The Bill of Middlesex by Benham Publishing Limited

contents PUBLISHER Benham Publishing 4th Floor, Orleans House, Edmund St, Liverpool, L3 9NG Tel: 0151 236 4141 Facsimile: 0151 236 0440 email: admin@benhampublishing.com web: www.benhampublishing.com

contents Contents

Officers for 2013-2014

Committee Members

local issues President’s Page

Editorial

Members Application

Notices

When you walk through a storm………

Compliance Forum: Beating the recession... and managing risks

5 Reasons Why Inbound Marketing Beats Cold Calling Every Time

ADVERTISING AND FEATURES EDITOR Anna Woodhams DESIGN AND PRODUCTION Fern Badman ACCOUNTS Joanne Casey MEDIA No. 1309 EDITOR Robert Drepaul PUBLISHED August 2013 – © Bill of Middlesex - Benham Publishing LEGAL NOTICE © Benham Publishing. None of the editorial or photographs may be reproduced without prior written permission from the publishers. Benham Publishing would like to point out that all editorial comment and articles are the responsibility of the originators and may or may not reflect the opinions of Benham Publishing. No responsibility can be accepted for any inaccuracies that may occur, correct at time of going to press.

property Earth, Wind and Power

centenary feature Middlesex Guildhall Centenary

Benham Publishing cannot be held responsible for any inaccuracies in web or email links supplied to us. DISCLAIMER The Middlesex Law Society welcomes all persons eligible for membership regardless of Sex, Race, Religion, Age or Sexual Orientation. All views expressed in this publication are the views of the individual writers and not the society unless specifically stated to be otherwise. All statements as to the law are for discussion between member and should not be relied upon as an accurate statement of the law, are of a general nature and do not constitute advice in any particular case or circumstance. Members of the public should not seek to rely on anything published in this magazine in court but seek qualified Legal Advice.

Copy Deadlines 2013/14 November Issue February Issue May Issue August Issue

18th October 24th January 18th April 18th July

Anyone wishing to advertise or submit editorial for publication in the Bill of Middlesex please contact Anna Woodhams, before copy deadline. Email: anna@benhampublishing.com Tel: 0151 236 4141

The Bill of Middlesex

Congratulation to the Middlesex Guildhall on its 100 years of service to the administration of Justice

professional issues “Lawyers are not just lawyers anymore – they are client managers and marketers”

The Centre of European Law, King’s College London

Quill Pinpoint research defies negative industry trend

The changing face of the cosmetic industry

The UK’s largest dog welfare organisation

Have you considered the risk of going cheap?

An iconic location

film FILM AND THE LAW No 20: The Court Room and Show Biz

book reviews The Criminal Law of Competition in the UK and in the USA

officers COMMITTEE MEMBERS

OFFICERS FOR 2013/2014 President: DARRELL WEBB Bolt Burdon Solicitors Providence House, Providence Place, Islington N1 0NT (020 7288 4795) (DX 122237 Upper Islington) e-mail: darrellwebb@boltburdon.co.uk Vice Presidents: GURMEET KHARAUD Fort & Co. Solicitors Saunders House, 52-53 The Mall, Ealing W5 3TA (020 170 8433) (DX 5119 Ealing) e-mail: gk@fortsolicitors.com ELISABETH VAN DER WEIT Hameed & Co. 4 Grand Parade, Forty Avenue, Wembley Park, HA9 9JS (020 8904 4900) e-mail: hameed@hameed.plus.com Honorary Secretary MAURICE GUYER Vickers & Co. 183 Uxbridge Road, Ealing W13 9AA (020 8579 2559) (DX 5104 Ealing) e-mail: mguyer@vickers-solicitors.co.uk Honorary Treasurer: NIRMALA CHANDRESENA Chands Solicitors 145 Cannonbury Avenue, Pinner, Middx HA5 1TR (020 8933 8332) (DX 48001 Rayners Lane) e-mail: n.chandrasena@btinternet.com Honorary Social Secretary: ROBERT DREPAUL Vickers & Co 183 Uxbridge Road, Ealing W13 9AA (020 82801095) (DX 5104 Ealing) e-mail: rdrepaul@vickers-solicitors.co.uk Honorary Membership Secretary: SUSAN SCOTT-HUNT Principal Lecturer in Law, Middlesex University The Burroughs, Hendon NW4 4BT (020 8411 6019) e-mail: s.scott-hunt@mdx.ac.uk Council Members for the Middlesex Area: Central & South Middlesex Michael Garson Kagan Moss 22 The Causeway, Teddington TW11 0HF (020 8977 6633) (DX 35250 Teddington) e-mail: Michael.garson@kaganmoss.co.uk North Middlesex Michael Singleton Singletons Austin Ryder 2 Crossfield Chambers, Gladbeck Way, Enfield EN2 7HT (020 8367 0387) (DX 90604 Enfield) e-mail: Michael.singleton@singletonsuk.com The Law Society Greater London Regional Office, The Law Society, 113 Chancery Lane, London WC2A 1PL (020 7316 5554) (DX 56 London/Chancery Lane) Regional Manager: Morag Goldfinch e-mail: morag.goldfinch@lawsociety.org.uk

Immediate Past President: SUSAN SCOTT-HUNT Principal Lecturer in Law, Middlesex University The Burroughs, Hendon NW4 4BT (020 8411 6019) e-mail: s.scott-hunt@mdx.ac.uk Alexis Ash of Iliffes Booth Bennett Solicitors Capital Court, 30 Windsor Street, Uxbridge UB8 1AB (08456 381 381) (DX 45105 Uxbridge) e-mail: alexis.ash@ibblaw.co.uk Dr Rebecca Bates of Brunel Law School, Brunel University Kingston Lane, Uxbridge UB8 3PH (01895 67909) e-mail: Rebecca.bates@brunel.ac.uk Robert Borwick of ABV Solicitors Kingshott Business Centre, 23 Clayton Road, Hayes UB3 1AN (0844 587 9996) (DX 44650 Hayes (Middlesex) e-mail: Robert.Borwick@ABVSolicitors.co.uk Professor Malcolm Davies Head of Ealing Law School University of West London St. Marys Road, Ealing W 5RF (020 8231 2226) e-mail: Malcolm.Davies@tvu.ac.uk Hardeep Dhillon of Desor & Co, 768 Uxbridge Road, Hayes, UB4 0RU (020 8569 0708) (DX 44657 Hayes 1 Middlesex) e-mail: hardeep@desorandco.co.uk Maralyn Hutchinson of Kagan Moss 22 The Causeway, Teddington, Middx TW11 0HF (020 8977 6633) (DX 35250 Teddington) e-mail: maralyn.hutchinson@kaganmoss.co.uk Andrew Lee of Hoffman-Bokaei Lithos House, 307 Finchley Road, London NW3 6EH (020 7433 2380) (DX38863 Swiss Cottage) e-mail: andrewlee6783@aol.com Vincent McGrath of Vickers & Co 183 Uxbridge Road, Ealing W13 9AA (020 8280 1098) (DX 5104 Ealing) e-mail: vmcgrath@vickers-solicitors.co.uk Fahmy Mohamed of Vincent Solicitors 11-13 South Road, Southall, UB1 1SU (020 8574 0666) e-mail: fahmy@vincentsolicitors.com Anthony Seymour of Rae Nemazec LLP 2 Barons Gate, 33-35 Rothchild Road Chiswick, London W4 5HT (020 8747 0055) (DX 80313 Chiswick) e-mail: ahseymour@hotmail.co.uk Chris Shearwood of Lovell Chohan Solicitors Tudor House, 44-50 Bath Road, Hounslow TW3 3EB (020 8570 6661) (DX 3537 Hounslow 1) e-mail: chris@lovellchohan.com Ariya Sriharan of Sriharans 223 The Broadway, Southall UB1 1ND (020 8843 9974) (DX 119583 Southall 3) e-mail: info@sriharanssolicitors.co.uk Renuka Sriharan of Sriharans 223 The Broadway, Southall UB1 1ND (020 8843 9974) (DX 119583 Southall 3) e-mail: info@sriharanssolicitors.co.uk

PAST PRESIDENTS R Garrod, J A S Nicholls, R C Politeyan, J Aylett, K Goodacre, H J B Cockshutt, W Gillham, L Lane Heardman, D Grove, L A Darke, C Beety, Mrs L E Vickers, H Hodge, E G B Taylor, A A M Wheatley, A H Kurtz, M J S Doran, H B Matthissen, G Parkinson, HHJ R D Connor, A Bates, J J Copeman-Hill, D B Kennett-Brown, S B Hammett, Miss F A Shakespear, HHJ P E Copley, A M Harvey, H R Hodge, G R Stephenson, B S Regler, W J C Berry, AS Atchison, L M Oliver, S W Booth, D D P Debidin, R E J Hansom, E H Lock, Mrs A Taylor, Mrs N Desor, Ms M Hutchinson, M Guyer, R S Drepaul, A Sriharan, Ms M Fernandes A Darlington, S Chhokar, Ms M Crowley, Professor M Davies, S Hobbs, Mrs R Sriharan, Mrs S Scott Hunt.

SOCIAL PROGRAMME 2013 - 2014 June July 13 Nov 15 Nov

Five aside Football Supreme Court, Guildhall Anniversary event Quiz Night Annual Dinner Dance

Contact the Middlesex Law Society Administrator, Peter Hesom: 07930 386798

EDUCATION &TRAINING PROGRAMME 2013 – 2014 24 July Crime Update – Dinner & Seminar 14 Aug Family Law – Dinner & Seminar • Feb.’14 Conveyancing Update Dinner & Seminar • Legal Aid Update - TBA UWL is University of West London, - St Mary’s Road, Ealing campus MU is Middlesex University, - Hendon campus BU is Brunel University – Uxbridge campus Others To Be Announced Contact the Administrator or visit our website for details.

