Portinari) as well as the desirability of making the silver more available to a wider audience. Most important of all, the Inn received a timely gift from the estate of a former ad eundem member of the Inn, Martin John Burr, which would cover three quarters of the cost. The Executive Committee decided that his legacy should be applied to the cabinets and that they should hereafter be known as the ‘Martin John Burr Cabinets’.

The path was clear, and the cabinets were installed over the Easter vacation of 2013. The deft craftsmanship of Steve Hanks, under the watchful eye of Paul Simmonds, ensured that the lower panels were remodelled to the exacting standards of the existing oak panelling in the Hall.

The cabinets are the most significant change to the fabric and appearance of the Hall since it was completed almost two generations ago. I had the fun part of this project.

Henrietta had some of the fun, but also a lot of the hard work. However, it would not have come together without the help of many others, only some of whom I have named.

I hope those who remain anonymous here will know that they are nevertheless much appreciated, and will forgive me for mentioning just two more names, William Gallagher, whose knowledge of the Inn’s silver and conscientious care of it have been invaluable, and the late Master Harrison, all too briefly Deputy Master of the Silver, whose amiable and encouraging tones I can still hear.

Master Cryan

129

130

INNER TEMPLE

The Inn’s Candelabra

by Richard Parsons

F

rom early times, there has been a tradition of communal dining at the Inner Temple. Generally, eating would have taken place in daylight hours; evening meals would have been costly because of the need for lighting, either by oil or candle light.

The Inner Temple silver collection contains a number of antique silver candlesticks made between 1697 and 1730, having a height of between seven and eight inches. They have been used for many years for table lighting at dinners.

More recently, it was decided to increase this collection with a group of contemporary silver candelabra. After a number of designs were submitted by invited silversmiths, Anthony Elson was selected to submit detailed designs for a set of four candelabra, one pair to celebrate the Millennium, the other pair to celebrate the Golden Jubilee of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, in the years 2000 and 2002 respectively.

The candelabra are described as each with a Pegasus raised on stems formed as four supporting columns (replicating the columns in the Temple Church), surmounted with interlocking Romanesque arches rising from the trumpet-shaped circular bases. Four light branches of reverse ‘c’ scrolls, with castellated drip pans issuing from the central Pegasus, stand upon a symbolic representation of the planets Saturn and Jupiter.

In 2007, the Inner Temple commissioned a further set of four candelabra, in a similar style to those already supplied, to commemorate the quatercentenary of the grant of a Royal Charter by James I in 1608. These candelabra differ by featuring radiating thistles beneath the central Pegasus that are oxidised in blue-green to represent the House of Stuart, and surmounted by the Pegasus oxidised in black with golden hooves.

The recently retired Master of Silver, Master Deby, was responsible for providing the candelabra brief to Anthony Elson and, on his retirement, he made a gift to the Inn of four smaller candlesticks to furnish the lower tables in Hall.

These sticks measure 15¼ inches high against the candelabra of 30¼ inches. Their design still features the four supporting columns, but here the pair of demi Pegasus issue from the above the trumpet-shaped bases.

This group of silver is an exceptional example of contemporary candle wear and should bring pleasure and light to diners now and to generations in the future.

Richard Parsons Silversmith and advisor to the Inner Temple

Photo: Richard Valencia

A one-off replica of a Wiltshire country house in 18-carat gold. This specially commissioned family treasure is unique and is cleverly designed to take apart and to become eighteen individual pieces of jewellery for three generations of that family.

4 The Square, Ramsbury, Marlborough, Wiltshire SN8 2PE Telephone: 01672 520428 www.peterpage.co.uk info@peterpage.co.uk

132

INNER TEMPLE

Tımeline

by Celia Pilkington, the Archivist

500 YEARS AGO

1513

A recurrence of the plague caused the Inn to be closed.

Above: A Tudor plague doctor

400 YEARS AGO

1613

Uncertainties over the occupancy of chambers are revealed by an order at Parliament held on 27 April 1613.

Anthony Diott was forbidden commons on the grounds that he had sub let his chamber to a butcher during Lent. The butcher used the chamber as a shop and sold meat from it for two or three days a week. Anthony Diott was presumably resident in the meaty chamber for the rest of the time.

At the following Parliament, attempts were made to redress the issue of chambers being traded and sub-let by residents for large sums of money. The enormously expensive masque, put on by the members of the Inn at Whitehall in celebration of the marriage of James I’s daughter the previous year, had led to the Inn accruing large debts. Parliament decided that in future, all admittances to chambers should be agreed by the Parliament and not the Treasurer alone.

For this service, a sum would be paid by all those admitted to chambers.

The total payable would depend upon the quality and size of chamber.

Revenue was thereby raised to pay for the Inn’s jollities.

Above: Butchers

300 YEARS AGO

1713

In October, William Shirley, the future longest serving Governor of Massachusetts, was admitted to the Inner Temple.

Following his Call to the Bar in 1720, he lost much of his wealth in the South Sea Bubble. Having emigrated to America to attempt to recoup his fortune, he was appointed the king’s only Advocate General. In 1741, he became Governor of Massachusetts. Amongst his many achievements, he managed to eliminate competition between banks and to restore a sound currency. He also strengthened the colony’s defences.

When Britain declared war on France in 1740, he had urged the Government to seize the fortress of Louisburg on Cape Breton Island. When the war ended in 1748, Shirley was asked to draw the boundary between English and French spheres of influence in Canada. He was appointed major general when the war broke out again between England and France in 1756. In 1757, his poor military record led to his being stripped of his duties. He was nearly court-martialled, but the charges were dropped due to a lack of evidence. In 1758, he became Governor of the Bahamas, where he spent the remainder of his life working to suppress smuggling, improve education and bolster the island’s defences. He relinquished the office to his son in 1767, and was buried on 1 April 1771 beside the bodies of his first wife and daughter.

Above: William Shirley

TIMELINE INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

200 YEARS AGO

1813

Henry Crabb Robinson, diarist, was Called to the Bar of the Inner Temple on 8 May. In his first substantial case that year, he defended a man accused of poisoning his wife by arguing that his client’s abnormal looks invariably attracted suspicion. He won the case. His sole aim was to secure an annual income of £500. Having done so, he retired to enjoy “a gentlemanly independence”. His diaries fill 33 volumes and contain many reminiscences of time spent with the Wordsworths in the Lake District. He toured with Wordsworth through Scotland, Wales and Switzerland.

Wordsworth’s poetic memorials contain a verse dedicated to Crabb, beginning “Companion! by whose buoyant spirit cheered”. He also counted Blake and Coleridge amongst his many friends.

He lived to the age of 91, holding his famous breakfast parties until his death in 1867. He is buried in Highgate Cemetery.

His many surviving quotations include the following: Above: Henry Crabb Robinson

100 YEARS AGO

“What is often called indolence is in fact the unconscious consciousness of incapacity.”

1913

This was a restful year before the turmoil of the First World War. Amongst the lists of those who were to serve in the trenches appears the name of Walter Monckton, who was admitted in 1913. He was to become a close friend and adviser to Edward VIII. His life as a politician and lawyer is mainly remembered for his involvement in the abdication crisis. The future king had met Walter Monkton at Oxford University and turned to him for help when the crisis began. Monckton suspended his legal work and was at the King’s side at Fort Belvedere, and acted as a go-between for the King and the Prime Minister, Baldwin.

He negotiated with the future king, George VI, for a financial settlement, and he begged for the Windsors to receive a royal title after the abdication.

He was also responsible for the abdication message broadcast on 11 December from Windsor Castle. His tact was so great that he managed to remain on friendly terms with both factions during and after the crisis. Throughout his life, he remained in contact with Wallis and Edward. He always greeted Wallis with a deep bow, even though she bore no royal title. He observed of his exaggerated courtesy that “it does no harm and it makes the little man so happy”. He went on to become Director General of the censorship bureau in the Ministry of Information. He was later an MP and a Minister of Labour and National Service under Churchill’s post war government.

Celia Pilkington Above: Walter Monkton

133

134

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

Extradition, Deportation and Human Rights Extracts from a lecture

by Master Fitzgerald

EXTRADITION, DEPORTATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

M

y purpose in giving this lecture is two-fold: first, to defend extradition law from the charge of being boring; second, to defend the Human Rights Act, the European Convention, and the judges who apply both.

On ‘boringness’: at a talk to the Inner Temple last summer, Lord Justice Kerr reflected that extradition law has the infinite capacity to bore. He was referring to the fact that it has tended to get bogged down in a quagmire of technicalities. But once extradition law starts to touch on human rights, it raises issues that are both legally and morally profound, with sometimes far-reaching political implications.

One example is the Pinochet Case, which raised the question of universal jurisdiction over the crime of torture. On this issue, the judgment of the House of Lords has become an inspiration and a source of law throughout the world.

More recently, in Assange v Sweden, the legal issue was itself interesting, whether a prosecuting authority in Sweden was a judicial authority for the purposes of the Extradition Act and the European framework. But behind that question were even more controversial issues: whether there was an ulterior motive to the Swedish extradition request and whether there was a risk of onward extradition to the United States, and an unfair trial there. It then all culminated in high drama with Julian Assange taking refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy.

In McKinnon v United States, the Home Secretary’s decision to refuse extradition was on the grounds of a high risk of suicide. In itself, that raises difficult legal and moral points on the scope of article 3 protection in cases where the requested person is threatening suicide if they are returned.

the basis of evidence obtained from his co-defendants by torture.

The European Court made two findings. First, that, although Jordan is a regime that practises torture, there is no real risk of torture on Abu Qatada’s return there. Secondly, however, that his extradition would violate article 6 because he would face a trial there that would constitute what was described as a “flagrant denial of justice”.

The wider saga involves the Government’s continuing efforts to seek the deportation of terror suspects to regimes that regularly practise torture, and to do so on the basis of governmental assurances that those individuals will not be tortured on return. There are those who ask: “Why can’t we send these ideologues of hatred packing?” and “Who cares if they go back to torture in Syria, or Libya, or Jordan?” The short answer because torture is absolutely wrong and we cannot, as a country, acquiesce in it, promote it or legitimise it. That is something we committed ourselves to by signing article 3 of the UN Convention Against Torture.

The debate started with the European Court decision in Chahal v United Kingdom that article 3 of the European Convention prevented extradition to India, where there was a real risk of torture. Some politicians objected to the affirmation that the protection was absolute, even when the person in question was found to present a risk to national security. But that principle is not just some exotic creation of the European judges. Even if we pull out of the European Convention, we have signed up to the exact same principle in article 3 of the UN Convention Against Torture.

“I would suggest that the test the European Court has developed is both reasonable and moderate. It recognises that we cannot expect complete uniformity of standards of justice in the world and, therefore, it is a very, very high test indeed.”

The McKinnon case is striking also for the irony that the Home Secretary had to rely on the much-maligned Human Rights Act and article 3 of the European Convention to justify her decision. Moreover, she was applauded for doing so by the Daily Mail and The Daily Telegraph, despite their campaigns to stop what they call the “human rights farce”.

Behind that decision were lurking even more profound background issues, such as whether the United States claims an exorbitant jurisdiction over foreign nationals and whether we should protect our own citizens by introducing a forum conveniens bar to extradition. The Government, commendably, has now undertaken to do so.

