Middle Templar Michaelmas 2013 by John Darley

The Middle Templar The Honourable Society of the Middle Temple

Issue 53 Michaelmas 2013

Middle Temple Officers 2013 Treasurer Christopher Symons QC Deputy Treasurer The Rt Hon the Lord Judge Deputy Treasurer Elect Stephen Hockman QC Lent Reader Professor Graham Zellick CBE QC Autumn Reader The Hon Mrs Justice Parker Director of Middle Temple Advocacy Derek Wood CBE QC Master of the Archive Michael Ashe QC Master of Debating David Reade QC Masters of the Garden Stephen Lloyd Esq The Hon Mrs Justice Parker Master of the House Ian Mayes QC Master of Moots Richard Wilmot-Smith QC Master of Music The Rt Hon Sir Stanley Burnton Master of Revels His Honour Peter Cowell Master of the Silver The Hon Mr Justice Ian Burnett

The Honourable Society of the Middle Temple Ashley Building, Middle Temple Lane Temple, London EC4Y 9BT Treasury Office 020 7427 4800 members@middletemple.org.uk www.middletemple.org.uk

Farewell to Catherine Quinn In November 2010 Catherine Quinn applied to join us as our Under Treasurer. In her letter of application she told us that in her previous roles she had brought about ‘dramatic service improvements’. She described her style to our head-hunters as ‘strategic, with a clear intent and transformational rather than dictatorial’. When we interviewed Catherine, all involved agreed that she was the right person for the job. We were right! She joined us in May 2011. In less than a year a draft paper on the governance of the Inn was in consultation. Within the same time frame the Temple Women’s Forum was launched, with the first formal session taking place in March 2012. Lisa O’Daly was recruited to revolutionise our HR. Mark Taylor was recruited to do the same with our IT. All staff now have clear reporting lines and proper incentive schemes. Our directors have been empowered and now talk to each other and interact with our Under Treasurer. From next year the time spent by our staff servicing committees and writing minutes will be greatly reduced so that they will be able to devote more time to carrying out their numerous other duties. As part of the governance changes there will be greater transparency and more participation in our appointments so that everyone understands the process leading to the appointment of Treasurer and to other positions within the Inn. The role of Under Treasurer has been transformed and strategy and forward looking now occupies much of the time. Catherine’s vision has brought great benefits to us all and there is now a greater recognition that we need to look to our future. It is fair to say that all who had the pleasure of working with her have been truly impressed. Although Catherine was with us for a relatively short time as is apparent she has been long on achievement. In fact she achieved an incredible amount in a very short time. She has provided great support to our Parliament and the Executive Committee, leading the way as to matters which need attention, in preparing agendas, writing papers and being there. She has then finalised the minutes and provided the action needed to put the committee’s intentions into effect. But more than that Catherine has looked after three Treasurers. I do not presume to speak for my predecessors, but working with Catherine was both a privilege and a pleasure. She is a true professional, efficient without being bossy, full of good ideas without being dictatorial (as she promised), and she managed regularly to plant ideas into my head so that I believed, at least for a moment, that they were my ideas! Happily we are now in the good hands of Guy Perricone, but during my year I have been looked after in a way which has made my task as Treasurer very straight-forward. We shall miss Catherine but our loss is the Oxford Saïd Business School’s gain. She has gone there as Assistant Dean and Chief Operating Officer and we wish her every success.

Christopher Symons QC, Treasurer.

The Inn’s new Under Treasurer: Guy Perricone After reading Modern Languages and Law at Cambridge, Guy trained as a solicitor with Linklaters & Paines in London and Hong Kong before moving into investment banking and joining Salomon Brothers and then S.G. Warburg. With three partners, he then established a joint-venture investment-banking boutique, MeesPierson EurAmerica, specialising in the markets of Central and Eastern Europe. After this business was acquired by ABN AMRO Bank NV, he was Global Head of Emerging Markets Corporate Finance at ABN AMRO from 1998 2005, based first in Prague, then in London. In 2004, Guy also assumed responsibility for managing the bank’s London-based M&A Advisory Group. In 2005, looking for a change of professional environment, Guy left investment banking to become Managing Director of the Institute of Contemporary Arts in London where, with the Artistic Director, he worked to set the overall strategic direction of the ICA. From 2009 – 2013 he was Chief Executive of the Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music. At the ABRSM, Guy managed a staff of 160 at the London headquarters and a further team of over 1,200 examiners, representatives and volunteers in the UK and internationally. Earlier this year, Guy was appointed Treasurer and Chairman of the Christ’s Hospital School Foundation (a voluntary role). With his mix of non-profit sector and commercial backgrounds, he will bring a wonderful range of skills and experience to Middle Temple. Guy joined the Inn on 9 September 2013.

Contents 1

Farewell and Welcome to our Under Treasurers Catherine Quinn and Guy Perricone

A Burst of Energy: The Lord Mayor of the City of London

Treasurer’s Foreword

Lord Mayors and the Inn

The Royal Visit Organ Rededication Service

Extradition: To Return or Not?

44 10

The Repristinated Organ

Book Review Relocation: a Practical Guide

New Masters of the Bench

Academics’ Dinner

In Memoriam

Dinner for Honorary Benchers

Book Review Banker, Traitor, Scapegoat, Spy: The Troublesome Case of Sir Edgar Speyer

Voga Longa Venice

South Africa Legal Conference September 2012

Bench Call of US Attorney General 50

The Valuable Work of CAFOD

Book Review: Child of Another Century

Book Review Free Country: selected lectures and talks

Sir Sydney Kentridge’s 90th birthday celebrations

Deputy Treasurer Master Judge

Valedictory for Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice

Interview with the Master of the Rolls

A Confiscation Judge abroad

Lent Reading: Re-engineering Civil Justice

The Inns and the Bar

The Advocacy Training Council Report

JUSTICE: A Reminder and Invitation

Book Review A Higher Duty

Temple Women’s Forum

Training for Middle Temple Advocacy

Autumn Reader

Are Human Rights Selfish?

A History of the Inn’s Honorary Benchers

A Portrait of Sir John Cust: the original Honorary Bencher

114

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge Scholarships

A Visit from our Royal Bencher

Fox Scholar

Scholars’ Dinner

MT Society in Hong Kong

UK Supreme Court judicial assistants’ visit to Washington DC

The Official Launch of the Malaysia Middle Temple Alumni Association

Portrait of Sir Christopher Turnor

Scholarships and Prizes 2012-2013 100 The Edmund Plowden Trust celebrates 50 years

Book Review Islam and English Law A Year in the Middle Temple Students’ Association

101

The Library’s Ecclesiastical Collection

102 Duelling, Fencing, Arms and Armour 104 Saving the Past

Debating

Moot News Everyone!

105 Book Review Legal Research: a Practitioner’s Handbook

Marshalling

106 Sir John Major’s visit to the Library

Marshalling appeal

107

Acid Violence

108 Pencil to Keyboard: 40 years in the Law

Human Rights Lawyers’ Association Judicial Review Competition

111 Garden News

MT Young Barristers

Connecting with the Future

Annual Dinner: Thoughts on the British Establishment

120 Temple Church and Magna Carta

Revels: a Director’s Note

123 The Fleet Street Gatehouse

Liverpool Legal Walk

125 What Dr Johnson knew

MT Northern Circuit Dinner

127 Forthcoming events

Wales and Chester Circuit Dinner

Gillian Kalitsi: an obituary

114 Six Beards and a Bird in Antarctica 118 Staff News 119 Farewell to James Vivian

T R E A S U R E R ’ S F O R E WO R D

Foreword by Master Treasurer

here have probably been upwards of 450 previous Treasurers of the Inn, all of whom, so far as one can tell, have done a perfectly acceptable job. Starting off one’s year as Treasurer therefore comes with a degree of pressure. The good news is that the staff at Middle Temple look after the Treasurer so well that the prospect of a complete disaster is much diminished. I cannot pay tribute enough to our staff who are universally loyal, efficient and hard working. Their unstinting work for the Inn makes all the difference and we are truly lucky to have them. Catherine Quinn our very hard working and insightful Under Treasurer, who sadly left us at the end of October, oversaw with the expertise and close collaboration of Master Jenkins, a review of the governance of the Inn, which was much needed. As a result from next year, the Standing Committees will have a strategic focus, decisionmaking will be streamlined, the number of committees within the Inn

will be reduced, and the number of committee meetings and Parliaments will also decrease. This is partly a reflection of good governance and partly recognition of the fact that we have an extremely competent professional staff to run the Inn. While it is important that the Benchers make the policy decisions to take the Inn forward, the day-to-day running of the Inn can safely be left in the hands of the staff, ably led by the Directors Colin Davidson, Ian Garwood, Andrew Hopkin and Christa Richmond. I am confident that with Catherine’s successor, Guy Perricone, and our Directors, the Inn is in good hands. I have tried during the year to reconnect different parts of the Inn so that we become a more inclusive place. We are all aware that between being Called to the Bar and becoming a Bencher, only a very small number of members of Middle Temple are much in evidence around the Inn. Add to that the fact that many members of the Inn practise outside

London or abroad and the lack of connection can be easily explained. I made a most enjoyable trip to Cardiff earlier this year for a dinner with the MT members of the Wales and Chester Circuit and received some much-needed education about what the Inn could be doing for them. One of the results of that evening was a dinner for those on circuit, in Hall on Friday, 29 November 2013 and I hope we shall repeat that each year. I am also suggesting that each year the two Readers, the Deputy Treasurer Elect, the Deputy Treasurer and the Treasurer each visit one of the circuits so that we retain contact around the country. I have made an effort to increase the number of hall members who come to All Inn Dining by suggesting to Benchers that they invite a member of hall to come with them. I would like more hall members to come and interact with our students and Benchers on these occasions. It is a good opportunity to have a mix of our membership all sitting together.

Sue and Christopher Symons Christopher Symons QC practises at 3 Verulam Buildings specialising in insurance, reinsurance and professional negligence. He also sits as a deputy High Court Judge, usually in the Administrative Court, and as an Arbitrator in domestic and international arbitrations. He is a director and Chairman of the audit committee, of the Bar Mutual Indemnity Fund Limited, the insurer for the Bar, and he is also the President of the Lloyd’s Appeal Tribunal. He works with the chambers’ charity and is on the Board of the Holborn Community Association and a Community governor of Christopher Hatton Primary School.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

T R E A S U R E R â&#x20AC;&#x2122; S F O R E WO R D I have particularly enjoyed meeting the students this year both in the Inn and at York and Cumberland Lodge on advocacy training weekends. It is a pleasure to spend time with the young who seem to be universally cheerful, enthusiastic and optimistic. This is due in no small part to the excellence of the Advocacy Training within the Inn. I am very grateful to Master Derek Wood, Director of Middle Temple Advocacy, and to all the many members of the Inn who give freely of their time to assist with the training of the students. The mooting competition, which is held every year always seems to produce an excellent standard and it must give considerable pleasure to the trainers to see some of the fruits of their work so publicly displayed in the semifinals and finals. It is not just in relation to advocacy training that members of the Inn give up their time to further the interests of the Inn. We are very fortunate to have students and hall members who devote time to serve on their committees as well as numerous Benchers who assist in the running of the Inn. I would like to say a special word of thanks to those who chair our Bench committees who devote a considerable amount of time to ensure that we are making the right decisions to keep the Inn up to speed. Even with our new governance model it will be necessary to find busy practitioners and hard-pressed judges to do this work, and we are fortunate that we have those who are prepared to serve. We had a very successful Dinner for Honorary Benchers in February when 28 of our Honorary Benchers attended. Hall members, students and Benchers all sat together. It was a very good occasion with some wonderful music to go with it and I hope we shall repeat this in alternate years in the future. Judging from the feedback received, it was much enjoyed and was a good opportunity to benefit from the diverse backgrounds of our Honorary

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

Benchers. Most of you will be aware that Temple Church now has a fully refurbished organ thanks to restoration work carried out by Harrison and Harrison. This was made possible by the extraordinary efforts of Master Michael Blair at Middle Temple and Master May at Inner who managed to raise the money to pay for this major refurbishment. The organ has been restored to its former glory and it was only fitting that Her Majesty The Queen and His Royal Highness The

Duke of Edinburgh attended a Service of Rededication, which took place on 7 May. It was a special occasion, with Temple Church overflowing with those who had generously made donations. The event was enjoyed by all, including our Royal guests. So with my year now nearly over and most of the balls hopefully still in the air, it merely remains for me to say thank you for the opportunity to do this wonderful job, which I have enjoyed, and continue to enjoy, immensely.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

R OYA L V I S I T

7th MAY 2013

Organ Rededication Service Five years after their visit to celebrate the Quatercentenary of the Inns’ Letters Patent, Her Majesty The Queen and His Royal Highness The Duke of Edinburgh returned to the Temple Church and to the Inns to rededicate the newly and triumphantly refurbished Temple Church organ. All, and only, the 450 donors to the Organ Appeal, with their partners, were invited; they filled the Church and enjoyed a Choral Evensong whose beauty vindicated every day of the work lavished on the organ over the past three years. The choir sang the première of an anthem, Let my due feet never fail by Gabriel Jackson, commissioned for this service by the Temple Music Trust in memory of Master John Toulmin, Chairman of the Trust 2002-2012. The entire cost of the organ’s repristination has been covered by donations. The organ now sounds finer than it ever has in the Church before, and thanks to this work will do so for the next fifty years or more. Our donors have earned the heartfelt thanks of our own, our children’s and our grandchildren’s generations; and we ourselves owe thanks in turn to Her Majesty for being with us on such a special day.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

R OYA L V I S I T

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

R OYA L V I S I T

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

R OYA L V I S I T

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

R OYA L V I S I T

The Repristinated Organ Master Michael Blair writes: s the article on pages six to nine of this edition of The Middle Templar amply records, Her Majesty The Queen and His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh were present in the Temple Church for the rededication of the Organ after its three year overhaul. The full congregation in the Church then was exclusively composed of the generous donors to the Organ Fund, set up in early 2009 to raise the £750,000 needed for the overhaul. Over 450 individual contributions were made, both large and small. The largest, indeed, was, with gift aid, over £40,000. All those donors who could be readily identified were invited to the Service of Rededication, and over 350 donors were able to be there, many with their spouses, partners or other relatives. Around two-thirds of the amount contributed came from the Benchers of the two Inns in the Temple, with magnificent generosity from almost 300 Bencher donors. Other forms of gift such as an organ concert, a lecture in the Church, salmon-fishing, claret and opera tickets offered for auction, the Church Fete and Christmas Fair, and a fundraising cycle ride overnight all helped as well. For all this, Sir Anthony May of the Inner Temple, who co-chaired the Appeal Fund Committee over the four years, and I are sincerely grateful. The principal person to thank, however, is Master Penny Jonas. She worked tirelessly, charmingly and highly effectively for the cause over that entire period. Master Andrew Spink and Under Treasurer Catherine Quinn also deserve our thanks for serving on the Committee along with Master Guy Beringer and the SubTreasurer of the Inner Temple Patrick Maddams.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

Alongside this note of appreciation is an interesting contribution (direct from the organ loft, as it were). It comes from the pen of James Vivian, who was until recently the Director of Music and Organist of the Temple Church and is now at St George’s, Windsor. He has thus moved from one centre of musical excellence in a ‘Royal Peculiar’ to another. We are very sorry to have lost him, but thank him warmly for his service to the Temple over the last 17 years and wish him well in his new post. James Vivian writes: The Temple Church organ is sounding stunning after its recent eighteen-month restoration made possible through the generous contributions of many. Already, the organ is receiving many accolades from organists who have played it since it was ‘unveiled’ on Easter Day. The organ is also looking splendid thanks to the regilding work carried out in the Easter vacation. The work was carried out by the organ’s maker, Harrison & Harrison Limited of Durham. It required various teams of highly trained craftsmen who lovingly restored the thousands of pipes, complicated mechanism and wind supply. The organ was reinstalled in the church last autumn and was ready for the final stage of work – the ‘voicing and regulating’ of each of the organ’s 3,828 pipes – which took place from January to March 2013. The opportunity was taken to voice the organ to the Church’s acoustic (the acoustics of its original surroundings in the ballroom of Glen Tanar House were very different) resulting in the organ singing beautifully into the Church. This work, however, has not changed the tonal characteristic of the instrument. It is still very much a classic example

of an English Romantic organ for which Harrison & Harrison were famous. Thankfully, the Temple organ survived the decades following World War II with few alterations; other English Romantic instruments were less fortunate and had their tonal characteristics changed to fit in with the new organ-building influences that pervaded this period. In the work of 2011-13, the opportunity was taken to return some of the altered stops back to their original designs and, in some cases, the wind pressures too. The result is an organ of tonal integrity. Four new stops were added to the Great Organ and these join five existing ranks to create a secondary chorus. With modern technology, this chorus can be transferred to a different manual (or keyboard) and used in dialogue with the main, existing chorus of the Great Organ. The secondary chorus also offers some delicate effects: I am sure you will hear these bell-like combinations during the Christmas period! The Temple Church Organ is now one of the finest in London and is an instrument worthy of a church famous for its music. As Director of Music and Organist, I would like to thank all those in the Inns who contributed to the organ financially or through other efforts. In particular, the tireless work of the Temple Church Organ Appeal Committee, which drove the restoration project forward. The organ is a joy to play and accompanies the choir with sensitivity and colour. It will, for decades to come, play a pivotal role in the Church’s liturgy in addition to the many other concerts and events hosted in the Church. It has already started its new life with a flourish: not many organs are rededicated in the presence of Her Majesty the Queen!

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

R OYA L V I S I T

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

R OYA L V I S I T

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

MASTERS

OF THE

BENCH

CALLED BETWEEN

SEPTEMBER 2012

AND

J U LY 2 0 1 3

New Masters of the Bench 2013 New Masters are Called to the Bench by Master Reader in a ceremony held in Hall attended by their guests, fellow Benchers, barristers and students. After dinner, each of the new Benchers is introduced by Master Treasurer and then gives a brief address which is usually a light-hearted autobiographical account revealing some amusing career anecdotes and highlighting his or her links with the Inn. Bench seniority is determined by date of Call to the Bar for members of the Inn, and at the Treasurer’s discretion for Honorary Benchers. At each Inn event, the most recently Called Bencher, ‘Master Junior’, replies to the Treasurer’s toasts to The Queen, Domus, and Absent Members.

DR JULIE MAXTON Before taking up her position as the Executive Director of the Royal Society in 2011, Julie was Registrar at the University of Oxford where she is an Honorary Fellow of University College. Called in 1978, Julie combined a career as a practising lawyer and academic, holding a number of senior positions, including Professor and Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Auckland, New Zealand. She is the author of numerous articles concerned with trusts, equity, commercial and property law. She is on a number of Committees and Boards as well as being a governor of Haberdashers’ Aske’s School for Girls and a Board member of Engineering UK.

The Hon Ms Justice Mary Finlay Geoghegan A High Court Judge since 2002, Mary is the designated liaison judge for Ireland for the International Hague Network of Judges and the European Judicial Network. She initially qualified as a Solicitor (1973) and later was Called to the Irish Bar (1980) and admitted as a Senior Counsel in 1988. She was a member of the Minister for Justice’s Working Group on qualifications for appointment as judges of the High and Supreme Courts; the Law Reform Commission; and head of the Irish Delegation to the CCBE. In 2009 she was nominated as an ad-hoc judge to the European Court of Human Rights. She is also a Bencher of the Honourable Society of King’s Inns.

PROFESSOR CONOR GEARTY FBA Conor was a Fellow in Law at Emmanuel College, Cambridge for seven years before moving to King’s College London in the early 1990s. From 2002-2009 he was the first Rausing Director of LSE’s new Centre for the Study of Human Rights, and is now Professor of Human Rights Law at LSE, as well as Director of its Institute of Public Affairs. A prolific journalist and author, his most recent book is Liberty and Security (Polity). He is a founding member of Matrix Chambers and has appeared in many cases before numerous courts.

The Rt Hon Dame Elish Angiolini DBE QC FRSA (HON) Lord Advocate of Scotland from 2006-2011, having previously been Solicitor General since 2001, Dame Elish was the first woman, the first Procurator Fiscal, and the first solicitor to hold either post. After 2011, Dame Elish was appointed as the first patron of LawWorks Scotland, a charity which helps people who cannot afford legal advice. She is a visiting professor at Strathclyde Law School, where she teaches undergraduates, and developed a Master’s course in advocacy studies. She is a member of Terra Firma Chambers. In September 2012, she became Principal of St Hugh's College Oxford.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

MASTERS

OF THE

BENCH

CALLED BETWEEN

SEPTEMBER 2012

AND

J U LY 2 0 1 3

Mr Justice Louis Harms (HONORARY) Until 2011, Justice Harms was Deputy President of the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa. He practised from 1966 to 1986 at the Pretoria Bar, and took Silk in 1981. He is an editor of The Law of South Africa and author of The Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: A Case Book. He has been actively involved in the drafting of intellectual property statutes and amendments to criminal procedure law such as plea bargaining, and drafted the rules of ethics for judges. He occupies at present the Adams & Adams Chair in Intellectual Property Law at the University of Pretoria and is a door tenant at 4-5 Grayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Inn Square.

PROFESSOR THE LORD HENNESSY OF NYMPSFIELD FBA (HON) Since 2000, Lord Hennessy has been Attlee Professor of Contemporary British History at Queen Mary, University of London. He co-founded the Institute of Contemporary British History in 1986. From 1992-2000 he was Professor of Contemporary History at Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of London. His analysis of post-war Britain, Never Again: Britain 1945-1951, won the Duff Cooper Prize in 1992 and the NCR Book Award in 1993. His study of Britain in the 1950s and the rise of Harold Macmillan, Having It So Good: Britain in the 1950s, won the 2007 Orwell Prize for political writing. He was appointed as a nonpolitical crossbench peer in October 2010.

THE HONORABLE ERIC HOLDER, JR (HONORARY) Prior to his appointment as Attorney General of the United States, Mr Holder was a litigation partner at Covington & Burling LLP in Washington, and also served as U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. In 1988, he was nominated by President Reagan to become an Associate Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Upon graduating from Columbia Law School in 1976, he moved to Washington and joined the Department of Justice as part of the Attorney General's Honors Program.

HER HONOUR JUDGE DIANE REDGRAVE Called in 1977, Diane is a fellow alumna of the Somerset House Peculiar, the Principal Registry of the Family Division. She was appointed as a Circuit Judge in 2008, sitting mainly but not exclusively in family. She has been given the responsibility of setting up a satellite care court in Bromley. She regularly marshals students of the Inn, and is also a supporter of the Young Vic Theatre.