COMMITTEE MEETINGS 2013 15 April 20 May 17 June 15 July 16 September 21 October 18 November 2014 20 January 17 February

AGM Wednesday 14 March 2014

PARLIAMENTARY LIAISON Robert Drepaul

Laura Vircan of Desor & Co. 768 Uxbridge Road, Hayes, UB4 0RU (020 8569 0708) (DX 44657 Hayes 1 Middlesex) e-mail: laura@desorandco.co.uk Alan Williams 59 St Marys Road, Ealing W5 5RG (07973 622312) e-mail: creativewit@tiscali.co.uk

www.middlesex-law.co.uk The Bill of Middlesex

local issues

President’s Page This year celebrates the centenary of the Middlesex Guildhall, which now houses the prestigious Supreme Court of England and Wales. The Middlesex Law Society has a close affinity with the Guildhall going many years. It may seems strange that the Middlesex Guildhall is in London rather than Middlesex, but this was due to the Local Government Act 1888, which, inter alia, established the administrative County of London out of parts of Middlesex, Surrey and Essex. The session House for the Middlesex justices had been Clerkenwell and the county administration was also based there. After the Act it was agreed that in exchange for the Clerkenwell building and an additional sum of £10,000 the County of London would part with the Guildhall site in Westminster to be used as the headquarters of the Middlesex

Darrell Webb President, Middlesex Law Society e-mail: darrellwebb@boltburdon.co.uk

Justices and the County Council. It is for this very reason that the Middlesex Guildhall was included, extra-territorially, within the region of the Middlesex Law Society to enable Solicitors on the staff of the Middlesex County Council to qualify for membership of the Society. In more recent years we have all known the Guildhall as Crown Court and many of our members will have attended the building in the course of their work, whether as Judges or Solicitors, and now as the Supreme Court that association continues to this day. If you would like to know more about the Middlesex Guildhall and the Society’s association with it there is a very interesting article in the Spring/Winter 2009 edition of the Bill of Middlesex by Tom Cryan, Honorary Member, which you can view via our website www.middlesex-law.co.uk. The Middlesex Law Society has been working in partnership with the Supreme Court and various other organisations over the last six months to organise an exhibition to celebrate the centenary of the Middlesex Guildhall. I attended the opening event on the 31 July, which was also attended by a number of the Society’s Past Presidents Robert Drepaul, Susan Scott-Hunt and Edward Locke. I was lucky enough to get an advance viewing of the exhibition and I can highly recommend a visit if you are in the area or at a loose end over the summer break. The exhibition runs from the 01 August - 27 September from 9.30am until 4.30pm and is free to enter. Those of you that read the last edition of this magazine will be aware that we have commissioned a new Shield to be displayed at the Supreme Court exhibition. The Shield really does look magnificent and is the centre piece of the exhibition. I would like to personally thank all those of you that have contributed towards the cost of the Shield by way of sponsorship. We’ve still got quite a way to go, so if you’d like to make a contribution please contact our Social Secretary, Robert Drepaul. I’m also pleased to be able to report that our first ‘Compliance Workshop’ on the 27 June was very well attended and the feedback we have received is that you want more of these workshops. We have therefore arranged a further compliance forum: ‘Beating the recession... and managing risks’, for the 24 October 2013. The workshop will be led by Michael Garson with guest speaker, Pearl Moses, from the Law Society Compliance Section. Not only will you get 2 CPD points, but it is absolutely free to all members of the Society. I do hope you’ll enjoy this special ‘Middlesex Guildhall’ edition of the Bill, so please do read on...

The Bill of Middlesex

local issues

Editorial Recording History In this special issue of the Bill of Middlesex there is a wonderful article by Ben Wilson, the UK Supreme Court's Head of Communications, on the 100 year history of the Middlesex Guildhall in Westminster. The Middlesex Guildhall used to be the administrative centre of the Ancient County of Middlesex before the arrival of the Greater London Council in 1965. The Supreme Court's special summer exhibition which explores this fascinating history is certainly worth a visit. In the decade since its relaunch, The Bill of Middlesex has chronicled the activities of solicitors and their firms in the County of Middlesex. Along with legal articles, it has recorded training events, social events and even births and marriages. Covers of the The Bill of Middlesex are featured at the Supreme Court's exhibition. The legal profession has changed in the last decade and is likely to be unrecognisable after the next decade. Hopefully The Bill of Middlesex has recorded a small part of the lives of those solicitors who have served the causes of Liberty, Justice and the Rule of Law and has given them the recognisation they all richly deserve.

Middlesex Law Society (est. 1959)

APPLICATION FOR MEMBERSHIP Surname _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Mr / Mrs / Miss / Ms Forenames _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Name of Firm or Organisation ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Postal Address or DX no: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Telephone ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Email ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Status & Area of Work _______________________________________________ Date of Admission _____________________________________________________ Would you be interested in joining the Committee?

Yes/No

I wish to apply for FULL/FIRM/ACADEMIC/ASSOCIATE/STUDENT (YMG) membership of the Society (see below for details) I enclose herewith my cheque for £ _________ for the current year, made payable to "Middlesex Law Society" Signature ____________________________________________________________ Date _______________________________________________________________ Subscription Rates: Full Individual Membership:

£50.00 per annum (more than 3 years admission) £30.00 per annum (less than 3 years admission)

Firm Membership:

Partners/Solicitors 2-5 £125 per annum 6-10 £250 per annum more than 10 £500 per annum

Academic Law Departments:

£200 per annum

Associate Membership:

£15.00 per annum (Trainee Solicitors, ILEX members, Paralegals)

Students:

£5 per annum (Young Members Group)

Please return completed form and remittance to: The Membership Secretary, Middlesex Law Society, Susan Scott-Hunt, Middlesex University, The Burroughs, Hendon NW4 4BT Tel: 020 8411 6019 e-mail: s.scott-hunt@mdx.ac.uk

The Bill of Middlesex

local issues

Past Presidents’ Charity Quiz Night Wednesday 13 November 2013 @ 6.30 pm The Drayton Court Hotel, The Avenue, W13

The Maria Crowley Photographic Competition Our recent past President Maria Crowley who tragically died earlier this year was a very keen and gifted photographer. She became the Society’s photographer of choice for all our social events and many of her photographs graced the pages of the Bill of Middlesex.

Her great passion was flora and fauna, animals and birds. Before moving to private practice, she was for many years the legacy officer at Battersea Dogs & Cats Home which is where her love of four legged creatures was nurtured and satisfied. After Maria was unable to continue working, she set about improving her skills and went on many courses. She spent many happy and fulfilled hours at the London Swan Sanctuary and driving herself in her own inimitable style to other locations which offered suitable objects for her lenses. In memory of Maria the Society is pleased to announce an annual photographic competition. Entries for the competition should be submitted by email to Maralyn Hutchinson, maralyn.hutchinson @kaganmoss.co.uk. Email attachments should be no more than 2Mb in file size. The subject matter of your entry should be either a subject with a legal flavour or flora, fauna or animals – entries will not be returned. Entries will be judged by the President and Committee of the Middlesex Law Society. The winner and prize will be announced at the Past Presidents’ Quiz Night on 13 November – entries will not be returned. The closing date for the 2013 Maria Photographic Competition is 31 October 2013.

The Bill of Middlesex

local issues

When you walk through a storm……… Since the beginning of this year Outcomes Focused Regulation (OFR) has become an every day reality for most of our members. A group of more than 30 including senior partners and Compliance Officers attended our first Compliance Forum on 27 June to share experiences and no doubt curious to find out if anyone has yet come up with all the answers! We have been moved from a system where the vast majority of the profession complied with rules last set out in the 2007 Code of Conduct to a mix of rules and theoretical outcomes in a very long and much amended Handbook including the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Code 2011 based upon Principles but with mandatory Outcomes. Those by definition are not defined. The new system is at best bureaucratic and noone is quite sure whether or not the way in which they operate their firm is compliant or not.

The SRA has made it clear that it will not offer’ safe harbour’ or give guidance generally. It is therefore left for each firm to plan its own course. In response to an ever changing Code – already in its 7th edition some firms have hired outside expertise to assist in building their system of compliance; some firms have designed their own but the general view from those members attending was that a problem shared is a first step on the way to a problem solved. We are truly ‘all in it together’. In discussion most were agree that they are coming to grips with more formal methods of assessing and managing their risks. This has involved reflecting upon practical issues that in most examples are not new but have new relevance in a compliance regime where ‘recording’ and ‘reporting’ to SRA are standards that have to be met. It was acknowledged that hitherto most solicitors unconsciously went through a process of assessing risk even if this was not actually recorded in terms of the current SRA Code Chapter 7 requirements. The meetings was attended by many COLPs (Compliance Officer Legal Practice) and COFAs (Compliance Officer Finance and Administration) and it came as a surprise to some that it is the COLP and not the COFA who bears responsibility for financial stability and the business plan of the firm. The COFA will inevitably be involved in most firms in the business planning process but is responsible for reporting only on Solicitor Client Account matters. In firms where the COLP and COFA are not one and the same arrangements for meeting and sharing information between the officers will be vital. There was general agreement that ‘uncertainty’ and fear of the unknown are creating, at least within smaller firms, an unwelcome distraction from carrying on work normally and a new cost centre. There was discussion around recognition of non material breaches and how they might be of ‘value’ if used as learning exercises. Most firms already do this in order to learn from and improve complaints handling. There remains a feeling that the true cost to the profession of the regulatory burden is still not widely enough recognised. So whilst it was agreed that most people did have manuals and procedures it was recognised that there could be merit in challenging status quo thinking and seeking new ways of doing things. Outsourcing and dealing online might present new solutions to old problems or an alternative business plan. Specific issues arising from old client account balances, payments to charity of unclaimed balances and file closure were discussed. The view was that quarterly meetings would be welcomed and so Thursday 24 October has been fixed for the next session. A strong theme throughout the discussion was SRA activity with its current emphasis on financial stability. Some argue that general business failure should not be the primary concern of a regulator. We must however recognise that for public protection and the interest also of the whole profession the Regulator does need to be able to react where a firm poses a risk and properly decide whether or not it needs to take action. It is perhaps in the procedure around that latter step that more two way information would give greater confidence to the profession.