Each of these cases would justify a lecture in itself, but I want to focus on the case of Abu Qatada. I want to defend the judgments of the European Court and our judges against, what I regard as, unjust criticisms.

Mr Qatada is not wanted here. He is alleged to be a serious threat to national security. As a result, he has already been detained for most of the last nine years, awaiting deportation, without any trial. But Abu Qatada is wanted in Jordan; he is wanted there for a retrial for two offences of terrorist conspiracy, for which he has been convicted in absentia. There is every likelihood that his retrial would be on

After 9/11, the Labour Government decided to introduce the power to detain, indefinitely, the people it said it could not prosecute, but could not deport. The House of Lords held that indefinite detention without trial was anathema, that the case for derogation from article 5 rights not to be detained arbitrarily had not been met, and that the proposed steps were not proportionate. I would suggest they were right; detention without trial is the first step to tyranny.

After the July bombings in 2005, the then Prime Minister, Mr Blair, revisited the issue of deportation of foreign terror suspects. He said the rules of the game had changed. He said it was fine to deport to regimes such as Egypt, Libya and Algeria, provided those regimes promised not to torture those sent back. The Foreign Office then negotiated memoranda of understanding with such various torture regimes.

There are three flaws in accepting non-torture assurances from torture regimes. First, there is the objection in principle.

If regimes systematically breach the UN Convention banning the torture, how can we be sure that they will respect bilateral agreements with us not to torture particular individuals? Then, there is the problem of monitoring compliance. Where torture is pervasive, it is almost always clandestine and denied. Finally, if we obtain assurances, what

135

136

INNER TEMPLE LECTURE SERIES

power do we have to enforce them once those people have been deported and we have no jurisdiction over them?

The European Court has recognised the danger of such reliance, most recently in Ismoilov and others v Russia, a case involving extradition to Uzbekistan. The European Court said: “Given that the practice of torture in Uzbekistan was described by reputable international experts as systematic, the assurances received from the Uzbek authorities could not be regarded as offering a reliable guarantee against the risk of ill-treatment.”

Against that background, the Abu Qatada Case is a setback, because the court accepted the assurances of the Jordanian regime that he would not be tortured. The European Court relied on the strong bilateral relations between our country and Jordan. It relied on the specificity and detail of the memorandum of understanding. It said that Mr Qatada was so high profile that there would be an international outcry if he were tortured. It confirmed that the assurances could be efficacious to reduce article 3 risks to an acceptable level. That put an end to what appeared to be the emerging principle in Ismoilov.

How could it possibly be said by the Government, or Theresa May, that this was an unbalanced or crazy decision?

If anything, the judgment did not go far enough in the protection of human rights. Yes, the European Court ruled that extradition was inconsistent with article 6, but the court emphasised that the test was a very high one. It cannot just be the trial that will not be fair; what is required is a breach that is so fundamental, it amounts to a nullification or destruction of the very essence of the right guaranteed by article 6. Applying that test, they said that trial on torture evidence was such a violation, and that is because the prohibition on the use of torture evidence is a universal norm.

They said: “More fundamentally, no legal system based upon the rule of law can countenance the admission of evidence – however reliable – which has been obtained by such a barbaric practice as torture. The trial process is a cornerstone of the rule of law. Torture evidence damages irreparably that process; it substitutes force for the rule of law and taints the reputation of any court that admits it. Torture evidence is excluded to protect the integrity of the trial process and, ultimately, the rule of law itself.”

The court further said that the applicant only had to show there was a real risk of the admission of evidence obtained by torture at his forthcoming retrial. However, in this case, the court found it highly probable that cogent and compelling evidence had been obtained by torture and that it was highly probable that it would be admitted.

The Government went back to Jordan to try to get further assurances. The Special Immigration Appeals Commission, which gave extremely careful consideration to the matter, concluded that neither a change in the composition of the court, nor an amendment to the Jordanian constitution, could remove the real risk that the confession evidence would be admitted at trial.

The matter continues, but the principal controversy throughout has been whether the real risk test is sufficiently exacting. I would suggest that the test the European Court has developed is both reasonable and moderate. It recognises that we cannot expect complete uniformity of standards of justice in the world and, therefore, it is a very, very high test indeed. It has been sparingly applied by the European Court, which has never refused extradition on article 6 grounds in the past. Our own courts have. For example, in Ahmad and Aswat v United States, the court said that sending someone back to trial under Military Order No1 in Guantanamo would

EXTRADITION, DEPORTATION AND HUMAN RIGHTS INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

be extradition to a flagrant denial of justice. Our courts have refused extradition to Russia and to Rwanda on the same principle. The concept that the European Court has developed, but only applied itself once, has a continuing vigour and application in our own courts.

There remains the problem of impunity: either the person returns to the risk of torture or a flagrantly unfair trial, or they remain here and are not tried.

The solutions we have are: first, the development of the principle of universal jurisdiction, so that people who cannot be extradited can be tried here or in an international court. The second is the development of principles of forum conveniens, so that at least British citizens who escape extradition could still be put on trial here. Those solutions are not panaceas, but they do begin to remove the unwelcome stark choice.

Our courts have upheld certain fundamental principles in the face of political pressure and condemnation, but they have not left our society unprotected. There remains the power to deport with appropriate assurances. There remain

the considerable powers to prosecute in this country. We have the criminal law: Abu Hamza got seven years for incitement to murder and incitement to racial hatred. Then there is a potential to extend universal jurisdiction.

Finally, there are control orders. The Government says that the European Court has left us totally unprotected against these menaces to society, that our courts are “barking cuckoo”. Nonetheless, both the House of Lords and the European Court have upheld control orders. It was the politicians of this Government that got rid of control orders.

So much, then, for the claim that it is the judiciary and the European Convention that leaves society unprotected.

On examination, the case law of the European Court, and of our own courts, under the Human Rights Act, is balanced, reasonable and entirely defensible.

Master Edward Fitzgerald Inner Temple Hall, 18 March 2013

“Our courts have upheld certain fundamental principles in the face of political pressure and condemnation, but they have not left our society unprotected. There remains the power to deport with appropriate assurances.”

137

138

INNER TEMPLE

Inner Temple Golfing Society ����

by Alastair Hodge, Honorary Secretary

A

good walk spoiled? Not a bit of it if you play golf and happen to find yourself in a foursome match in the company of members of the Inner Temple Golfing Society. Indeed, many members consider the golfing element to be of lesser import. Unsurprisingly, good food, good wine and a plentiful supply of Kummel after lunch have been known to significantly improve certain members’ golfing ability!

Neil King QC on the 9th at the Machrie GC

2012 began with members of the society heading to Norfolk for the annual match against Hunstanton Golf Club.

On a cold and windy day, Hunstanton emerged victorious by a margin of 14 points to 6. As always, Master Nick Coleman arranged a fine dinner in the clubhouse and ensured that festivities went on well into the small hours.

The spring meeting took place on Maundy Thursday at Rye Golf Club under the watchful eye of society captain, Oliver Saxby QC (as he now is, and then was not).

GOLF INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014 The late Master Connell

Alastair Hodge (left) and Master Charlton (right)

Clearly unfazed by having won the Sir Ian Percival Salver in 2011, Judge Philip St John Stevens teamed up with Tim Higgonson and duly won again. Notwithstanding a serious hangover, Master Charlton took the honours in the Captain’s Prize. In May, the annual match against the circuit judges was held at New Zealand Golf Club at West Byfleet and the result was a win for the circuit judges.

Many members of the Society travelled to the Royal Cinque Ports Golf Club, Deal, in early June for the Bar Golfing Society’s annual tournament. It was a most splendid week, with Inner Temple’s Alastair Hodge beating Philip Grundy at the 20th hole in what was an epic final. The Society is always pleased when one of its own is victorious in the greatest prize of the golfing year.

July saw the society return to Huntercombe Golf Club on a warm and sunny Sunday. Brilliantly organised by Master Anthony Anderson, this is now the most popular fixture of the year, and competition is severe to obtain a place in the team. Sadly, members of the society (in particular Master Peter Jackson) seemed to concentrate more on the fine food and wine on the day of the match, as the Huntercombe team won by a margin of eight points to four.

Since 1994, the society has had a biennial event in the form of a week’s golfing tour of Scotland. The pattern is now well established, with a match against Blairgowrie Golf Club on the August bank holiday, followed by golf on different courses at another location during the rest of the week.

Notwithstanding that the match was rained off, we were entertained to dinner, dancing and singing by Master Macpherson and some of his fellow Blairgowrie members.

Society members then played at Crieff Golf Club (where Master Critchlow displayed some seriously dangerous buggy driving) and then headed to the Machrie Golf Club on Islay for two days of sheer golfing delight. A trip to the Bruichladdich distillery, brilliantly organised by Master Pickering, was the highlight of the trip.

Members then returned to the mainland and headed south to Machrihanish Golf Club for a match against the Club. Again, the rain played its part, but it was nonetheless a superb day.

The autumn meeting of the society was held at Woking Golf Club in September. The Profumo Cup was won by Neil King QC and yours truly won the Scratch Cup. Masters Charlton and Connell emerged victorious in the Autumn Foursomes.

The big event of the year for the golfing societies of all the Inns of Court is the Scrutton Cup. The Inner Temple Golfing Society has had an outstanding record in this competition in recent years. In the morning, a close match against Gray’s Inn saw the team progress to play against Lincoln’s Inn in the afternoon. After a nail-biting finish, Inner Temple emerged victorious by a margin of 4 to 3. Members of the winning team: Master Christie, Master Coleman, Master Akenhead, Master Charlton, Master Connell, Patrick McMorrow, Judge Jeremy Carey, Judge Philip St John Stevens, Oliver Saxby QC, Mark Shaw QC, Jonathan Waite QC, Jill Frances, Neil King QC and yours truly. Thanks must also go to the team psychologist, Graham Rose.

For a very long period, the late Master Robert Speed organised a match between the Inner Temple Bench and Bar at Huntercombe Golf Club. This year, the match took place at the end of September and saw a comfortable win for the Bar. The final event of the year saw the society return to New Zealand Golf Club for the Honorary Secretary’s Turkey Trot.

On a glorious December morning, Judge Jeremy Carey and Patrick McMorrow were the main event and, as has become customary, members enjoyed a fine Christmas luncheon and excellent hospitality in the clubhouse afterwards. Special mention must also go to Master Forrester, who won the Giles Forrester Look-a-Like Award 2012.

Oliver Saxby QC completed his captain’s year at the end of 2012 and handed over the reins to Jill Frances for 2013.

Finally, on a sad note, the Society recently lost one of its most dear members, Master Connell. He was a fine man, a fine golfer, and he is much missed by us all.

All golfing members of the Inner Temple are both eligible and welcome to take part in the Society’s programme of events. If you are, or might be, interested in joining the ITGS, please do not hesitate to contact Alastair Hodge at hodge@5essexcourt.co.uk.

Alastair Hodge

139

140

INNER TEMPLE

Following a project to index the Executive Committee minutes since 1956, Kate Faulkner recounts some of the challenges and humour unearthed as a result

B

eing the freelancer that I am, the prospect of an on going project that would provide some guaranteed income for a year and a half was irresistible.

Indexing is the kind of work that you either love or hate.

You need to have the right mind for it, otherwise it can drive you mad. Most librarians (sorry, information scientists) do have the right temperament for it and we all appreciate how useful an index is. But not everyone would want to take on 36 volumes of the Honourable Society of the Inner Temple’s Executive Committee minutes (1956–2006).