ANDREW SIMMONDS QC A leading practitioner at the Chancery Bar, Andrew was Called in 1980 and took Silk in 1999. Since 2006 he has sat as a Deputy Chancery Division Judge. He is recognised as a leader in pensions, trust and probate litigation and related professional negligence issues. He has been a Trustee of the Bar Council Pension Scheme (2000-2006) and a member of the Legislation Committee of the Association of Pension Lawyers (2005-2009) and of the Pensions Litigation Court Usersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Committee (1998 to date). Andrew has also run the London Marathon twice for charity.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

MASTERS

OF THE

BENCH

CALLED BETWEEN

SEPTEMBER 2012

AND

J U LY 2 0 1 3

STEPHEN KILLALEA QC A leading practitioner in claimant catastrophic injury litigation and health and safety prosecutions, Stephen was Called in 1981 and took Silk in 2006. He has been an advocacy trainer for the Inn for many years, training at NPP level and acting as a ‘Rover’ to advocacy trainers. He specialises, in his civil practice, in brain and spinal injuries. He was a prosecutor for the Professional Conduct Committee and a former member of the Bar Standards Board. In both flat and jump racing he specialises in backing horses which come fifth.

MICHAEL MCLAREN QC Called in 1981, Michael is a commercial Silk (2002) at Fountain Court, with an emphasis on aviation and regulatory work. He was a member of the Temple Church Committee for many years, and has done advocacy training in Pakistan. He is a Temple Song underwriter and a keen supporter of music in the Temple. He was a trustee of the Chelsea Physic Garden and is a trustee of various Fishmongers’ Company charities. He manages (for the National Trust) Bodnant Garden in North Wales. A large Welsh Food Centre is his latest mad venture.

PHILIP BROOK-SMITH QC Called in 1982, Philip is a general commercial Silk (2002) at Fountain Court who practises predominantly in the areas of product liability. He is also a Recorder. He has been an advocacy trainer for the Inn for many years. From 2008 - 2010, he was Director of the South Eastern Circuit Advanced Advocacy Course held annually at Keble College. He serves on the Tribunal Procedure Committee and Chairs the subgroup responsible for rules applicable to General Regulatory and related Administrative Appeals, Tax and Chancery, and Lands Chambers. He is Chairman of the Commonwealth Boxing Council and a member of the British Boxing Board of Control anti-doping panel.

MAX HILL QC Former Chairman of the Criminal Bar Association and recently elected Head of Chambers at 18 Red Lion Court, Max was Called in 1987 and took Silk in 2008. He is a former Junior of the Essex Bar Mess and of the South-Eastern Circuit. He was also Recorder of the Circuit. He specialises in cases involving terrorism and Control Order and related public law work for the Treasury Solicitor. He was counsel for the Metropolitan Police in the July 7 ‘London Bombings’ Inquests. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts and a Patron of a children’s charity, SceneandHeard which connects inner-city children with volunteer theatre professionals who mentor them.

PAUL EPSTEIN QC Paul is a tenant at Cloisters. He was called in 1988 and took Silk in 2006. He specialises in helping clients with discrimination and employment problems. Over the course of the past few years he has appeared in the High Court, the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court and the employment tribunal in some large equal pay cases. His other work is contract and commercial. From 2009-2011 Paul was Chair of the Employment Law Bar Association. In 2012 he was elected onto the management committee of the Employment Lawyers’ Association. He teaches advocacy for Middle Temple. Paul is a keen and untalented amateur cyclist. M I C H A E L M A S 2013

T H E M I D D L E T E M P L A R 15

MASTERS

OF THE

BENCH

CALLED BETWEEN

SEPTEMBER 2012

AND

J U LY 2 0 1 3

HIS HONOUR JUDGE PETER MURPHY Peter was Called in 1968. After practice in London he taught and practised in the United States. In 1983, Master Warren Burger appointed him to the committee which created the American Inns of Court Foundation of which he is a lifetime emeritus trustee. Between 1998 and 2007 he was defence counsel at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in The Hague. He was appointed a circuit judge in 2007 and sits at Blackfriars Crown Court. His text Murphy on Evidence is now in its twelfth edition. He was editor of Blackstone’s Criminal Practice between 1991 and 2007. He has also published two novels: Removal and A Higher Duty.

PHILIP CAYFORD QC A leading family practitioner and long-standing member of the FLBA committee, Philip is editor of the FLBA magazine and a member of its website and communications committee. He has lectured regularly at FLBA, Butterworths’ and Jordan’s conferences. For six years, he was a member of the BSB Complaints Committee. Called in 1975, and Silk in 2002, he chairs the tenancy committee at 29 Bedford Row. An active MT advocacy trainer, he has judged several moots and written new family exercises for the pupils’ course. He is a trustee of Tusk and Captain of the Bar cricket team, and has made TV documentaries and written others.

OLIVER HEALD QC MP Appointed Solicitor General in 2012, Oliver was Called in 1977 and practised as a barrister in London and East Anglia with a break when he was a government minister. He has held various government posts including Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Department of Social Security and Shadow Leader of the House of Commons. In July 2007 he became a backbencher following thirteen years' continuous service on the Conservative Front Bench. In 2008 he became a member of the Committee on Standards in Public Life. He is a former ViceChairman of the Society of Conservative Lawyers.

MARTIN HOWE QC Called in 1978 and Silk in 1996, Martin is a practitioner in intellectual property and European Union law. He has made a major contribution to education in his specialist areas by writing numerous publications, including Halsbury’s Laws on Trade Marks and the leading practitioner textbook Russell-Clarke and Howe on Industrial Designs. Outside the Bar, he has long been interested in politics, where he has made good use of his legal expertise. Among other things, he chaired the Courts and Sentencing Policy Group of the Centre for Social Justice, and he is a member of the Commission set up by the current coalition Government to look into the case for a Bill of Rights.

MARK HATCHER Director of Representation and Policy at the Bar Council since 2006, Mark has extensive experience in Law Reform and Legal Policy. Called in 1978, he practised in family law before moving to the Lord Chancellor’s Department in 1980 where he worked on the Courts and Legal Services Group and with the Treasury Solicitor’s Office and the FCO. In his role at the Bar Council, he has guided responses to legal services legislation and assisted in the creation of the All Party Parliamentary Group for Constitutional Affairs. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, and is an ordained (non-stipendiary) minister of the Church of England.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

MASTERS

OF THE

BENCH

CALLED BETWEEN

SEPTEMBER 2012

AND

J U LY 2 0 1 3

ELISABETH LAING QC Called in 1980, Elisabeth specialises in public and administrative law. She is a Recorder, and a former member of the Attorney General’s Panels. She took Silk in 2008, and was appointed a Deputy High Court Judge in 2010. She was appointed to the Welsh Government’s Panel of Queen’s Counsel in 2012. She has contributed to Halsbury’s Laws, and to Supperstone, Goudie and Walker’s Judicial Review. She is on the editorial board of Local Government Reports, and is a member of the BSB’s Standards Committee and of the Committee of the BBA.

SARAH FORSHAW QC Since July 2012, Sarah has been the Leader of the South Eastern Circuit. Called in 1987, she is a leading criminal practitioner. She took Silk in 2008 and prosecutes and defends in equal measure. She is head of her own chambers at 5 King's Bench Walk. She was a popular and hardworking Chair of the Central London Bar Mess until 2012 and now serves as a member of the Bar Council.

MARIE DEMETRIOU QC Marie grew up in Athens and read law at St Hilda’s College, Oxford where she took a First in the BCL. Called in 1995, she gained inside knowledge of the workings of the ECJ by acting as a référendaire to Judge Edward between 1999 and 2002. Thereafter at Brick Court Chambers she has developed a wide-ranging practice in EU law, competition law and public law. She took Silk in 2012, having previously been a member of the AG’s ‘A’ panel. She is a Visiting Fellow of the Centre for European Law, King’s College and a Trustee of the Slynn Foundation. She does considerable pro bono work.

PROFESSOR ROBERT MCCORQUODALE Director of the British Institute of International and Comparative Law in London, Robert is also Professor of International Law and Human Rights at the University of Nottingham, and a door tenant at Brick Court Chambers. Previously he was a Fellow and Lecturer in Law at St John's College, University of Cambridge, and Associate Professor in International Law at the Australian National University, after practising as a solicitor in Sydney and London. Robert's research and teaching interests are in the areas of public international law and international human rights law, and he has published, taught and trained on these areas around the world.

The Hon Mr Justice Stewart Called in 1975, Silk in 1996 and appointed High Court Judge (QBD) in May 2013, Stephen was previously Designated Civil Judge for Liverpool and Manchester. He was the Judicial College Course Director for The Civil Induction Course and for the Equality Act and Jackson reforms and on its International Committee. He recently obtained a First Class degree in French and Spanish from the Open University. He is a Consulting Editor of the White Book. Until 2013 he was a Member of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee. He has been a marshalling judge for the Inn.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

MASTERS

OF THE

BENCH

CALLED BETWEEN

SEPTEMBER 2012

AND

J U LY 2 0 1 3

The Hon Mr Justice Jeremy Baker Jeremy was appointed a Justice of the High Court (QBD) in March 2013. Called in 1979, Silk in 1999, he was appointed a Recorder in 2000 and a Circuit Judge in 2010, and also sat as a deputy High Court Judge. A proud member of the North Eastern Circuit, he formerly practised at Sheffield’s Paradise Chambers and specialised in criminal cases, both prosecuting and defending serious and sensitive cases. His practice covered police disciplinary and coronial inquest matters, together with medical malpractice and HSE work.

The Hon Mr Justice Keehan Michael was appointed as a High Court Judge (Family Division) in May 2013. Having been Called in 1982, he was appointed as a Recorder in 2000, took Silk in 2001 and sat as a Deputy High Court Judge from 2003. Michael specialised in family law and undertook cases involving complex medical cases concerning the death of, or serious injury to, young children. He practised from St Ives Chambers in Birmingham where he was Head of Chambers for the last seven years. He is a contributing author to Jordan’s Family Court Practice and the Family Law Precedents Service.

Antony Zacaroli QC Antony was Called in 1986 and took Silk in 2006. He has a commercial practice, specialising in banking, company, restructuring and insolvency law. He has been a member of the management committee of the Bar Pro Bono Unit since 2000, a member of the Insolvency Rules Committee since 2012 and has assisted the Inn in the training of pupil-supervisors. Away from the law, Antony is a keen musician, singing with one of London’s leading amateur chamber choirs for 25 years, and playing piano in his spare time.

Rebecca Stubbs QC Rebecca was a pupil of Master John Hopkins at Downing College where she took a First as well as a half blue in karate. Called in 1994, she joined 13 Old Square, now Maitland Chambers, and rapidly became a specialist in company and insolvency law matters, winning the Chambers and Partners Directory Insolvency Junior of the Year in 2009 before taking Silk in 2012. She chairs the Chancery Bar Association Equality and Diversity Committee and sits on the Bankruptcy and Companies Court and the Rolls Building Users' Committees. She is a Fellow of the RSA, a member of the Kandahar, a qualified ski instructor and a mother of two.

Sonia Tolaney QC Sonia read Jurisprudence as a scholar at Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford. Called in 1995, she was Banking and Finance Junior of the Year in 2007 (Chambers and Partners) and Commercial Litigation Junior of the Year in 2008 and 2009 (also Chambers). She took Silk in 2011 and is a leading Banking and Commercial Silk, with expertise in complex financial products. She has contributed to and edited practitioner texts on Banking law, interviewed for scholarships, served on the panel of the Temple Women’s Forum and was a founder member of the Times Law Panel in 2007. In Chambers she was a pupil master and mentor for many years and now heads one of the management committees. 18

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

MASTERS

OF THE

BENCH

CALLED BETWEEN

SEPTEMBER 2012

AND

J U LY 2 0 1 3 S

JULIUS DRAKE (HONORARY) The pianist Julius Drake lives in London and specialises in the field of chamber music, working with many of the world’s leading artists, both in recital and on disc. He appears at all the major music centres: recent seasons’ concerts have taken him to the Aldeburgh, Edinburgh, Munich, Schubertiade, and Salzburg Music Festivals; to Carnegie Hall and Lincoln Centre, New York; and the great halls of Amsterdam, Berlin, Paris, Rome and Madrid. He proudly curates a series of song recitals entitled ‘Julius Drake and Friends’ at the historic Middle Temple Hall in London.

In MemoriAm John Hugill QC Michael Essayan QC Michael Sherrard CBE QC Professor Ronald Dworkin Leolin Price CBE QC

11 August 1930 - 25 September 2012 7 May 1927 - 23 October 2012 23 June 1928 - 30 October 2012 11 December 1931 - 14 February 2013 11 May 1924 - 24 March 2013

GUSI Peace Prize Winners

Master Gruder’s son, Jonathan, married Master Janner’s daughter, Isabel on 14th October 2012. They celebrated the wedding at the Middle Temple. There is no other record of the children of two Masters marrying one another.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

H O N O R A RY B E N C H E R S

20th FEBRUARY 2013

Dinner for Honorary Benchers

Photographs courtesy of Chris Christodoulou

Master Treasurer Christopher Symons, Master Robin Butler and Master Gus Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Donnell.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

V E N E T I A N P AG E A N T

Voga Longa Venice by Master Jeremy McMullen

or over a thousand years the doyen of Venice, once the Doge, now the mayor, has sailed out on Ascension Day to throw a gold ring into the lagoon as a symbol of La Serenissima's marriage to the sea. On 19 May this year, one thousand rowing and sculling boats joined the Voga Longa, or long row, of 30km round the islands and canals from San Marco to Salute. Regular readers of

this magazine may recall a similar pageant on the Thames in 2012. This year the same crew, not trusting entirely to the local organisers, was augmented by a cox, Hilary Cook. We were in a 1920 clinker pair, not a double yole this time. We rowed out from our reciprocal boat club Cannotieri Diadora on the Lido under the Pageant banner and the red ensign. The rain was continuous round

Burano, Torcello and through Murano when it stopped, perhaps out of reverence, perhaps shock at the spectacle. We slipped into full pageant kit and rowed to the first bridge on the Grand Canal to find a Molesey quad athwart the arches. Being only two oars, and with a wily cox with a paddle, we bi-passed the chaos and emerged onto the canal. There was by then no boat ahead and nothing aft for the full 4km length. Enthusiastic spectators all along, including our faithful logistics team, roared us on. At Salute we were tossed our medals and citations, paddling on to a quiet byway for Peronis and a fraught struggle back over the lagoon for 8km in now reopened shipping channels. The city looked splendid with vogatori passim in rowing livery and high spirits Do it again? Yes, but next up is the Napoli â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 35km round the Bay. Crew: Bow: Mark Watters, Sons of the Thames BC. Str: Jeremy McMullen, Putney Town RC. Cox: Hilary Cook, Sons of the Thames BC

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

U S AT T O R N E Y G E N E R A L

20th NOVEMBER 2012

Bench Call of US Attorney General

“

Master Treasurer; Masters; my Lords; ladies and gentlemen – it is a privilege to be with you today. And, as always, it’s a pleasure to be back in London. I would like to thank you for the tremendous honour of being Called to the Bench – and for putting me in such extraordinary company. In particular, I’d like to thank my good friend Baroness Scotland for sponsoring my Call – and ensuring that I would not be required to wear a wig today -- though given the rate at which my follicles are fleeing my

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

head I’m really willing to put almost anything on my cranium. I’m proud, and humbled, to be counted as a member of this distinguished organisation. And I’m particularly grateful to have been elected by acclamation – since I’m told the alternative would have been to sit for exams. Now, I’m used to being recognized by acclamation. As you might have read I have been, by the opposition party in the United States, pretty consistently recognised by acclamation. Let me assure you – this is a far more enjoyable process.

In recent years, I’ve had the chance to work closely with many of this country’s leaders, including some of those in this room, in order to advance the mutual interests of our nations, to ensure the safety of those we’re privileged to serve, and to help realise the priorities, the essential principles we have always shared. From coordinating efforts to wage an aggressive, values-based global fight against terrorism; to protecting the privacy, civil liberties, and rights of our citizens; combating human trafficking, transnational organised

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

US A T T O R N E Y G E N E R A L

crime, and cybercrime; and strengthening the rule of law – I believe we can all be proud of what’s been achieved as a result of our cooperative efforts. I’m convinced that the ‘special relationship’ between the United States and the United Kingdom continues to be a strong one. We can see this in the critical work that Middle Templars are leading every day, in countries around the world – and in the ties that bind Benchers and Honorary Benchers on both sides of the Atlantic. Now any great relationship will have its ups and downs – ask my lovely wife – but at its core that which binds the UK and the US far outweighs any transient disagreement. It might be customary to say that it’s a rare treat to be in the company of so many Benchers this afternoon – but the truth for me is that I encounter a fair number of Middle Templars on a regular basis, during the course of my duties in Washington. In addition to the colleagues and counterparts who are here today – including Baroness Scotland; President Obama’s Ambassador to the Court of St James’s, Louis Susman; and my Justice Department colleague, Bruce Swartz, who got into Middle Temple the hard way – by examination – the current Chief Justice of the United States, John Roberts, is a Middle Templar. Did he take the exam? A number of distinguished legal scholars and members of the American judiciary are proud Honorary Benchers. And, if you have visited my conference room at the Justice Department, you will know that every day I come face-to-face with two of the most distinguished Middle Templars ever to serve the United States government – my predecessors, Attorneys General

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

Robert Jackson and Elliot Richardson – whose official portraits hang just outside my private office in Washington. Shortly after becoming Attorney General, I chose to display them there because I admired the principled leadership that they provided during times of great challenge and consequence: in upholding the rule of law following the Second World War, and in restoring integrity to our government in the aftermath of Watergate. I was inspired by the examples they set – of service to the American people, fidelity to the law, and courage – even in the face of unprecedented obstacles and intense partisan opposition. They did what was then not necessarily politically popular but what has proven to be historically correct. Of course, I had no idea that both of these remarkable leaders also happened to be Middle Templars. But it’s hardly a coincidence that such exemplary public servants were Called to the Bench. And that’s just one of the reasons why I regard it as a truly special and humbling honour to follow in their footsteps today – and to join you here, in what’s been called the ‘cradle of the Common Law of England and of America,’ among so many of the leaders who will help to write the next chapter in the enduring friendship between the United States and the United Kingdom. Just as surely as our histories are intertwined, the future progress of our nations is clearly, and permanently, connected. The course we will follow – and, ultimately, the world that we will help to create – depends on the goals that we set, and the policies that we establish, today – and work to refine and carry out in the future. Over the years, our nations have

proven that – no matter who’s living in the White House or Number Ten Downing Street, and no matter who holds the majority in Congress or in Parliament – people across the United States and the United Kingdom desire to work together. Even when we’ve struggled to reach agreement and to find common ground – and even on those rare but inevitable occasions when our governments or judicial leaders may not see eye-to-eye – we always have met one another with respect and mutual friendship. And even today our discussions and negotiations have consistently reflected a determination to honour our long tradition of working together – a tradition that is very much alive here in the Middle Temple. Today, the responsibility of extending this tradition falls squarely on our shoulders. We must not shrink from that duty. The need to renew our focus on international cooperation – and to build on the progress that’s already underway – has never been more critical. And this afternoon, as the Inn’s newest Honorary Bencher, I am proud to join each of you in pledging my strongest support – and my own best efforts – in carrying this work into the future, both as my nation’s Attorney General and in whatever other role the future may hold for me; in standing together, as our nations always have, in shared purpose and common cause; and in signalling – to our citizens, and to all the world – our collective commitment to security, opportunity, and equal justice for all. Once again, thank you for this honour. I look forward to all that we surely will accomplish together. And I will continue to rely on, and be grateful for, your friendship and your best efforts.”