By Michael Garson Council Member and chair of Law Society Regulatory Affairs Board michael.garson@kaganmoss.co.uk

The SRA assessment of risk will be measured in terms of danger to client money or disruption to client work. However the current worry arising from intervention is the cost in the case of medium or large size firm where there is financial collapse and no funds available to close down in an orderly fashion or fund an administrator. In an effort to head off and contain that risk in the coming months around 2000 letters are being issued to firms seeking financial information. This may allow for analysis

The Bill of Middlesex

local issues

Middlesex Law Society

Compliance Forum: which renders future enquiry unnecessary or allay concerns. On the other hand there is bound to be a great deal of time used up by SRA in chasing information which when received is incomplete or irrelevant. Given the costs involved in the new burgeoning SRA function of Supervision the question must be asked whether a ‘protective’ or ‘preventive’ policy is the right approach at all. It may be that SRA resources should be limited to providing the triage services necessary when disaster strikes rather than trying to second guess the market. There can be no doubt that closure and interventions in a number of medium size firms has delivered a shock to the market and provision is made for the cost in an increase in this year’s Compensation Fund levy. The SRA have given warnings about indicative signs of financial risk and this gives firms the chance to take steps and to prepare contingency plans. Provided these are funded (admittedly could be a big ‘if’) they ought to be sufficient to allay any SRA concerns. In the case of small firms a closure plan or disaster recovery plan will inevitably throw a strain on capital but at a time when the economic cycle bites along with LASPO and legal aid changes in the legal services market such active planning will surely be of comfort to owners of firms and those who work in them alike.

Beating the recession... and managing risks 24th October 2013 Universaity of West London

Chaired by Michael Garson with Guest Speaker Pearl Moses, Law Society Risk and Compliance Thursday 24 October 2013 from 4.00 pm Workshop 4.30 – 6.30 p.m. CPD points Pearl is manager of the Law Society Risk and Compliance Service Michael is the constituency Law Society Council Member and current chair of the Law Society Regulatory Affairs Board. The topics covered will include • Compliance officer experience and SRA guidance • Managing everyday risks for COLPs and COFAs, • Update on latest Regulatory changes • Billing costs, Business planning and recession issues Registration and Refreshments from 4pm at Centre for Professional Development Ealing Law School at University of West London St Mary’s Road Ealing London W5 5RF

Places cost: Full Members £25 Non Members £65 to include joining fee Trainee Members…Free Please contact Peter Hesom Tel: 07930 386798 email: peterhesom@aol.com Website: www.middlesex-law.co.uk —————————————————————————————————————————————

BOOKING FORM One of the main topics carried forward for our October meeting is a discussion around fee estimates and billing processes. Many firms find that billing is a slow and unwieldy function that is intrusive on their working time. Few enjoy the prospect of sitting down and preparing bills and, whilst controlling unbilled work in progress is a priority, doing it more frequently is not an attractive prospect to the majority. We will be looking for ways to improve this and thereby increase cash flow and make the task easier. The collective view is that new solutions in this area would be widely appreciated and help us weather the storm. I look forward to seeing you on Thursday 24 October.

The Bill of Middlesex

Please send this form, with a cheque to: Peter Hesom, 55 Brookbank Avenue, Hanwell, London W7 1LA or (DX: 5104 Ealing) Name: (BLOCK LETTERS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Firm’s Name: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DX or postal address: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................................................................................... Please reserve places for the following, at the workshop 24 October 2013: 1 ................................................................................. 2 ................................................................................. 3 ................................................................................. 4 ................................................................................. I enclose a cheque for £…………. Payable to “Middlesex Law Society” Receipts will not be issued. For confirmation of your booking, please send a SSAE c I would like to join Middlesex Law Society, please send me an application form.

local issues

5 Reasons Why Inbound Marketing

Beats Cold Calling Every Time The post-Jackson world is a strange, strange place for small practices, especially those who’ve traditionally relied on claims management companies to provide them with leads. With the noose ever tightening around our easiest route to market, what can we do to combat the almost inevitible decline in business? Online marketing is something that, as an industry, we’ve shied away from. The barrier to entry can be relatively high, the learning curve steep and the pitfalls too numerous to count. But what if I told you that the real trick to Internet marketing isn’t knowing your HTML from your JavaScript - it’s just about knowing how to have a meaningful conversation?

Inbound Marketing Builds Trust To an extent, inbound marketing is a “long game”, meaning you’re investing time now in order to get a return in the future. The advantage is that you’ve already provided your potential customer with something of value. By giving them something they can use for free you’re more likely to attract their paid business in the future, and you’ve established yourself as a trustworthy and authoritative voice.

Inbound Marketing Costs Nothing But Time Though time’s at a premium in all of our lives, 30 minutes a day spent on the core inbound activities - blogging, website optimisation, social media interaction, content curation and sharing - could help bring down your average cost-per-lead by 62%, with no capital investment.

By providing potential customers with content that’s of real use that simultaneously extols the values of your product, you can engage with an entirely new audience of people that a) already know what you do and b) know that you’re informed and active in the space you’re working in. This beats any cold-calling CMC hands down and shifts the paradigm - your clients don’t feel harassed into making a claim, and you have complete control over their onboarding and flow through your company.

Inbound Marketing = SEO By taking control of your inbound marketing and focussing your efforts around your website, you’re acting as your own Search Engine Optimisation consultant. Creating content that people want to read and share, placing the main bulk on your website and sharing it through multiple channels can help your site to seem more trustworthy and so appear higher in Google and Bing’s search results.

With no further ado, here’s our top 5 reasons why your business should be looking at inbound marketing as the next step in your lead sourcing.

Inbound Marketing Covers Thousands of Channels By using a CMC, you’re limiting yourself to a single sales/marketing channel with a high cost. By making the switch to inbound, the blog that you write for your site can be shared on Twitter and Facebook, be broken down into an infographic to share on BuzzFeed or Pinterest, be turned into a presentation to throw up on Slideshare, a webinar, a workshop…the possibilities are as endless as the number of channels available. It also means that, if one of your channels should become closed, you have many others still available to use.

Inbound Marketing Snowballs Over Time Rather than print advertising which, by its nature, is ephemeral, inbound marketing sticks around. As you create more content, you’re creating a database of knowledge and wisdom that potential clients and you! - can draw upon months or years in the future. This is the power of inbound - the long tail. The content you create will keep working for you.

Content Is King It’s not a secret - people are more likely to buy from people they trust, and in today’s market we need to view ourselves as salesmen and ambassadors for our products. The best salesmen - the ones who don’t need to paint their customers into corners, but rather let them come to decisions themselves - are evangelists, and who’s a better evangelist for your business than you?

Even armed with all of this new knowledge, venturing into the world of content and inbound marketing can be daunting. For help and advise on creating sharable content, or developing your inbound marketing strategy, contact Oriel Responsive today. As the team behind Lawyerly.co.uk, Oriel Responsive has industry-leading experience in creating innovative and attractive products for the legal services industry. Call us today on 0151 242 6755 or email info@orielresponsive.co.uk for more information on our services.

The Bill of Middlesex

property

Earth, Wind and Power Satisfying our energy demand comes with side effects. As the government pushes on with incentives on new energy sources, it brings community conflict and home buying risk as their impacts are felt on the ground. Marshall King, Chief Executive at SearchFlow, assesses the impacts and what it means for conveyancers’ due diligence. An estimated 150,000 Britons live within 165ft of electricity pylons and recent research at the University of Bern has identified stronger links with elevated rates of dementia. National Grid, which manages the network, has stated that putting high-voltage cables underground poses different risks and is prohibitively expensive. They recognise that there may be some health impacts but states that the balance of evidence still points away from harm.

Marshall King CEO, SearchFlow www.searchflow.co.uk

The UK is hungry for energy. Its population growth demands more resources at a time when it must reduce its dependency on coal, rapidly dwindling North Sea oil and imported energy. With commitments to achieve a 15% clean energy target by 2020, the Government has been exploring all avenues to reap the energy harvest available. We live in the windiest place in Europe and large scale offshore arrays have already been established. This is not enough to meet our renewable wind targets and there are now multiple planning applications in targeted areas where there are fewer planning restrictions. Northamptonshire is a key hub for wind farm applications at the moment. It is popular with developers as the county has very few environmental designations, such as sites of special scientific interest, historic designations or lower level flight paths, relative to others. There are some 20 applications totalling 159 turbines in a 20 mile radius of Northampton. The M1 Wind Farm proposal has 9 turbines at 90m in height, with the argument that there is already man made intrusion from the motorway, why not just add to it? Other proposals, such as that in the Haversham, impact directly on the fabric of the village. 5 turbines are proposed at 127m high - the height of the London Eye - and will also be seen across all of Milton Keynes in a 24km radius. The Government knows this is a middle England vote loser and is giving back power to communities to block wind farm development but in return for a five-fold rise in benefits in local area if they agree. The subsidies, worth about £100,000 a year from a medium-sized farm, could be used to reduce energy bills. It could also provide much needed funds for parish councils, charities or community groups. A valuable carrot, but will it be enough to overcome the NIMBYs and avoid blight to properties on the market while uncertainty continues? I suspect the latter could prevail. The same applies to electricity pylons. Living near one is not considered desirable. Concerns continue about electromagnetic radiation that could lead to childhood leukaemia or increased dementia, but these have yet to be proven.