Quoting for such a big job is also hard. You can roughly calculate how long it will take to go through the volumes the first time round and to type up a draft index, but it is the query and checking stages that are unquantifiable. You can fiddle and double-check things for evermore, or you can stop checking too soon and not find a glaring error. Fortunately, I was lucky that the Inner Temple Archivist was happy for me to take my time with the project and fit it in alongside my other book-indexing work.

I was concerned that having the volumes off-site for two years would be inconvenient for the Inner Temple and that, if they were needed during that time, it would be frustrating for the Archivist. Worse still, if the volumes were not needed in all that time, why pay me to index them? I have had about ten enquiries over the past year, which has proved very beneficial. They took time away from the indexing but gave me insight into how the index would ultimately be used. Some of the answers to the enquiries could be found through the index, but some could not. However, the failures turned out not to be the fault of the index, as the information sought was not included in the minutes anyway.

Information professionals know that even when something is digitised, full text searching is not the same as having a good index, which pulls concepts together, controls terminology and provides cross-references for the reader. A clear example is hereditary titles and allied name changes, which I will discuss later.

The absolute essential in preparing any sort of index is to keep constantly in mind the question of who is going to use it, and what kind of information they will be after. The prime users of this index will be the Archivists and Librarians of the Inner Temple, but also other officers and members. Yet not all enquiries will be generated internally. They may well come from outside; from historians, biographers, genealogists, exmembers of staff and so on.

There are some unique issues dealing with committee minutes. They are already a form of summary, which is very

handy. Each numbered minute is on a particular point, often with a clear subheading. However, what I soon learnt is that what a discussion is originally called in the minutes is not usually what it ends up being known as. In other words, the terminology is inconsistent. In addition, the person taking the minutes (and there will have been several over the years) will not have had a future indexer in mind. For example, in Volume 36 (2006) at every meeting there is a discussion sub headed 2008 Committee. This was the committee organising the 400th anniversary celebrations of when the Inn received its Royal Charter. The best place to put the entry would be Royal Charter, subheading 400th anniversary celebrations, probably with a see cross-reference from 2008 Committee (which of course, being a number would be filed right at the beginning of the index).

I fret about the accuracy of the index. The secretary would not dream of inaccurately spelling the name of a senior QC or Master of the Bench, but there is less care over staff of the Inn. Various porters and kitchen staff have different spellings of surnames and first initials and, of course, there is the perennial problem of women marrying and changing their surnames. It isn’t usually possible to find these ‘normal’ people on the Internet to confirm spellings, so we have to check other Inn documents; their descendants are just as likely as descendants of members to contact the archives to research their family history. We all expect an index to be accurate, and rightly so, but I could only work with information I have in front of me. If it is a simple matter of spelling, all I can do is put down both possibilities in the index so the reader will realise there was an inconsistency – e.g. Smith/Smythe, John.

The Inner Temple Estate

TEARS, DRAMA AND MEETING MINUTES: AN INDEXING EXPERIENCE INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

The Da Vinci Code being filmed in the Church

Master Silsoe in 1966 as Treasurer

However, coping with the changing names of senior members of the Inn is another matter. An individual can start off as Fred Bloggs but then become Fred Bloggs QC, Master Bloggs, the Right Honourable Lord Justice Bloggs, Lord Bloggs of Ely etc. It was not until halfway through the project that I realised that Master Eve and Master Silsoe were the same person, Master Eve became Baron Silsoe in 1976, when his father died and he inherited the title. Once I know this, a simple see also will suffice, but this is an example of something that a person using free text searching would not discover.

I have invented a new verb – ‘who’s who-ing’. Hours are spent using an electronic version of ‘who’s who’ to check spellings and to find the first names of the Masters of the Bench as well as unravelling the sons and grandsons of families of barristers.

In this type of project, the indexer is often far more involved with questions of design and layout than is usually the case. When an indexing job comes from a commercial publisher, one is normally given a style guide or at least some basic parameters and usually there is a maximum length.

The indexer only has to return a Word or rtf file with the index in it and the typesetters do the rest. When undertaking an assignment of this sort, however, you have to consider how the index will be formatted because it affects how the indexing is done.

The addition of any type of subheading does take up time, but a string of page numbers without subheadings is horrible to read and use. I have heard other indexers say that as a rule of thumb, with more than six (some say ten) locators, the string needs to be broken into subheadings. This is a good rule but an added frustration is how often a page locator needs to go under more than one subheading.

What is even more unique about this project is the inclusion of the date with each locator, so entries look like this:

This meant that run-on subheadings and locators would not have been a sensible way forward or it would have looked like this:

Investment Committee/Sub-Committee 1 Nov 2001 29/10,419 6 Apr 2005 35/12,930 annual reports 3/805 11 Nov 1980 10 Nov 1981 4/905 8 Nov 1982 4/1075 14 Oct 2003 33/11,897 Nov 2004 34/12,739 constitution…

Investment Committee/Sub-Committee: 1 Nov 2001, 29/10,419; 6 Apr 2005, 35/12,930; annual reports: 11 Nov 1980, 3/805; 10 Nov 1981, 4/905; 8 Nov 1982, 4/1075; 14 Oct 2003, 33/11,897; Nov 2004, 34/12,739; constitution…

In effect, each date is a set out subheading that provides a chronological context. However, I decided that if an entry has more than ten locators it would be split up further.

Much of this deliberation is geared towards the printed index – bound up to sit comfortably on the shelf alongside the volumes themselves; in future the index may increasingly be used in electronic form.

There are also problems caused by the sheer size of the index. As it grew bigger (currently 395 pages long) I had to begin to use ‘control F’ to navigate through it and had to remember to use more sophisticated searching than is usual in Microsoft Word. I got very frustrated whenever Master Sumption was mentioned because every time I searched for ‘sumpt’ I got the entry for ‘gas consumption’. I later realised Master Sumption is now in the Supreme Court and deserves a little more respect. Searching ‘May’ for Master May brought up every entry for May unless I remembered to search for “May”. Every time I searched for Master Rix and put in ‘rix’ I got Princess Beatrix.

When reading real life minutia of day-to-day activity for months, you can get very attached to the characters. I came to know which person will speak on particular matters or who loves being on committees, who is new and gets the job of being Master of the Car Park. Worryingly, I even get tearful when sometimes they die. Often they forget to tell me! Usually it isn’t mentioned in the minutes, until they’re discussing whether to erect a memorial bench or start up a scholarship fund in their name.

It’s lovely to see how the Inn has taken care of its staff in the past. The committee reports on how someone is doing after an operation, arranges bonuses for people who have worked hard during times of departmental upheaval, and discusses the tax position of the staff Christmas fund.

141

142

INNER TEMPLE

In the 1960s, they even attempted to insure their manuscript cataloguer because it was so hard to find a suitable scholar to undertake the project and they were concerned he might keel over in the middle of the project.

Sometimes there is drama – the use of DNA testing to track down a bicycle thief. Politics – the debate over whether to reinstate the membership of the late Mahatma Ghandi.

There are permissions for people to get married in Temple Church and every now and then there’s a lunch for them all. Thank heavens (pun intended) for The Da Vinci Code (snippets were filmed on the premises), as it paid for new guttering on Temple Church.

I do worry about unwittingly creating bias in an index.

Indexing is surprisingly subjective. All trained information professionals should know what to include but it’s how we do this that can become subjective. This problem is not specific to this project but there is a danger that one is always more likely to index an event or scandal where someone is in trouble, but less likely to index little mentions of “thanks for doing a good job on the so-and-so report, Master Bloggs”.

I am left with the nagging concern (because I am a librarian) that I have indexed every little event with the library (new chairs being purchased, new photocopiers, theft of books) but not so much with the Catering Department.

An extra peculiarity on this project is that I am continuing on from two previous indexes. The original index, developed over time by the archivists, was in a Kalamazoo volume. Then another indexer had indexed the first four volumes before he fell ill. The older index covers topics the archivists needed to look up, so mainly events and decisions. But the more time that passes, the more queries there are about people for biographers and family historians. The human interest angle is now just as relevant.

For example, they had not indexed an entry for when the City of London School requested that it might use the Temple Gardens as a playground at lunchtime for two years in the early 1980s while their new building was being constructed.

This, to me, is fascinating (even though they said no).

The social and historical context is enjoyable. There is actually an entry in the 1960s discussing whether the Inn should employ more female servants, as they are cheaper.

The introduction of photocopiers, computers, CCTV and websites was all documented. The Queen’s Coronation and Jubilees are celebrated. The Inn’s role in supporting local and national charities is heart-warming. The Committee’s desire to maintain the scholarship funds, and to see the right candidates have access to the profession, comes across. The Inn’s role in educating and supporting young barristers is often apparent in the background.

On the other hand, there is a recurring battle to try to prevent the installation of a helipad on the Embankment; discussions over whether to put a tennis court in the gardens; and lots of buying and refurbishing of multi-million-pound properties. The relations with other Inns and institutions are also fascinating.

I have thoroughly enjoyed this project but will be equally pleased to see it finished and in use. I would like to thank the Squire Law Library staff for allowing me to take over two shelves and a desk over the past 18 months and for making me feel welcome. Finally, it is not often after a year and a half that you realise you’ve been indexing one of the chaps who has been bustling in and out of the library office looking for the day’s copy of The Times.

Kate Faulkner

A unique venue in the heart of the City

cxztáâá is now available for exclusive weekend private hire.

For more information about hiring the Pegasus bar for your event contact: 020 7797 8234 Catering@innertemple.org.uk

MASTER HUGH SMITH INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013-2014

Master Hugh Smith S

ir Andrew Hugh Smith, who died aged 81, was chairman of the London Stock Exchange during the crucial phase that followed the ‘Big Bang’ reform of its membership.

A handsome, upright man with a strong adherence to the traditional market dictum “my word is my bond”, Andrew Hugh Smith was very much a product of the old City, in which his family had deep roots. But he came to stockbroking after experience at the textile conglomerate Courtaulds and emerged as an effective moderniser, with no fear of change.

He became senior partner of his own firm, Capel-Cure Myers, in 1979 after a period of weak performance and internal strife, but led it back to profitability by focusing its business in niches where it could prosper.

When the impending Big Bang reforms permitted banks to acquire brokers in 1984 but abolished fixed commissions, he maintained a steady ship while negotiating the sale of Capel-Cure Myers for a substantial price to Grindlays, which was itself almost immediately taken over by the Australia & New Zealand Banking Group. The broking business was merged into ANZ Merchant Bank, of which Hugh Smith became deputy chairman.

He joined the council of the Stock Exchange in 1980, and was chairman from 1988. Though its modus operandi had changed radically over the preceding four years, neither its governance nor its technology had kept up; Hugh Smith saw through the replacement of the Exchange’s council by a more effective board structure. He also rationalised the range of services offered, and did his best to tackle a long–running failure to develop a workable electronic settlements system.

The Taurus settlements project, first mooted in 1981, was scrapped in 1993 at a cost of £400 million, leading to the resignation of the Exchange’s chief executive. Hugh Smith temporarily took on that role as well as the chairmanship, and went on to launch a complete overhaul of trading and information systems, having persuaded his board not to opt for the easier option of buying a package which would have effectively given control in London to the US Nasdaq exchange.