T H E M I D D L E T E M P L A R 23

BOOK REVIEW

Child of Another Century Review by Master Daniel Janner

he book may be entitled Child of another Century but it is an important read for this century and beyond. Marshalling for Sir Ronald in 1980 was the highlight of my pupillage. His languid charm, immense kindness, huge intelligence and wise perception, which all his friends miss so much, has been brought to life in this wonderfully entertaining autobiography. It is full of surprises. His father ‘took up smoking at 40 and encouraged his sons to smoke from 18 years as a calming pleasure’. He never grasped how to milk a cow, modestly admitting ‘numerous milkmaids tried to teach me how to milk the herd without getting kicked but I never achieved any real success at it and was glad when the arrival of electricity eventually led to the introduction of milking machines at the farm.’ He ‘had the bizarre experience of dining next to and very close to Laurence Olivier and Stewart Granger as they discussed in detail the shortcomings of their former wives!’ In 1957 he was stung by a medusa jellyfish and the scars took 50 years to fade. His neighbour was Paul McCartney. He led Derry Irvine (before he became Lord Irvine of Lairg) and ‘a very surprising aspect of the hearing was that Derry had two pupils ...Tony Blair and Cherie Booth, who were soon walking hand in hand.’ His clerk, Stanley, ‘slept very discreetly on a camp bed in my room at the law courts.’ Sir Ronald was never afraid to speak his mind when it mattered: ‘... as a High Court judge, I sat all over England and Wales under the aegis of real Lord Chancellors, who were effective independent heads of the judiciary before the ill-thought out

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

changes under Tony Blair and before judicial work became bedevilled by artificial human rights issues (or at least quasi-political) decisions.’ ‘I cannot accept that the new appointments commission will achieve any better results and the risk of inappropriate selection is now significantly higher.’ The book is not short on advice to practitioners. To young barristers: ‘never rely on friends to get going. One’s friends tend to have too critical or sceptical a view of one’s capabilities to entrust one with any really challenging legal case.’ He had ‘an innate distrust of barristers who customarily do criminal work but who refuse to appear for the prosecution and there are too many of them.’ ‘It is probably unwise to harbour any ambition to leave a permanent mark on one’s Inn because all four have managed to exist for centuries without a revolution. This advice is particularly appropriate at times when others are casting their eyes upon the law and lawyers with ill will and an urge to cut them down to size.’ However, he obviously loved the Middle Temple and his considerable work for the Inn. He was Master Treasurer in 1995. His big influences are ever present in the book. His wife (to whom he was clearly utterly devoted), his family, his friends (the illustrious of his generation, Robin Day, Geoffrey Howe); the Cambridge Union Society (he was President in Michaelmas 1950) and the Welsh Bar. He was involved in landmark cases at every stage of his career, and remarkably, even after his notional retirement. He describes his work as a junior (Aberfan Inquiry, Moors murder trial), in Silk (Slater Walker

affair; chairing rabies inquiry) and as a High Court Judge (in the EAT, Family Division and then Queen’s Bench Division); and after his retirement, chairing the child abuse in care homes inquiry, which he described as ‘undoubtedly the most arduous task I had ever undertaken.’ In 2002, he was awarded the Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the British Empire. He presided over the Ken Dodd trial, which he describes as ‘easily the most notorious and still attracts interest’, but for no doubt good reason only covers two of the 298 pages. He started writing the autobiography mainly for his wife and children, to whom the book is dedicated. But he ends poignantly: ‘It is sensible to end this record here because nothing much happens in one’s eighties. Like many soldiers and even more lawyers I am gently fading away now and trying not to be too much of a nuisance. Our friends and family diminish in number but it is still good to be alive and I have enjoyed reliving my life through the medium of writing about it.’ Sir Ronald died shortly after on his 85th birthday on 8 May 2011.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

DEPUTY TREASURER

Deputy Treasurer Master Judge by Master Brian Leveson

n 30 September this year, an era ended as Master (Igor) Judge retired as Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, having been a member of the senior judiciary for no less than 25 years. Taking up the responsibility for leadership in the area of criminal law, practice and sentencing from Master (Christopher) Rose after he retired in 2006, Master Judge deftly negotiated the quicksand of poorly drafted legislation and guided judges of all ranks onto the firm ground of principle. All who practise in the field should be immeasurably grateful to him for that. But it is not either his contribution to the criminal law or the way, from a standing start, that he championed judicial education that represents his most significant contribution to the administration of justice. In a period of phenomenal constitutional turbulence, Igor Judge has been at the forefront of judicial leaders, approaching each new twist and turn with penetrating analysis of the issues, always conscious of the fundamental importance of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary. Consider the many critical positions he has held: Senior Presiding Judge for England and Wales (1998-2003), Deputy Chief Justice (2003-2005), President of the Queen’s Bench Division (2005-2008), Head of Criminal Justice (2006 to date) and Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales (2008 to date). For fifteen years, through the period up to and following the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, the creation of the Ministry of Justice, issues surrounding access to justice and myriad reforms large and small, he has taken a leading role in fashioning each and every judicial response,

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

bringing to bear on the problems of the day his unique experience and crystal clear vision. In his time as Lord Chief Justice, he has had to deal with no fewer than three Lord Chancellors and two Permanent Secretaries; he has stayed the course with the assistance of three successive Senior Presiding Judges and there is no problem that he cannot illuminate by reference to past experience. One of the first to arrive each morning in the Royal Courts of Justice and one of the last to leave, in addition to sitting on the most significant cases of the day (both in the Court of Appeal and, on occasion, the Supreme Court), he has had to deal with issues of judicial appointments, welfare and discipline, the financing of the courts and the judicial office, the relationship of the judiciary with the executive and with parliament, and the processes of modernization and rules. He has chaired the Judicial Executive Board and the Judges’ Council; he has given speeches both in this country and around the world (which he has always insisted on writing himself). The list is endless. But of greater importance to him than any other are the problems of those whom he leads. A judge is ill? His is the first enquiry. A personal or professional problem? There is no step that he will not take to assist any one of his judges or staff. My family has always been amused by those who have surnames that can be associated with their occupations: there was no-one more aptly named than Master Judge for that is precisely what he is and always has been. The judiciary will miss his contribution enormously and I have no doubt that his successor will be first in the queue seeking his views as

Master Igor Judge

new problems arise. In the meantime, the Middle Temple is fortunate that he is to become its Treasurer for I am equally clear that the golden thread that will run through his term of office will be his profound respect for the rule of law and justice for all, his commitment to the institutions of the law – and, in particular, Domus – and, perhaps of greatest importance, his overwhelming personal concern both for students and all whom the law has touched.

Master Leveson is a Lord Justice of Appeal and was Senior Presiding Judge for England and Wales between 2007 and 2009. He is the Chairman of the Sentencing Council and in 2011-12 conducted the Inquiry into the culture Practices and Ethics of the Press.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

VA L E D I C T O RY

30 JULY 2013

Valedictory for Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice by Master John Dyson, Master of the Rolls

â&#x20AC;&#x153;

We are here to say an official and very public farewell to one of our greatest Chief Justices. This is but one of many farewells, but, in the presence of this glittering array of distinguished witnesses, it is perhaps the most important. As you know, this is an invitation-only event. Such has been the demand to be present today that we could have filled this court many times over. It is a very strange role reversal for me to be sitting here today making this speech alongside Igor. In fact, it is he who should be delivering this valedictory to himself. I realise that this would be a rather unusual step to take and a departure from tradition. But I have heard him deliver dozens of speeches of welcome and valediction to judges and Lord Justices of Appeal. They have all been little short of miniature works of art, each marvellously crafted and carefully tailored to the honorand and the occasion, expressed with clarity, warmth and wit. He always finds something charming to say. Even in those cases where that may be a bit of a struggle and the evidence is a little thin, you would never know it. As a student of his speeches, I have noticed that a recurring motif is his love of the circuits. When welcoming a new judge from a specialist field (usually of a commercial nature), he takes obvious delight in saying that he is just a Circuit Hack. He is justly proud of his circuit roots. But hack? All I can say is that he is the finest Circuit Hack of his generation. What he

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

means, of course, is that he is an allrounder who has bags of common sense, and not one of those specialists whose feet are not always on the ground and who produce over-long, over-complicated and sometimes incomprehensible judgments. With characteristic modesty, he also greatly underestimates his ability as a lawyer. He has made major contributions to the development of our law in many areas, particularly, of course in the area of criminal law. I said at the outset that he is one of our greatest Chief Justices. This is no mere hyperbole. It is undeniably true. I have seen at first hand these last ten months the burdens that he has borne. He has been responsible for leading the judiciary of England and Wales during a period of unprecedented difficulties and challenges. The Government likes to portray challenges as opportunities. The problem of keeping the morale of the judiciary up in the eye of the pensionsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; storm was a very odd kind of opportunity. Igor felt this very keenly. He battled long and hard to negotiate the best deal that he could with the Government. He was disappointed with the outcome. But nobody could have done better. Such has been his dedication to the judiciary that, over a two-week period, he went round the country speaking to the judges and giving them an account of what he had done. I attended one of these speeches. At the end, those who were present were so grateful to him for what he had done that a good deal of the sting of

their anger had been drawn. That was precisely what he intended. Igor has never lost his art as advocate. I heard him give the final address at the Commonwealth Law Conference in Cape Town earlier this year. He spoke movingly and brilliantly about the evils of inequality and discrimination. At the end, he received a standing ovation. After four days of many rather turgid presentations, long after torpor had taken hold, that was quite an achievement.

humanity and deep understanding of people . . . The post that he has held with such distinction for five years is arduous and stressful. One of his most remarkable attributes is that he always has time to chat, even occasionally to indulge in unadulterated gossip, with anyone. He is as happy talking to clerks and judicial assistants as to senior judges, and maybe more so; as happy talking to tiny children as to the elderly who are well past their prime. He remembers the names of everyone, as well as those of their partners, their children and their dogs. I find this most annoying, because I sometimes canâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t even remember the names of colleagues who I see day in and day out. He has a real interest in his fellow human beings. It is entirely genuine. It is what makes him so popular. Let me give one example. Anne Sharp, the previous chief executive of the Judicial Office, was on leave. Igor knew that she was

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

VA L E D I C T O RY

anxiously waiting for her sonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Alevel results. She received a message that Igor wanted to speak to her urgently. She wondered what on earth had happened and was very worried. When she spoke to him, she discovered that he simply wanted to know how her son had done. What better illustration could there be of the humanity of the man. It is this humanity and deep understanding of people that can be seen in all aspects of his life, not least his judgments. It comes naturally to him. There is nothing contrived or studied about it. And he encourages everybody and brings the best out in them. That is the hallmark of a great man. I should add that he has given me wonderful encouragement and support. For this I shall always be grateful to him. Igor is so universally admired and held in such affection that it may seem unkind, if not perverse, to say that, when preparing this speech, I wondered whether there were any stories about Igor that I could tell which showed that he has some weakness after all. Surely there has been some peccadillo or indiscretion lurking in the shadows, which I could disclose to the world, some minor faux pas. I asked colleagues. I asked clerks, members of his staff, court ushers. But there was nothing. Or nothing that they were prepared to disclose. They all had nothing but praise. Well, I can disclose a story about Igor and a fig tree. Now I can feel that he is a little worried. It happened in 1992. He had been a QB judge for

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

about five years and I was still at the Bar. Our wives and we happened quite by chance to be together on a group walking holiday in Italy. It was hot and we were tired. We came upon a wonderful fig tree laden with fruit. It stood alone in a field, but fairly close to a house. It was not entirely clear whether the tree was on private land. Everyone fell on the succulent figs, except for Igor (not sure about Judith). I never asked him why he held back and resisted the temptation. Perhaps he just doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t like figs. Perhaps he suspected that someone would leak to the Press the story of the top judge fig thief. I think that the reality is that, even in a remote field in Italy, he just knew instinctively how to behave. The rest of us did not. But eventually I did think of a weakness. I found his Achilles heel. It has stared me in the face almost every day since I became MR. It is identified by two letters: IT. In a word, the IT revolution has completely passed him by. Surprisingly, he disputes this, but it is true. His whole family will say that it is true, even his grandchildren. It is as if the IT revolution never happened. Emails, no; BlackBerry, no; mobiles, no; i-pads, no. I could go on. How has he managed? By having a formidably efficient army of loyal supporters, all I think female. I have seen first-hand how perfectly he treats his team and how and why he commands their unstinting loyalty and affection. And I should not, of course, overlook Judith, who is a

most competent out-of-hours IT supporter, too. I am confident that Igor does not regret the IT situation in which he finds himself. But I believe that, in his dreams, like many of us, he regrets that he was never invited to open the batting for England. How wonderful it would have been to score that century at Lords. But leaving dreams on one side, he has no cause for any regrets whatsoever. Igor is a devoted and loving family man who is intensely proud of his family, most of whom are here today. Sadly, Helen is unable to be here as she is abroad, nor can his mother be here. She lives in Malta. I have never met her. Igor frequently speaks about her. She sounds utterly formidable. Which of course brings me to Judith. Igor has told me on countless occasions that he could never have done this job without her support. And he is not referring to her IT skills. She is a remarkable person. Warm, intelligent and every bit as interested in people as he is. In fact, if she had been a judge, I suspect that she would have been a terrific Lady Chief Justice. Igor, the country is so grateful to you for what you have done during the last five years and indeed throughout your long and distinguished judicial career. You are still remarkably energetic. I speak on behalf of us all in wishing you, Judith and your entire family good health and happiness for many years to come.â&#x20AC;?

T H E M I D D L E T E M P L A R 27

MASTER

OF THE

RO L L S

Interview with the Master of the Rolls by Master Marcel Berlins

or a provincial lad from an entirely non-legal background, with no contacts, who drifted into the law, found chambers by accident and had no plans or specific ambitions to rise in his profession, John Dyson has done pretty well. His rise and rise, to the Supreme Court and thence to Master of the Rolls, was achieved quietly, unaccompanied by the animated speculation that usually accompanies the top jobs. And, it seems, without making enemies or attracting the usual grumbles that the office should have gone to someone else. Lord Dyson’s English father and Bulgarian mother owned a chic dress shop in Leeds. Though there was no family or any other link with the law, his father, for some reason he’s never quite understood, always wanted him to be a barrister. After a classics degree at Wadham College, Oxford, he flirted with the possibility of entering academia, then considered the civil service, before plumping for the Bar. ‘Looking back on it, it was all delightfully haphazard. I really didn’t have any burning ambition. And so in the end I rationalised the decision I made, on the basis that the Bar seemed to have that very interesting mix of quite an intellectually challenging job as well as being very practical.’ He then drifted into what was to become his speciality at Keating Chambers: construction law, arguably the least sexy and one of the most obscure legal subjects. In spite of his somewhat laissez faire attitude he found himself, to his slight surprise, liking his job, being extremely good at it, and much in demand. His practice blossomed, he took Silk, and a few years afterwards was the subject of an unusual ploy, better known in the world of football. He was persuaded – some would say poached – to become head of what was is now 39 Essex Street. At the time it was unusual enough to move chambers – to do so and leap into the top spot of a substantial set from his first day was considered unprecedented. It was there that he had his first mild taste of media attention, acting for Dave Clark, the Sixties’ pop star. Thirty years later Clark devised a musical based on his group’s songs. It did not do as well as he’d hoped, for which he blamed London’s Dominion Theatre’s box office. With Dyson QC acting for him, Clark sued the Dominion and was awarded £600,000. Dyson remembers the trial for a particular reason. ‘Our case was that the box office had been negligent and

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

not sold the tickets properly. The defence was that the show fizzled out because it was no good. They called the Daily Telegraph theatre critic as their expert. I can still remember to this day that when I read his report there was something about it, I just had a feeling, and so my first question to him was ‘Have you seen the show?’, and, unbelievably he said no he hadn’t. So I asked about one more question and then sat down. I think that was my most effective cross examination ever.’ He reached the High Court in 1993, but was later diverted to preside over the Technology and Construction Courts. ‘It was not something I particularly wanted to do, because I had been on the bench for about five years by then and I was really enjoying the variety, but Tom Bingham asked me if I would do it and of course I said yes.’ He made his mark immediately, with his robust seminal judgment in Macob v Morrison, which has had a dramatic effect on the adjudication of construction disputes. ‘I was very pleased about that decision because I think it has worked very successfully.’ His record in the Court of Appeal, to which he was appointed in 2001, is notable for the sheer variety and scope of cases in which he was involved, especially coming after his stint in the narrow confines of construction law. ‘It was a great place, the Court of Appeal. I enjoyed it very, very much. I’ve been very fortunate.’ In 2010 Dyson was the first judge to be appointed directly to the Supreme Court without first having been a peer; thus, he could be referred to only as Sir John Dyson SCJ. A subsequent Royal Warrant enabled him and subsequent appointees to bear the title ‘Lord’ or ‘Lady’. He did not behave with the timidity often shown by the newest recruits to the highest court. Relishing the ambiance of intellectual collegiality, his contributions, according to colleagues, were, from the start, learned and quietly forceful. A short concurring judgment in one of his first cases, involving applications for asylum from homosexual men fearing persecution in their own countries, demonstrated the combination of clarity of thought, realism and - importantly – compassion, which were apparent in many of his judgments to come. He stayed at the Supreme Court for less than two and a half years before being offered his present job. ‘Now I am in a position, for the first time in my life, to choose what cases I want to do. I have never had that

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

MASTER

luxury before. Everybody likes to sit with the Master of the Rolls, because on the whole he gets good cases.’ But he emphasises that he doesn’t have a hidden agenda. ‘I would be surprised and disappointed if people looking at my judgments were able to say that I had one.’ It is inevitable, though, that judgments delivered by the Master of the Rolls attract more attention and debate than decisions taken by other judges. Lord Dyson does not court controversy, but nevertheless expresses his opinions vigorously, whether or not they might provoke a reaction from an angry government or hostile media. He tasted both when, in March, he delivered the Court of Appeal’s judgment preventing the deportation of the alleged terrorist Abu Qatada. Earlier this year the Court of Appeal ruled that the Home Office scheme to overhaul the system of criminal records was unlawful. The requirement on all job applicants to disclose all offences, however minor or ancient, was a breach of their right to a private and family life. Unusually, publication of the decision had been delayed for several weeks to enable the Home Office, at their request, to make further submissions. Nothing more was heard from them. ‘It is extraordinary that nothing has been done. The government needs to pull its finger out and produce legislation,’ Dyson remarked. This is not the language of a judge anxious to avoid offending government ministers. These days, a Master of the Rolls is also expected to perform a quasi-political role – in a non-party sense - in meetings and negotiations with the executive on proposed legislation or policy reforms affecting the legal system. Some judges –- not only the most senior - have expressed their reservations, or even outright opposition, in extrajudicial contributions, especially in public - and publicised lectures. Dyson is hesitant to express strong views on such platforms. ‘No, I don’t think that it is a good idea for someone in my position, when the government announces it is proposing to do something, to give a lecture saying I think it’s a bad idea. I think that the right way to do it is to respond, to talk to them. To stand on a platform and shout publicly I don’t think is right and I think is probably counter-productive.’ But didn’t Dyson himself, last October, deliver a lecture severely warning the government of the awful consequences of their slashing legal aid? ‘That wasn’t aimed at the government. It’s not controversial, it’s inevitable and everybody says it is

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

OF THE

RO L L S

inevitable and the government knows it is going to happen. The problem is, once the government has made a decision, has taken up a fixed position, then I think we have to accept that. But in the run up to the making of the decision, then, as senior Judges, we have a duty to warn the government and try and persuade them not to take a certain course. But ultimately they are the government and once they have made a decision there is no point in going on about it. We’ve just got to do our best to deal with it. On the legal aid issue, so far as possible steps are being taken to try to help the litigating person and to help the judges to cope with the litigating person. It’s very difficult.’ But does the government consult the judiciary sufficiently? ‘This Government is making lots of proposals and to be fair to them, they do consult. They often expect a response with alarming speed, but they do consult and so they expect us to tell them what we think. If we think they are going terribly wrong then we are under a duty to tell them that in no uncertain terms and to tell them why we think so. We do have access to them. But ultimately they are the government.’ Away from his judicial role, Lord Dyson’s interests are mainly musical. His pianistic talent is attested by the fact that, as a teenager, he was taken on as a pupil of Dame Fanny Waterman, one of England’s most influential teachers and creator of the internationally renowned Leeds piano festival. ‘Well, I’ve always said that I was her least good pupil, but I was quite good. I had lessons for nearly four years between the ages of 13 and 17, and I haven’t had lessons since. I have regretted that sometimes, but I still play. I don’t practise much. I now just play for myself, I play so much less well than I did when I was 17, but it hasn’t caused me to stop.’ He looks fit, and younger than his 70 years, which is no doubt attributable to his passion for serious walking, shared by his wife Jacqueline, a senior law lecturer. ‘We both love it. Virtually all our holidays are walking holidays.’ John Dyson never dreamed, expected or planned that he would reach the heights he has, but he’s clearly revelling in the experience. He’s become Master of the Rolls at a difficult time. The entire legal system is reeling from the financial restraints being imposed, and the judiciary is under a spotlight - not always a benign one – as never before. Lord Dyson is clearly well up to the challenges posed.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

LENT READER

26 FEBRUARY 2013

Lent Reading Re-engineering Civil Justice by Master Graham Zellick, Lent Reader

“

I want to suggest that the civil justice edifice, while structurally sound and with strong foundations, is in need of refurbishment and that, in the process, some deeply entrenched principles may need revision. My concern is with the architecture and interior design of the arrangements currently in place. My perspective is that of the erstwhile legal scholar informed by experience in the judicial foothills. In the absence of PowerPoint or other visual aids – from which these ancient walls and timbers would recoil – I shall resort to verbal imagery and continue with my property

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

metaphor. I ask you to imagine a large and impressive mansion, many hundreds of years old, set within a vast estate. It has a large central portion and a west wing and an east wing. The mansion has been fairly well maintained over the years. It’s a bit basic in places, but very stately and ornate elsewhere. The west wing could be described as utilitarian. There are certainly no frills. Although it has its own entrance, there is internal access at various points between the grand central section and the west wing, but the east wing is under-populated, entirely separate and accessible only through its own entrance. Most of those of who work in or have cause to visit the rest of the building know little or nothing of what goes on in the east wing and regard it as something altogether different. The sign at the entrance to the estate might in another country have said ‘Palais de Justice’, but in England it reads, accurately if inelegantly, in the argot of our times: ‘Civil Justice Centre’; and underneath in letters too small to read it refers to the east wing. The sign at the main entrance proclaims ‘Her Majesty’s Courts’; the sign at the entrance to the west wing says simply ‘Tribunals Entrance’. The east wing entrance says merely ‘East Wing’; but more of that later. It is to this building that we and our fellow citizens, locked in a dispute which has proved resistant to settlement by any other means, repair if we are determined enough and if we can afford it. We come in search of justice. We come with certain kinds of disputes, big and small, to the main portion of the house, where we find on the ground floor the High Court of Justice with its three divisions; on the first floor is the Court of Appeal, Civil Division; on the top floor, with panoramic views of the surrounding countryside as befits the far- and clear-sighted men and woman who occupy this floor, sits the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom; and in the basement, to which the majority of visitors are directed, is the county court. There is a fair bit of daily traffic in this, the more majestic part of the building, but it is dwarfed by the multitudes who swarm every day into the west wing to have their disputes adjudicated in the First-tier Tribunal or in one of the few tribunals not, or not yet, part of this new system; and upstairs is the Upper Tribunal which hears appeals from

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

LENT READER those below. The creation of the unified tribunal system by the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 was one of the most important developments in the administration of justice in recent times. It removes tribunals from their sponsor departments; it unequivocally establishes them

I want to suggest that we need to escape from this straitjacket, that there are other perfectly legitimate ways of adjudicating and resolving disputes, that the due process hearing model is no better than, and may sometimes be inferior to, certain other techniques

•

Tribunals are said to be multi-disciplinary. Some are; many are not. Originally, they were entirely lay bodies, but since the Leggatt report, that is no longer regarded as appropriate. Most cases today are heard by a judge sitting alone. Some jurisdictions involve other kinds of professionals, such as doctors, surveyors, economists, businessmen. It might be asked why this paradigm isn’t adopted by some of the courts next door. There is surely a strong case for involving other specialists and even lay people in the work of the family courts, for example.

•

Tribunals are often described (even by senior judges) as inquisitorial in contradistinction to the adversarial procedure of the courts. They aren’t. It has been said that sections 2 and 22(4) of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 implicitly require an inquisitional approach. They do not. It seems to be thought that what makes a body inquisitorial is the ability or duty to take points not raised by the parties and to ask questions of witnesses and parties. It is not. I know of only two bodies which can be said to be truly inquisitorial: the Investigatory Powers Tribunal and the Criminal Cases Review Commission, which is not a court or tribunal at all. Perhaps the Coroner’s Court should be added to the list. But I know of no other tribunal that justifies that description. Their procedures tend to be more informal than the courts; the strict rules of evidence do not generally apply; and they are expected to take points not raised by the parties; but they are essentially adversarial just like the courts. A more accurate description is ‘interventionist’, as Professor Dame Hazel Genn has pointed out.

•

The rules of procedure that govern tribunals very closely resemble those applying in the courts. Just look at the rules for any chamber of the First-tier Tribunal. The substantive law they apply, and the relevant jurisprudence or case law, is every bit as technical and complex as anything being litigated in the courts. The lawyers who preside are now called judges. Some indeed have expressed concerns that this growing judicialisation and formalisation of tribunal jurisdictions is inimical to their purpose and rationale. Moreover, there are tribunals no less formal than the High Court that deal with matters of considerable complexity. The Competition Appeal Tribunal comes to mind.