Ironically, the residents of Richborough in East Kent, who celebrated removing the eyesore of two old cooling towers last year, are now contending with the prospect of a new power link from Belgium. The Nemo Link, as it is called, will lay high voltage electricity cables under the sea, improving the link between UK and European electricity generation. It will then connect to about 70 new pylons each the height of 11 double decker buses, which will cut through the countryside on one of two proposed routes. National Grid says the pylons are needed because they have to carry double the voltage of the existing line, while villagers are up in arms at the impact it will have on the unspoilt landscape between Sandwich and Canterbury. The visual proximity of tall pylons and power lines strung across rural vistas and the audible crackle from them could well be enough to put many off buying a home. It could lock down communities from being able to move or suffer loss in the value of their properties - a risk that conveyancers will surely need to be alive to on behalf of their clients. Another energy battleground, and one the Government seems determined to win the fight, is the more controversial subject of shale gas and its process to get it out of the ground – Fracking. George Osborne has announced an incentive package to get shale gas exploration and extraction underway - streamlining operator permits and world leading tax breaks. The rewards for doing this appear to be great. The latest British Geological Survey (BGS) analysis suggests that there are far greater shale gas reserves under UK soil than previously thought. In the North of England alone, there could be as much as 1300 trillion cubic feet of shale gas, of which roughly 10% would be recoverable. The UK consumes some 3 trillion cubic feet of gas a year, meaning that we could easily be self sufficient for decades to come. “Fracking” is a necessarily invasive process. Shale deposits have lain for millions of years under high pressure many kilometres below ground. By injecting water, sand and chemicals at high pressure into boreholes, fissures are created in horizontal shafts and the gas is released to be captured and stored. The US experience is what is causing the concern. Already a very mature industry, there are over a million fracking wells across the US. They have spread almost uncontained because the rights to drill for shale gas extend to the landowner to exploit. The wells themselves are vast, 20 or 30 of them extending a mile and half in two directions underground.

Concerns exist about the, as yet, unproven stories of damaged wells leaking a cocktail of chemicals into the groundwater. A recent investigation in Pennsylvania identified that residents within a 3 mile radius of the wells had elevated levels of methane that could have escaped into a water supply as a result of a fractured well. The UK experience should be far more controlled, more planned and more restrictive. To start with, there are already pre-defined licenced blocks issued to specific exploration companies and their activities are highly regulated. The wells themselves will be subject to stringent standards before, during and crucially after use. Also, the contents of the fracking chemicals will need to be revealed by every drilling company so that it is utterly transparent to the local authority and the Environment Agency. Shale gas has transformed the US energy market with cheap plentiful gas. There could also be significant benefits to local UK communities, with the latest offers by the Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) offering £100,000 per fracked well and 1% of the revenues generated. Communities would decide how the cash was spent. The BGS recently declared fracking as “safe” providing the wells had a high degree of integrity before and after drilling. However, they think more research is required into the relationship between fractured wells and aquifers, which the south of England relies on for 70% of its drinking water. What are certain are the human reactions to this in their backyard, which are understandably not great. So where are the battlegrounds likely to be? Aside from the Fylde Valley in Lancashire, other licenced block areas can be found in Leicestershire, East Yorkshire, Staffordshire, Dorset, north of Winchester and across the South Downs to the Weald of Sussex and West Kent. Significant opposition is already well underway at high profile sites like Balcombe, West Sussex, which will start exploration soon. The BGS, which was involved in the latest shale gas estimates, is examining the Weald basin in the South East, where protest is spreading. The fear of fracking is strong because it is focussed on areas previously unaffected by mining or past industrial activity that could cause an environmental or planning risk. Homebuyers will be concerned to understand the current and future impact of energy installations as their presence becomes increasingly felt in proximity to their proposed home. These are significant planning issues that are not automatically addressed by standard searches. Prospective energy installations are something conveyancers are now advising their clients on and new reports can easily be obtained from search companies such as SearchFlow for a modest fee. This bridges an important gap in the property data market as these issues are as relevant as environmental and flooding risks that could affect their client’s decision to proceed to exchange.

The Bill of Middlesex

centenary feature

Middlesex Guildhall Centenary The UK Supreme Court’s Head of Communications, Ben Wilson, offers a potted history of the Middlesex Guildhall, which is celebrating its 100th birthday this year.

In 1888 a major reorganisation of local government across England meant that Middlesex lost as much as 20% of its territory to the newly formed London County Council. As a result, the Middlesex Justices lost their Sessions House in Clerkenwell. In exchange, to soften this blow, Cockerell’s prominent Guildhall building was sold to the Middlesex Justices and the newly-formed County Council (even though the Middlesex County boundary now stood considerably to the west of Westminster). However, the building soon proved inadequate to meet the requirements of both the Courts and civil administration in this hugely populous area. Plans were drawn up for radical alterations, with two additional storeys to accommodate the new incumbents.

Artists's impression of the new Guildhall for an architectural journal, 1911. Image courtesy of the City of London, London Metropolitan Archives. On a cold bright December’s morning in 1913, one hundred boy scouts and one hundred members of the Middlesex Territorial Regiments lined up to form a guard of honour outside their county’s gleaming new headquarters on Parliament Square.

The architect employed to carry out this work between 1892-94 was the County Surveyor for Middlesex, F H Pownall. He used red brick (complementing the home of the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors, which still stands next door) to create what he hoped would be a lasting home for the county’s administration. Over the next few years works of art, mainly portraits, came to the Guildhall from many sources such as Magistrates, Judges and citizens of Middlesex. With the passage of time the gifts evolved into the Middlesex Guildhall Art

As Big Ben struck midday, HRH Prince and Princess Arthur of Connaught arrived to officially declare open the new Guildhall for Middlesex. Prince Arthur swung open the heavy wooden doors, and was presented with a gold key by the architect waiting inside. The Bishop of Willesden led prayers, before the prince gave a short speech and unveiled a bust of his recently departed brother, King Edward VII. This grand ceremony marked the latest lease of life for a building on a site that has been linked to public administration and justice for many decades. This year, we mark the centenary of the Guildhall. The Supreme Court, along with a range of other partner organisations with a stake in the history of Middlesex and the building (including the Middlesex Law Society), have worked together to produce an exhibition to chart the history of this magnificient building in the heart of the capital. In this article, I will offer a whistle-stop historical tour designed to whet your appetite to come and visit in person this summer, to learn more about how Middlesex ended up with such a prominent central location for its administrative base.

A site of history The present building is the third Guildhall to be erected on the site. The first was built in 1804, and was designed by Samuel Pepys Cockerell (a relative of the diarist) with a domed, octagonal central tower over the courtroom. The first hearings by the Justices of the “Liberty of Westminster” were held there in January 1809. Many of the cases dealt with were petty thefts and misdemeanours. In our exhibition you will be able to read about the infamous case of ‘The Boy Jones’, Queen Victoria’s stalker. Under an Act of 1845, the Sessions House was formerly transferred to the jurisdiction of the Middlesex Justices (who had previously heard all their cases in Clerkenwell). At this time, Middlesex was a hugely important county covering much of the area we know today as Greater London, with ancient boundaries formed by the rivers Colne, Lee and Thames.

Foundation Stone.

The Bill of Middlesex

centenary feature

Society building to extend the available site. Thus, without any sort of open architectual competition and little by way of proposed designs on the table, Gibson was invited by the committee to set about demolishing Pownall’s Guildhall and create a new home for the county’s administration. Such a prominent site in central London raised a considerable challenge, even for an experienced civil architect such as Gibson. Jeremy Musson records how Gibson echoed aspects of surrounding buildings in his work: “While it is a novel design overall, certain details closely mirror features of buildings near by: the carved, canopied niches echo those in Henry VII’s chapel in Westminster Abbey; the parapets and dormers are reminiscent of Barry and Pugin’s Palace of Westminster; the balconies are modelled on George Gilbert Scott’s lively terrace that faces the Middlesex Guildhall; and the height of the tower aspires to that of the parish church of St Margaret.” Critics were somewhat divided on the extent to which Gibson achieved these aims. Some were not so keen on the “fussiness” of the sculptural detailing, and a critic writing in the Daily Mail shortly ahead of the official opening offers the faint praise that “altogether the building, if not too closely analysed, has a pleasing effect. Its chief merit is that its scale does not clash with that of the surrounding architectual monuments.” You can learn more about the design of the building on a new audio tour, produced to help mark the centenary and available for download from the Supreme Court website or via the Apple or Android “app” markets.

A building serving the county

James Gibson. Image courtesy of the RIBA Library Photographs Collection. Collection (on the abolition of the Greater London Council in 1986). The Trust was set up in 1992 and continues to cherish and promote the collection today.

Those inside the new building set to work quickly. Like any local authority serving the rapidly growing suburbs of the capital, the council’s agenda was a busy one. A commemorative book published in 1965 lists some of the council’s main achievements in the pre-war years as the opening of the Great West Road by King George V in 1925, the building of a new maternity block at the West Middlesex County Hospital in 1932, the construction of three Middlesex/Surrey Thames bridges at Hampton Court, Twickenham and Chiswick in 1933, and the inauguration of the West Middlesex Main Drainage system in 1936. Meanwile, the Middlesex Justices began work in their new home, trying a wide range of minor crimes under the watchful gaze of their forebearers

Within a decade, Pownall’s building was beginning to feel the strain. When the opportunity arose to purchase a neighbouring building belonging to the National Society (the Church organisation which provided the first free schools), the Middlesex Justices jumped at the chance. They were less sure, however, whether to simply extend Pownall’s building into the extra space, or demolish the lot and start again.

A new guildhall Enter a Scottish architect, James Gibson, to advise the council on the options available to them. Gibson had come to London in the early 1880s, initially working on projects including the Savoy Hotel and the Palace Theatre, before starting his own practice and entering into an architectural partnership with S B Russell in 1890, with whom he notably won the commission for the West Riding County Hall in Wakefield. This project was significant, as Gibson worked closely with the sculptor Henry Fehr who carved the interior of the council chamber – a collaboration which would be repeated for the Guildhall. Gibson and his team impressed the Buildings Committee’s Guildhall subcommittee with their energy and ideas – such as the prospect of closing off the small road which separated Pownall’s Guildhall and the National

The Bill of Middlesex

Cockerell's Guildhall. Image courtesy of the City of London, London Metropolitan Archives. continued on page 20

centenary feature

Congratulation to the

on its 100 years of service to

from sponsors of the Sheid and s

The Bill of Middlesex

centenary feature

Middlesex Guildhall

the administration of Justice

supporters of The Bill of Middlesex.