Hugh Smith retired from the chair in 1994, but the technology project he initiated (including a new settlements system called Crest) was delivered on time and under budget two years later. He did not escape criticism over the Taurus debacle, but according to one market historian he was “widely acknowledged to have done an excellent job of holding the bruised organisation together”.

Andrew Colin Hugh Smith was born on 6 September 1931. His father and grandfather were naval officers, but the Smiths were also a prolific financial dynasty. Their forebear Thomas Smith founded a bank in Nottingham in the 1650s, one of the earliest in England, which eventually came to London and became part of NatWest. Andrew’s kinsmen included Hugh Colin Smith, a late 19th Century Governor of the Bank of England whose son Vivian Hugh Smith became the 1st Lord Bicester, chairman of the merchant bank Morgan Grenfell.

Andrew was educated at Gilling and Ampleforth, with an interlude during the war years at a tiny school close to Ardtornish, the family’s West Highlands estate. For National Service he was commissioned in the Royal Horse Guards in 1950 and posted to Germany, before going up to Trinity College, Cambridge, to read History and Law. At his father’s urging he was then Called to the Bar in Inner Temple and practised for four years, until he made a career change to join Courtaulds, the textile group, in 1960.

There he became one of a team of bright young men working for the chairman Frank (later Lord) Kearton, a corporate autocrat with a fearsome reputation. More enjoyably, Hugh Smith was for a time assigned to the Gossard lingerie subsidiary, which was engaged in developing the Wonderbra. He was then headhunted into the stockbroking firm of Capel-Cure Carden in 1968, becoming a partner two years later and playing a key role in its transformation by multiple mergers after the 1973-74 market crash into CapelCure Myers.

In later years, Hugh Smith was chairman of the gunmakers Holland & Holland; of the human resources consultancy Penna and the European advisory board of Accenture, formerly Andersen Consulting; and a director of a number of venture capital businesses. He was also chairman of Brooks’s Club in St James’s, where his calmness in dealing with agitated members was much admired.

In the charitable sphere, he was a vice-chairman of Guide Dogs for the Blind and treasurer of the Malcolm Sargent Cancer Fund for Children.

He was knighted in 1992. Andrew Hugh Smith was a keen gardener, especially proud of his Buckinghamshire lawns, but was happiest of all with a gun in his hands and a golden retriever at his side. At school he was said to have brought down a pheasant with a pencil propelled by a blank from a Cadet Corps Lee Enfield rifle; in later years he shot pheasant and partridge in the Scottish borders, and was a skilled stalker at Ardtornish, a beautiful 35,000 acre wilderness on the Morvern peninsula, which his great uncle Owen Hugh Smith had acquired in 1930.

Idyllic childhood years there gave Andrew a lifelong love of the Ardtornish landscape, facing the Sound of Mull. Besides annual stalking and fishing holidays, he was a frequent visitor as chairman of the Ardtornish Estate Company, through which he worked alongside his cousins, the Raven family, to create a successful community enterprise out of what had once been purely a sporting estate.

His own views on land management were traditional, but as ever he saw the merits of modernisation, and was quietly incisive in nurturing consensus. In particular he led the development of schemes to exploit the estate’s hydroelectric generating potential, and was able to see them in operation only ten days before his death.

He married, in 1964, Venetia Flower, who survives him with their two sons.

Courtesy of the Telegraph Group Ltd

143

144

INNER TEMPLE

Malaysia Inner Temple Alumni Association Report for Inner Temple 2013–2014 Yearbook

L–R: Chief Justice of Malaysia and His Excellency Simon Featherstone with their wives.

T

Past President Dato’ R R Sethu with the Sub-Treasurer and Master Treasurer, Jonathan Hirst QC

he Malaysia Inner Temple Alumni Association (MITAA) enjoyed another active year, thanks to the dedication and enthusiasm of its members in Malaysia and the support of the Inner Temple, London. MITAA is pleased to report on some of the activities undertaken in the past year.

Visit to Malaysia

Public lecture

MITAA was honoured to receive Master Treasurer, Jonathan Hirst QC, his wife, Mrs Fiona Hirst, their son, Charles and the Sub-Treasurer, Patrick Maddams, when they visited Kuala Lumpur in August 2012. Whilst in Kuala Lumpur, Master Hirst visited the Kuala Lumpur Regional Arbitration Centre, the Malaysian Bar Council, and met with law students and lecturers at Advance Tertiary College. He also paid a visit to the Chief Justice of Malaysia, Tun Arifin Bin Zakaria, at the Palace of Justice, Putrajaya, and, from what we gather, thoroughly enjoyed Malaysia’s culture and cuisine.

The Treasurer delivered a lecture entitled ‘Fraud by Bankers; Fraud on Bankers’ at the Royal Lake Club on 29 August 2012. The lecture was very well received and was attended by members of MITAA and representatives of financial institutions.

Annual Dinner MITAA’s annual dinner was held at the Hilton Hotel, Kuala Lumpur, on 30 August 2012. Approximately 70 members of MITAA, the Malaysian Bar and the Malaysian judiciary were in attendance. The event was enhanced by the presence of the Treasurer and

his family, and the Sub-Treasurer. Both the Treasurer and MITAA President for the year 2012 – 2013, Dato’ R R Sethu, gave interesting and engaging speeches.

A talented string quartet kept the guests entertained with classical tunes.

Guests were also treated to a special performance by four female members of MITAA, known as ‘Temple Angels’, who sang a number of popular tunes, much to the delight of the crowd.

MALAYSIA INNER TEMPLE ALUMNI ASSOCIATION INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

7th Annual General Meeting of �����

Dining Night at Taylor’s Law School

MITAA’s 7th AGM was held on 28 March 2013 at the Royal Selangor Club, Kuala Lumpur. MITAA is pleased to announce the office bearers elected for the year 2013 – 2014:

On 6 June 2013, MITAA and Taylor’s Law School jointly hosted a mock dining night for the students of Taylor’s Law School. The objective of the event was to enable the students to experience the traditions and culture at the Inner Temple.

The dinner was held at the Thyme & Tarragon, one of the restaurants at Taylor’s University’s scenic lakeside campus. Once the students were seated, a roll-call of MITAA members in order of seniority was conducted as the MITAA members made their way into the dining hall. Welcome speeches by Mr Harmahinder Singh, dean of Taylor’s Law School, and Tan Sri James Foong Cheng Yuen MITAA President for the year 2013/14, followed. In the spirit of a dining night at the Inner Temple, grace was recited and, thereafter, everyone tucked into an excellent four course dinner, courtesy of students of Taylor’s University School of Hospitality, Tourism and Culinary Arts.

President: Tan Sri James Foong Cheng Yuen Vice-President: Ms Faizah Jamaludin Secretary: Ms Ezane Chong Assistant Secretary: Ms Ong Doen Xian Treasurer: Mr Oommen Koshy Committee Members: Mr Ariff Rozhan Mr Oommen Kurien Datuk N Chandran Ms Serene Ong Mr Sin Cheang Chuan

MITAA members attending this function enlightened students on their experience at the Inner Temple and as members of the legal profession. A brief talk was also delivered by MITAA member Ms Serene Ong on some of the challenges and humorous experiences that she faced in her career. All in all, it was truly an enjoyable evening, made worthwhile by meeting so many bright and inquisitive young people buzzing with excitement at the prospect of a legal career ahead of them.

Publication of the Pegasus MITAA continued to publish its newsletter The Pegasus during the year of 2012–2013.

MITAA looks forward to another year of social and educational activities and good fellowship, and eagerly awaits the visit of the Treasurer, Simon Thorley QC, and the Sub-Treasurer to Malaysia in August 2013.

Ezane Chong and Ong Doen Xian Honorary Secretary and Assistant Honorary Secretary Malaysia Inner Temple Alumni Association

145

146

INNER TEMPLE

Temple Church: Michaelmas Term October 2013

Sunday 6 October, 11.15am

Choral Mattins

– First Choral Service of the Legal Year Followed by a Term Lunch in Middle Temple Hall.

Thursday 17 October, 5.45pm

Choral Evensong – for St Luke’s Day

Followed by drinks in the Round and Benchers’ Night.

Monday 9 December, 7.30pm

Tuesday 24 December, 11.15pm

Temple Church Choir Christmas Concert at The Cadogan Hall

Midnight Choral Communion

Roger Sayer, Director. Greg Morris, Organ. Sally Pryce, Harp.

Programme includes Britten’s Ceremony of Carols. For booking and further information: www.cadoganhall.com/ choral, tel: 020 7730 4500.

Wednesday 11 December, 6.00pm

Choral Evensong

Temple Church Christmas Carol Service

– for All Saints’ Day

Followed by drinks in the Round.

Followed by drinks in the Round.

Sunday 15 December, 11.15am

Thursday 31 October, 5.45pm

November 2013

Sunday 10 November, 10.50am

Choral Mattins

– Remembrance Sunday

Preacher: Field Marshal the Lord Guthrie of Graigiebank GCB, LVO, OBE, DL.

Temple Church Christmas Carol Service (Ticketed service)

Followed by Christmas lunch in Hall (to be booked with your own in). NB For carol service tickets please contact Catherine de Satgé, catherine@ templechurch.com, 020 7353 8559.

Followed by a Term lunch in Inner Temple Hall.

3.00pm

Wednesday 20 November, 7.00pm

Your children and grandchildren are welcome to come and play a part.

For further information please contact Liz Clarke, liz@templechurch.com, 020 7427 5650

Concert: The Temple Singers with Choristers from The Temple Church Choir Roger Sayer, Director.

Greg Morris, Organ.

Programme includes Britten’s St Nicholas Cantata. For further information and booking visit: www.templemusic.org.

December 2013

Monday 2 December, 6.00pm

Advent Carol Service Followed by drinks in the Round.

Thursday 5 December, 12.00 noon – 8.00pm

Temple Church Christmas Fair

Nativity Play

Monday 16 Dec ember – Friday 20 December, 7.30pm

Temple Winter Festival BBC Concert Series

For further information and booking visit: www.templechurch.com (Booking from 9th September 2013) Thursday 19 December, 7.30pm

Temple Winter Festival BBC Concert Series: The Temple Church Choir Roger Sayer, Director.

Greg Morris, Organ.

Programme includes Vivaldi’s Gloria.

For further information and booking visit: www.templechurch.com(Booking from For further information contact Liz Clarke, 9th September 2013).

020 7427 5650, liz@templechurch.com – Middle Temple Hall and Bench Apartments

– Christmas Eve

Wednesday 25 December, 11.15am

Choral Mattins – Christmas Day January 2014

Sun 12 January, 11.15am

Choral Mattins

– First Choral Service of the Year Mon 3 February, 5.45pm

Choral Evensong – For Candlemas

Wed 5 March, 5.45pm

Choral Evensong – Ash Wednesday

Sun 13 April – Sun 20 April

From Palm Sunday to Easter:

Temple Church Services and Music Sun 4 May, 11.15am

Easter Carol Service Wed 11 June, 5.45pm

Choral Evensong

– To Celebrate the Inns’ Amity Sun 27 July, 11.15am

Service of Baptism, Confirmation and Choral Communion President and Preacher: The Bishop of London

WEDDINGS AT THE TEMPLE CHURCH INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Congratulations

Petre Norton and Camilla ter Haar

Jonathan Tritton and Zoe Howard

James Luke and Rachel Davies

Simon Stevens and Kate Peddie

147

148

INNER TEMPLE CELEBRATE THE LIFE

Rod Cunliffe

by Master Davidson

T

his wonderful photograph of Rod captures perfectly the infectious qualities of interest, intelligence, modesty, delight and youthfulness, which those who knew him knew to be there always.