•

Tribunal jurisdictions are narrow or specialised, but is that not also increasingly the case in the courts, where the ever-growing complexity of the law calls for specialist judges who can dispose of the work efficiently and speedily? We have the Family Division, the Administrative Court, the Commercial Court, the Technology and Construction Court and the Patent Court.

within the judicial firmament; it makes the courts judiciary eligible to sit in tribunals and in fact High Court judges now preside over all of the chambers of the Upper Tribunal; it professionalises their judiciary; it standardises their procedures and appeal routes; it creates a unified administration (indeed, one now merged with HM Courts Service to create HM Courts and Tribunals Service); and it places a senior judge at its head as Senior President. Training, too, is now vested in a single body, the Judicial College. All this is designed to strengthen the rule of law and provide users with a better service. But in doing so, in creating this parallel system to the courts, perhaps even with parity of esteem, a number of questions are prompted: • What is the difference between courts and tribunals? •

Should there be two systems?

•

What cases should be heard where?

•

Are the partition walls separating the two systems in the right place?

•

Is the judiciary in the west wing different from the uniform branch next door?

Thinking on this owes more to history than to either logic or rational policy. And much of what is thought or said about tribunal justice is wrong or outdated. • You will note that I speak of ‘tribunal justice’ and not ‘administrative justice’ or ‘administrative tribunals’, terms I dislike. They should have been discarded years ago when Lord Franks first and forcefully made clear that tribunals were not part of the administration (as they still are in America and, I think, Australia). •

It is not even the case that all tribunal work concerns disputes between citizens and the State: much tribunal work is what is called party v. party, for example everything in the Employment Tribunal and much, if not all, in the new FTT Property Chamber. It is also true of other tribunal jurisdictions.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

LENT READER

There is much work in the county court which is no different in character from that done in tribunals and could quite properly be transferred. The small claims work in the county court handled by district judges might just as well, and with advantages to litigants, be reclassified as a tribunal jurisdiction. Which raises the question whether the word ‘tribunal’ itself is appropriate or helpful. I venture to suggest that we should be much better off without it. So what might we call them instead? How about ‘courts’? There is certainly a strong case for having simplified, streamlined methods for adjudicating certain kinds of dispute in a specialised setting. I sat for a while as a member of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Appeals Panel, where our maximum award was half a million pounds. We typically disposed of eight cases a day. I have long thought that such a process would be a much better way of dealing with NHS litigation, which consumes vast amounts in legal costs. It is not so much two systems side by side that we should have but a single system with personnel, procedures and rules adapted for particular streams of work. I anticipate that over time that is exactly what will happen as the FTT and Upper Tribunal and the courts converge. Meanwhile, structural changes within the central part of our mansion are also called for. A Unified Civil Court, amalgamating the High Court and county court, is one possibility, favoured by Master Phillips when he was Lord Chief Justice, but sadly failing to command the support of a majority of the High Court Bench; Master Dyson, Master of the Rolls and Head of Civil Justice, has opined that the current divisional structure of the High Court is a relic of

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

history, albeit one modified and updated from time to time, which could be more rationally and practically organised; in fact, the President of the Supreme Court in a lecture last week reminded us that it was the intention in the 1870s to move to a more fundamental restructuring of the High Court once the new system under the Judicature Act had time to bed in; and Mr Justice Ryder, who is in charge of the Modernisation of Family Justice, has urged the creation of a Single Family Court. But in the little time left I should like to take you to the east wing (to which the only visitor is the postman) because that is particularly where the re-engineering of which my title speaks needs to take place. We lawyers tend to have a rather monolithic view of adjudication or dispute resolution. The paradigm is the public adversarial proceeding. Its essence is captured in Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights, made part of our domestic law by the Human Rights Act, but in any event derived from the values and principles of the common law. It reads: ‘In the determination of his civil rights and obligations . . , everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing . . . by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.’ I want to suggest that we need to escape from this straitjacket, that there are other perfectly legitimate ways of adjudicating and resolving disputes, that the due process hearing model is no better than, and may sometimes be inferior to, certain other techniques. Which brings us at last to the east wing. Whom do we find inhabiting this corner of our fine mansion? There is the Parliamentary Commissioner for

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

LENT READER

Administration (the Parliamentary Ombudsman) and her alter ego, the Health Service Commissioner. There are the Local Government Commissioners or Ombudsmen, and other ombudsmen whose powers derive ultimately from statute. There is – though not for much longer – the Social Fund Commissioner. Appeals under the Social Fund, which provides support to some of our poorest citizens, are handled by the Social Fund Commissioner as the Head of the Independent Review Service for the Social Fund. 94% of cases designated as urgent were resolved within 24 hours; 36% of appeals were successful. Would any court or tribunal do better? The system has drawn plaudits from the Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council. But the Social Fund and its Commissioner is to go the way of the AJTC itself. On April 1, when the Welfare Reform Act comes into force, they will be no more. My argument tonight is simply that these institutions should be viewed as part of the civil justice system. They deal with vast numbers of disputes – far more than the courts. The administrative law textbooks recognise them as part of the administrative justice landscape (to use the AJTC’s language); but not as part of the civil justice system. I note that the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (s. 2(3)(d)) specifically requires the Senior President of Tribunals to have regard to ‘the need to develop innovative methods of resolving disputes’. I should like to see these bodies re-engineered. The Ombudsmen would need to make binding decisions, not just recommendations as now. The MP filter would have to go. But they have huge potential to take on much work,

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

particularly in the judicial review arena, currently going through the courts, slowly and expensively. Their factfinding techniques are at least as good as the courts’, if not rather better; their services are free. Statute excludes cases where there is a remedy in the courts or a tribunal, but the proviso to section 5(2) of the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 allows the Ombudsman to conduct an investigation if satisfied that it is not reasonable to expect the aggrieved person to resort to it. In practice, the Parliamentary Ombudsman, and I think her local government counterparts and others, frequently take on cases that could have been pursued in the courts. Of course, they are not suitable where difficult points of law are involved; and because of Article 6, there may need to be agreement of the parties. I believe that some of the work currently done in courts and tribunals could be done in the east wing, more quickly, cheaply and informally and, dare I say it, more effectively. To adopt a rather ugly contemporary expression, there is no one-size-fits-all model for handling disputes. I have argued this evening for a broader, more flexible conception of what constitutes civil justice and how disputes can be decided. Our palace of civil justice is indeed a house of many fine rooms. We need to be a little bolder in moving the partitions and the furniture. Professor Graham Zellick CBE, QC, AcSS is Emeritus Professor of Law, University of London and Honorary Fellow of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge. He delivered his reading in Middle Temple Hall on 26 February 2013.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

JUSTICE

A Reminder and Invitation by Masters Guy Mansfield and Martin Partington

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

f membership of Middle Temple stands for one thing above all, it must be support for the rule of law. JUSTICE, as some readers will already know, is an allparty law reform and human rights organisation. It promotes improvements to the British legal system, access to justice, human rights and the rule of law. It does this through research, education, lobbying and interventions in the courts. For more than 50 years it has been at the cutting edge of the debate on legal reform. JUSTICE’s links with our Inn are well established. For fourteen years from 1991 to just a few months before his untimely death in 2005, the late Master Alexander (Treasurer 2001) was its Chairman and guiding spirit. On 14 October 2003 he gave his memorable lecture Iraq: the pax Americana and the law. He was the first person of national legal stature to argue publicly and from the deepest principle that the invasion of Iraq was illegal as contrary to the norms of Public International Law. The occasion was the annual JUSTICE Tom Sargent memorial lecture . Almost ten years to the day, on October 15, 2013 Lord Neuberger, President of the Supreme Court, delivered the 2013 JUSTICE annual (and 50th) Tom Sargent lecture ‘Justice in an Age of Austerity” at the offices of Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, just a stone’s throw from Middle Temple. JUSTICE’s launch can be traced to events in January 1957 when a public meeting was held at the nowdemolished Niblett Hall, Inner Temple. An audience of lawyers heard accounts of show trials in South Africa and Hungary. The meeting had been called by a new organisation – JUSTICE – formed from an ad hoc alliance of lawyers from each of the three main political parties. Over the years, JUSTICE has exerted an influence out of all proportion to its size. Many of the issues JUSTICE took up have turned into major legal reforms. Its work laid the foundations of a number of highly significant developments. These include the Ombudsman system, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme, the Crown Prosecution Service and data protection and freedom of information laws. JUSTICE became renowned for its work on miscarriages of justice, through its association with the BBC’s Rough Justice programme. This work ended in success when the

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

JUSTICE

independent review body for which JUSTICE had long argued, the Criminal Cases Review Commission, came into being in 1997. Here is another link with our Inn: Master Zellick, our Lent Reader this year, was Chairman of the CCRC from 2003 to 2008.

JUSTICE retains two fundamental characteristics established from the outset: a concern for the rule of law and a belief in the effectiveness of an allparty approach At the turn of the millennium, JUSTICE was active in educating the legal profession and public servants about the practical implications of incorporation of the European Convention via the Human Rights Act, and has been a key player in the subsequent debates on a UK Bill of Rights. In the years since 9/11, counter-terrorism has been an important thread in JUSTICE’s work. The organisation has charted and warned of the ‘mission-creep’ of the expanding use of secret evidence and special advocates. It has examined, by reference to comparable jurisdictions, how intercept evidence might be used in UK courts, so dispensing with inherently unjust ‘special measures’ by allowing terrorist offences to be tried openly. JUSTICE has also exerted significant influence on legal developments through its carefully targeted interventions as a third party in the higher courts. Two recent cases may be cited as example. First, Cadder v HM Advocate ([2010] UKSC 43), where JUSTICE argued that the failure to provide legal advice to suspects in police detention in Scotland was a breach of fair trial rights under Article 6 of the European Convention. The Supreme Court decision that Scottish practice did violate Article 6 led to an immediate change in the law north of the border. Second, Al-Rawi v Security Service ([2011] UKSC 34), where JUSTICE intervened (together with Liberty) to argue that the Government’s case for the expansion of ‘closed material procedures’ (CMP) under the common law was flawed and incompatible with principles of open, equal and adversarial

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

justice. The Supreme Court agreed with JUSTICE’s assessment. JUSTICE retains two fundamental characteristics established from the outset: a concern for the rule of law and a belief in the effectiveness of an all-party approach. Master Alexander took the Conservative whip in the House of Lords. His three successors have been respectively a cross-bencher and members of the Liberal and Labour parties, all sitting members of the House of Lords. The late Lord Bingham called JUSTICE ‘the legal conscience of the nation … sharpening perceptions, deepening insights, voicing concerns, challenging preconceptions and illuminating dark corners.’ To the Times, JUSTICE is ‘thoughtful and unremitting’. JUSTICE is about to enter an exciting phase in its development. Its new Director, Andrea Coomber is conducting a strategic review of its activity, to ensure that the priorities of its tiny staff are clearly set. Andrea is keen to reconnect with a resource that is currently underused – the expertise of outstanding lawyers who share JUSTICE's commitment to the rule of law. She has issued this rallying call to lawyers: ‘JUSTICE’s voice is measured, informed and authoritative across a range of rule of law issues. For more than 50 years we have represented the best of the legal profession, but we are only as strong as our membership. I’d like JUSTICE to become the first port of call for any lawyer concerned about the rule of law or with a desire to see the law reformed and rights protected.’ We are both members of the Council of JUSTICE. We invite you all to consider becoming a member; if you are a member, becoming a friend; letting JUSTICE know if you could participate in training events, or would like to host an event in Chambers. We invite student members to find out about the JUSTICE student network and its free events.

For further details visit http://www.justice.org.uk; On the student human rights network visit http://www.justice.org.uk/shrn_home.php

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

HUMAN RIGHTS

Are Human Rights Selfish? by Master Geraldine Van Bueren

he question ‘Are human rights selfish?’ which is posed by some politicians and by some in religious communities, deserves a serious rebuttal because although it is tempting to avoid answering criticisms of human rights for fear of legitimising the criticism, to leave serious questions unanswered can be more damaging. There are two principal strands of argument in answering the question. The first is that human rights are inherently generous as everyone benefits from a society which does not tolerate torture. In addition, there are no calls for the repeal of the law of contract or other areas of law such as restitution even though individuals exercise rights under them. However, there is one class of human rights litigation, which rarely succeeds when claimed by an individual but is more likely to succeed when the case impacts directly on the entitlements of sections of the community. This second strand focuses on the omission of many human rights, which although legally binding on the United Kingdom have never been incorporated, making it easier for critics to describe human rights as selfish. International human rights law divides human rights into civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights regarding both sets of rights as indivisible and universal. The title of the Human Rights Act is misleading, because accurately in law it ought only to be entitled the Civil and Political Rights Act. The majority of rights including the rights to privacy, freedom of religion and expression belong only to one half of human rights. With the exception of the rights to freedom of association and education, the Human Rights Act excludes one half of the world’s universally recognised human rights, which the United Kingdom has been legally been bound by since 1976. The economic, social and cultural rights enshrined in both the United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 1966 and the Council of Europe’s Social Charter, the twin sister of the European Convention on Human Rights, are commonly described as socio-economic rights. They include the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, adequate housing, progressively free university education and the right to an adequate standard of living. They are rights which are included in most of the modern constitutional democracies of this century and the end of the last. Democracies from Argentina to South Africa, including the BRIC states of Brazil and India, constitutionally include socio-economic rights within the concept of the rule of law because their own historical experiences demonstrate that protecting civil

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

and political rights alone is insufficient to protect against an expansion of inequality, which leads to disorder and increasingly harsh forms of government. Socio-economic rights also have the advantage of increasing substantive access to dignity and equality by women and children. Civil and political rights by their nature focus mainly on entitlements in the public sphere, however currently the denial of substantive rights such as health, housing, and food, which impact also on women and children and life in the private sphere, are difficult to argue for outside of the entrenched arena of party politics. Therefore, the question which requires answering is, what is the reason for the United Kingdom failing to protect equally one half of the body of human rights law, when litigation on socio-economic rights is generally cost effective, protecting not only the litigant appearing before the court but also a significant section of the community? There are at least six possible reasons. The first is an argument which has been raised by governments of all political persuasions that the United Kingdom is different from other states with its longestablished welfare state. The United Nations, however, has rejected this argument, observing that a welfare state alone is insufficient to protect the socio-economic rights of those within the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom. In addition, by enshrining socio-economic rights such as the right to progressively free university education in law, the welfare state is better protected from the vagaries of political football. The second argument raised against bringing socioeconomic rights back home is that they are too costly and particularly too expensive during a time of austerity. However, this is not an argument which has been accepted in relation to civil and political rights. The core costs of due process including the recording of judgments, training and payment of the judiciary and the maintenance of court rooms has not prevented the United Kingdom’s proud heritage of due process and has not been raised as a reason for dispensing with due process. Another objection is that socio-economic rights are in essence broad principles incapable of definition and protection by the three branches of government. Records show that this same argument was used from the 1960s in arguing against the incorporation of civil and political rights. Establishing the parameters and content of each of the socio-economic rights has been made easier for both the courts and government because of the rapidly expanding

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

HUMAN RIGHTS

jurisprudence around the world and because the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (the Committee responsible for overseeing the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights) has issued General Comments which provide authoritative guidance on the duties upon states in implementing each of the rights. In addition, the Chief Justice of the Canadian Supreme Court has observed that even one of the broadest of rights, the right to an adequate standard of living, is capable of being interpreted by the courts. Some argue that socio-economic rights are rights only appropriate for the poorest states in the world and therefore unnecessary for the United Kingdom; however, aid agencies accustomed to providing assistance for overseas people in need are finding it necessary to establish programmes to assist people in the United Kingdom. In addition, civil society organisations such as the Tressel Trust are establishing food banks not only for those on benefits but also for the working poor. A right to adequate nutrition would place this duty firmly upon government. There are two other principal arguments as to why governments have argued that socio-economic rights ought not to be incorporated into United Kingdom law: nonjusticiability and the entry of the judiciary into the political arena. The argument that socio-economic rights are inherently non-justiciable i.e. incapable of being resolved by courts, is factually fallacious. There is now a significant ever-expanding corpus of jurisprudence which demonstrates clearly that courts daily reach judgment on a wide range of socio-economic rights cases. It is possible to argue that politically the incorporation of socio-economic rights is not desirable, but to argue that they are incapable of being decided by British judges could only be based on the fallacious assumption that judges in the United Kingdom are less skilful than their counterparts overseas. It is also argued that to incorporate socio-economic rights into law would mean that judges would enter the political arena and become activist judges. Statutes, however, are the product of party political debates, hence this is an arena which the judiciary inevitably enter without undermining the separation of powers. Comparative jurisprudence demonstrates that, far from being a disadvantage, court judgments can assist in reducing the heat of some political debates. The Treatment Action Campaign case was politically charged because the then President denied that HIV was a principal cause of AIDS and the case concerned access to anti-retroviral drugs to the 24% of pregnant women who were HIV positive; however, after the Constitutional Court ruled that the right to health guaranteed such access, South Africa embarked upon a roll out

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

programme. The term judicial activism has also become distorted. Judges would be performing the same role under a socioeconomic rights statute as they perform under any statute; hence, in the case of Grootboom, in which the South African Government was held by the Constitutional Court to be in breach of the right of access to adequate housing to nearly a thousand people suffering inadequate shelter, the court was merely applying standard principles of statute interpretation and reasonableness. There are different approaches to countries incorporating socio-economic rights. Some, as in Argentina, create a hierarchy where specific international human rights laws take precedence; others such as Ireland and India constitutionally recognise socio-economic rights as policy goals rather than express justiciable rights; whereas others protect socio-economic rights expressly in their national bills of rights. This latter approach is the most desirable as it creates a legal certainty and limits judicial discretion. Although it is possible in the United Kingdom to apply Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits torture, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment, it was never intended to be an umbrella for all anti-poverty litigation. In cases of poverty and social disadvantage, as in the Limbuela case, do we as a society wish for someone to suffer such an extreme level of loss of dignity as to face the prospect of begging for food and shelter before the courts can take action. It is this inherent generosity and support of community in socio-economic rights, which makes them so consistently popular. Research by the London School of Economics’s Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion in 2005 on a Bill of Rights and a written constitution indicated that 93% wanted the right to free healthcare and 85% wanted the right to be looked after by the state in times of need. In addition, there was a wide range of civil society organisations calling for additional rights in the consultation by the Commission on a Bill of Rights. When all the human rights legally binding on the United Kingdom are incorporated, human rights are the opposite of selfish, benefitting all of society. In essence socio-economic rights transform Descartes’s cogito ergo sum into I am because you are; the antithesis of selfishness. © Professor Geraldine Van Bueren QC

Professor Geraldine Van Bueren QC was Called to the Bar in 1979 and Called as a Bencher in 2012. She is Professor of International Human Rights Law at Queen Mary, University of London and a Visiting Fellow of Kellogg College, Oxford. She is the author of Law’s Duty to the Poor (UNESCO).

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

H O N O R A RY B E N C H E R S

A History of the Inn’s Honorary Benchers by Lesley Whitelaw, Archivist

hen Sir John Cust was Called to the Bench of the Middle Temple in 1761, the position of Honorary Bencher was unprecedented and for that reason the ceremony was fully described in the records of Parliament. However the concept of electing Honorary Benchers was foreshadowed by two much earlier strands of Middle Temple membership: Admissions of Honour and Associates to the Bench. Admissions of Honour provided a means of admitting to the Inn prominent men who were distinguished in fields other than the law, while Associates to the Bench were generally eminent lawyers who had been Called to the Bar at the Middle Temple, but had not served as Readers. The earliest Admissions of Honour were recorded in the 16th century and increased conspicuously in the latter part of Elizabeth’s reign. Generally they consisted of eminent men who were admitted gratis to membership of the Inn by the Reader, honoris causa, free of all the requirements and obligations to which the general membership was subject. Many were noblemen and courtiers whose Garter Arms may be seen in the heraldic glass of Hall or aldermen and sheriffs of the City of London or merchant princes like William Bonde of Crosby Place. Others were famous explorers and distinuished naval and military officers such as Sir Martin Frobisher, Sir John Hawkins, Sir Francis Vere, Sir Thomas Norris and Sir Edward Norris. The pattern continued in the early 17th century with the admission of great courtiers like the Duke of

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

Buckingham, the Earls of Northumberland and of Cassilis, leading churchmen, the Venetian Ambassador Antonio Foscarini and Inigo Jones following on his

Holding the office of Reader could be onerous and expensive and many senior barristers sought to avoid it designing a Middle Temple masque. After ceasing almost entirely during the reign of Charles I, the practice was resumed after the Resoration. Although men admitted in this way were not Masters of the Bench, the eminence and diverse range of such members suggest that the origins of the sort of Honorary Benchers elected from the beginning of the 20th century owed much to the tradition of Admissions of Honour. In past centuries serving as Reader, or from 1648 agreeing to Read when required to do so, was a condition of becoming a Bencher. Holding the office of Reader could be onerous and expensive and many senior barristers sought to avoid it. Those declining the Readership were thus precluded from becoming Benchers; instead they were known as ‘Ancients’ and occupied a special table in Hall just below High Table. From the 16th century a small number of distinguished members who had been Called to the Bar, but who had not Read were elected Associates to the Bench because of their seniority or because of the judicial offices they held. If they paid a fine for not Reading (defined in 1585 as at least

£10 in plate or the like ‘for the furniture of the Bench Table’) they were permitted as Associates to the Bench to enjoy all the privileges and dignities of Masters of the Bench except that they would have no voice in Parliament. Examples of such Associates to the Bench were William Periam, Chief Baron of the Exchequer, in 1577; the elder Richard Hakluyt in 1585; Henry Montagu, Recorder of London in 1603; Sir Benjamin Rudierd (specially exempt from paying a fine) in 1619; James Pagitt, Baron of the Exchequer in 1631 (on payment of 100 marks or £66 13s 4d); Henry Calthorpe, Queen’s Solicitor in 1635; Peter Ball, Queen’s Solicitor in 1636; Bulstrode Whitelocke, Commissioner of the Great Seal, in 1648 and Sir Robert Henley, Prothonotary of the King’s Bench in 1663. However in 1730 this practice of Calling Associates to the Bench was discontinued, so when Cust was nominated to become a Bencher in 1761 and accepted on condition he be excused participating in the government of the Inn and from holding the offices of Reader and Treasurer, it became necessary to devise the category of Honorary Bencher to accommodate him and similar future nominations. It is surprising that so much time elapsed until the next Honorary Bencher, Lord Robertson, Lord of Appeal, was elected in January 1900. Since then the very regular election of distinguished Honorary Benchers drawn from the Law and diverse other disciplines and from many countries around the world has added greatly to the lustre of the Inn.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