The Bill of Middlesex

centenary feature

In 1971, as if to complete the rapidly changing nature of the building’s workload, wider changes to the judicial system in England and Wales meant that county Quarter Sessions were themselves also abolished. In effect, the Guildhall became a full time Crown Court, hearing criminal cases from across inner London. Lawyers from the Middlesex area continued to form the bulk of those working in the Guildhall on a regular basis. As many readers will know, in 1959 the Middlesex Law Society had been formed. To reflect the long heritage of Middlesex lawyers and the Guildhall, the Society’s constitution was amended to allow extra-territorial membership to solicitors on the staff of the former Middlesex County Council: this facility is still open today to the staff of the Supreme Court.

Council Chamber 3. depicted in the Guildhall’s growing art collection. The building also began to serve as headquarters for the Lord-Lietenant of Middlesex.

Westminster at war During the First World War, the Guildhall served as the setting for a number of trials by court martial of German spies, who were charged with “war treason” crimes against Britain. Details of the most infamous of these cases – that of Carl Lody, who ended up as the first spy to be executed in England during the war – can be found in our exhibition. After the end of the First World War, Middlesex County Council commissioned Richard Goulden to create a memorial to the 12,694 men from the county who had died in battle. As his model for the bronze figure in front of the memorial (which is still located in our entrance hall), Goulden chose Robert Ryder VC. Ryder was an employee of the County Council before serving in the 12th Battalion of the Middlesex Regiment. He was awarded the Victoria Cross for his gallantry in the attack on Thiepval in September 1916, during the Battle of the Somme. Ryder survived the war and died aged 83 years in 1978, and is buried in Harefield, Middlesex. The memorial was unveiled on 20 November 1924 by General Sir Ivor Maxse, Colonel of the Middlesex Regiment. In subsequent years, services were held in the Guildhall on Armistice Day and this tradition is maintained today with an annual service on the Saturday before Remembrance Sunday.

Over 35 years, the building’s seven courts dealt with thousands of cases, and played host to tens of thousands of defendants, victims, witnesses, lawyers and judges. As former Circuit Judge Fabyan Evans has written: “The court was entrusted with a local jurisdiction over cases committed from Marlborough Street and Marylebone Magistrates’ Courts. These came from a catchment area that provided some high-profile allegations of misconduct in nightclubs and restaurants by well-known sporting personalities – allegations that were rarely proved to the satisfaction of the jury. “The court performed a useful role in absorbing cases from other venues in order to relieve listing problems or to avoid them being tried in a particular locality because of their notoriety. The caseload began to require judges who were sufficiently experienced to try certain classes of offender, such as those accused of serious fraud.” A major refurbishment took place between 1982 and 1988, converting the former council chamber into a proper courtroom and creating four new ones. The Guildhall was reopened for business as a Crown Court and was formally opened by the then Lord Chancellor, the Right Honourable The Lord Mackay of Clashfern on 5 April 1989. A commemorative stained glass window marking the occasion can still be seen in this lobby (a guide to all the stained glass has also been produced to mark the centenary, and is freely available for download from the Supreme Court website).

Twenty years later, and Europe was again at war. During the war, the Guildhall served as a courthouse for governments in exile, staffed by foreign judges, to deal with maritime and military offences commited by foreign nationals. Once peace came, the names of 160 Middlesex County Council staff who died during active service during the Second World War were recorded on a plaque displayed in the entrance hall, alongside the First World War memorial. As Europe emerged from the horrors of the war, Middlesex County Council faced the same challenges as many other local authorities around the country: dealing with the demands of a growing population with ever increasing expectations of the health and education services in particular. As an indication of its growth of responsibilities and population, total expenditure by the council by 1947/8 was three times that spent in the year the Guildhall opened.

All change But with the arrival of the Greater London Council in 1965, the administrative County of Middlesex was no more. A year before, the Middlesex lieutenancy had been subsumed into Greater London, reflecting that entity’s growing monopoly over such civic responsibilities.

The Guildhall in the 1960s. Image courtesy of the City of London, London Metropolitan Archives.

The Bill of Middlesex

centenary feature

Fabyan Evans continues: “In the 1980s circuit judges around the country had found themselves trying offences that had previously been within the exclusive province of High Court judges. In London these had been tried at the Central Criminal Court [the Old Bailey], but by the 1990s cases of rape and child abuse were regularly transferred or commited for trial at the Guildhall. They were followed by cases of murder for judges who were authorized to preside over them.”

A new lease of life Not long after the turn of the millennium, the most senior judges in the United Kingdom were looking for a new home. The Constitutional Reform Act 2005 provided for the setting up of a Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, taking over the role of ‘apex court’ from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (the ‘Law Lords’). The decision to create a Supreme Court for the UK was taken for a number of reasons. The most compelling reason, in many people’s eyes, was the fact that it was rather odd for the country’s top judges to sit as members of the upper house of Parliament – technically able to both contribute towards, but also vote upon, new legislation. The doctrine of the separation of powers is a principle designed to ensure that no single branch of the state has too much power. The fact that the judicial branch of state (the judges) could sit on appeals involving legislation they themselves had debated and helped to pass was felt by many to be an anomaly that needed to be fixed. So the Government brought forward legislation that removed the Law Lords from the Houses of Parliament, and created a new home for them. Once this decision was taken, that home needed to be found. A number of options were considered, against criteria that included the need for a specified minimum working space and a central London location. Options assessed included one of the (then vacant) wings of Somerset House on the Strand, and disused office buildings in Westminster. The Middlesex Guildhall building was, however, always a strong contender to take on this new lease of life. It was ideally located opposite Parliament, symbolically positioning the most senior court in the land opposite the Parliament it complements; it was the right size; and it was already owned by the Government. In December 2004, the Middlesex Guildhall was officially announced as the Government’s preferred choice. Preparations began to transfer the court’s work to the Crown Court at Isleworth in West London and to agree deals with architects and developers on the major refurbishment project. Campaigners attempted to reverse the decision, taking their judicial review to the High Court in a bid to retain the Guildhall as a Crown Court. They were concerned that the refurbishment would mean that many of Gibson and Fehr’s original features would be destroyed. Others joined the protest for other reasons, keen to see the building’s historic role in trying criminals from the County of Middlesex retained. Ultimately, however, the conversion plans proceeded. The Crown Court closed its doors for the final time on 31 March 2007: the keys were handed to the developers and more than two years of extensive refurbishment and renovation began. The outside of the building was deep-cleaned to reveal the beauty of Fehr’s intricate mouldings and carvings. The Art Collection was painstakingly removed, and the Trust arranged for many of the items to be expertly cleaned. Detailed plans were discussed with Westminster City Council and English Heritage. New public areas were created, and natural light was introduced to areas of the building by reintroducing the original lightwells

The Bill of Middlesex

One of the Crown Court rooms (now Ct 2). and adding interior floor-to-ceiling windows. Old committee and jury rooms were converted into modern meeting rooms for lawyers to use while at the court. Carpets, wall hangings and furniture was specially designed and produced. And new IT and communications systems were installed to ensure that the Supreme Court was ready to begin its work in October 2009, as the first court in the UK to routinely film and broadcast its proceedings.

Still serving Middlesex Those responsible for the building’s renovation were very aware of the social as well as physical heritage for which they had responsibility. While planning protection means the rich heraldic footprint of Middlesex will forever be imprinted on this building, the Supreme Court also maintains contemporary links with the historic county. As historian Rupert Barnes wrote to his fellow Middlesaxonians during the refurbishment in 2009: “Weep but briefly, for the master left his home over forty years ago, and will not return. He is not forgotten though; looking down over the hearings of the Kingdom’s highest court will be the old virtues, in pre-Raphaelite allegorical maidens, and still the arms of the County of Middlesex and the Lord Lieutenants of the shire.” The Supreme Court’s special summer exhibition marking the centenary of the Middlesex Guildhall explores this fascinating story in greater detail. The exhibition will be freely open to the public between 9.30am – 4.30pm Monday to Friday from Thursday 1 August to Friday 27 September 2013. The Supreme Court is also opening for the ‘Open House London’ weekend on Saturday 21 and Sunday 22 September from 10am – 4.30pm, when the exhibition will be on display. We very much hope that members of the legal profession from across Middlesex will be able to take the opportunity to visit us and learn more about the history of this building, and how we seek to remember that heritage today in the Supreme Court’s work. My thanks are due to the many sources from which we have gathered material for the exhibition, including the historical overview by Sir Clifford Radcliffe, a similar work by former Crown Court staff member Steve Jones, and the contributors to Chris Miele’s book produced to mark the opening of the Supreme Court in 2009. We are also grateful to the Middlesex Law Society for its kind contribution towards the exhibition in the form of a Shield.

professional issues

“Lawyers are not just lawyers anymore – they are client managers and marketers” At the beginning of the year, we spoke to our client IBB Solictors about the challenges in the market, and how as the title of that piece suggested, “Good firms will always survive - properly run and properly managed”. The key to this was clear, law firms who are willing and able to react quickly to the changing environment have a better chance of sustainable growth. In the last piece we talked to Penningtons Solicitors LLP about the areas in which firms should be looking to their bank to support them, and how flexible solutions were important. With this in mind, I thought we would look at one of our clients who we’ve helped through a complete restructuring of their business over the last few years, how they have gone about this and what the future holds for them.