Rod was someone who truly loved the world and all that is good in it; both natural and man-made. He was by birth and in essence a country man, yet as one who understood, loved, cherished and renewed outstanding buildings in the centre of one of the world’s largest cities, he delighted in being able to make a long lasting contribution. He loved beauty wherever it was. He also knew how to make the most of an existing building.

Each year in the Hall, the Reader’s coat of arms is added to the hundreds already there. Each panel has room for 20 of those shields. For 19 years, almost the period it takes to fill a complete panel, there was just one surveyor to the Inn, whose task it was to tackle the great challenges of a tired estate. Those challenges had to be met in an era when the Inn’s finances also needed to be revived. The challenges were enhanced by the fact that barristers are often not easy to deal with. He engaged across the table with a Finance Committee whose duty it was to be sceptical, occasions which his self-effacing character must have made very difficult for him. Sometimes he encountered, frankly, testy tenants, whose opposition on occasion prevented what would have been very beneficial projects. What he delivered was both sound and elegant. When a building was revitalised, so were its tenants, who were often surprised and delighted by the results.

On 15th February 2013, the Estates Department was empty and the Inn short staffed, as many from the Inn, past and present, journeyed to Hay-on-Wye for his funeral. We knew that Rod was a very private person, but we learned more about him from the exceptionally moving address given by his sons, Ian and Alex. In particular, one got a vivid picture of him in childhood, of a child being the father of the man. A few words about trains and nature gave me at once the sense of the person one can see in the photograph. Extraordinarily observant, he must have had from the start an inquisitive mind which wanted to understand everything he saw, how it worked, how it looked and how it felt if it were a living creature. He had an instinct for beauty, both of what was seen and of mind, and an appreciation and love of what was good. With those qualities, he consistently made the best of himself and was accomplished in all he did. Knowing how little of himself he revealed in the Inn, it is perhaps no surprise to learn that he had been a chorister at St John’s, Cambridge, and that for a quarter of a century, he was organist in one of England’s most beautiful villages, Bourton-on-the-Hill. Furthermore, we learned that in retirement he had taken up his cello again, that he had a flock of a hundred sheep, several horses and an array of cats and dogs to care for – and that he still found time for sailing.

We learned with admiration of his interests, about which we may have known the existence but not the depth. It is possible to underestimate the depth of what he did here.

About ten years ago, Master Jonathan Hirst said to me simply, on a brilliantly sunny day when our paths crossed in Church Court, the cleaned stone almost shining against the vivid blue sky, “Nick, isn’t it amazing how the Inn’s buildings have been transformed in our time here?” That was Rod’s great and successful work; transformation, inside and out. It was achieved with patience and humour. We laughed once over the

vexed issue of the cost of the external lifts which are vital for wheelchair users. My chambers in Lincoln’s Inn were, indeed are, anything but graced with an ugly utilitarian contraption which should not be in one of London’s finest squares. The lifts at Inner Temple are elegant, but the elegance had a substantial price tag which we needed to justify. We laughed when I called him to say that the great Bill Parker should hasten round to Lincoln’s Inn with his camera, as an unusually large quantity of litter had collected on our lift and it was a good opportunity to get a photograph to show how unsightly the wretched thing could look. Fortunately, the chairman of the Finance Committee understood the joke.

Testaments to a person’s ability come in many ways, some of them silent. It is often telling of a senior person how more junior staff who work for him turn out. Neil Coe was Rod’s Deputy. Having worked here with Rod, Neil was recruited to be Director of Building and Estates for that most fabulous and precious of sites, the Old Royal Naval College at Greenwich.

Rod was passionate about traditional apprenticeships, even while they were unfashionable. He knew that they enabled craftsmen to become truly skilled, to be a source of knowledgeable and reliable workers for the Inn, and to export his high standards elsewhere to real public benefit when, as must occasionally happen, there was no vacancy for the craftsman when he emerged from the apprenticeship.

He had the trust of his staff because they recognised that he understood their work and could turn his hand to much of it himself. And what fun, and cultured fun, he was. He would never have called someone an oaf, but he would have been delighted had I had the chance to tell him of a word I came across two or three weeks after his death. I can imagine him saying with a twinkle in his eye to a young man who had had a careless day, “Come on, you don’t want me to call you a slubberdegullion, do you?”

What greater compliment could there be than that paid to him by Nick Paladina, who had so often sat opposite and quizzed him at Finance Committee meetings, trying to drive expenditure down? In his new role at Oxford, our former Collector found himself needing a shrewd surveyor. Of course that city’s buildings mean that it has many surveyors within its boundaries and neither London nor Birmingham, both filled with surveyors, is far away. Hay-on-Wye is far away, but Nick knew that there was where to turn for the best, and Rod answered the call.

He himself was the epitome of loyalty. The job grew bigger and bigger; he wasn’t just, if just is the word, seeing to the condition of the buildings, he was running a property company, changing the pattern of rentals, changing the type of leases, undertaking redevelopments in the teeth of English Heritage and then facing the massive demands of Serjeants’ Inn. Everyone who knew him will agree with me that to be valued

by Rod was a true compliment. I speak for many when I say that my life was enriched by knowing him.

I end with the words of his wife, Amanda, in a letter to me: “May you remember Rod in the Inn, and may his legacy live on in the buildings he loved and was proud to be custodian of for a brief moment in time.”

We will and it will.

Master Davidson

OUTSTANDING ELEGANCE THAT’S IN TUNE WITH YOUR PERSONAL STYLE For information on Steinway & Sons pianos or to arrange a private appointment to visit our London showroom, please call 0207 487 3391 or email info@steinway.co.uk

www.steinwayhall.co.uk Steinway & Sons, Steinway Hall, 44 Marylebone Lane, London W1U 2DB

150

INNER TEMPLE

New Benchers

Tim Lord ��

Brick Court Chambers

Michael Burrows ��

Mark George ��

Garden Court North

Jonathan Laidlaw �� 2 Hare Court

Rory Phillips ��

No� Chambers

3 Verulam Buildings

Sarah Clarke

Serjeants’ Inn Chambers

Dr Vanessa Davies Bar Standards Board

Richard Heaton ��

Permanent Secretary and First Parliamentary Counsel

NEW BENCHERS INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Daniel Toledano ��

Martin Griffiths ��

Adam Hiddleston

Richard Benson ��

Adam Constable ��

The Rt Hon Lord Menzies

His Honour Judge Roger Tomas ��

The Chief Justice of Bhutan

Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis Chief Rabbi Designate

One Essex Court

Cornwall Street Chambers

Essex Court Chambers

Keating Chambers

3 PB Barristers

Senator of the College of Justice in Scotland

151

152

INNER TEMPLE

Masters of the Bench In Seniority Order (as of 31 July 2013)

Treasurer Simon Thorley Esq ��

B

Royal Benchers HRH The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh �� �� �� ���

R

HRH The Princess Royal

R

Reader The Rt Hon Lord Justice Tomlinson

J

Masters of the Bench (ex Treasurers) His Honour E F Monier-Williams S

William Glover Esq ��

U

Sir Edward Cazalet

S

The Rt Hon Sir Roy Beldam

S

The Rt Hon Sir Mathew Thorpe

S

Sir Oliver Popplewell

O

H

Professor Francis Reynolds ��� ��� ��

The Rt Hon the Lord Armstrong of Ilminster ��� ���

H

H

Sir Michael Morland

O

The Honourable Justice Antonin Scalia

H

Ian Hunter Esq ��

B

Sir John Drinkwater ��

S

Michael Worsley Esq ��

U

Sir John Alliott

U

Sir Michael Turner

U

Nigel Inglis-Jones Esq ��

U S

S S

The Rt Hon the Lord Scott of Foscote

Edward Nugee Esq �� ��

S

The Rt Hon Sir Christopher Staughton

The Rt Hon the Lord Kingsdown of Pemberton ��

U

The Rt Hon the Baroness Butler-Sloss S of Marsh Green ���

The Rt Hon The Lord Brittan of Spennithorne ��

S

David Sullivan Esq ��

U

The Rt Hon the Lord Lloyd of Berwick DL

S

Sir Thomas Legg ��� ��

S

Stanley Brodie Esq ��

S

The Rt Hon Sir Swinton Thomas

S

The Rt Hon Sir John Chadwick

O

The Rt Hon Sir Bernard Rix

O

The Rt Hon Sir David Keene

O

Stephen Williamson Esq ��

S

H

Mark Tennant Esq

O

David Barker Esq ��

U

Harvey McGregor Esq ��

B

Sir Richard Curtis

U

Sir Allan Green ��� ��

U

The Rt Hon Sir William Aldous

U

Sir Anthony Hidden

S

Neville Thomas Esq ��

U

The Rt Hon Sir Anthony May

O

The Rt Hon the Lord Richard of Ammanford ��

U

Vivian Robinson Esq ��

B

Anthony Smith Esq ��

U

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Laws

J

Sir Christopher Holland

S

The Rt Hon Lady Justice Hallett ��� J

Sir Edward Evans-Lombe

S

Jonathan Hirst Esq ��

The Rt Hon the Lord Irvine of Lairg

S

Evan Stone Esq ��

S

Her Honour Shirley Anwyl ��

S

B

Masters of the Bench The Rt Hon Sir Robin Dunn ��

U

David Widdicombe Esq ��

U

The Rt Hon the Lord Goff of Chieveley

S

John Willmer Esq ��

S

The Rt Hon the Lord Woolf of Barnes

S

The Rt Hon Sir Brian Neill

S

The Rt Hon Sir Andrew Leggatt

S

His Honour George Dobry ��� ��

U

O

The Rt Hon the Lord Mackay of Clashfern ��

The Rt Hon Sir Stephen Brown ���

S

John Deby Esq ��

U

The Rt Hon the Lord Griffiths ��

O

O

U

S

The Rt Hon Sir Konrad Schiemann

U

Roger Henderson Esq ��

The Hon Sir Charles Morrison ��

Sir Godfray Le Quesne ��

Richard Southwell Esq ��

William Crowther Esq ��

Sir William Macpherson of Cluny ��

Eben Hamilton Esq ��

S

His Honour John Previte ��

U

The Rt Hon the Lord Sainsbury of Preston Candover ��

H

Richard Clegg Esq ��

U

Michael Lyndon-Stanford Esq ��

U

The Rt Hon Sir Jonathan Parker

S

John Beveridge Esq ��

U

His Honour Humphrey LLoyd ��

S

His Honour Anthony Thompson �� S

The Rt Hon Sir Henry Brooke

S

Sir Peter North ��� ��� ��� ��

H

Sir Martin Jacomb

H

Patrick Ground Esq ��

S

David Vaughan Esq ��� ��

B

Professor Sir John Baker ��� ��� �� H The Rt Hon the Lord Hutton of Bresagh

H

David Robson Esq ��

S

His Honour James Wadsworth ��

S

Jules Sher Esq ��

U

Eldred Tabachnik Esq ��

U

The Hon Mr Justice Tugendhat John Crowley Esq �� The Rt Hon Sir Stephen Sedley

J S O

Dame Rosalyn Higgins ��� ��� ��� ��

S

His Honour David Elfer ��

S

Raymond Potter Esq ��

S

Nigel Hamilton Esq ��

S

Sir Sydney Lipworth ��

H

The Rt Hon the Lord Sumption ��� J Leonard Woodley Esq ��

U

Nicholas Wood Esq

B

The Hon Mrs Justice Slade

J

His Honour Sir Lawrence Verney

U

Henry Knorpel Esq �� ��

S

Keith Topley Esq

U

The Rt Rev and Rt Hon the Lord Carey of Clifton

H

Judge Martin Feldman

H

Sir Ivan Lawrence ��

B

James Goudie Esq ��

S

Christopher LockhartMummery Esq ��

B

Edwin Prince Esq

U

Richard Salter Esq ��

B

Sir David Steel

O

MASTERS OF THE BENCH INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Neil Kaplan Esq ��� �� �� ����

S

The Rt Hon Sir William Gage

S

Paul Purnell Esq ��

U

His Honour Jonathan Playford ��

Kevin de Haan Esq ��

B

His Honour Judge Jeffrey Burke ��

J

Ian Glick Esq ��

B

The Rt Hon the Lord Falconer of Thoroton

O

His Honour Judge Havelock-Allan �� J

The Rt Hon Jack Straw ��

O

His Honour Judge Simon Brown ��

J

Chief Justice Yong Pung How

H

Jonathan Acton-Davis Esq ��

B

Judge Richard Posner

H

J

Anthony Temple Esq ��

B

U

Richard Rampton Esq ��

S

Professor Andrew Ashworth ��� ��� ���

A

The Hon Mr Justice Owen

J

Gary Flather Esq ��� ��

S

Christopher Purchas Esq ��

B

Miss Pamela Scriven ��

B

Nicholas Padfield Esq ��

B

S

Sir Thayne Forbes

O

Sir Brian Jenkins ���

H

Murray Pickering Esq ��

B

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Moore-Bick The Baroness Mallalieu �� The Rt Hon Lady Justice Gloster ��� His Honour Judge Cryan ����� ���

J J

Anthony Anderson Esq ��

U

Harry Turcan Esq

S

Gerald Angel Esq

S

The Rt Hon Sir Richard Buxton

S

Professor Sir Royston Goode ��� ��� ��

H

The Rt Hon Viscount Runciman of Doxford ��� ���

H

John Swift Esq ��

U

His Honour James Stewart ��

U

The Rt Hon the Lord Howard of Lympne �� ��

S

His Honour Jeremy Roberts ��

O

Sir David Clarke

O

Sir Neil Butterfield Sir Peter Singer

S O

His Honour Judge Lawson ��

J

The Reverend Roger ter Haar ��

B

Stephen Bickford-Smith Esq

B

Mrs Margaret Bickford-Smith ��

B

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Sullivan

J

Sir David Penry-Davey The Rt Hon the Lord Wilson of Culworth

O J

Sir Andrew Kirkwood

O

Giles Wingate-Saul Esq ��

O

Gerard Elias Esq ��

B

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Beatson ���

J

Anthony Hacking Esq ��

S

Sir Hugh Bennett Dermod O’Brien Esq ��

O S

The Honourable Justice Anthony Kennedy

H

His Honour John Gower

S

The Rt Hon The Lord Toulson

J

Tom Shields Esq ��

O

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Elias

J

Anthony Glass Esq ��

S

Michael Shorrock Esq ��

B

Sir Gordon Langley

O

Sir Christopher Pitchers

S

Nigel Pascoe Esq ��

S

Her Honour Judge Korner ��� ��

J

Oliver Sells Esq ��

B

Kenneth Aylett Esq

B

Andrew Tidbury Esq

B

Sir Timothy Walker

O

Nicholas Merriman Esq ��

O

Robin de Wilde Esq ��

B

Peter Birkett Esq ��

B

Graeme Williams Esq ��

O

Robin Purchas Esq ��

B

Sir Geoffrey Nice ��

B

Sir Frederick Crawford �� �� ���

H

J

His Honour John Adams

S

Sibghatullah Kadri Esq ��

S

Robert Webb Esq �� �����

O

Nicholas Davidson Esq ��

B

Miss Rosamund Horwood-Smart �� O Stuart Brown Esq ��

B

His Honour Judge Everall ��

J

David Pittaway Esq ��

B

His Honour Judge Milford ��

J

Stephen Solley Esq ��

B

Dorian Lovell-Pank Esq ��

B

The Hon Mr Justice Field

J

Sir Hayden Phillips ��� ��

H

His Honour Denis Orde

O

The Rt Hon Sir John MacDermott

H

The Hon Dr Justice Adarsh Anand

H

Sir Jeffery Bowman ���

H

Justice Richard Goldstone

H

His Honour Michael Fysh ��

S

David Friedman Esq ��

B

Nicholas Stewart Esq ��

B

Timothy Raggatt Esq ��

B

The Hon Mrs Justice Cox ���

J J

The Baroness Deech of Cumnor ��� �� �����

O

The Rt Hon Lady Justice Black ���

Professor Sir Ian Kennedy ���

H

The Rt Rev and Rt Hon Lord Habgood of Calverton

H

Sir Richard Gibbs

U

The Rt Hon the Lord Collins of Mapesbury

O

Baroness Clark of Calton ��

O

His Eminence Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor

H

George Staple Esq �� ��

H

The Hon Mr Justice Keith

J

His Honour John Weeks ��

U

Michael Spencer Esq

B

His Honour Judge Denyer ��

J

Victor Temple Esq ��

B

Sir Richard Plender

U

The Hon Mr Justice Akenhead

J

The Rt Hon Sir Anthony Hooper

O

The Hon Mrs Justice Swift

J

Bruce Mauleverer Esq ��

O

Justin Fenwick Esq ��

B

S

Thomas Baxendale Esq

S

His Honour Neil Butter ��� ��

The Rt Hon the Lord Hughes

Michael de Navarro Esq ��

B

Godfrey Carey Esq ��

O

Rex Tedd Esq ��

B

Johnny Veeder Esq ��

B

His Honour Duncan Matheson ��

O

Her Honour Christian Bevington

O

Miss Caroline Willbourne

B

KEY

J

B Barrister Governing Bencher

O Other Governing Bencher

J

H Honorary Bencher

Her Honour Judge Hughes �� Michael Sayers Esq �� The Hon Mr Justice Henriques

U J

Sir Christopher Sumner

O

Martin Bowley Esq ��

O

The Honourable Justice Stephen Breyer

H

Judicial Governing Bencher

S Senior Bencher

L Legal Academic Bencher

U sUpernumerary Bencher

V oVerseas Bencher

153

154

INNER TEMPLE

His Honour Judge Hooper ��

J

Dr Mads Andenas ��� �� ��hil

A

His Honour Judge Davis

J

James Guthrie Esq ��

B

Professor John Spencer ��

A

Sir Raymond Jack

S

J

His Honour David Hodson

S

The Rt Rev and Rt Hon Dr the Lord Williams of Oystermouth

Deputy Senior District Judge Arbuthnot

H

His Honour Judge McGregor-Johnson

Malcolm Bishop Esq

B

His Excellency Judge Kenneth Keith ��� ���

J

Mrs Gay Martin

O

Philip Sapsford Esq ��

B

Dr Pehr Gyllenhammar

H

The Hon Mr Justice Wilkie

J

His Honour Judge Bourne-Arton ��

J

Peter Joyce Esq ��

B

Christopher Nugee Esq ��

B

Christopher Moger Esq ��

B

The Rt Hon Justice Gault �����

H

The Hon Philip Havers ��

B

Professor Dr Jürgen Schwarze

H

His Honour Judge Iain Hughes ��

J

His Honour David Paget ��

O

Tim Charlton Esq ��

B

Her Honour Judge Fisher

J

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Floyd

J

The Hon Mr Justice Openshaw

J J

The Hon Mr Justice Patrick Chan

H

His Honour Judge Critchlow

The Honourable Justice McGrath

H

The Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks of Aldgate

The Rt Hon the Lord Macdonald of River Glaven ��

O

H

The Rt Hon Sir Dennis Byron

V

Terence Coghlan Esq ��

B

Andrew Caldecott Esq ��

B

Jonathan Gaisman Esq ��

B

The Hon Mr Justice Popplewell

J

The Hon Mr Justice Moor

J

Professor Sir Alan Dashwood ���� ��� ��

B

Nigel Pleming Esq ��

B

His Honour Judge Owen Davies ��

J

Charles George Esq ��

B

The Rt Hon the Lord Cullen of Whitekirk ��

H

M Jean-Paul Costa

H

M Luzius Wildhaber

H

Stephen Coward Esq ��

U

Michael Austin-Smith Esq ��

B

His Honour Judge Peter Collier ��

J

Michael Redfern Esq ��

B

Robert Smith Esq ��

B

Andrew Trollope Esq ��

B

Iain Milligan Esq ��

B

Robert Francis Esq ��

B

Miss Elizabeth-Anne Gumbel ��

B

John Marrin Esq ��

B

Richard Drabble Esq ��

B

Gavin Kealey Esq ��

B

His Honour Judge Burrell ��

J

The Hon Mr Justice Flaux

J

Edward Fitzgerald Esq ��� ��

B

His Honour Judge Melbourne Inman ��

J

Dr Nicholas Green ��

B

Sir Stuart Lipton

H

Anthony Porten Esq ��

O

His Honour Judge Nicholas Browne ��

J

His Honour Judge Pegden ��

J

David Wilby Esq ��

B

His Honour Judge Goss ��

J

His Honour Judge Leonard ��

J

Miss Alison Foster ��

B

Roger Stewart Esq ��

B

The Hon Mr Justice Ribeiro

H

Professor Christopher Forsyth

A

Professor John Gardner

A

Alexander Allan Esq

H

Sir Edward Caldwell ��� �� �����

H

Ian Laing Esq ��� ��

H

Sir Ian McKellen �� ���

H

David Spens Esq ��

B

His Honour Judge Ford ��

J

Alastair Hammerton Esq

B

His Honour Thomas Crowther ��

U

Sir David Maddison

O

His Honour Judge Coleman

J

Brigadier Peter Little ���

H

Sir Brian Williamson ���

H

Dr Stephen Cretney

A

The Rt Hon Lord Hamilton

H

The Hon Justice Michael Kirby �� ���

H

Philip Mott Esq �� Thomas Seymour Esq

H

The Hon Mr Justice Wyn Williams

J

The Hon Mr Justice Moylan

J

His Honour Mervyn Roberts

O

Robert Rhodes Esq ��

B

His Honour Judge Tyzack ��

J

Patrick Upward Esq ��

B

David Melville Esq ��

B

Miss Sally Smith ��

B

Graham Hyland Esq ��

B

His Honour Judge Jeremy Richardson ��

J

Nigel Giffin Esq ��

B

Jonathan Swift Esq ��

B

Christopher Brougham Esq ��

B

Nicholas Atkinson Esq ��

B

Miss Susanna FitzGerald ��

B

Orlando Pownall Esq ��

B

The Hon Mr Justice Eder

J

His Honour Judge William Davis ��

J

Richard Lissack Esq ��

B

Abbas Lakha Esq ��

B

Her Honour Frances Kirkham ���

H

The Hon Mrs Justice Eleanor King

J

Michael Soole Esq ��

B

His Honour Judge Grainger

J

Miss Margaret Bowron ��

B

His Honour Judge Seed ��

J

Charles Gibson Esq ��

B

Miss Ingrid Simler ��

B

Stuart Catchpole Esq ��

B

Iain Christie Esq

B

His Honour Giles Forrester

O

His Honour Judge McCreath

J

His Honour Gregory Stone ��

J

B

Patrick O’Connor Esq ��

B

B

James Corbett Esq

B

Sir Nicholas Stadlen

O

His Honour Judge Bayliss ��

J

David Streatfeild-James Esq ��

B

Steven Kay Esq ��

B

The Hon Mr Justice Dingemans

J

David Green Esq �� ��

B

J

Peter Wright Esq ��

B

Miss Deborah Eaton ��

B

The Reverend Robin Griffith-Jones H

Nicholas Lavender Esq ��

B

Adrian Brunner Esq ��

O

His Honour Judge Charles Harris �� J

Nicholas Asprey Esq

B

His Honour Judge Mark Brown

J

Augustus Ullstein Esq ��

B