H O N O R A RY B E N C H E R S

The Original Honorary Bencher

ir John Cust was Called as an Honorary Bencher of the Inn on 27 November 1761 and details of his Bench Call are recorded in the Minutes of Parliament as follows: At a Parliament holden the Twenty seventh Day of November 1761 Ordered that the Form and Manner of Mr Speaker’s being received on his Coming up to the Bench be entered into the Book of Orders of Parliament of this Society. At a parliament held on the sixth day of November 1761 Upon a Motion made by M[aste]r De Grey One of His Majesty’s Counsel, the Right Hon[oura]able Sir John Cust Baronet having been chose Speaker of the House of Commons was unanimously nominated to be one of the Masters of the Bench, which Nomination being communicated to him (according to Order) by M[aste]r Treasurer and by M[aste]r Norton and M[aste]r Blackstone two of his Majesty’s Counsel, he was pleased to declare his assent thereto. When the Speaker came to the Temple, the head porter in Form waited on him from his Coach to the steps leading into Hall, where (attended by his Chaplain, Secretary, Serjeant-at-Arms, and Train-bearer) he was received by the Treasurer, introduced into the Parliament Chamber and addressed by Each Master then present: His mace being left there, his Attendants retired into a parlour appointed for their Reception, where they and the Under Treasurer dined together. When dinner was ready and set on the table in the Temple Hall, the Speaker, on the Right Hand of M[aste]r Sewell the Senior King’s Counsel, went thither and was seated in an armed Chair at the upper End of the Bench Table, and after dinner reconducted in the same manner into

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

Sir John Cust, 3rd Bt, (1718-1770) in his robes as Speaker of the House of Commons. Painted by Sir Joshua Reynolds, the portrait hangs in The Marble Hall at Belton House, Lincolnshire. ©National Trust Portrait Library/John Hammond

the Parliament Chamber to which place M[aste]r Cust his Chaplain was immediately invited, and accordingly came. The Speaker chose to be considered only as an Honorary member, not liable to be Elected

Reader or Treasurer; but to pay all Duties then due and growing due. The whole Entertainment was provided at the Expense of the Society, including an additional Dish and two Bottles of Wine given to each Mess in the Hall.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

T H E L O R D M AYO R

A Burst of Energy by Master Fiona Woolf, Lord Mayor of the City of London

“

There can be no greater honour for a solicitor than to be elected as an Honorary Bencher of Middle Temple. We solicitors do know our place in the legal hierarchy! What a delight to become a Middle Templar after years of coming to dinners and events in my favourite of all Halls and one that had welcomed Shakespeare under its celebrated roof. If that were not enough, I gather that I am the very first solicitor to be so honoured – all the more remarkable as my very unusual career took me to over forty countries to implement reforms to the electricity industry. I could not have been made to feel more special and welcome. I must thank the Inn for stretching out so many hands of friendship to the solicitors’ profession during my long career with the Law Society that culminated in my becoming President in 2006-7. I had travelled with many Middle Temple Chairmen of the Bar to promote the interests of both professions and the judiciary internationally and, who knows, maybe they felt that I was one of them. We frequently joined the delegations of the Lord Mayor of London on his overseas visits. His door-opening powers would get us in to Ministers of Finance and Trade, which we could not achieve on our own. It enabled us to make the case for liberalisation of legal services and market opening. Little did I realise at that time that I might wind up as only the second woman Alderman to become Sheriff of London (since the 10th century), supporting the Lord Mayor in all aspects of his role, including promoting the whole of the UK services sector overseas and the City, which is – still -– the number

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

one global financial centre, as a place in which and with which to do business. A few months after I had finished my term as President of the Law Society, I was elected Alderman for the Ward of Candlewick, in the heart of the Square Mile, to represent the people who live and work there on the Court of Common Council of the City Corporation, which is the local authority or municipality for the City -– the oldest continuing democracy in the world. It is from the members of the Court of Aldermen that the Lord Mayor is elected. We are all independent members, and do not follow political party lines. Candlewick is a microcosm of the City with foreign banks, asset managers, hedge funds, insurance brokers, underwriters and re-insurers, commodity and foreign exchange traders, lawyers and a plethora of small specialist businesses including international recruitment agencies, PR consultants, property developers and ship brokers. What makes the City great is not just its great cluster of businesses and professional services but also the diversity of its talent at all levels which give it the creativity and ability to innovate that are key to its sustainability. The City does contain outstanding global female talent but we do need to see more women in the top positions, particularly the senior executive positions. We have only had one female Lord Mayor in the City and that was in 1983-4. Dame Mary Donaldson was the wife of Sir John, a very distinguished Middle Temple Bencher who was Master of the Rolls when I was Chairman of the London Young Solicitors Group. Clearly, she had to

be quite a pioneer. She redesigned the two versions of the mayoral uniform, a form of 18th century court dress –- in velvet and in wool. Her predecessors had worn tailcoats with breeches and tights and a lace jabot or silk stock. Being quite small, she neatly redesigned it into a skirt and box jacket. The Lord Mayor is elected at the end of September by the members of all the Livery Companies, having been approved as a candidate by a committee of ‘the great and the good’ in the City and by the Court of Aldermen. He or she takes office on the second Friday of November and the Lord Mayor’s Show takes place on the second Saturday. It is really the People’s Parade but the Lord Mayor sets the theme. This year the Lord Mayor’s Parade took place on Saturday, 9 November and the theme was ‘The Energy of Life’ – and there were fireworks this year! Middle Temple has had its fair share of Lord Mayors and I am sure that they have all been well supported by the Inn in their roles and in their charitable appeals. As 2014 will be Shakespeare’s 450th anniversary, Middle Temple will kindly be hosting a ‘birthday party’ to raise funds for the Appeal. The Lord Mayor’s Appeal is now a registered charity in its own right with permanent infrastructure. This enables Lord Mayors to add more value by supporting smaller community-based charities and helping them to raise their profiles. This year the Appeal will even support the start-up of an entirely new charity called The City Music Foundation as well as trees, art and young people. After 8 November, the four charities that will be in the

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

T H E L O R D M AYO R spotlight all punch above the weight that their size would imply. • Princess Alice Hospice – developing the use of technology to reach more people at home in a way that can be shared • Beating Bowel Cancer - raising awareness and supporting

patients with this very treatable but second largest cancer killer •

•

Raleigh International – transforming the skills of young people as they become the agents of sustainable development in poor, rural communities Working Chance – a recruitment

Lord Mayors and the Inn by Lesley Whitelaw, Archivist

n Tudor and Jacobean times the Middle Temple had numerous Lord Mayors of London among its membership. Hall famously provided a place for lawyers and students to dine, debate, dance, revel and carouse with men outside the legal profession such as courtiers, navigators and explorers and the rich and influential merchants, aldermen and sheriffs of the City of London. Much Elizabethan and Jacobean exploration and many trading ventures and colonial enterprises in North America with which Middle Templars were closely associated were funded by City merchants. The most eminent members of the Inn at the time Middle Temple Hall was built were commemorated in heraldic glass windows dating from the 1570s. Among the surviving glass is an armorial shield and an inscription ‘Edward Osborne, Alderman’ (as he was from 1573 and Lord Mayor as he was to be in 15834). The story of Osborne’s rise is a remarkable one. As a boy he was apprenticed to a prominent merchant and cloth-worker, Sir William Hewlett. When a careless nurse dropped Hewlett’s infant daughter from the window of an apartment on

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

London Bridge into the Thames below, the young apprentice dived into the river and rescued her – for which act he was many years later rewarded by marriage to her and in due course he inherited his father-inlaw’s extensive business and estates. He traded very successfully with Spain and Turkey and was instrumental in obtaining a charter for the Turkey Company, becoming its first governor. In the final decade of the 16th century and the first two decades of the 17th several leading alderman and no fewer than eight* Lord Mayors holding office between 1602 and 1616 were admitted to the Middle Temple honoris causa – the equivalent status of Honorary Benchers today. This happy state of amity between the City of London and the Temple Inns was rudely shattered later in the century by clashes over the status, inherited from the time of the Knights Templar, of Inner and Middle Temple as liberties: although situated within the boundaries of the City of London, they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the Lord Mayor. The first rowdy confrontation between a visiting Lord Mayor and members upholding the

agency for women offenders that successfully integrates them back into society The title of the Appeal will be ‘The Energy to Transform Lives’. There is plenty of choice in the good causes that everyone can support. For more information visit www.thelordmayorsappeal.org

privileges of the Temple occurred in 1668 when the Lord Mayor attended a Lent Reading at Inner Temple with the Sword of Justice borne aloft before him as the symbol of his civic authority. He encountered such a hostile response that he was forced to seek refuge in private chambers before he could scuttle back to the City in safety. The second incident occurred during the devastating fire of January 1679 when, according to Roger North’s account, the assistance of the Lord Mayor was spurned and his sword was beaten down by angry members of the Inns who preferred to forego his help ‘rather than connive at such a precedent to be made in derogation of their liberties’. Fortunately subsequent relations have been happier. Sir David Salomons, the first Jewish Lord Mayor (in 1855), one of the first Jewish magistrates and a leading figure in Jewish emancipation as well as an authority on joint-stock banking, was admitted to the Middle Temple in 1846 and was Called to the Bar here in 1849. More recently, Sir Gavyn Arthur served as Lord Mayor in 2002, an event celebrated by a dinner in Middle Temple Hall. *Robert Lee (1602); Sir Thomas Lowe (1604); Sir John Watts (1606); Sir Henry Rowe (1607); Sir Thomas Campbell (1609); Sir John Swynnerton (1612); Sir Thomas Hayes (1614); Sir John Jolles (1616)

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

EXTRADITION

To Return or Not? Lecture by Masters Alan Moses and Scott Baker Edited by Master Ros Wright

discussion of extradition both into and from the United Kingdom could not be timelier. Arrangements with the United States have lately been the subject of a great deal of media and political interest with cases such as Norris, the NatWest 3, Mackinnon, Tappin and O’Dwyer attracting publicity. More recently, the Government has pledged to opt out of all the pre-Lisbon Treaty criminal justice provisions and negotiate to re-join individual measures where that is in the national interest. Key among the pre-Lisbon measures is the European Arrest Warrant, which has equally been acclaimed as a huge step forward in the fight against crime to streamline the return of fugitive criminals to the UK and condemned as a blunt instrument used indiscriminately to force UK citizens to face trial abroad for trivial offences or where there is scant evidence to incriminate them. In January, two eminent authorities discussed the finer points of extradition law and practice in Middle Temple Hall. Masters Moses and Scott Baker enlightened and entertained a packed audience on this fraught topic. Master Scott Baker took as his theme, ‘Extradition from the United Kingdom: Is it fit for purpose?’ He explained the basis of extradition -- the legal process by which persons accused or convicted of crimes are surrendered from one State to another for trial or punishment, a two-way street, usually based on treaties or conventions entered into by Sovereign States. The Extradition Act 2003 created a new statutory regime. Part 1 emanates from the Council Framework Decision of the European Union made on 13 June 2002. It covers extradition between the United Kingdom and the other 26 member states plus Gibraltar. The vehicle is the European Arrest Warrant and the underlying philosophy is that those wanted for trial or punishment should be swiftly surrendered from one State to another. Following arrest a judge decides whether extradition is barred for any statutory reason. The main bars are double jeopardy, extraneous considerations, passage of time and specialty. An extraneous consideration is where the claim for extradition is motivated by reason of race, religion, nationality, gender, sexual orientation or political opinion or where the individual would be prejudiced at trial or his liberty restricted for any of these reasons. Specialty means, broadly, that the person extradited can only be dealt with for

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

the offence for which he is extradited. The extradition must also be compliant with the European Convention on Human Rights. Extradition under Part 1 is in consequence of a judicial order in distinction to Part 2 where the Secretary of State has the last word. Master Scott Baker explained that, broadly, the European Arrest Warrant works well. With cross-border crimes and criminals becoming ever more sophisticated, it was obvious by 2003 that changes to the old arrangements, or the lack of them, were needed, and it is sometimes forgotten that it is now much easier to retrieve our criminals from many European countries. However, successful extradition arrangements have to be based on mutual trust and confidence. No two States have identical criminal justice systems and those of some of our Part 1 partners leave a good deal to be desired by United Kingdom standards and improvements, particularly in six areas, need to be made: First, where a sentence is twelve months or less the judge at the extradition hearing should have power to refuse to surrender a convicted person where he is a British resident or national or staying in the United Kingdom. Second, in the case of lengthier sentences it should be made easier for a sentenced prisoner to be transferred to serve his sentence in his home State. Third, the European Arrest Warrant needs to be used proportionately e.g. not for trivial offences. Fourth, steps need to be taken to avoid disproportionately long pre-trial detention. Fifth, the so-called Schengen alert system should be changed. When a State issues a European Arrest Warrant it is flagged up in all the Member States that the subject of it is wanted. Even if his extradition is rejected by the State in which he is apprehended, the flag remains unless and until the issuing State removes it, which often it does not. Sixth, legal representation ought to be available for the individual both in the issuing State and in the executing State. There is an imperception that the arrangements with the USA are imbalanced. The present position is that requests from the United States require ‘probable cause’ and those from the United Kingdom ‘reasonable suspicion.’ In practice both expressions mean the same; both are the test for the issue of a domestic arrest warrant. Furthermore, before a request for extradition from the United Kingdom can leave the United States it has to cross the ‘probable

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

EXTRADITION

causeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; threshold. Master Scott Baker also addressed the vexed question of forum - in which country a person should be tried - but suggested that that is an issue on which the politicians will ultimately have to decide the ground rules. Whatever system of extradition is operated it is important that the public should have confidence in it. Master Moses, who, as a Lord Justice of Appeal, has presided over many high-profile extradition cases, reflected wryly on the opportunity that extradition presents to stymie the UK judiciary in its attempts to demonstrate that innate and quintessential attribute for which it is justly famous - an effortless belief that (our) system of justice is better, and woe to the poor requested person who will be compelled to face trial in Latvia, Poland or Greece, or, if already convicted, languish in an Azerbaijani centre of detention. Commenting that, though speed in extradition should be of the essence, sadly the intention falls miles short of the reality. The authors of the Framework Directive and the Act paid scant regard to the consequences of consigning the jurisdiction to the hard-pressed few senior District Judges at Bow Street, who understandably enough are often unable to sit on a sufficient number of consecutive days, nor did they reckon on the ingenuity of counsel, and, in particular, the deployment of arguments under Article 3; prison conditions in a far off jurisdiction; harshness of punishment; Article 6 inadequacies of a trial system; or the consequences for the family, the young children left behind in the UK. He cited examples of the delays, including Tollman in 2008. There had been eighteen hearings in total, five since 2006. The defendant was finally discharged because he was too ill to go back to US in 2009. But the fraud had taken place in 1993, he was indicted in 2002 and the request made in 2004. Delays had a rather happier outcome for the requested person, a former Iranian ambassador to Jordan, in Tajik. He was accused of exporting forbidden equipment from the USA in 2006. His extradition was sought by the US and resisted on grounds of ill health. This plea failed in 2008; he then had more heart symptoms, which led to further request to reconsider to the Home Secretary. After about a year it emerged that medical advice did not support his argument against being extradited. But in the meantime the UK was worried about the situation in Tehran. Would there be danger to our man in Tehran should Tajik be extradited to the US? The Home Secretary asked the FCO to ask the US whether they really did want him. There was no response. Eventually they decided they did, but by then the 28 day period after the Order had long since expired and in the absence of any explanation of why the US had not

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

replied, the court refused to extradite. Master Moses commented, with some irony, that itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s not all bad news for the requesting states. Poland has a high success rate in seeking extradition for those who have handled spare parts of second-hand motor cars some five years previously and Portugal successfully obtained extradition of a fireman, who had left some four years earlier. A young man was accused of bludgeoning his best friend, who was paraplegic, to death, in France. He confessed and then withdrew his confession and accused his father. His father had an alibi: he was dining that night with the Chief of Police. The son then accused his mother. She had by that time come to live in England with her other children. She was arrested on a European Arrest Warrant. Master Moses was rather keen to find a way of allowing the appeal. But when he went into court he changed his mind. There before him was one of those Chabrol beauties, rather like Stephane Audran, but a little faded. She was plainly a murderess and he whispered to his somewhat startled colleague that he thought they would have to uphold the extradition. Half-way through the case there was a commotion and a very large lady attempted, with great difficulty, to negotiate the benches in Court 1. When she sat down she began a long whispered conversation with the beautiful murderess behind. Thoughtful as always, Master Moses asked what the matter was. He was told that Madame apologised for being late and was having a hasty conference with her interpreter, his erstwhile murderess in the bench behind. They allowed the appeal. It is small wonder, Master Moses observed, that requesting states might look wistfully at the successful career of Dr Schultz, the bounty hunter who unchains Django.

Master Scott Baker (right) chaired a Government-appointed panel to review extradition arrangements, which reported in, 2011. Master Alan Moses (left)

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

BOOK REVIEW

Relocation: A Practical Guide Review by Emily Rayner

ith the growing ease of international travel and communication, families are no longer confined to individual countries but are increasingly transnational. Correspondingly, the transnational family presents a burgeoning area of work for the family law practitioner to grapple with, not least when one parent seeks to relocate internally or internationally with the children following a breakdown of the original family. Behind this growing area of dispute, the Family Division is facing seismic shifts in its fabric. For a while

The most striking feature of Relocation: A Practical Guide is the constant promotion of a collaborative and co-operative approach to resolving relocation disputes now there has been an increasing policy focus on a move away from litigation as the answer to many family problems. In conjunction with this, legal aid funding for parents was removed from the majority of private law children disputes in April 2013. The reality is that in the coming years fewer cases involving children will make it into the court arena and those which do will increasingly be without the benefit of specialist family law advice. In the introduction to Relocation: A Practical Guide authors Frances Judd QC and Damian Garrido state that their primary aim is to provide a handbook which brings together in one place all the information needed for family law practitioners advising

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

clients on relocation. The book fully achieves this aim and would be a valuable addition to the family lawyer’s library. As suggested by the title, it is a practical guide to all relocation cases: internal, international, forever and temporary. It comprehensively covers the law of relocation, discusses where relocation law might be going and offers practical tips on how to run a relocation case. With the added benefit of Dr Rob George’s empirical research into first instance decisions (yet to be published), there are fascinating preliminary insights into how actual relocation cases proceed on the ground. The book goes further than this, however, and while not overtly saying so, addresses the huge shifts within the Family Division in the context of relocation disputes. The most striking feature of Relocation: A Practical Guide is the constant promotion of a collaborative and co-operative approach to resolving relocation disputes. The popular myth of the family lawyer actually promoting conflict for their own ends is fully debunked by the authors who, at every stage of the process, impress upon the readers (and specifically any parents) the need to think about the effect of conflict on the children embroiled in the middle of the dispute. The authors have written an accessible book which could be picked up by the relocating parent or the parent seeking to prevent relocation at any stage during the process. One imagines that the authors intended this as a supplement to the individual advice provided by the parents’ lawyers. However, with the growing number of cases where legal aid is no longer available and

where lawyers simply can’t be afforded, the book would provide a helpful guide to the increasingly common litigant in person. By providing first an introduction to relocation law and then dividing the chapters into the various steps along the relocation process, it means the parent can dip in and out of the book to find guidance and advice tailored to his or her specific issue at a particular point in time. The text is accessible and, after the first two introductory chapters, the more complex law or academic thoughts are largely confined to footnotes. There are practical tips for parents peppered throughout the book, including what to expect at a First Hearing Dispute Resolution Appointment, how to impress a Cafcass officer and even the Court of Appeal’s telephone number. Moreover, the appendices include extracts from the leading cases, Practice Directions and examples of application forms. The authors have successfully demystified the relocation dispute process and, perhaps unwittingly, talked themselves out of a job.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

AC A D E M I C S

4th FEBRUARY 2013

Academics’ Dinner by Master Dawn Oliver One hundred and forty academics, practitioners and judges dined together in Hall at the second Academics’ Dinner. Every area of law and practice seemed to be represented. After dinner, Master John Dyson, Master of the Rolls, spoke about the value of academic writings to judges, even if they disagree with them, and the value to academics of having court decisions to criticise. The relationship, he said, was symbiotic, and flourishing, and often strengthened by a shared love of gossip. Master David Lloyd Jones, Chairman of the Law Commission, felt that his was the best job going, the perfect blend of the academic and the practical. He expressed his gratitude and that of many judges and practitioners to academics for their contribution through their teaching to the future of the profession, and through their scholarship to the development of the law. He recognised the importance of seeing the ‘bigger picture’, which is often difficult for those at the coal face but is part of what academics have the time to do. If anyone had ever doubted whether the two sides have much to say to each other, the evening proved otherwise. In fact it was rather noisy with lively conversations and discussions about the law being enjoyed at every table.