Restructure and diversification Four years ago, Healys were a two partner practice renowned for their property services. Now they are a seven partner LLP with two offices in Central London and Brighton and a growing international business. The founding partners, John Healy and Marios Pattihis, quickly identified that given the economic environment and the way the market was changing, they needed to restructure and diversify their business in order to survive. Following their conversion to LLP, the whole structure of the firm was changed to form five new business areas – corporate/commercial, real estate, commercial litigation, private client and serious/ catastrophic injury. Healys have also expanded their international business through their contacts in Cyprus as well as in China and the Middle East, where they have developed local alliances. There were also changes at an organisational level with LEXCEL Accreditation followed by membership of the Law Society’s Conveyancing Quality Scheme – the mark of excellence for the home buying process. This involved lots of training, reporting changes and auditing as part of the rigorous assessment carried out by the Law Society. Despite all of these fundamental changes, Healys LLP stayed profitable throughout and last year increased their fee income by 17%.

Relationship building Dino Skinner, Managing Partner at Healys, took some time to explain the importance of financial support during this restructure and what the firm are working on now. “During all of these positive changes in the firm we really needed the support of our bank. Fortunately, we have had a very good relationship with Allied Irish Bank (GB) for 6 years. They have been very supportive through what has been a difficult trading period and I knew that at any time I could pick up the phone and get a response directly from our Relationship Manager. Not only was the response always immediate, it was always a positive conversation. They’re receptive to our changing needs and think outside the box when providing financial solutions.” “Allied Irish Bank (GB) look after our full banking and provide us with funding when we need it – their online iBusiness Banking is also excellent. This relationship is consistent throughout the organisation and I never hear any complaints from my accounts team. For me, as a firm looking to grow – this is the level of service you should expect from your bank.” “With this continued support, we are now looking forward to building on the growth we saw at the end of last year.” As well as utilising their new structure to look at new sectors such as retail, hotels & leisure, business immigration and international work, Healys are particularly focused on strengthening a USP that is very close to our hearts – relationship building. “In a very competitive environment it is important to constantly look to maintain and improve your USP. For Healys LLP this has always been around building mutually beneficial relationships with our clients – our clients are not just a file on a desk.” “We succeed by understanding our clients’ objectives and maintaining a clear focus and in today’s environment, clients are particularly looking for value for money and transparency. The days of charging by the hour and presenting a figure at the end are gone. Our relationship approach means we understand this and we’re upfront about the cost of getting from A to B and do what we say we’ll do – this helps the client’s budget and helps to build trust which leads to referrals. Lawyers are not just lawyers anymore – they are client managers and marketers.”

Peter Slattery, Regional Manager – London and the South East, at Allied Irish Bank (GB), continues with the third part of his look at the legal sector from a bank’s perspective and what banks should be offering their professional clients.

“As part of our growth plan, we are investing in our training and development programme for all of our staff to ensure this relationship philosophy is at the core of everything we do at every level of the organisation. We’ve found that this not only strengthens our client proposition but also creates a more positive environment for our staff, who appreciate that investment in their development is recognition of their high performance.”

Partnerships Last week I heard someone say that “doing business in today’s environment is all about partnerships” and Dino’s comments very much echo this, not only with regard to the relationship between the Bank and Healys, but also between the firm and its clients. At Allied Irish Bank (GB) we like to feel like we’re part of our clients’ businesses, on the phone when they need us and always supportive in our conversations. We also look to refer our clients to one another and to our network of professional contacts. For example, where we’ve helped other firms grow they have reached a point where they have needed to change accountants to enable them to receive the level of support required by a larger business – we would facilitate meetings for them and get them set up with the right firm. There is clearly a synergy between the way both Allied Irish Bank (GB) and Healys do business. Building mutually beneficial, long term relationships are at the core of both organisations at all levels – clearly this is a very positive thing. Peter Slattery Regional Manager – London and the South East, Allied Irish Bank (GB) www.aibgb.co.uk With special thanks to: Dino Skinner Managing Partner – Healys LLP www.healys.com

The Bill of Middlesex

professional issues The Centre of European Law, King’s College London The Centre of European Law has a fine tradition of teaching and research into all areas of European Union Law and celebrates its 40th anniversary in 2014. It enjoys a reputation of excellence for offering a distinguished programme of public lectures, seminars and conferences. Over 300 students are currently enrolled on our four Postgraduate Diploma/MA Programmes in EU Law, EU Competition Law, Economics for Competition Law and United Kingdom, European Union and United States Copyright Law. These programmes have an excellent reputation amongst the top UK and EU Law firms who sponsor their employees to take the programmes which contribute to their professional development. 2012-13 has been a most active year, with many events which can be found on the Centre website – http://www.kcl.ac.uk/cel. The Centre is rightly proud of its many activities which are the product of a large number of members of academic staff and friends of the Centre. These activities are closely connected with research undertaken at King’s, and aim to contribute to the creation of a rich and stimulating research environment. This makes the Centre a true centre of European law, unique and recognized in the UK, Europe and beyond.

The Bill of Middlesex

professional issues

Quill Pinpoint research defies negative industry trend With regular, depressing news of law firm closures, it’s unsurprising that the just-published Annual Statistical Report by The Law Society shows a reduction in the number of private practice firms. Many reasons are cited for this dwindling number of practicing law firms, including strong competition from rival practices and changes to costs and funding, which mean that firms are finding it ever harder to achieve favourable profit margins. However, in defiance of this negative industry trend, come the results of recently undertaken research by Quill Pinpoint on their Pinpoint Interactive cashiering service clients. The statistics show an average 25.4% increase in profit costs over a 3-year period, attributable in part to outsourcing their bookkeeping function. In monetary terms, that’s worth in excess of £100,000 per firm. The research results demonstrate how outsourcing back office processes can have a positive impact on business models because outsourced support is a proven way to improve profitability by reducing overheads, and offloading the responsibility of cashiering, reporting, forecasting and compliance. As an additional benefit, outsourcing is provided on a continuous service provision basis.

The Bill of Middlesex

Supporting commentary for the Quill Pinpoint research is provided by Pinpoint Interactive client, David Foster, Partner at David J Foster & Co Solicitors, who states: “We’ve reduced our capital expenditure and overheads because we don’t need to employ accounts staff nor maintain hardware or software. Pinpoint Interactive has contributed to our growth in turnover of 20% over the past 2 years”. Further reinforcement is given by Matthew Bradley, Director at Bradley & Jefferies Solicitors Ltd, who outlines: “Our profit costs have increased consistently year after year… the cashiering service has undoubtedly played its part by limiting our outbound costs, and helping us to tighter control and better forecast our finances”. Cassandra Simpkins, Partner at Simpkins & Co Solicitors, concludes: “Using Pinpoint Interactive for cashiering responsibilities means my Partner and I can concentrate on providing excellent legal advice to our clients and we can keep a

closer eye on other key areas of our firm’s business management. The outsourcing service ultimately helps immensely with our long term aim of increasing profits and our firm’s continued survival in an ever challenging legal marketplace”. This supporting evidence shows how outsourcing enables firms to channel their energies on the essential tasks of legal services delivery and practice management, so that fee earning capacity can be increased, and managers have the business intelligence insight needed to grow their business. By being more productive in both of these business areas, firms can improve their competitiveness and profitability. If you want to find out more on the Quill Pinpoint profit costs research project or request information on Pinpoint Interactive, get in touch by email at info@quill.co.uk, call their Manchester head office on 0161 236 2910 or visit their website at www.quill.co.uk.

professional issues

The changing face

of the cosmetic industry

James Colville MBBS BSc MSc FRCS(Plast)

The number of cosmetic operations performed in the UK has increased year on year over the last 5 years according to figures from the (British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons) BAAPS; in 2008 there were just over 34,000 cases and in 2012 more than 43,000; this is despite the recession, the PIP breast implant scandal and a government review of cosmetic surgery published this year.

Surgical and non-surgical treatments are now worth many billions of

legally binding document but is supporting evidence that the patient was

pounds a year and draw a wide variety of practitioners to the table, leaving

sufficiently informed before surgery. Photographs are essential for cosmetic

the patient open to exploitation. There are signposts that can help including

work and these should be taken with good lighting and in well defined

membership of reputable bodies such as BAPRAS (British Association of

positions.

plastic, reconstructive and aesthetic surgeons) and BAAPS but the patient is none the wiser unless they have done their homework.

The patient may be dissatisfied after ‘successful’ surgery, which could be due to unrealistic expectations; this is very subjective and unlikely to lead

They need to have discussed the problem with their GP, with friends and reviewed the Internet to see what treatments are available and what is involved. The consultation, when it comes, needs to define what the patient requires and what the surgeon can offer and whether there is sufficient overlap between the two to proceed to surgery. Some surgeons give the patient unrealistic expectations or have overstated their experience and some will not recognise the problem patient who may want an operation urgently or is secretive, unable to identify his or her desires, very demanding, narcissistic or maybe overly concerned with a minor problem.

to a successful claim against the surgeon. There maybe complications after surgery which are well recognised and presented in the medical literature which are also unlikely to be successful. However, if there have been problems after using unrecognised techniques, or the surgeon is not qualified to carry out such procedures, or there has been gross negligence, these are more likely to meet with success. Cosmetic surgery is a difficult area to police since there are very few restrictions placed on practitioners, but the Keogh report published in April this year, may help protect cosmetic patients from the unscrupulous practitioner; it proposes adequate training, that all fillers should be

Informed consent is therefore essential where the details of the discussion

prescription only and the establishment of an ombudsman for poorly

are recorded legibly in the notes as well as potential complications; these

treated patients.

are mentioned if they occur more frequently than 2% and if they are rare, life altering or threatening complications, such as blindness after

James Colville is a Consultant Plastic Surgeon and Hand Surgeon. He is a

blepharoplasty (eyelid) surgery which occurs in 0.04% of cases.

member of BAAPS and BAPRAS and consults privately at St. Anthony’s

Complications must also be recorded on the consent form which is not a

Hospital, Cheam.