The Rt Hon Lady Justice Sharp ���

J

John Ross Esq ��

B

Professor Michael Lerego ��

O

The Honourable Tan Sri Dato’ James Foong Cheng Yuen

V

Jeremy Storey Esq ��

B

Guy Beringer Esq ��

H

James Turner Esq ��

B

David Yale Esq ��� ��

A

The Hon Mrs Justice Lang

J

The Baroness James of Holland Park ���

H

Nigel Lithman Esq

B

The Hon Mrs Justice Carr ��� Dr Mary Malecka

The Hon Justice Salihu Moddibo Alfa Belgore

O

V

MASTERS OF THE BENCH INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Her Honour Judge Hildyard ��

J

Andrew Goodman Esq

B

Grahame Aldous Esq ��

B

Guy Fetherstonhaugh Esq ��

B

Matthew Reeve Esq

B

Russell Coleman Esq ��

V

The Most Reverend Vincent Nichols �� ��� ���

H

Her Honour Judge Deborah Taylor

J

Michael Humphries Esq

B

Miss Alison Levitt ��

B

His Honour Judge Oliver-Jones ��

J

His Honour Judge Wide ��

J

Thomas Woodcock Esq ��� �� ���

O

Professor Barry Rider

A

Her Honour Judge May �� Professor Robert Walsh The Honourable Justice Baragwanath ���� ��

J A V

The Hon Mr Justice Peter Jackson

J

Miss Tracy Ayling ��

B

Ian Dove Esq ��

B

Iain Morley Esq ��

B

Dr Colin Ong

V

Miss Helen Davies

B

The Rt Hon Lord Bonomy ���

H

Judge Koen Lenaerts

H

His Majesty The King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck of Bhutan

H

His Honour Judge Wait

J

His Honour Judge Philip Waller ���

J

The Rt Hon Francis Maude ��

O

Michael Pooles Esq ��

B

Martin Spencer Esq ��

B

Miss Patricia Lynch ��

B

Miss Susan Jacklin ��

B

Aftab Jafferjee Esq ��

B

Richard Barraclough Esq ��

B

Peter Village Esq ��

B

Ian Stern Esq ��

B

Miss Raquel Agnello ��

B

Professor the Worshipful Mark Hill ��

B

Ms Patricia Robertson ��

B

Sam Stein Esq ��

B

Professor Nicola Lacey ���

H

Ms Libby Purves ���

H

Judge Paul Mahoney

V

Justice Sundaresh Menon

H

Nigel Aiken Esq �� ��

V

The Most Revd and Rt Hon Justin Welby

H

Richard Benson Esq ��

B

Mark George Esq ��

B

His Honour Judge Roger Thomas �� J

The Baroness Shackleton of Belgravia

B

H

Richard Heaton Esq ��

O

Professor Timothy Endicott

A

Adam Hiddleston Esq

B

Professor Timothy Macklem

A

The Hon Tim Lord ��

B

Professor Julian Webb

A

Daniel Toledano Esq ��

B

Miss Sarah Clarke

B

Peter Blair Esq ��

B

The Hon Sir Peter Caruana ���� �� V

Alistair Schaff Esq ��

B

Dr the Hon Prime Minister Navinchandra Ramgoolam

His Honour Judge Neil Clark

J

Harry Matovu Esq ��

B

V

Michael Payton Esq ��

B

B

J

A H

Martin Griffiths Esq ��

Ms Finola O’Farrell ��

The Hon Mr Justice Cobb

Professor Cheryl Thomas John Griffith-Jones Esq

Rory Phillips Esq ��

B

B

B

H

B

Simon O’Toole Esq

B

Alexander Hall Taylor Esq

The Rt Hon the Baroness Prashar of Runnymede

Miss Julia Dias ��

B

Michael Simon Esq

B

Charles Parsley Esq

Andrew Tait Esq ��

B

H

O

B

Philip Moser Esq ��

B

His Honour Inigo Bing

Paul Bleasdale Esq ��

B

Jonathan Laidlaw Esq ��

J

J

B

Miss Taryn Lee ��

Michael Burrows Esq ��

The Rt Hon Lord Reed

His Honour Judge Tonking

Miss Christina Lambert ��

Adam Constable Esq ��

B

Dr Vanessa Davies

O

The Rt Hon Lord Menzies

H

Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis

H

The Hon Chief Justice Togbye of Bhutan

H

Painting of the Inner Temple Garden by Charlotte Partridge

155

156

INNER TEMPLE

Chairmen of Bench Committees & Sub-Committees 2013 Executive Committee Master Treasurer Master Thorley (Chairman) Finance Sub-Committee Master Roger Stewart (Chairman, Senior Bench Auditor)

Wales & Chester: Master Gerard Elias Master Bishop Master Parsley David Elias (BLC Rep)

Investment Sub-Committee Master Tugendhat (Chairman)

Western: Master Pascoe

Estates Committee Master Fetherstonhaugh (Chairman)

Master Ford

Library Committee Master Beatson (Chairman)

Midland: Master Raggatt

Education & Training Committee Master Francis (Chairman)

Master Tedd

Advocacy Training Committee Master Soole (Chairman)

Master Bleasdale

Scholarships Committee Master Taylor (Chairman) Qualifying Sessions Sub-Committee Master Pegden (Chairman) Student Societies Committee Master Morley (Chairman) Outreach Sub-Committee Master Dingemans (Chairman) Pupil Supervisors Sub-Committee Master Glick (Chairman) Pegasus Scholarship Trust Master Flaux (Chairman) Circuits Committee Master Bishop (Chairman) Northern Circuit: Master Birkett

(BLC Rep vacant)

Master Dove Jason Hadden MBE (BLC Rep) South Eastern: Master Kay Master Bowron European: Master Rhodes Master Nicholas Green Kieron Beal QC (BLC Rep) Benchers’ Selection Committee Master Reader (Master Tomlinson) (Chairman) Archives Committee Master Baker (Chairman) The Temple Church Committee Master Treasurer Master Bevington Master Sells

Master Wright

Master Moger

Simon Gurney (BLC Rep)

Master Coghlan (Chairman)

North Eastern Circuit: Master Stuart Brown

Master Andrew Popplewell

Master Robert Smith

Susan Lindsey (BLC Rep)

Inner Temple Representatives on External Bodies Bar Council Master Salter Master Rhodes Hefin Rees QC (BLC Rep) Inns of Court and Bar Educational Trust (Trustee) Master Eder Inns Of Court Libraries Liaison Committee Master Beatson Institute of Advanced Legal Studies (IALS) Master Plender Advocacy Training Council (ATC) Master Nicholas Green (Chairman) Master Soole BSB Entity Regulation Group Master Robinson Sub-Treasurer Council of The Inns of Court Master Treasurer Master Reader Master Pittaway Incorporated Council of Law Reporting Master Patrick Elias Master Sally Smith Training for The Bar Committee Master Fetherstonhaugh Inns’ Conduct Committee Master Margaret Bickford-Smith (Chairman) Master Streatfeild-James Daniel Matovu Karon Monaghan QC Simon Russell Flint QC Tribunal Appointments Board Master Willbourne Master Ayling

Master Lee

Temple Women’s Forum Master Taylor (Co-Convenor)

(BLC Rep vacant)

Master Agnello Sonia Nolten (BLC) Harini Iyengar

Risk you can’t afford...

PROFESSIONS

cover you can!

Bespoke insurance solutions for barristers What do you want from your broker?

More competitive rates, better insurance cover, faster claims payments or outstanding client service and technical support?

Whatever your priority, LONMAR, a leading Lloyd’s broker and insurance partner to the Bar, will deliver.

What cover is provided?

The first product is about employment related actions, the other is about scale – the larger actions relating to your professional work.

Coverage includes:

l Employment-related defamation l Employment-related breach of data protection laws l Employment related wrongful infliction of emotional distress Excess Professional Indemnity

Employment Practice Liability

With Limits of Indemnity currently available up to GBP 122,500,000 in excess of Bar Mutual Indemnity Insurance placed including cover for;

Fully retroactive, with Limits of Indemnity up to GBP 10,000,000 placed with Lloyd’s security and from less than GBP 200 per head, which covers for claims made against all members of Chambers and Staff including;

l Non legal services l Breach of data protection legislation

Unfair dismissal Discharge or termination of employment Employment-related discrimination Employment-related harassment Employment-related victimisation, wrongful failure to employ or to promote l Wrongful deprivation of a career opportunity l Failure to grant tenure l Negligent evaluation l l l l l

Cover is placed with a number of leading Lloyd’s syndicates and insurers

Contact To find out more or for a competitive quote, contact us.

Robin Wilson Executive Director T: +44 (0)20 7204 3625 E: robin.wilson@lonmar.com

Experience the difference LONMAR GLOBAL RISKS LIMITED | MATRIX HOUSE, 9 ALDGATE HIGH STREET, LONDON EC3N 1AH Registered in England No. 1302663 | Registered Office: Dukes House, 32-38 Dukes Place, London, EC3A 7LP Authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority

www.lonmar.com

158

INNER TEMPLE

People Finder Title

Name

TREASURY OFFICE

Telephone

Email

020 7797 8250

enquiries@innertemple.org.uk

Sub-Treasurer

Patrick Maddams

020 7797 8177

subtreasurer@innertemple.org.uk

Personal Assistant to the Sub-Treasurer

Jennie Collis

020 7797 8177

jcollis@innertemple.org.uk

Head of Treasury Office

Henrietta Amodio

020 7797 8182

hamodio@innertemple.org.uk

Assistant to the Head of Treasury Office

Edward Harper

020 7797 8182

eharper@innertemple.org.uk

Events & Administration Assistant

Catherine Gallagher

020 7797 8183

cgallagher@innertemple.org.uk

Membership Registrar

Jude Hodgson

020 7797 8206

jhodgson@innertemple.org.uk

Records & Membership Assistant (Mon-Wed)

Jacqueline Fenton

020 7797 8241

reception@innertemple.org.uk

Receptionist & Office Assistant (Thurs-Fri)

Iroda Asqarova

020 7797 8241

reception@innertemple.org.uk

Archivist (Wednesday -Friday)