Professor Dan Sarooshi, Masters Stephen Oliver, Richard Jacobs, Peter Murphy and Francis Jacobs and HHJ Michael Hopmeier with others enjoying the Academics’ Dinner

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

BOOK REVIEW

Banker, Traitor, Scapegoat, Spy The Troublesome Case of Sir Edgar Speyer Foreword by Master Louis Blom-Cooper

“

There is a danger, not to be underestimated, in resurrecting past miscarriages of justice, with the prospect that glaring faults of yesteryear will illuminate lessons to be learnt today. Very often the defects of such cases will have been cured by subsequent judicial rulings or legislative action. What remains is the intrinsic interest only; legal history has, of course, its own fascination. This book is a classic example of avoidable damage. Professor Lentin does not merely revive an unfamiliar story of an incidence of social injustice, but also uncovers a lamentable tale around the time of World War I of political bigotry and social ostracism, born out of nationalistic hostility, partisan politicism and an undercurrent of anti-semitism – a lesson to us all. The chemistry of the legal process and political intrigue that engulfed Sir Edgar Speyer and his family needs unravelling. The ultimate procedure

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

to deprive a prominent national figure of British citizenship and his position as a Privy Councillor, along with the citizenship of his family, makes for compulsive reading. Professor Lentin displays a helpful lucidity. That Sir Edgar, with his German heritage and youthful background (he lived in Germany until the age of 25), committed indiscretions that warranted official censure cannot be gainsaid, although, significantly, there were never any criminal proceedings for offences relating to association with, and even indirect assistance to, an enemy with whom Britain had been at war. But did those matters, which were intrinsically quite serious – they were more than public indiscretions – constitute ‘disloyalty or disaffection’ towards the Crown? The three-man Committee of Inquiry (a High Court judge [Mr Justice Salter], a county court judge and a prominent citizen) in a fourteen-page report made to the Home Secretary in December 1921, long after the war had ended, was singularly uninformative, beyond largely rubberstamping the Conservative-dominated Coalition Government’s submissions that Sir Edgar should be deprived of British citizenship under the alien and citizenship legislation of 1914-18. Public opinion at the time was divided, and nothing since has pointed to a clear verdict. Professor Lentin, with conspicuous evenhandedness, inclines slightly to favour a record of ‘not proven’. His authorship is all too judicious and modest. The lesson for us is to beware a process that was gravely deficient and at that time underregulated, in two respects, by judicial

review. The Committee’s conclusion that Sir Edgar’s conduct (or misconduct, if you will) fell foul of the statutory provision of ‘disloyalty or disaffection’ was a total failure to apply a legal mindset to an odd phraseology. That terminology in the British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act 1914 (as amended in 1918) survives in the same form to this day by virtue of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, even though the language is more than a little outdated. A more modern formula appears in the European Convention on Nationality, to which Britain is a signatory but has not ratified; and, of course, the Human Rights Act 1998 would nowadays come into play as a controlling factor over the granting and deprivation of naturalisation. Deprivation is still considered to be available to the Government as a sanction that can be taken against those who act in a way that is seriously prejudicial to British interests, over and above the operation of the criminal law. Be that as it may, the deprivation of citizenship has always been regarded as a very serious step, to be taken only in the most flagrant cases of deception or disloyalty. It is a sanction that has been employed on very few occasions. And recent case law has affirmed the principle that ‘disaffected’, as well as the word ‘disloyal’, requires an attitude of mind – be it noted – towards the Crown to which allegiance is owed: ‘To be disaffected is to be estranged in affection towards an entity to which one owes allegiance or with which one at least has a relationship1’.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

BOOK REVIEW Loss of affection is not enough. Nothing like that appears in the Slater Committee report of 1921. If the Committee had approached the language of Parliament seriously and considerately – in the way anybody would today and as the Committee should have done under the 1914/1918 Act – a result favourable to Sir Edgar should have been arrived at. Judicial review today would have seen to that. What is worse is that the Home Secretary of the day, with whom the ultimate decision lay, seems totally to have ignored the legal issue, in which he had had some advice to the contrary from a government lawyer, and adopted a stance that would not today have survived judicial scrutiny. The Committee’s report in its introductory paragraph recites Sir Edgar’s 27 years of life in England in glowing, if understated, terms: ‘He was a very prosperous and successful man; he was the head of a great business (merchant banking); his wealth was large; he was the friend of distinguished persons (including the Liberal Prime Minister, Mr Asquith, who publicly in 1915 had declared his confidence in Sir Edgar); he was a munificent patron of music (he rescued Sir Henry Wood’s Promenade Concerts – the BBC Proms – from inevitable collapse); his charitable bequests were many; he took an active and useful part in hospital management. He was created a baronet in 1906 and sworn to the Privy Council in 1909’. All this conspicuous philanthropy and contribution to cultural and public life in Britain – which included financing the construction of much of the London Underground – was deemed irrelevant by the Committee. If rightly so, it should not have been irrelevant to the Home Secretary of the day, although if Sir Edgar’s intention to disaffection was the statutory test, his contributions to British cultural life were, in my view, a relevant consideration for the tribunal, and certainly for the Home

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

Secretary. No longer a British subject, Sir Edgar automatically ceased to be a Privy Councillor. For reasons to do with official understanding about the Royal Prerogative (very differently understood today), Sir Edgar was not stripped of his baronetcy, although he never used the title thereafter. The Home Secretary was not obliged in the law relating to public inquiries (then or now) to accept or act in accordance with the Committee’s

“What is worse is that the Home Secretary of the day… seems totally to have ignored the legal issue…and adopted a stance that would not today have survived judicial scrutiny” recommendation. In the ensuing debate in the House of Commons, the previous Home Secretary, Sir George Cave, pointed out that the final decision had to be made independently of the Committee. Sir George rightly stated: ‘The act is the act of the Secretary of State, and not of the Committee’. Peremptorily and in a decision that would today be judicially reviewable, the Home Secretary followed internal advice that he was bound to endorse the Committee’s legally unreasoned verdict. He was wrong. The fact that Sir Edgar was driven into exile to the United States in June 1915, never to return to live in England, dying in 1932 aged 70, hardly merited the loss of British citizenship, and even less so his Privy Councillorship – a sinecure to a nonpolitician. It all betokened of an unyielding prejudice against a distinguished man, at the very least totally harmless to the interests of Britain in 1922. If one needed evidence of unbridled bias, and moreover an irrational decision by the Home Secretary, Sir Edward Shortt, it

was his decision also to deprive Sir Edgar’s wife (a distinguished violinist) and their three teenage daughters of British nationality. It is a mark of splendid rebuke to the Conservative Government of that day and age that all three daughters (who were British by birth) subsequently returned to live in England, two to live here permanently, the third in the vanguard of the US forces in World War II. That they were granted leave to remain in England is small recompense indeed. We should be grateful to Professor Lentin for rediscovering an episode of World War I. The case of Sir Edgar Speyer has been described as a ‘minor tragedy of the war’. So it was, but it was more than that. It reflected no credit on a legal system that had always prided itself on protecting the individual against the might of the State. It did not merely fail one prominent citizen; it blotted its own copybook. Moderately expressed, Sir Edgar described the deprivation of his British nationality as ‘an unrighteous action’ by a civilised nation long after the war had ended, governing with, at the very least, evident vengeance and absence of humanity. As was said by the Trojan lord, Pandarus, a public administrator’s mantra should be: ‘Be moderate, be moderate’2 1. per Pill LJ in Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Hicks [2006] EWCA Civ 400, para 32. 2. Troilus and Cressida, Act IV, scene 4, line 1.

Louis Blom-Cooper practised mainly in public law. He taught criminology and penology at Bedford College, University of London from 1961-1981. He coedited The Judicial House of Lords 1876-2009 (OUP, 2009) and served as the Chairman of the Library and Archive Committee from 2004-2008

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

SOUTH AFRICA LEGAL CONFERENCE

SEPTEMBER 2012

Legal Conference in South Africa by Master Louis Harms

t was wet and cold. Very wet and very cold. Typical English weather. Ideal weather for a conference of the Honourable Society of the Middle Temple and its guests. We sat like members of an orchestra in a half moon with the 2012 Treasurer, Master Anthony Clarke, as conductor. His first announcement related to a change in the dress code, considering that he had left his business suit at home. His second concerned the application of the Chatham House rules, hence the paucity of detail in this note. After this refreshingly brief opening and a word of welcome from Dame Nicola Brewer, the British High Commissioner and Honorary Bencher of Middle Temple, and one from a cohost, the session chairmen (or chairs, as we are wont to say) and speakers took over. If the eye wandered while pondering some profound pronouncement by a panellist or participant (or because the said person fancied himself as a horse whisperer) to the outside, it fell on a vineyard, oak trees and a mountain range. And you realised again that, in spite of the English weather, you were somewhere else. We were in fact in the Cape of Good Hope and Occasional Bad Weather. At a vineyard, or rather a ‘wine estate’, named Allée Bleue, at Franschhoek in South Africa. The English Bar at a French wine estate at a Dutch village. That requires some explanation. The choice of venue, described in the promotional material as the Heart

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

of the Cape Winelands, was that of Master Treasurer who fell for the Cape and its fruits during a previous conference under the baton of Master Stanley Burnton (whose presence was noted). Franschhoek is a corner where the Dutch East India Company dumped some French Huguenot families at the end of the 17th century to keep them out of harm’s way and to prevent them from corrupting the Dutch colonists. The estate derives its name from the avenue of impressive but invasive Australian bluegum trees. And the use of French names has become a marketing ploy in an area where the only French influence left is the double negative in the Afrikaans language. The Dutch, I’ll have you know, were the first winemakers in the Cape. For additional historical local flavour: the mountain range is known as the Hottentot-Hollands range. Conferences, especially those concerned with law, are not only about wine tasting and fine dining and rekindling old friendships and forging new ones. They are also about serious matters. In this case, as was the position in 2010, the focus was on a number of subjects relevant to both English (used in a non-generic sense) and (principally) South African barristers (advocates) and judges. I say ‘principally’ because there was also some nominal representation from places such as Namibia, Mauritius and Lesotho. The conference had no particular topic although the recurring underlying theme was the rule of law

and the scope and protection of certain human rights. The universality of these issues soon became apparent and, in spite of the geographical and other divides between the South and England as representative of the Northern hemisphere, speakers tended to strike the same chord, although some notes jarred the ear. The topicality of the papers appeared from the first session, which dealt with the right of privacy versus the freedom of the press. The subject was set after Wikileaks but long before the latest semi-public and private performances by a member or two of the Royal Family. In the one instance the solution was a swift tour to Afghanistan, in the other a swift trip to French courts. The irony of the Royal Family having to resort to French courts to protect its privacy while English law is struggling to come to grips with the concept was not missed, though tactfully not mentioned. We were reminded that discretion is the better part of law and that the view that one could be frank or indiscreet in private is no longer an option. Privacy has become a celebrity issue and the rights of the common man or woman either do not arise or are impossible to enforce. Recognition of the right is of little value without an effective enforcement mechanism. This session also highlighted a conceptual divide between the common-law approach and what we South Africans consider as a more principled approach to the subject.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

SOUTH AFRICA LEGAL CONFERENCE

Our common law has always recognised the right to privacy and that an infringement of the right amounted to a ‘tort’. The only problem that we have is to determine whether or not an infringement could be justified, and justification depends on reasonableness in the light of public policy considerations. Unfortunately the right of freedom of the press, which is not of a higher value, is trumping the rights of the individual in spite of the fact that truth on its own is not considered in South Africa to be a justification above public interest. And, as the saying goes, what is interesting to the public is not the same as the public interest. Related to this was the discussion of secrecy, security and fair trials. Fortunately, I have not been appointed as rapporteur of the session because the divergence of view among the English themselves or, for that matter, the locals, was such that a sensible rendition of the discussion is not possible. The session on the trias politicas was as inconclusive as far as the English participants were concerned while the locals had little difficulty with the issue, simply because it is difficult to entrust basic rights to a Parliament dominated by a party with no fear of being voted out of office. London has to keep its eye on Strasbourg and Luxembourg while the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein must watch out for Braamfontein where the Constitutional Court sits (and

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

deliberates). It, in turn, was subject, at least in theory, to the jurisdiction of the South African Development Community's tribunal, which could adjudicate human rights abuses by member states at the behest of private individuals until, after the first judgment against a state, the right of the individual to engage the court was summarily abolished. That it occurred on the day of the Marikana ‘event’ was eerie.

contribution from the General Council of the South African Bar) and from the visible Catherine Quinn and invisible Kristine McGlothlin. The delegates, well fed, well fuelled, and well informed, returned home where it was wet and cold, very wet and very cold. Typical English weather. But this time where it belonged - in England.

As the saying goes, what is interesting to the public is not the same as the public interest Other topics related to reflections on the courts of ultimate appeal in our respective countries, corruption and access to justice, and the meeting ended on the third day. By now it was not only raining - the wind was howling in the Cape of Storms. Barring that fact, the conference was a great success. If only it could be an annual event. It is time to disclose the identity of the local co-host. It was the law faculty of the University of Stellenbosch whose founder, Professor Mortimer Malherbe, had been a member of the Middle Temple on merit. Lastly, the conference could not have taken place without the ambidextrous multi-taskers in the form of Master Jeremy Gauntlett (ably assisted by the Cape Bar and with some non-vegetarian

Until 2011, Justice Harms was Deputy President of the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa. He practised from 1966 to 1986 at the Pretoria Bar, took Silk in 1981 and was called the Bench in 2012. He is an editor of The Law of South Africa and author of The Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: A Case Book. He has been actively involved in the drafting of intellectual property statutes and amendments to criminal procedure law such as plea bargaining and drafted the rules of ethics for judges. He occupies the Adams & Adams Chair in Intellectual Property Law at the University of Pretoria and is a door tenant at 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

C AF O D

The Valuable Work of CAFOD by Master Catherine Newman

aster the Rt Rev John Arnold, Auxiliary Bishop of Westminster, and I are both Trustees of CAFOD, the major development charity. CAFOD works with more than 450 local partners in 40 different countries of the world. In recent years each of them has visited some of CAFOD’s local partners to see the work being done. Master John Arnold visited the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Rwanda and Kenya in the summer of 2011. Each stage of his many trips could furnish much interesting material for articles as he keeps a detailed, fascinating

(and often moving) travel diary wherever he goes, which he kindly let me see so that I could prepare this short piece on behalf of us both. That Kenyan visit included going to the Isiolo in Northern Kenya, severely affected by the devastating drought which hit the region in 2011, affecting over 13 million people. CAFOD donors raised £5.2 million for its East Africa drought appeal, providing not only emergency food and water supplies but also helping farmers to re-plant their crops and pastoralists, who rely on livestock for a living, to re-stock their herds. Master Arnold

later said of that visit: ‘These are people who have come to the end of their ability to cope. In one community when we asked about food stocks, they held out some small plastic bags with some berries. There were also some nuts from the acacia tree which they feed to the livestock, but most of the livestock is dead. We saw a few goats left, there were a couple of chickens, but the rest of the livestock has either been sold off or died. Even when the rains come and they can begin to grow their crops again, they have lost all that investment in their future.’

‘CAFOD works with local partners who understand what is going on. One of the greatest strengths of the Catholic Church is that it is in all these regions already. There are priests, there are catechists and lay people in the church in all these communities, and CAFOD is working with them. It just takes determination to meet those basic needs.’ In the spring of 2012, I visited some of CAFOD’s work in Zambia. Three-quarters of its 10 million people live on less than 60 pence per day. At independence in 1964, Zambia was a major copper producer, but declining copper prices and prolonged drought seriously damaged Zambia's economy during the 1980s and 1990s. Amongst those I met were CAFOD partners working to improve labour conditions in Chineserun mines, using Jesuit-prepared local price indices for basic baskets of goods to support negotiations for a living wage for workers. The HIV epidemic has become a dominant health and development problem in Zambia. The HIV prevalence rate among adults is estimated at 21.5%, though recent figures show an encouraging decline in the prevalence among young adults. From what we could see, ARV drugs were in plentiful supply in local clinics. However I learned that the cost of food is rising and people are increasingly struggling to afford the balanced diet essential for the success of the treatment. Without enough to eat, the drugs cause serious nausea and vomiting, and bring severe abdominal cramps. We met clinic workers who said that mothers, in particular, stop taking the drugs because they do not have enough to eat for themselves and their children,

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

Photographs Simon Rawles/ CAFOD

CAFOD

Rosena drinking water in Zambia

and the drugs make them hungry. Zambia has the third worst rates of hunger in the world according to the latest UN figures and CAFOD’s local partners are calling the situation a ‘time bomb’, with many people taking ARVs coming off the treatment as they lack the money for food whilst others are refusing to start urgently needed treatment for the same reason. So the treatment programmes that have been most successful give people food alongside their ARVs, as well as helping people to earn a living. I met a delightful family with many children, the parents both HIV positive, and some of the children also, brought back to good health and independent living on their small farm, as a result of the work of one such project. It is impossible to say as much as one would wish in such a small space,

and in particular about CAFOD’s work for the emancipation and development of women and girls, and in the field of human rights, but I leave the last word to Master John Arnold. What does he say to critics who say aid creates a culture of dependence? ‘Quite simply, I know aid works. I have seen it working. And I have seen in the places I visited groups of people who are proud and do not want to ask for help but are driven to. They ask for the minimum. If we provide the minimum, they will work very hard to provide for anything else that they need. People do not want to receive charity. They want to be proud of what they can do for themselves.’ For more information visit www.cafod.org.uk

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

BOOK REVIEW

Free Country Selected Lectures and Talks Review by Master Robert Seabrook

his fresh and relevant collection of lectures and talks, given by Sir Sydney Kentridge QC between 1979 and 2011, is testimony to a man for whom the ethics and morality of practice at the Bar have been axiomatic during a long and challenging professional career. The late Master (Lord) Alexander described Sydney Kentridge as ‘the greatest advocate in the Commonwealth’. This collection to mark Sir Sydney’s 90th birthday, by Masters David Lloyd Jones and George Leggatt, former colleagues in Brick Court Chambers, provides an insight into this modest, perceptive and wise man and the qualities that have underpinned the making of the great advocate that he is. The early lectures are contemporaneous reflections on practice during the worst of the apartheid era in South Africa, where Sir Sydney practised as a barrister following his Call to the South African Bar in 1949. The Government had increasingly hardened its approach to the prosecution of political offenders, widening the concept of treason; shifting the burden of proof to the accused; and permitting detention in solitary confinement without access to legal advice or other contact until the police were convinced that ‘no useful purpose will be served by his further detention’ (Section 6, Terrorism Act 1967). This was a time when the then Minster of Justice, Mr B J Vorster, infamously declared that ‘rights are getting out of hand’. Sir Sydney reflects on the moral dilemma as to the extent to which a lawyer should participate in a legal

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

system that is ‘so immoral and unjust as to be totally repugnant’. If so, does that mean that the advocate ‘must simply resign from the system’? In a measured and thoughtful analysis, by reference to many intriguing, and sometimes chilling, cases in which he was involved, he observes that there was some scope for securing acquittals within the grotesque system and that the accused themselves often wanted or needed to be represented (especially, for example, if they faced a possible death sentence) and concluded that the cab rank rule was ‘essential’ in South Africa at the time. He was never himself confronted with the dilemma of being offered a prosecution brief in such cases. Many years later in a talk entitled ‘The Ethics of Advocacy’, he addresses this point: ‘I believe that I and many other advocates would have been unable to comply with the cab rank rule. Perhaps no rule of conduct can be an absolute rule. There may be times, fortunately rare, when one’s own conscience rather than the general rule must govern one’s own conduct’. This absence of dogmatism combined with a strong belief in the moral and ethical obligations that should govern a barrister’s practice infuses these lectures and talks with contemporary relevance. In the ‘Ethics of Advocacy’ talk, he rejects calls for barristers to see themselves as a service industry: ‘I believe we are still a profession and not merely a business’. Moreover, he stresses the word ‘honourable’ profession. Courage and independence are essential for the advocate, but some

situations require decisions that are ‘intensely personal’. You can take advice from your colleagues but ‘once you are in Court, your conduct is your own responsibility, yours alone’. Sir Sydney has represented no less than three Nobel Peace Prize winners in Court – Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu and Chief Albert Lutheli; he represented the family of Steve Biko at the Inquest into his miserable and brutal death. Following his move to England in the late 1970s he soon made his mark as a formidable advocate in a remarkable variety of complex and important cases. He celebrated his 90th birthday in November 2012 by appearing for the Law Society in the Supreme Court in a case about legal professional privilege. The same quiet, reasoned and compelling qualities that have made Sir Sydney such an outstanding advocate are to be found in this book. Drawing on fascinating personal experience and historical references, what he has to say about the roles and duties of lawyers and judges, the ethics and obligations of advocates, the selection of judges, freedom of speech, civil liberties, the rule of law and a host of related issues, transcend the years. This slim and immensely readable volume, written without any hint of pomposity, is a real gem.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

12th JUNE 2013

Sir Sydneyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 90th Birthday Celebrations

Photographs courtesy of Charlotte Hudson

On 12 June 2013, no fewer than 21 former Chairmen of the Bar, including Middle Temple Masters Robert Seabrook, David Bean, Stephen Hockman, Guy Mansfield, Tim Dutton and Peter Lodder, celebrated Sir Sydney's 90th Birthday at a private dinner hosted by the Chairman of the Bar, Master Maura McGowan, at Brasserie Blanc in Covent Garden.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

I N T E R NAT I O NA L T R AV E L S

A Confiscation Judge Abroad by HHJ Michael Hopmeier

n the last few years I have been fortunate to have been invited to speak abroad at various conferences and training seminars in a number of different countries on issues concerning the fight against corruption and economic crime with particular reference to ‘confiscation/asset recovery’. These have included Bucharest, Banjul, Manila, Madrid, Lisbon, Istanbul, Budapest, Copenhagen, Colombo and Dar es Salaam. In the first six months of this year, I gave talks in Copenhagen, Malta, Bermuda, Bangkok and Birmingham. Leaving aside that this has enabled me to visit different and often fascinating countries, the experience has been enormously interesting and fulfilling. So how did all start? Well, over five years ago as I attended, then as a Recorder, one of the three-day (those were the days!) JSB sentencing refresher seminars for judges and when innocently, as I thought, I commented over a quiet drink or two with the then course director that there were too many difficult complex text books on confiscation and that what Crown Court judges really needed was an ‘idiot’s guide’ to confiscation: ‘Yes Michael...,’ he said... ‘and I know just the person to write it...’ The rest is, of course, history. Little did I know that my life would suddenly be changed. Not only have there been some four editions of the Guide on Restraint and Confiscation, published on the Judicial College website, but as a result of writing the Guide and also undertaking a number of serious economic crime cases, both in my practice prior to and then since my appointment trying such cases in my

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

home court at Kingston, I have also been invited to give talks and lectures on the subject by the EU, Commonwealth Secretariat, Academy of European Law, Interpol and others. The Guide is freely available to judges and recorders, although I understand it is a bestseller in prison. Of course being known as a person (aka anorak) interested in this area of work has its moments. As I was greeted by a kindly judge, whom I had never met, at a party in Yorkshire last Christmas, ‘You’re the chap who writes the Guide.’ he said. followed by, ‘You’re not going to confiscate my car are you?’ So why are so many countries interested now in fighting corruption and what is important about confiscation of the proceeds of crime of criminals? The simple fact is that organised crime, fraud and corruption are all on the increase throughout the world. According to the evidence set out in the recent Transparency International 2013 Global Corruption Barometer, published this week, there is a global pandemic of corruption; the UK is not immune from this. It has been estimated that the value of bribes in the world represents some 3% of the world economy. Cybercrime is the hot topic. Fraud alone costs the UK some £73 billion per year, according to the 2012 National Fraud Authority Annual fraud indicator. Following the recent G8 conference, so-called tax havens such as Cayman and Bermuda are set to become more transparent with regard to beneficial ownership of companies and bank accounts. No longer do criminals seek to hide their ill-gotten gains in small mountainous countries

in Europe, but instead they must look further afield for a safe haven - and the number of those havens is undoubtedly becoming smaller and subject to scrutiny by governments and banks alike. The days of a person seeking to hide assets in an Isle of Man company with nominee directors whose shares are owned by a Guernsey discretionary trust with nominee trustees, may well be over, or at least will be very soon. Further, the amounts said to have been stolen from relatively poor countries by their rulers or former rulers is staggering. The recent Arab Spring has caused a resolve by countries affected to secure return of stolen assets. The first Arab Forum on Asset Recovery was held in Doha, Qatar in September 2012. Poor countries see their minerals and resources being exploited by companies and countries who export the profits abroad paying little or no tax in the countries from where the resources are extracted, and certainly they do not invest the profits in those countries. As Kofi Annan said ‘… corruption hurts the poor disproportionately by diverting funds intended for development, undermining a government’s ability to provide basic services, feeding inequality and injustice and discouraging foreign investment.’ Developing countries lose between $20 billion and $40 billion each year to bribery and other corrupt practices yet over the last 15 years only about $6 billion has been recovered and returned. There is much work to be done in this area. Whilst our Courts may struggle with the provisions of the Proceeds of Crime Act and Court of Appeal judges may bemoan the drafting of

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

I N T E R NAT I O NA L T R AV E L S

some its provisions, the fact remains that the UK was one of the first countries to embrace a comprehensive criminal and civil asset recovery scheme, now mature and wellestablished (albeit in a state of continuing development (cf most recently R V Harvey 2013 EWCA Crim 1104), which is the envy of many countries. Other countries want to learn from our experience. When in March 2012 the EU proposed a new Directive (2012/0036) on the freezing and confiscation of the proceeds of crime in the European Union, the Minister of State for Crime Prevention at the Home Office stated, ‘The UK has strong powers which are successfully used to tackle criminal finances. Our powers are already compliant with or stronger than those contained in the Directive.’ Commonwealth countries in particular who have adopted similar POCA legislation seek and need training for their judges and prosecutors on how best to implement asset recovery measures fairly and effectively. Human Rights considerations, particularly in the area of restraint of assets as well as in the enforcement against property (e.g. family homes) also play an important part. The principle that criminals should not profit or benefit from their crimes is now universally accepted as being right and proper.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

During my last visit to the Philippines in 2012, at the invitation of the British Ambassador and the Philippines Commission on Good Government (PCGG), I was privileged to give the 3rd Haydee Yorak lecture on ‘Asset Recovery as an Anti-Corruption Tool.’ The PCGG have been successful in seeking and securing the repatriation of millions of dollars allegedly stolen from the country during the Marcos regime. The shoes can be seen in a museum. Cooperation between countries and their judicial authorities in this area of law is very important. The fraudster in Russia does not keep his ill-gotten gains in Russia. The UK fraudster does not generally keep his profits in the UK. What has been particularly interesting to discover is that countries who on one level may not have the best relations with each other, nonetheless regularly attend conferences on this area (in particular fighting corruption and recovering the proceeds of crime/stolen assets) intending and wishing to cooperate with each other. Thus, most recently in July I spoke at the Interpol /StAR 4th Global Focus Point Conference on Asset Recovery in Bangkok, which some 150 delegates from over 65 countries attended, including Iran and the USA, countries from Europe, Asia, the Middle and Far East, Africa and North and South America.