The Bill of Middlesex

professional issues

The UK’s largest dog welfare organisation Dogs Trust (formerly the National Canine Defence League) was founded in 1891 “to protect dogs from torture and ill usage of every kind”. Nowadays, we are best known for our famous slogan A dog is for life, not just for Christmas®. We have grown to be the largest dog welfare charity in the UK, with 18 rehoming centres, caring for over 16,000 stray and abandoned dogs every year. We never put down a healthy dog. It is a shocking fact that over 118,000 dogs were picked up on our streets last year. Sadly, many of these dogs were put to sleep through no fault of their own. Our mission is to stop this tragic waste of life. Situated throughout the United Kingdom, our rehoming centres offer everything abandoned dogs need to get them back on their paws again. We offer comfortable kennels, first class veterinary care, exercise facilities, and all the TLC that our canine guests deserve.

Most of our dogs are rehomed in a few weeks but those who need a little extra help will always be safe with us – thanks to our non destruction policy. We treat every dog like a beloved family pet. Ensuring your dog’s happiness and security after your lifetime… Many people worry about what would happen to their dog if they were no longer around to care for them. Our Canine Care Card scheme is a special free service that will guarantee peace of mind. By registering on the Canine Care Card scheme, Dogs Trust promises to be there to take care of your dog should the worst happen. To find out more about the Canine Care Card call 020 7837 0006, email us at ccc@dogstrust.org.uk.

The Bill of Middlesex

professional issues

Discover the affordable alternative to expensive online databases Can’t find that case? Having trouble locating a particular piece of legislation? Then the Law Society library can help you. Our team of experienced law librarians can save you valuable time by researching and locating information from over 55,000 resources. So there’s no need to take out an expensive online subscription for resources you might never fully use. We can help you to find cases, legislation, precedents, law reports and much more. Simply telephone or email your request to the team to get started - 0870 606 2511 or library@lawsociety.org.uk. To give you an idea of how we can help, here are just a few of the enquiries that our librarians have handled in the past.

Quarter Days

I have a very old legal document that mentions ‘Lady Day’. What does this mean?

Halsburys Laws Volume 97 (5th edition) under the ‘Time’ section explains that Lady Day is one of the four feast days or quarter days that mark the beginning of each quarter of the year, and are still referred to in some rental agreements. In England and Wales, Lady Day is 25th March; the other three quarter days are Midsummer Day (24th June), Michaelmas (29th September) and Christmas Day (25th December). Scotland and Ireland use different quarter days.

Case searches

Q. A.

I’m looking for case-law on a particular scenario. Can you help?

Yes. The library currently subscribes to Westlaw, Justis and LexisLibrary, all of which have case databases that can be searched by keywords. If you would subsequently like a copy of a case or law report, we can email you copies (subject to licences and copyright law) via Lawdocs, our document delivery service.

The library research service is open to members of the Law Society of England and Wales and their employees. To get started, phone us on 0870 606 2511 or email library@lawsociety.org.uk Lawdocs document delivery service can email you copies of documents within half a working day. If your request is urgent we have a 45 minute express service. For more details about this and the rest of the Library’s services please visit www.lawsociety.org.uk/library or call us on 0870 606 2511. You can also follow us on Twitter @LSlawlibrary. We look forward to hearing from you.

If your document is very old indeed, and predates 1750, then Hill and Redman’s Law of Landlord and Tenant (loose leaf), explains that quarter days prior to this “fall 11 days after the equivalent modern usual quarter days”, and that some documents around this time may refer to “old quarter days”. This is because of the changes to the calendar made by the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750 and the Calendar Act 1751.

Comparing text between previous and current editions.

I have a copy of the 28th edition of Tristram and Cootes on Probate Practice. Can you let me know if some text has changed?

Yes. The library holds the current edition of Tristram and Cootes, which is the 30th edition published in 2006 (the 31st edition is due in 2014). We are happy to read a reasonable amount of text over the phone. If there is too much to read out we can supply copies of pages via Lawdocs, our document delivery service.

Ownership of airspace above a property

Does the old saying that the ‘owner of land is presumed to own everything up to the sky and down to the centre of the earth’ apply in law? My client wants to know how much air above his property he owns.

The Law of Real Property by Megarry and Wade (8th ed., 2012) discusses this “ancient maxim” at paragraph 3-043, saying that “this is inaccurate as regards to the right to airspace”. This is discussed further at paragraph 3-035, an “owner’s rights over the airspace above his land and buildings are limited to the height necessary for their ordinary use and enjoyment”. Case law is referenced in regards to airspace being invaded by trees, telephone wires and other objects including that of projectiles being fired. Aircraft in flight are generally dealt with under the Civil Aviation Act 1982.

The Bill of Middlesex

professional issues

Have you considered the risk of going cheap? The professional indemnity insurance renewal season is now upon us and proposal forms are dropping through the door, but could your choice of insurer this year lead to it being your last year in business because you chose to go cheap? Since the fall of Quinn and Lemma the SRA has been under pressure to take a more active role in assessing which insurers should be allowed to provide insurance to law firms, but until now has chosen to leave matters relating to the provision of professional indemnity insurance to the financial regulator. However, faced with the fallout from the Lemma failure and the risk of 1300 law firms and their clients being affected by the fall of the unrated insurer Balva, it has finally decided to act, and is now starting a review of the unrated insurance market. If Balva does eventually succumb to an insolvency event it will leave the firms it covers not only having to find a new insurer within four weeks but also the money to pay for the new policy; these firms are likely to be with Balva because of the attractive low premiums so one has to question whether they would be able to find the extra money for a new policy even if they could find the rated insurer willing to take them on.

The Law Society and Solicitors Regulation Authority have both issued warnings to law firms about the risks involved with choosing an unrated insurer, but many firms are likely to ignore these warnings and go with an insurer that offers the lowest rates even though this carries significant risks! So what are the risks with going cheap? •

•

If an insurer becomes insolvent during a term of insurance policy holding firms would be required to arrange alternative cover within a month and pay a second premium, likely to be at a higher rate due to the circumstances involved; If an insurer became insolvent after 1 October 2013 and new policies could not be secured firms would have to cease practice.

Another unrated insurer has apparently thrown its hat into the ring as an option for Balva firms to consider, but could this just be jumping from frying pan into another! As mentioned above, firms choosing to place their business with an unrated insurer in 2013 could put themselves under the microscope with the SRA, but an added complication will come in October 2014, when in all likelihood the SRA will have concluded its review of the unrated insurance market and decided to ban them from the law firm arena, if this happens the firms going with unrated insurers in 2013 are likely to have real problems being able to get rated insurance at the 2013/14 renewal point. The SRA has announced a number of changes that will be implemented for the indemnity year starting on 1 October 2013, and these are: •

Removal of the Assigned Risks Pool - firms that cannot find openmarket insurance by 1 October will no longer be afforded cover through the ARP, and instead will have a 90-day extension period with their last insurer. After the first 30 days, if no cover can be found, the firm cannot take on any new business and will be expected to focus on an orderly wind-down over the next 60 days

•

Alterations to the length of cover - for policies incepting on or after 1 October 2013 there will no longer be a requirement for policies to expire on 30 September. Firms will be able to negotiate any length policy they like, assuming their insurer agrees

•

List of insurers - as suggested by the Law Society, the Qualifying Insurers List will change its name to the Participating Insurers List. This is to remove any misunderstanding that the insurers involved have undergone any vetting by the SRA

There are a number of messages that could be given out by firms going with unrated insurers, which regulators could use as a means of determining whether these firms need further investigation, for example: •

Are the firm’s finances so precarious that it is not able to pay a rated insurer’s premium?

•

Has the firm been rejected by rated insurers for being too high risk (high claims and/or complaints rates, no compliance plan or risk register, etc.)?

•

Does the firm take risk management seriously if it is happy to expose itself to such a high risk, especially when clear warnings have been given?

Clearly, it is for firms to decide for themselves which route to go down, but if it is the unrated route it should not come as any surprise that the regulator may then come knocking wanting to know why!

Quite clearly firms have much to think about in relation to what is, one of their most costly business expenses, they cannot do what many firms have done to date, and think it is just a form filling and cheque signing exercise! Written by Brian Rogers, Director of Regulation and Compliance, Riliance.

The Bill of Middlesex

professional issues

An iconic location With a rich heritage dating back to 1904, the Lindley Hall is an impressive setting for your special event. This elegant, lightfilled space with iconic glass vaulted ceiling creates a dramatic backdrop for any memorable occasion. Whether you are hosting an intimate dinner, sumptuous banquet for 350 or drinks reception for 600, or conference you will find the expansive, uncluttered space flexible and versatile. Dressed and lit for maximum impact, the atmospheric surroundings of Lindley Hall will make a lasting impression on your guests. As one of the largest uninterrupted floor spaces in Central London, the Lindley Hall is always in great demand by professional conference organisers. The Grade II listed building is a organiser’s dream boasting space for up to 500 delegates with state-of-the-art audio visual facilities, and an abundance of natural light. Our experienced events team are committed to ensuring that your event reflects well on your organisation. Delicious food, sophisticated

The Bill of Middlesex

settings, and excellent service – our catering partners have got it covered. Set in Vincent Square Victoria; the Lindley Hall is within easy walking distance from main stations. Victoria, St James’s Park and Pimlico stations are all close by. The Lindley Hall first opened its doors in 1904 by H.M Edward VII and Queen Alexandra. It was the monarch himself who had first mooted the idea of the Royal Horticultural Society having its own exhibition space for flower shows. This idea turned into one of London’s most sought after venues; an iconic film location, fashion week central, product launches with prestigious car marques such as Maserati and Lotus as well as a recognised political venue for conferences and question time. This really is a venue to inspire!

film

Film and the Law No 20

The Court Room and Show Biz

The name of Richard Linklater does not appear on many film buff’s list of all time fave directors. And yet he is responsible for two very successful films, namely Before Sunrise (1995) & Before Sunset (2004) which depict a screen romance that defined a generation.