Celia Pilkington

020 7797 8251

cpilkington@innertemple.org.uk

020 7797 8208

E&T@innertemple.org.uk

EDUCATION & TRAINING Head of Education & Training

Fiona Fulton

020 7797 8171

ffulton@innertemple.org.uk

Education Co-ordinator and Assistant to the Head of Education & Training

Francesca Ellis

020 7797 8207

fellis@innertemple.org.uk

Professional Training Manager

David Miller

020 7797 8209

dmiller@innertemple.org.uk

Education Co-ordinator

Kerry Upham

020 7797 8213

kupham@innertemple.org.uk

Scholarships & Students Manager

Eamonn O’Reilly

020 7797 8210

eoreilly@innertemple.org.uk

Scholarships & Students Co-ordinator

Paul Clark

020 7797 8211

pclark@innertemple.org.uk

Outreach & External Relations Manager

Anthony Dursi

020 7797 8214

adursi@innertemple.org.uk

Outreach Co-ordinator

Carys Nelkon

020 7797 8262

cnelkon@innertemple.org.uk

COLLECTOR’S DEPARTMENT

collectors@innertemple.org.uk

Collector

David Bartlett

020 7797 8185

dbartlett@innertemple.org.uk

Assistant Collector

Lilian Sherwood

020 7797 8186

lsherwood@innertemple.org.uk

Financial Controller

Ania Johnson

020 7797 8242

ajohnson@innertemple.org.uk

Account’s Clerk

Emma Prayer

020 7797 8187

eprayer@innertemple.org.uk

LIBRARY

library@innertemple.org.uk

Librarian & Keeper of Manuscripts

Margaret Clay

020 7797 8215

mclay@innertemple.org.uk

Deputy Librarian

Tracey Dennis

020 7797 8218

tdennis@innertemple.org.uk

Systems Librarian / Network Administrator

Peter Higgins

020 7797 8220

phiggins@innertemple.org.uk

Assistant Network Administrator

Jonathan Delaney

020 7797 8285

jdelaney@innertemple.org.uk

Library Administrator

Tina Denby

020 7797 8216

tdenby@innertemple.org.uk

Assistant Librarian (enquiries & cataloguing)

Michael Frost

020 7797 8248

mfrost@innertemple.org.uk

Assistant Librarian (enquiries & acquisitions)

Sally McLaren

020 7797 8221

smclaren@innertemple.org.uk

Senior Library Assistant / Network Support

Simon Hindley

020 7797 8222

shindley@innertemple.org.uk

Library Assistant

Mark Leonard

020 7797 8217

mleonard@innertemple.org.uk

Library Assistant

Natalie Kent

020 7797 8217

nkent@innertemple.org.uk

ESTATES

020 7797 8200

surveyors@innertemple.org.uk

Director of Properties & Surveyor

Richard Snowdon

020 7797 8203

rsnowdon@innertemple.org.uk

Capital Programme Manager

Nicholas Waring

020 7797 8192

nwaring@innertemple.org.uk

Procurement Manager

Nick Green

020 7797 8199

ngreen@innertemple.org.uk

Temporary Office Administrator

Anne Mason

020 7797 8173

amason@innertemple.org.uk

Estates Officer

Bill Parker

020 7797 8202

bparker@innertemple.org.uk

Works Supervisor

Paul Simmonds

020 7797 8190

psimmonds@innertemple.org.uk

Electrical Foreman

Ian Ward

020 7797 8197

iward@innertemple.org.uk

Mechanical Foreman

Tony Baca

020 7797 8196

tbaca@innertemple.org.uk

Carpentry Foreman

Steve Hanks

020 7797 8275

shanks@innertemple.org.uk

Foreman

Delbert Brooks (Julius Rutherfoord)

020 7797 8195

dbrooks@innertemple.org.uk

PEOPLE FINDER INNER TEMPLE YEARBOOK 2013–2014

Title

Name

CATERING

Telephone

Email

020 7797 8230

catering@innertemple.org.uk

Head of Catering

Vicky Portinari

020 7797 8231

vportinari@innertemple.org.uk

Deputy Head of Catering

Priya Patel

020 7797 8233

ppatel@innertemple.org.uk

Functions Manager

Jack Breedon

020 7797 8282

jbreeden@innertemple.org.uk

Sales & Marketing Manager

Alice Pearson

020 7797 8230

apearson@innertemple.org.uk

Catering Administrator

Rosy Gotelee

020 7797 8179

rgotelee@innertemple.org.uk

Head Chef

Martin Cheesman

020 7797 8232

mcheesman@innertemple.org.uk

Pegasus Bar Manager

Elcio Mendonca

020 7797 8234

emendonca@innertemple.org.uk

Head Gardener

Andrea Brunsendorf

020 7797 8243

abrunsendorf@innertemple.org.uk

Garden Trainee

Nanette Hudson

020 7797 8243

pottingshed@innertemple.org.uk

020 7797 8255

porters@innertemple.org.uk

GARDEN

PORTERS Head Porter

Roger Ward

rward@innertemple.org.uk

Under Porter 1

Dennis Moffat

dmoffat@innertemple.org.uk

Under Porter 2

Jim Stephenson

jstephenson@innertemple.org.uk

Porters’ Office

020 7797 8247

porters@innertemple.org.uk

Duty Porter (including weekends & silent hours)

020 7797 8255

Tudor Street Gate and Night Security

020 7797 8268

tgate@innertemple.org.uk

Master@templechurch.com

TEMPLE CHURCH Master of the Temple

The Rev Robin Griffith-Jones

020 7427 5642

Reader

The Rev Hugh Mead

020 7353 8559

Verger

John Shearer

020 7353 3470

verger@templechurch.com

General Administrator

Catherine de Satgé

020 7353 8559

catherine@templechurch.com

Director of Music

Roger Sayer

020 7427 5650

liz@templechurch.com

Associate Organist

Greg Morris

020 7427 5650

greg@templechurch.com

Music Administrator

Liz Clarke

020 7427 5650

liz@templechurch.com

Fundraising Consultant, Temple Music Foundation

Rachel Pearson

020 7427 5640

rachel@templechurch.com

Administrative Assistant, Temple Music Foundation

Alex Madgwick

020 7427 5641

alex@templechurch.com

TEMPLE CHURCH MUSIC OFFICE

TEMPLE MUSIC FOUNDATION (TMF)

COUNCIL OF THE INNS OF COURT (COIC)

020 7822 0760

Director

James Wakefield

020 7822 0761

jwakefield@coic.org.uk

Secretary

Julia Hawkins

020 7822 0762

jhawkins@coic.org.uk

020 3432 7350

info@tbtas.org.uk

BAR TRIBUNALS & ADJUDICATION SERVICE (BTAS) (at Gray’s Inn) Interim Registrar

Wendy Harris

020 3432 7346

wendy.harris@tbtas.org.uk

Tribunals Administrator

Margaret Hilson

020 3432 7348

margaret.hilson@tbtas.org.uk

Inns’ Conduct Committee Administrator

Linda de Klerk

020 3432 7347

linda.deKlerk@tbtas.org.uk

ADVOCACY TRAINING COUNCIL (ATC)

0207 822 0763

Executive Secretary

Beth Phillips

020 7822 0764

bphillips@advocacytraining council.org.uk

Assistant Secretary & Secretary to the International Committee

Linda Hunting

020 7822 0765

lhunting@advocacytraining council.org.uk

Secretary to the Training & Accreditation Committee

Prerna Sian

020 7822 0766

psian@advocacytraining council.org.uk

159

THE INNER TEMPLE STORE

Mediation Course

Paperweight

The Regent’s School of Psychotherapy & Psychology* enables you to develop the skills required for successful conflict resolution.

This unique psychotherapeutic approach to conflict management is a 5 day course, which provides Accredited Mediator status, Bar Council and Law Society approved CPD hours.

Check our website for start dates T 020 8339 0767 (Course Leader Paul Randolph) E randolphp@regents.ac.uk W regents.ac.uk/adr Member of and registering organisation for The United Kingdom Council for Psychotherapy. Looking for a Mediator? Check our database: http://adr.regents.ac.uk/adr *Previously known as the School of Psychotherapy & Counselling Psychology

Enamel Cufflinks Mr Justice Squeezy

Available from the Treasury Office and via the Inn’s website.

020 7797 8250 innertemple.org.uk/innstore

Temple Music Foundation Autumn/Winter season at Temple Music Monday 23 September, 7:30pm

Saturday 19 October, 11am – 4:45pm

Thursday 14 November, 7:30pm

Annette Dasch and Julius Drake

Come and Sing with John Rutter

Roderick Williams and Julius Drake

Middle Temple Hall

£45, £35, £25, £15, £10, £5 Wednesday 2 October, 7pm

Middle Temple Hall and The Temple Church £25

Endymion

Thursday 7 November, 7pm

£25, £20, £15

The Temple Church

The Temple Church Tuesday 8 October, 7pm

David Briggs silent film: Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde The Temple Church £20, £15, £10

The Wallfisch-York Duo £20, £15, £10

St Nicolas Cantata

– with Nicholas Daniel, Aurora Orchestra, Temple Singers and the Choristers of The Temple Church

The Sixteen

Monday 2 December, 7pm

The Temple Church £40, £30, £20

£20, £15, £10

Lucy Parham with Samuel West and Juliet Stevenson Middle Temple Hall

The Temple Church

£45, £35, £25, £15, £10, £5

£20, £15, £10

INNER TEMPLE_01_09_13_330x210_80493.indd 23

Wednesday 20 November, 7pm

The Temple Church

Sacconi String Quartet

160

£45, £35, £25, £15, £10, £5

Monday 11 November, 7:30pm

Tuesday 15 October, 7pm

We are already in early discussions with some superb artists for 2014 including Angelika Kirschlager, John Tomlinson, Natalie Clein, Aurora Orchestra, Ben Grosvenor and plenty more.

Although none of these are confirmed we are confident that 2014 will be another fruitful year for Temple Music. Any suggestions you may have for future concerts are always welcome.

The Temple Church

None of these wonderful concerts can happen without the generous support of individuals.

If you would like to support Temple Music Foundation either by joining one of our circles or by becoming an individual sponsor please contact our development consultant Rachel Pearson at Rachel@templechurch.com

For more information, to book tickets or to join one of our circles visit www.templemusic.org or phone 0207 427 5641 Temple Music Foundation, Lower ground floor, 2 Kings Bench Walk, London EC4Y 7DE 0207 4275641 www.templemusic.org

14/08/2013 10:51

Commentary titles from Westlaw UK to give you the competitive edge

REUTERS/Ahmad Masood

WESTLAW UK BOOKS & LOOSELEAFS Online. Current. Accessible.

Westlaw UK now has over 130 Sweet & Maxwell book and looseleaf titles available online, giving access to flexible and up to date, authoritative content.

Our online titles provide so much more benefit than just a replication of the print, with enhanced contents and navigation, seamless linking to primary law and expert interpretation, instant updates, chapter PDFs and the ability to print, download and email whole sections at a time.

Work faster, work smarter, and advise with total confidence.

For more information on all our titles, visit westlaw.co.uk/books-library or contact your account manager to discuss subscription options.

E stablished in 1843...

... P erfected in 2014 WWW.GEORGEATTENBOROUGH.COM 193 FLEET STREET LONDON EC4A 2JQ TEL 020 7430 0243

COMMISSIONS UNDERTAKEN GOLD, JEWELLERY & WATCHES PURCHASED JEWELLERY, SILVER & WATCH REPAIRS ENGRAVING VALUATIONS PEARL RETHREADING