That quiet drink at the bar at Scarman House was fortuitous. What has followed has been a highly interesting and worthwhile experience. I have little doubt that the Bribery Act 2010, DPAs, the 4th EU Money laundering directive and further developments under POCA will keep speakers busy for some time. So whilst MTIC fraud and confiscation may not be everyone’s cup of tea, when it results in visiting fascinating and sometimes remote places, meeting interesting and committed people in differing justice systems, seeing the odd lion in the Selous game reserve, visiting medieval painted monasteries in the Bukovina as well as drinking Nuwara Eliya Pekoe in Kandy, eating goulash in Budapest, Imam Bayildi in Istanbul and sipping a ‘dark and stormy’ in Hamilton, then I think to myself that being the author of an idiot’s guide is perhaps not quite so idiotic after all.

Michael Hopmeier was called to the Middle Temple in July 1974. He sits as a Circuit Judge at Kingston on Thames and is a Diversity and Community Relations Judge. He is an editor of the 4th Edition of Millington and Sutherland Williams on the Proceeds of Crime, recently published by OUP.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

THE INNS

AND THE

BAR

The Inns and the Bar by Master Maura McGowan, Chairman of the Bar

verybody loves their Inn, is fond of their circuit, and appears to hate the Bar Council. So I’m told, on a regular basis. I’m not chasing anyone’s else’s right to the affection of the Bar but I am determined that the profession and what it does goes back to being at the core of what the Inns and the Bar Council do. The current belief of the average barrister is that the Bar Standards Board bullies them into doing things for no good reason and punishes them if they don’t. The Bar Council takes too much money from them for no good reason and does nothing

Maura McGowan QC is Chairman of the Bar for 2013. Maura was Called to the Bar in 1980 and took silk in 2001. She is a criminal practitioner at 2 Bedford Row in London and Lincoln House Chambers in Manchester. She has extensive experience in all areas of crime; most notably murder, drugs, violent and sexual assault and child abuse. She also appears in serious and complex fraud cases. A Deputy High Court Judge since 2010 and a Recorder since 1996, she is a Bencher of Middle Temple and an advocacy trainer. She has also been Called to the Irish and Northern Irish Bars.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

worthwhile with it. But despite that it seems that they do not yet believe the Inns are giving them a good enough reason to come back to seek refuge here. I’ve pointed out before that for a lot of practitioners, there will be nothing between Call night and trying to become a Bencher, other than a possible visit to check the place out as a venue for their wedding reception. When I was Called there was the incentive of an encounter with Jess and the Martians in the Middle Temple bar; given that it was the cheapest gin in London, it was quite a powerful incentive. For too many, that casual sociability has gone; a bar as common room is not part of the everyday life of the Inn any more. Barristers can be shy and retiring creatures. They have to be coaxed out of their routines. They have grown used to not being involved, even under compulsion. I am determined to encourage, cajole and downright bully them, if necessary, to get involved in and therefore become part of shaping the development of all our futures. I am equally committed to working with the Inn, to cooperate in the process of bringing them back here. I am working with the Advocacy Training Council to formulate a scheme of continuing education, based on further advocacy training, as well as the other areas already covered. We must find a way to make it worthwhile and of positive interest. Providing and educating a small number of very skilled advocates and advisors to the highest ethical standards has always been the raison d’etre of the Inn. The desire to ensure that membership is open to all who achieve those exceptional

standards, irrespective of background or any other characteristic has not altered the requirements of excellence and integrity. This Inn is a thing of history and wonder, as are many of the Benchers. I want to encourage the profession back into the collegiate world of learning, not just the law but advocacy and ethics too. The pride and affection in January, at the swearing in of Master Munby as the new President of the Family Division and some other chap from Gray’s as something or other was palpable. I want that sense of belonging, of being part of the fabric, to be felt by all. Back in the real world, I am facing a fairly daunting year. The commercially-funded Bar goes from strength to strength but for too many the imperative to live in a commercial world takes them away from much of what is good and of true value in the Inn. The country is struggling through the worst economic crisis in decades; certainly in my lifetime, although Master Arlidge tells me it was worse when he did his pupillage in the 1930s. The Bar is three times larger in number than when I was Called and about 50% of it is dependent on public funding. In family, welfare, housing and immigration vast areas of work have been taken out of scope. That means an end to representation for large numbers of vulnerable individuals. It means a very different task for judges trying those cases, but it also means an end to a livelihood for those barristers who practise in those fields. In crime, solicitor advocates now do a significant proportion of work in the Crown Court. The volume of cases has, and will continue to fall. Fees have been cut from levels set in

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE INNS

1997 by 14% in all cases and by 40% in homicides. A wholesale review of legal aid in criminal work raises the real prospect of even more swingeing cuts in fees. The pressures on quality and standards are obvious and potentially very dangerous. To succeed, the Bar has to be excellent, not just competent. We have to become better and more rigorous at policing our own. It is not a criticism of the BSB but there was undoubtedly a greater sense of pressure to achieve and shame if one failed when we judged ourselves. To that end I am looking at rejuvenating the Bar Quality Advisory Panel but I would like to

see this happen in conjunction with the Inns and possibly the Advocacy Training Council. It would be a panel of established and respected practitioners who can be called upon to offer advice and guidance and possibly to prevent a barrister falling foul of the BSB, or even more terrifyingly, the Court of Appeal. To ensure that the Bar regains pride, self-respect and a true sense of the value of what we do is at the core of my ambition. We are right to worry and agitate about fees but there is more. There are other battles to be fought. We need the help and support of the Inns and the Bench. Our over-arching regulator appears

AND THE

BAR

not to understand the cab-rank rule. The paper produced recently on behalf of the Legal Services Board suggests that specialisation inevitably causes breaches of the rule. All the Inns and the Bar Council united to respond, which we did. It’s one example of how effectively we can work together. We should continue to develop the practice. When asked what my plan for 2013 was, the only answer was survival. In truth I would very much like this to be the year that sees a truly united profession, not just across the disciplines, but through the Inns and the representative body.

Donations to the Library We would like to thank Master David Bean for Injunctions; Master Michael Blair for Financial Markets and Exchanges Law, edited by George Walker and Michael Blair; British Museum for Shakespeare’s Restless World by Neil MacGregor; Glen Davis and Marcus Haywood for Butterworths Insolvency Law Handbook; Barry Denyer-Green and Navjit Ubhi for Development and Planning Law; Master Colin Edelman for The Law of Reinsurance by Colin Edelman QC and Andrew Burns; William Flenley for Solicitors’ Liability and Negligence by William Flenley and Tom Leach; Master Michael Gledhill for History and Sources of the Common Law by Cecil Herbert Stuart Fifoot; Master Joanna Glynn for The Regulation of Healthcare Professionals; Master Robin Griffith-Jones for Islam and English Law: Rights, Responsibilities and the Place of Shari’a; Vicky Harper for Double Take; Richard Harwood for Historic Environment Law; Carl Islam for Tax Efficient Wills Simplified; Master Leslie Kosmin for Company Meetings: Law, Practice and Procedure, edited by Leslie Kosmin QC and Catherine Roberts; Professor Peter Leyland for Textbook on Administrative Law and The Constitution of the UK: A Contextual Analysis; C.L. Lim for The Trans-Pacific Partnership, Economic Diplomacy; The Law in His Hands: A Tribute to Chief Justice Chan Sek Keong, edited by Master Chao Hick Tin; and Law of the Hong Kong Constitution, edited by Johannes Chan and C. L. Lim; Master Jan Luba for Housing Allocation and Homelessness; Stephen Mason for Electronic Evidence; Robert McCracken, Gregory Jones and James Pereira for Statutory Nuisance; J. Richard McManus for Education and the Courts; Master Christopher Morcom for The Modern Law of Trade Marks; Charles Phipps for Confidentiality by R.G. Toulson; Master Geoffrey Robertson for Crimes Against Humanity; and Mullahs without Mercy; Michael Wilkins, Viscount of the Royal Court of Jersey for Jersey Insolvency and Tracking by Michael Wilkins and Anthony Dessain; Master Eric Stockdale for Blackstone’s Criminal Practice; Donne: Poetical Works, edited by Sir Herbert J.C. Grierson; Milton: The Complete Poems edited by B.A. Wright, The Strange Alchemy of Life and Law by Justice Albie Sachs; and America’s Supreme Court by Stephen Breyer.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

A DV O C AC Y T R A I N I N G C O U N C I L

ATC Report by Nicholas Green QC, Chairman, Advocacy Training Council

he Advocacy Training Council (ATC) is responsible for providing leadership, guidance and coordination in relation to the pursuit of excellence in advocacy. Drawing its membership primarily from the Inns and circuits, its committees also include the judiciary, BPTC providers, academia and the Bar Council. With its primary role to oversee the development and delivery of advocacy training for the Bar of England and Wales, the ATC works to ensure that advocacy training provision - from the vocational stage through to the delivery of New Practitioner and advanced advocacy

Mr Justice Green was appointed to the High Court in October 2013. Nick practised from Brick Court Chambers from 1989 until 2013 and acted as joint head of chambers in 2011. He specialised in all aspects of competition, European, regulatory and administrative law. Nick was Chairman of the Bar Council in 2010 and is an Accredited Advocacy Trainer. He has been Chairman of the Advocacy Training Council since 2011 and was instrumental in the restructuring of the ATC. He worked closely with the Inns and the new committees to finalise its new constitution in 2012.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

training - is of the highest standards, helping to ensure advocates are effectively equipped in the defining skill of the profession. Key functions of the ATC’s committees include monitoring and supporting the Inns and Circuits in the delivery of their Pupil and New Practitioner advocacy programmes; assessing BPTC advocacy tutors for accreditation by the Bar Standards Board; ensuring standards for the training and grading of Inn / Circuit Pupil advocacy tutors; undertaking research and development projects to support the delivery of advocacy training in specialist skills and promoting the rule of law overseas through specialist ATC training programmes. The Council also has an important constitutional commitment to respond to requests from overseas jurisdictions in the development and expansion of their advocacy training programmes and has established an international reputation as a world leader in advocacy training, largely in the developing world. In keeping with the custom of barristers providing advocacy training for the English Bar without payment, overseas advocacy training is undertaken on a pro bono basis. ATC International Committee members together with senior advocacy trainers from across the Inns and circuits have worked alongside colleagues in jurisdictions including India, Malaysia, Hong Kong, Nigeria, South Africa, and the International Criminal Court and Tribunals in The Hague. The ATC adopts a ‘seed corn’ approach, ensuring partners at the host Bar are equipped to continue to develop and enhance their own advocacy training

programmes. The ATC has most recently assisted in an on-going advocacy tutor-training programme in Zimbabwe, delivered in partnership with South African colleagues and funded by the British Embassy in Harare. A major and growing part of the work of the ATC is in relation to barriers to justice. The ATC is presently working on a range of projects which are designed to improve the way that the trial process works in relation to vulnerable persons. The Advocacy Training Council’s Raising the Bar report of 2011 identified the need for better guidance and training for advocates in this field. In April 2013 the Attorney General launched a new website, ‘The Advocates Gateway’. This collaborative project brings together the entirety of the legal profession including academics, leading experts and researchers, the Law Society, CBA, Registered Intermediaries and the MoJ and is intended to act as a focal point for material relating to a vulnerable person in court. The Gateway is a free web resource and as such, is a public interest platform stimulating research into issues of real and pressing public importance. Other projects working towards removing barriers to justice include the initiatives of the ATC Research and Development Committee. The Committee is working on developing professional ethics together with University College London and looking into the use of expert evidence in court in collaboration with the Law Commission. Its third project is to look at the use of interpreters in court, in conjunction with the University of Surrey. The aim of such projects is to raise

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

A DV O C AC Y T R A I N I N G C O U N C I L

standards in court, to develop toolkits and guidance for use in courts (by advocates and the judiciary) and to improve training in such areas. The ATC recently held a lecture and workshop, both led by Professor The Hon George Hampel AM QC, the progenitor of the basic method used by the Inns and the ATC in its training programmes. The sessions enabled senior advocacy trainers of the Inns and Circuits to review teaching practices and methods at an advanced level. In April, the ATC also launched its new website that serves as a central point of information about the work of the ATC and all matters relating to advocacy training and an invaluable calendar of advocacy training events, key on-going projects and annual reports. In the next few months, the ATC and The Advocate’s Gateway will be hosting a series of CPD courses to provide practical training when dealing with the vulnerable in court and will be hosting its first ‘ATC Advocacy Training Conference’ for advocacy trainers from across the Inns and Circuits and BPTC providers to establish how to achieve best practice when teaching advocacy. If you are an advocacy trainer and are interested in hearing more about the ATC, information can be found on the ATC website.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

Examples of Best Practice in Advocacy Training: ●

Pairing experienced trainers with those who are less experienced, to share knowledge and expertise and allow ‘on-the-job’ development of training skills.

●

Involving members of the judiciary in training sessions, and allowing trainees to sit alongside judges during training exercises to gain a sense of the judges’ perspective during a trial.

●

Adopting the practice of having ‘room trainers’ on longer-term training courses, who remain with the same group of trainees throughout. This helps to promote good working relationships during the course.

●

For submissions exercises, allocating roles the evening before the exercise, and exchanging skeleton arguments. This has been seen to help trainees prepare fully, familiarising themselves with the arguments to be put by the opposing side.

●

Making use of local BVC students to act as witnesses, paying expenses only. This practice is beneficial both to the smooth and effective running of the advocacy training course, and to the BVC students who gain invaluable insight and experience.

●

Asking trainees to complete evaluation reports ensures any problems experienced during the course are addressed, and any useful practices identified and built upon.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

BOOK REVIEW

A Higher Duty Reviewed by Paul Magrath

n an exclusive gentlemen’s club in London, a group of men are discussing the future of their business. They are barristers and the question they must decide is who to keep – and who to keep out – as fellow tenants of their chambers. Two of them have pupils who would like to join, but one of the pupils is a woman, the other is Jewish. Compelling reasons are offered for preventing each of them joining chambers. For one thing, neither would be admitted to this club, where chambers dinners are held. If they cannot fit into the club, how can they fit into chambers? As you may have guessed, this novel is set in a time when such prejudice was an unthinking, rather than unthinkable, habit of mind. It was a time before the ‘Establishment’ became the name of a comedy club, when that word was used to refer to a national conspiracy of the upper classes – politics, the professions, the services and academe – to retain their unspoken grip on power. It was a time when, in the law, clients got what was good for them (or convenient for their advisers), when deference was assumed and the gap between law and justice wider than it is today. Into this world come three young hopefuls. Two of them are the pupil barristers referred to above: Harriet Fisk, whose father, a former diplomat, is master of a Cambridge college; and Ben Shroeder, who rejects his Jewish family’s East End business in favour of a career in law. The third, Clive Overton, is an undergraduate at the same Cambridge college, from which he is summarily sent down, as well as being banished from the land by his QC father, after a fatally stupid rugby club dinner stunt. He, too, had been

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

destined for the law. Can his career be salvaged? Their fates are determined in the course of a story in which their elders and betters manage to demonstrate an impressive array of human weaknesses and hypocrisy. In chambers, a divorce case based on marital cruelty is nearly lost as a result of a reckless sex scandal involving one of the barristers. Another barrister is allowed to sink into debt and lose his livelihood after failing to recover the ground lost during the war, when he went off to fight while others spent the time building up their practices. A QC eagerly accedes to a solicitor’s plan to blackmail the lawyers on the other side, just to win an undeserving case. Meanwhile, the members of chambers in whose hands rest the fates of the hopeful pupils play politics and prejudice at their club, all in the name of upholding their ‘higher duty’ to the integrity of the Bar.

Two of them have pupils who would like to join, but one of the pupils is a woman, the other is Jewish

War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague. In 2007 he became a circuit judge and normally sits in the Crown Court at Woolwich, though at present he is sitting in Huntingdon and Peterborough. He has also written a political thriller, Removal, set in the United States, and a number of law books including Murphy on Evidence. The good news is that he is currently writing a sequel to A Higher Duty.

It is clear from the sheer authenticity of the detail and the characters’ psychology that the author is or has been a barrister. And indeed Peter Murphy, who was Called to the Bar at Middle Temple in 1968, practised here for a decade or so before being lured to the United States, to practice and teach advocacy at South Texas College of Law. Then in the 1990s he became involved, through one of his former students, as defence counsel in the Yugoslavian

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

W O M E N ’ S F O RU M

Temple Women’s Forum by Master Dawn Oliver

‘

‘Women in Crime’, ‘Judicial Diversity’, ‘Why and How to Become a Judge’: these were the topics for the Temple Women’s Forum in Middle Temple Hall on 17 April 2013. The first keynote speaker, Frances Oldham QC, reflected on her career in publicly-funded criminal practice and on how - with persistence, clear priorities and energy - she has overcome some of the particular challenges faced by a woman in that world. Next, Lord Sumption, drawing on his experience as a member of the Judicial Appointments Commission from 2006 to 2011, discussed some of the problems in achieving diversity in judicial appointments given the fact that many women have left the Bar before becoming eligible for appointment to the bench; it might take a generation or two before fifty per cent of judges are women. I hope that this prediction turns out to be wrong. A panel consisting of Lady Justice Black, Mr Justice Coleridge, HHJ Rosalind Coe QC, Tribunal Judge Siobhan McGrath, Recorder Joe Delahunty QC, and Judicial Appointments Commissioner Martin Forde then addressed the question ‘Why and how to become a judge’. Rachel Langdale QC chaired this session. I doubt whether any audience before has had the privilege of hearing judges speak about their reasons for going on the bench - and how much they enjoy the work. It was an excellent and inspiring discussion. After the formal part of the evening the porters were kept up later than expected as the audience of three hundred female barristers and Bar students and other guests enjoyed the

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

networking reception. On 23 May ‘Improving your CV’ was the subject of a new TWF initiative, a Workshop. The first session focussed on ‘Planning ahead for your career, identifying the building blocks and constructing your CV’. A panel chaired by Freya Newberry QC highlighted some of the less obvious aspects of a practitioner’s experience – in the Inn, Chambers, Circuit, SBAs and also outside practice that should be included in a CV to establish a person’s suitability for an appointment. The second session, chaired by Anna Worrall QC, asked ‘What do others look for in your CV/application form?’ Christopher Stephens, Chairman of the JAC, spoke of what impresses them in CVs – including ways in which applicants have dealt with personal challenges in life and thus demonstrate their strength of character. HHJ Lucy Theis and Judge Marcia Levy spoke of their own experiences in learning how to present themselves effectively in their CVs. The Question and Answer session afterwards showed how useful and often surprising participants had found the event. The TWF steering group, jointly convened by HHJ Deborah Taylor (Inner Temple) and I (Middle Temple) started to plan ahead, holding further Workshops, including ‘Applying for Silk’ which took place in Inner Temple in November. Other subjects under discussion include: ‘Crossing over from Criminal to Civil Work’, ‘Self-marketing’ and ‘Work at the

Employed Bar’. The next big Forum will be held in May 2014. The initial idea for the Forum and its driving force came from our Under Treasurer, Catherine Quinn. We are very grateful. We shall miss her. But, encouraged by the very positive response to our activities, the steering group is developing plenty of energy and good ideas for the future.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

A DV O C AC Y S TA N DA R D S

Training for Middle Temple Advocacy by Master Bernard Richmond

n December 1994, Christa Veile (as she then was) met with Michael Sherrard QC, the first Director of the newly formed ‘Middle Temple Advocacy’. He was in a pickle. His administrator had taken a new job and, with weeks to go before the first pilot course, he was without any assistance at all. Christa had just finished her term as a member of the academic staff at Cumberland Lodge (having previously been a lecturer at Bristol University). She was looking for her next job and agreed to help out for a short period. Fortunately, she has taken a rather relaxed view of the meaning of that phrase. Michael Sherrard’s view of the needs of pupils was that there should be a two-week full-time course in which they could immerse themselves. As the minimum requirement for advocacy was nothing so long, it was decided that the course would be voluntary. A shorter course would be available for those who did not wish to undertake the longer one. The vast majority of pupils opted for the two-week course. During 56 hours of teaching in a two-week period, pupils received lectures and participated in master classes, seminars and workshops. There were also two court- based days with full-time judges who agreed to allow a small group of pupils to observe their day (and discuss it with them), and also invited the pupils to perform mock applications in front of them (usually at the end of the day). These days were a highlight of the course for the pupils who participated.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