By Vincent McGrath vmfilmnite@googlemail.com 020 8579 5330 07877 551442

Ken dodd - laughing all the way to the bank.

Before Sunset - the most annoying couple ever to hit the silver screen. Each film stretches over a period of one day and consists of two characters talking to one another more or less non-stop as they amble around Vienna in the first instant and Paris in the latter. Young American male Jessie (Ethan Hawke) bumps into young Frenchwoman Celine (Julie Delpy) on route to his return flight across the pond. On the spur of the moment they decide to de-camp the train and stroll around Vienna till check in time. It goes without saying that they fall in love but decide (as wacky young people do) not to swap details save to meet again in 9 months time. Fast forward several years when they meet in Paris after he has written the book of their first meeting, and the aborted rendezvous. By now he is unhappily married with a son and she is pretty well screwed up. Everything is clearly set up for the third part of the trilogy, Before Midnight (2013), which is on general release now.

Bernie - I shot her but couldn't help it.

Chariots of fire - disputed jingle.

In the name of the father - Emma Thompson as Mrs Gareth Pierce.

I have been following the adventures of Jessie & Celine with close interest since we recently viewed Linklater’s latest offering Bernie (2013) at Film Nite. Jack Black plays a much loved East Texas mortician Bernie who kills the most hated woman in town (Shirley MacLaine can you believe?) with four bullets to the back and hides the corpse under the sweet corn in his king-size freezer – much to the delight of the pop corn munchers in the front row. The prosecutor, fearful that Bernie will get off due to his popularity with the townspeople of Carthage, seriously considers moving the trial to another venue. Which of course brings to mind the young Lord Leveson (of inquiry fame) who was offered THE dream case for any ambitious young barrister eager to make his mark. Advised by colleagues that whilst ostensibly it was an open and shut case, he should nevertheless be wary as the defendant was effectively treated like family in his native city of Liverpool. Large sums of undeclared cash found under Ken Dodd’s bed would be a no-brainer to any brief worth his salt but to a jury of diddy-loving scousers it was clearly a different kettle of fish. Disregarding the advice of his companieros on the North West circuit, to transfer the case to say scouser-free Manchester, the latter-day scourge of the Murdock press fell badly at the first fence and the rest is history. Just like Harry Redknapp, Doddy had the jury eating out of his hand and left them laughing all the way to the bank. Show biz and the law make uneasy bedfellows to the delight of the public. Witness spaghetti western supremo Ennio Morricone being taken to court recently over a dispute as to who actually composed and played those memorable twangy riffs that made the director Sergio Leone a household name. Not to mention Vangellis winning his case against a plaintiff who claimed he had hummed the selfsame melody to the composer prior to it transforming Chariots of Fire into an iconic Brit film. Van

The Bill of Middlesex

film the Man’s defence was that thousands of wannabes are to be found humming similar little ditties for his delectation in his outer office every day of the week. Hummm! So that’s how it’s done. Picture an aspiring scriptwriter settling down to a well-earned pint in front of his telly. Fast forward a few minutes and low and behold our aspiring Jimmy McGovern chokes on his stella. “What is this I doth behold?” Quoth he. Cut to the chase and it transpires that the programme he is watching, Rock Follies, bears a striking resemblance to a pitch he had previously peddled unsuccessfully to Thames TV. Yes the company accepts he did speak to them and they even have a record of it, but, yah boo there is no copyright in an idea, dontchaknow? Thanks to Smarty Pants Lawyers Inc he won the case on the basis of breach of confidentiality, and now lives in Splendid Isolation Sur la Mer. Still on the same subject, it is hard not to forget the redoubtable Emma Thompson who has 100% thespian blood gushing through her feisty veins, playing the reclusive solicitor Mrs Gareth Pierce. Only bewigged national treasure Emma could pop up and down in the Appeal Court as the judge incongruously bashes his gavel every time he releases an appellant. “It’s for or the American market”, In the name of the Father’s director Jim Sheridan sheepishly explained. Oh well, all’s fair in love and war and of course Brit films aimed at the home of the brave. And what of Bernie? Incidentally, he bears a striking resemblance to the main character in Wes Anderson’s quirky Rushmore where precocious Max Fischer is king of the school’s extra curricular activities but at the same time is unable to pass conventional exams – clearly a wry comment on formal education! In mitigation it should be remembered that Linklater & Anderson are old pals and go back all the way to their Texan indie film days, so a wee cross fertilization of ideas is inevitably de rigeur.

Behind the candelabra - I have never taken part in homosexual acts says Liberace. If you ever get into Linklater’s trilogy, and find yourself confused, have no fear as you will not be alone. Could be you find 4 and half hours of the most annoying couple ever to hit the silver screen is not to your taste. But let me counsel a wee caveat. Cinefiles detect in the three films, the influence of new waver Eric Rohmer’s The Green Ray and Roberto Rossellini’s masterpiece Voyage to Italy, where we are witness to the disintegration of Ingrid Bergman/George Saunders’ marriage as they meander around Pompeii, whilst behind the camera, the deteriorating relationship between the director and his leading lady, and real life partner, hits the headlines around the world. Perhaps Linklater is leading up to a world series of films of the ups and downs of Jessie & Celine where the penultimate episode will be Before the Divorce, to be quickly followed by Before the Funeral. Arhhh…………….

Did Bernie get off like Diddy? Well here comes a spoiler so close your eyes now. Bernie was ever so apologetically found guilty by the good folk of the East Texas town and is still happily running clubs and societies for his fellow prisoners - just like Max in Rushmore. Needless to say he gets more visitors than any other inmate and appears to be a thoroughly fulfilled person. And yet, can you believe, it is a faithful interpretation of a true story that actually happened. Honest! Watching recently, the hugely entertaining Behind the Candelabra (2013), I was reminded of when Liberace sued The Daily Mirror in 1956, for alleging he was gay. Represented by the colourful show biz solicitor David Jacobs, the High Court jury was asked to decide whether columnist William Connor (Cassandra) was aware of the meaning of the American slang word fruit when he alluded to Liberace as being fruit–flavoured. Amazingly Jacobs scored yet another famous and lucrative victory with the result that Liberace just like Doddy & Harry after him, was laughing all the way to the bank – a phrase he later claimed to have coined. It’s worth noting that the candelabra-kid testified in court that he had never taken part in homosexual acts, which appears a tad contradictory when juxtaposed with his publicly proclaimed devotion to the Catholic Church. One suspects that his mantra, To Thine own Self be True, has a more contemporary ring to it, in that there are some Catholic theologians (to say nought of the current Pope Francis ) who would argue that the real devil of the piece was not Liberace’s persuasion, but the hypocrisy of society which forced the ivory tinkler to tell an untruth, in order to avoid the alternative which in his mind would have been too ghastly to contemplate - witness the untimely death 50 years previously, of genius boy Oscar Wilde after he was found guilty of sodomy at the Old Bailey shortly after the collapse of his ill advised libel action in the High Court. Whilst The Love that dare not Speak its Name, lead the disgraced Oscar to Reading Gaol, and the enriched Liberace back to Palm Springs, we should be grateful at the very least to be the beneficiaries of Oscar’s famous last words. Either that wallpaper goes or I go.

The Bill of Middlesex

book review

THE CRIMINAL LAW OF COMPETITION IN THE UK AND IN THE US Failure and Success FOR COMPETITION LAWYERS: A “TEN YEARS ON” ASSESSMENT OF CRIMINAL COMPETITION LAW IN THE UK As Professor of Competition Law and Policy at Glasgow University School of Law, Mark Furse brings his experience and authority to the fore in writing this book, in which his primary aim is to evaluate the impact ten years on, of the Cartel Offence as set out in the Enterprise Act 2002. Fundamentally, he feels that the legislation has not done enough to curb the often insidious process – and progress – of cartelization and, although wishing to be positive, he remains pessimistic about future developments.

It should be borne in mind here that cartels are actually conspiracies, usually on the part of big companies, mainly to monopolize markets and/or fix prices. It is not surprising then, that cartels are described in this book as an undermining and destructive force against capitalism, which, like it or not, is fundamental economically and politically, to the underlying philosophy and belief systems of By Mark Furse

western democracies.

ISBN: 978 0 85793 430 7 Quoting a comment from the Swedish Competition Authority, Furse describes Cartels as “cancers on www.e-elgar.com An appreciation by Phillip Taylor MBE and Elizabeth Taylor of Richmond Green Chambers

the open market economy” and which according to another commentator, “serve only to rob consumers.”

“I take the view,” continues Furse, “that cartels are not rare, that they are very harmful, and that they are organised in known defiance of legal prohibitions.”

“Criminalisation and incarceration is an appropriate enforcement mechanism,” he adds, “but only where the conditions are appropriate.”

Following the US example, the UK introduced the Cartel Offence in 2002 to curtail anti-competition activity, the main manifestation of it being cartels. We are reminded here that yes, there was a decision to introduce competition law into the UK in 1948, (the first anti-competition law in the UK since 1844,) but by just about all standards, it was ineffectual, as criminal enforcement rarely happened.

It was not until the UK joined the EC (now the European Union) in 1973 that substantial financial penalties and remedial orders were put in place. An intriguing historical perspective is offered here by reference to similar legislation enacted and enforced in the US – and the comparison between the two as outlined in this useful book is instructive.

In all, Furse examines the key arguments relating to criminal enforcement of anti-cartel laws as a clear statement of the law in the US and Ireland, as well as the UK — and considers in particular the role of the US as ‘global antitrust policeman.’

As a comparative study of the criminal law of competition in the UK and US, this book will, no doubt, become a valued acquisition in the libraries of competition lawyers on both sides of the Atlantic. The law is stated as at 1 April 2012.

The Bill of Middlesex