Such is the success and value of this course that, 18 years on, the twoweek Pupils’ Course remains the flagship course of Middle Temple Advocacy (MTA). Some of the seminars have changed and we have added sessions on practice management and ethics but the key aims and ethos remain the same, namely to inspire pupils to excellence in advocacy (oral and written), the highest standards of integrity and a commitment to client care. In 1995 there was a considerable degree of scepticism as to the need for advocacy training. Many senior practitioners said openly that advocacy could not be taught and the teacher training courses in the early days involved a great deal of

persuading potential trainers that the concept of MTA and advocacy training was here to stay and worth their time and effort. Nowadays, of course, it is an accepted and valued part of the barrister’s experience and most practitioners of under 17 years’ Call will have taken part in a Pupils’ Course and a New Practitioners’ Programme (either at Middle Temple or in another Inn or circuit). Our programmes are now extensive. As well as training for BPTC students at Cumberland Lodge, the Pupils’ Course and the New Practitioners’ Course (for those in the first three years of practice), we participate in courses for established practitioners, ethics training and,

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

A DV O C AC Y S TA N DA R D S sometimes, overseas training. Some of our trainers are responsible for training new trainers, assessing BPTC teachers for accreditation as advocacy teachers, and for sitting on various policy committees regarding advocacy training. In short, Middle Temple and its trainers are a committed part of the advocacy training machine of which the Bar can be rightly proud. It does, however, create an enormous pressure on the Education Department of the Inn and, particularly, our Education Officer, Stacey Brown. Whilst our Pupils’ Courses are in action there is an enormous demand for trainers who are willing and able to commit (and who actually turn up!). Of course, it can be an imposition. Our workshops run in the evening (and weekends for the New Practitioners’ Programme and Cumberland Lodge). After a long day in court it is often the last thing that anyone wants to do. In truth, however, the experience of most of our trainers is that the teaching is interesting, rewarding and well worth the effort. Most importantly, our workshop training is essential to the structure and quality of the courses we offer. The experience of practice, running complex cases and client care which our faculty possess is priceless. So often during a workshop a small piece of advice which comes from a trainer will inspire a pupil and give him or her confidence. Pupils gain not just inspiration but role models whose skills they aspire to replicate. Being an effective barrister is not a guarantee of talent as a trainer. We acknowledge that our volunteers need advice, support and structure to their teaching to make it easier to run classes. We, in common with all Inns and circuits, use the Hampel method of training. This provides a structured format for giving feedback and allows the trainer to focus on improving just one aspect of a student’s performance per exercise. This is effective because

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

the student will engage in a number of exercises during any course and they will improve and develop incrementally rather than trying to cope with too many pieces of information during one exercise. We run a training course over two weekends to familiarise our teachers with these methods. As part of this training, our trainees will get an opportunity to observe an experienced teacher run a class. This occurs between the first and second training weekends. Following successful completion of the training course, our newly qualified trainers will be invited to ‘team teach’ with another trainer. We expect that after two or three teamteaching sessions, our trainers will be ready to ‘fly solo’, if necessary. This does not mean that a new trainer is unsupported. We have a system of ‘Roving Trainers’ which will be implemented fully in the next academic year. The task of these ‘Rovers’, all of whom are senior trainers, is to observe training and to provide feedback and support to the trainers. As Director of Studies, one of my roles is to train and support our trainers. As such, I am on hand either in person or at the telephone to provide help and assistance when needed. Our experience is that often our new trainers soon find their feet and grow in confidence and expertise. This is an investment of time and energy on both sides. Our teacher

trainers give up a significant number of hours in addition to ‘ordinary’ teaching in order to assist us. It is a little soul destroying when, as sometimes happens, time is spent training someone who then uses the skills either to teach solely in their own chambers or, worst of all, who does not commit to the teaching process at all, thereby losing their accreditation and wasting all the time, cost and effort of training them. If you are a trained trainer who is teaching regularly, we thank you for your efforts. The Bar depends on you, as do we. If you are a trained teacher who has not taught recently, please give us some of your time. We can arrange team teaching to get you back into the swing of things. We can only offer great teaching if we can offer great teachers. We need more good teachers! If you are interested in joining the team and you’re over 6 years’ Call, then we would be delighted to have you. Please contact Stacey Brown at s.brown@middletemple.org.uk for more details. If you would like to look at some teaching before committing, Stacey will doubtless be able to organise a ‘sitting-in’ for you with one of our established teachers.

Bernard Richmond has been Director of Studies at the Inn since 2006. He was Called to the Bar in 1988 and as a Bencher in 2005. He practises criminal law from Lamb Building.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

AU T U M N R E A D E R

No War Stories: but a view from the front line by Master Parker, Autumn Reader

practised at the Bar for 35 years. I became a judge in 2008. I sit in the Family Division and Court of Protection. I have been a bencher since 2000. I am one of the Masters of the Garden. I am not going to write about that. The garden is there to be seen. I am privileged to be Autumn Reader. Historically the Reader taught the students. The Reader’s role still includes teaching. I am a Middle Temple advocacy trainer. Mostly I teach family law advocacy. The government thinks that family cases take too long. They take too long to hear, too long to conclude. I agree. I try to teach my students techniques to stop this. We teach using the Hampel method. I heard Professor Hampel and his team speak recently. Professor Hampel says that advocacy is a skill. For most it is not an innate gift. It can be taught. It needs to be taught. Technique needs to be practised. People don’t learn through being talked at. War stories - anecdotes about past triumphs or defeats - are forbidden. The training technique is hard to learn for the trainer. It is hard for the student. It needs to be practised. It gets easier. The Hampel method tackles one thing at a time. It is called a headline. This is my headline. NO QUESTION SHALL BE LONGER THAN 10 WORDS This is not new. My pupil master was the late, great Keith Evans. His books are required reading. He taught me this rule. His advice was: visualise the transcript as you cross-examine. One line is about ten words. The rule applies to every type of case. It applies to all questions to witnesses. It is not just for cross-examination. I hear too many words, with not enough content. I think that this is because of 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Bad habits. Believing it is expected, since everyone does it. Lack of preparation. Wanting thinking time. Wanting to seem nice. Not wanting to ask the questions you must. The

The Hon Mrs Justice Parker was called in 1973 and appointed a Bencher in 2000. She is Autumn Reader for 2013. She delivered her Reading entitled ‘Science Fiction and the Rule of Law’ in Hall in November.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

case is hopeless. The answers will make it worse. So you ramble round the point. 7. Your client thinking that more words mean more impact. They don’t. Your client thinks that time spent means result achieved. It doesn’t. Often opinions and statements are expressed rather than questions. I intervene a lot. I say: keep it short. I say: ask a question. I say: I’m not interested in opinions. I think my reasons are usually understood. But usually the habits are too ingrained. Without practice, it’s difficult to change. So-called questions often start with a long run up. Usually it ends in a collapse with nothing achieved. I call this the pole vault. It is excruciating to listen to.

I don’t mean to be critical. I don’t want to be unkind. I don’t want to be unfair. I’m sure I have committed all these sins myself. I probably still do

In cross-examination, if unchecked, it goes something like this. I won’t give a full example. I don’t have space. It could, on the worst examples, go on for pages. The questioner ‘puts the case in context’. This means explaining what they think the case is about. Or it may be what their client thinks about it. There is over reliance on documents. This is before any question is asked. Bits are read out, sometimes quite long passages. Often no question follows. Eventually a proposition will be put. Or several may be put, linked or not. There may be an interrogative tone. Or the questioner may say ‘Don’t you think that…’. This is not cross-examination. At best it is a debate. You can’t take a witness apart like this. You can’t close a trap. You can’t make an impact. You can’t dissect. You can’t probe. The witness has to be asked a question. It must be one question at a time. And it must aim to elicit evidence. That is, evidence which is relevant to the outcome. Smart witnesses sometimes respond with an unsolicited, damaging observation. They have had time to think. But usually the witness is completely lost. The witness has no idea what to deal with. Anyway the judge is not interested in the question. The question is not evidence. The judge is bored by it. The judge wants to get on to a killer point. You need to make the judge

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

AU T U M N R E A D E R

interested in the answer. I hear other flabby introductions. They are used in chief as well as cross-examination. They waste time. ‘I’d just like to ask you about what [X] says about …’ ‘I am just going to read you the emails which [X] sent you…’ ‘You say that [Y] is the case but I’d like you to consider what [X] said which is that…’ ‘I wonder whether you would be good enough to turn to the psychological report of Dr Wisdom in bundle C2 1098 at para 367 where he says that ...’ ‘What would you say if I asked you about what [X] says about …’ ‘I’d like you to understand that we all realise that this is very difficult particularly because ….’ ‘May I please ask you to think about what you said at para 103 in your fifth statement…’ ‘I want to go to what happened on the night of 28th September when you say that …’ Don’t do it. It is not necessary. Go straight into the question. I don’t mean to be critical. I don’t want to be unkind. I don’t want to be unfair. I’m sure I have committed all these sins myself. I probably still do. But it is never too late to improve. It is never too late to learn. Think full stops. Full stops are our friends. I like subordinate clauses as well as the next person. But they are often the product of insufficient preparation. Word order is important too in keepings sentences short. Professor Hampel did a short demonstration last week. No question was more than six words. Short questions are a pleasure to listen to. And they are a pleasure to pose. Short questions get results. They advance step by step. The process is not slow. It is quicker than the pole vault. Your own witness is less likely to ramble. You are in control. Cross-examination is paced. Short questions pose points that must be answered. Or they are unanswerable. They can give a witness no escape. The witness is not allowed thinking time. The witness cannot see where you are coming from. Don’t worry that you will sound aggressive or unkind. You will not. The right body language and tone will prevent that. Bad habits are hard to change. To relearn new ones takes time and practice. But you can say all you want in ten words.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

SCHOLARS

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge Scholarships by Master Andrew Hochhauser

ne of the most important of the Inn’s core functions is education and training for the Bar. A vital element of that function is the provision of financial support to those who might not otherwise be able to embark on that training, particularly as there is no funding available from Local Education Authorities, and career development loans for the Bar Course are drying up. In 2013, the Inn plans to award in excess of a million pounds in scholarships, the majority to students undertaking the Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC). The remainder is earmarked for scholarships for the law conversion course and some smaller awards for post-BPTC activities. It is the Inn’s policy to interview every applicant who has obtained a place on the BPTC: potential as an advocate is not always recognisable from a written application and we feel that all applicants should be given an opportunity to argue their case. In 2012, 228 applicants were interviewed and 108 scholarships awarded. In 2011, in acknowledgment of our relationship with our Royal Bencher, Master Prince William, and as a wedding present to him and the

Duchess of Cambridge, the Inn created two scholarships entitled ‘The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge Scholarships’. In addition to the four usual criteria on which panels assess applications: namely intellectual ability, motivation to succeed at the Bar, potential as an advocate and personal qualities, in the case of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge

Scholarships, as with the Diana, Princess of Wales Scholarship, personal circumstances are taken into account as all three are intended for candidates who are specially deserving of financial assistance, because they have overcome serious disadvantages in their lives in order to study for the Bar.

Master Andrew Hochhauser is a member of Essex Court Chambers. He is Chairman of the Scholarships & Prizes Committee and runs the Middle Temple Civil New Practitioners' Programme together with Master Colin Edelman. In 2011 he and Master David Bean established the Access to the Bar Awards Scheme.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

SCHOLARS

8th OCTOBER 2012

A Visit from our Royal Bencher

Photographs courtesy of Chris Christodoulou

2012 was the first year in which the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge Scholarships were awarded and the Inn was delighted when Their Royal Highnesses accepted an invitation to visit the Inn to meet the first recipients of their scholarships and to present them with their scholarships. The visit took place on 8 October 2012 in the Princeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Room, and it was a joyous occasion. The royal couple spent a considerable time chatting informally with the new Scholars, Kerri-Anne Ferdinando and Steven Kennedy, together with members of their families. The royal couple also met the Princess Diana Scholars for 2011 and 2012 and one of the Queen Mother Scholars for 2010. The photographs show how they put those present at their ease and there was much laughter and celebration, before the formal presentation took place. We hope it will be the first of many visits and occasions when the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge will meet members of the Inn and particularly engage with the students. We will always have a warm welcome for them.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

SCHOLARS

Fox Scholar by Joshua Normanton

I have set myself the impossible task of condensing a year’s experiences into one succinct and concise article. Oddly, I am glad the task is an impossible one. For, on the Harold G. Fox Scholarship, I have done more, learnt more and developed more as an individual than I ever thought possible in a year. During the course of the Scholarship, I was involved in some extremely complicated and high profile matters at Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP, a Canadian law firm with considerable international reach. Although understandably daunting and at times nearing the scope of my ability, I found comfort in the work ethic of my colleagues and superiors and in the trust which was placed in me from the very beginning. I now find myself in the enviable position (for one so young) of having had an active and important role in a number of serious matters. Working in the litigation department of the firm, I was involved in the preparation and organisation of large-scale class action suits. This work included complex legal research, often requiring expertise in areas I had never previously encountered, ranging from Rylands v Fletcher non-natural use to electoral law as it applies in Newfoundland. I also found myself in a wide range of fascinating scenarios, including cross-examinations, client meetings and court sessions. During all of these, I was fortunate enough to be given an active role. I was also fortunate to be involved in a fascinating multi-billion dollar nuclear arbitration for which I carried out research and assisted in the organisation of millions of files of evidence. Further, I worked in what

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

was essentially an associate capacity on a planning case. This case escalated so that I was able to research and draft written submissions in both a Judicial Review application and a Leave to Appeal motion. Both matters included extensive research on the independence of expert witnesses, an area I am now comfortable professing some expertise in. As an English barrister, the focal point of many practices is advocacy. I admit that I was concerned that my advocacy skills, rudimentary as they may be, would suffer from not being tested in the legal forum this year. I was very wrong. I was placed with one of Canada’s most formidable and respected litigation barristers, John A. Campion. John has led the most interesting life, having appeared in many high profile cases, including before the Supreme Court of Canada. Importantly, he is truly invested in supporting aspiring young lawyers. He is one of the most passionate, brave and steadfast advocates I have seen. He simply will not back down. I have learnt much from the forthright speeches and aspire to emulate his quick thinking, intelligence and devastating mind for strategy. John has become both friend and mentor to me. His impromptu but near-daily lessons were a source of much inspiration; it is these that I shall miss the most. I am now aware that law is so much more than, well, law. It is a conglomeration of a whole host of different roles which share common threads of responsibility. These threads include: having the ability and determination to get things done for your client, knowing what keeps your client awake at night and most importantly, thinking outside the

box. John’s maxim for success is that ‘we are not practising litigation but exercising power.’ I also include Antonio Di Domenico to the list of people who have been both friend and mentor. Tony is an associate at the firm who works with John often. He always found time to teach me a point on procedure, or bear with me when I didn’t understand something. I felt comfortable engaging with him in discussions about the ethics of what we did, an important field for a novice lawyer. My growing sophistication as a lawyer has also been caused by exposure to a wide range of other techniques and practices within the large firm. As a barrister, confined to Chambers, the corporate structure of the typical firm is unfamiliar. In Canada, solicitors and barristers are merged, there is a fused profession and the interplay of the disciplinary skills, the human resources available to the firm and the financial stability of barristers makes for a heady and attractive mix. In practice, when an issue arises which is complex in such a way that it requires several minds to bring it to resolution, the head partner on the file will quickly corral a number of experts from about the firm. These experts, some procedural, some litigators, some securities or corporate specialists are brought together and, after useful discussion and argumentation, produce a sophisticated answer which may be beyond the ken of all but the most intelligent and experienced lawyer. In a career which prides itself upon its independence it is somewhat ironic that the best work derives from a concerted group effort. Irony aside, it is a power which should be harnessed

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

SCHOLARS

in the United Kingdom. I have seen that it works, and works well. While the corporate structure of a firm may be incompatible with the ethical regulations of both barristers and solicitors, the prospect of barristers and solicitors working together under some alternative business structure is an attractive one. It is certainly not something to be dismissed out of hand. I have had ample opportunity to develop personally. There is real value in living and working abroad. Canada is a vibrant place with an enviable and progressive immigration policy. I felt included from the first day I arrived. The people I met were always warm, inviting and interested in my progression. I owe particular thanks to Justice James MacPherson and Justice Thomas Cromwell of the Ontario Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada respectively. My time at both of these institutions was extremely valuable and, fundamentally, demystified the higher court process for me. I understand the mechanisms of appeal, the ultimately ceremonial nature of the higher courts and the thought

processes of the people who deal with appeals. I can now aspire to more sophisticated and complicated appeal work, confident in my understanding of the process. An understanding I could not have gained but for my time there. Canada’s vibrancy is reflected in the group of friends I made there. I will miss every one. However, in a way, this is the point of the Scholarship. It is more than just a year in a law firm on the other side of the Atlantic. In the current global market, that is just a year in a law firm. It is a year in a place with a fascinating history, a year learning from people who have had a completely different life and experiences from my own, and a year developing contacts who I will be close to for the rest of my professional and personal life. By living and working in Canada, I have begun to realise that engagement in the human experience does not mean that I have to be confined to any one place. The value of moving around, making one’s own way and choosing one’s own space is immeasurable. All that is required is

ambition, hard work and a certain amount of affability. I feel that, in both professional and personal forums I am now unfettered by the constraints, often self-imposed, of my education or upbringing. That said, with a year of excellent experience under my belt I recognise that it is time to turn that which I have learnt to good use. I am now in a position to utilise fully the resource of pupillage and keen to begin. If anything, the Scholarship has taught me how incredibly fortunate I am to have been (partially) accepted into what is one of the best professions in the world. Although my Principal and those I have met will be magnanimous and say that no debt is owed, that is simply not true. I owe them a great debt, both as friends and supporters. The distinction is that the only way I can repay it is to the profession. I must take the tools with which they have provided me and craft my own practice. It is from this practice that I will one day perhaps find myself in their position, able to impart my knowledge to a fresh, young lawyer.

10th JUNE 2013

Scholars’ Dinner On 10 June 2013, the Inn’s fifth Scholars’ Dinner took place in Hall. Open by invitation to students who have recently been awarded scholarships for their BPTC year, it was a celebration of our scholars' achievement. For most of them, this was the first visit to the Inn since their interview. 51 students and 28 seniors were welcomed by Master Treasurer. Emmanuel Fagbemi, one of the two Duke and Duchess of Cambridge Scholars, made a speech on behalf of the scholars. Master Hochhauser, the outgoing Chair of the Scholarships and Prizes Committee, thanked all who supported the scholarship scheme, whether by donating to the Scholarship Appeal or by giving their time to interviewing the applicants, to ensure that the best students, regardless of background, receive help with their chosen career.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

STUDENTS BPTC Scholarships Awarded 2012 Queen Mother Ayesha Christie, Thomas Copeland, Matthew Crowe, Robert Dacre, Adrian De Froment, Harry East, Charlotte Godber, Stuart Gooch, Benjamin Isherwood, Tamara Jaber, Stefan Kuppen, Jennifer MacLeod, Hannah Noyce, Daria Popescu, Alex Pritchard-Jones, Rosie Scott, Robert Scrivener, Andrew Wheelhouse, Luke Wilcox Duke & Duchess of Cambridge Kerri Anne Ferdinando, Steven Kennedy Diana, Princess of Wales Priya Sidharh Diplock Matthew Cassells, Nargees Choudhury, Ben Du Feu, Helen Jones, Callum McCall, Alice Meredith, Christel Querton, Daisy Ricketts, Laura Vernon-Collier Harmsworth Constanze Bell, Elizabeth Bennett, Caislyn Boyle, Paul Dormand, Celena Field, Grace Garrett-Sadler, Natasha Gasson, Thomas Hubbard, Alexander Mellis, John Oxley, Patrick Paisley, Gavin Penn, Andrew Pike, Kiesha Robinson, Kevin Touhey, Kirsten Ward, Emmi Wilson

Pumfrey Memorial Award, Richard Davies; Pump Court Tax Chambers Scholarship, Laura Deuxberry; Quatercentenary Scholarship, Nirosha Sithirapathy; R E & Florence Cooper Award, Zoe Sutherland; Robert Garraway Rice Award, Charlotte Johnson; Safford Award, Gianni Sonvico; Sir Joseph Cantley Memorial Prize, Fiona Clegg; Sir Robert Micklethwait Memorial Award, Tyrone Campbell; Stanley Levy Memorial Award, Lucy Plumpton; State School Award, Yasmeen Couser, Michelle Koleosho; Terence Fitzgerald Award, Graham Coombs; The 3-4 South Square Chambers Scholarship, Kalliopi Lykourgou; The Connor Scholarship, Sophia Dower; The Rose Scholarship, Katy Laverty; Winston Churchill Award, Victoria Barker GDL Scholarships Awarded 2012 Queen Mother William Hooper, Yasmin Omotosho, Daniel Black Diplock Christina Rothnie, Anika Randawa, Feriha Tayfur, Peter Jolley Astbury Edward Adkins, Victoria Empson, Thomas van der Klugt, Alistair Stark

Astbury Charlotte Bates, Jamila Bernard-Stevenson, Thomas Bushnell, Timothy De Swardt, Max Byng, Simon Gilson, Hannah Gomersall, Kathryn Mason, Emer Morrison, Paul Renteurs, Stephen Reynolds

Jules Thorn Mansour Mansour, James Duncan-Harthill, Victoria Teather, Azba Malluk, Livia Pality

Jules Thorn Polly Allison, Rosie Bayley, Laura Bedson, Gemma Chalk, Lucy Conroy, Chakindra Deshpande, Kimball Edey, Emma Fenelon, James Fraczyk, Coco Keene, Rebekah Mayrick, Anna Peace, Gavin Rice, Emma Spencer, Laura-Jane Swaile, Kenneth Tang

Queen Mother Philip Anderson, John Bethell, Joanna Chen, Ubah Dirie, William Hooper, Sophia Hurst, Daniel Isenberg, Anja Lansbergen, Georgina Morgan, Francis Payne, Rachel Pimm-Smith, Kirsty Schneeberger, Peter Stewart, Emma Walker, James White, Lydia Williams

Benefactors Charles Brabin, Lloyd Hopkin, Matthew Hunt, Shauna Lyttle, Andrew Ozanian

Duke & Duchess of Cambridge Emmanuel Fagbemi, Ashantina Johnson

Individual named awards Atkin Chambers Scholarship, Glenn Holmwood; J B Montagu Award, Iain Shirley; Blackstone Award, Timothy Rawlings; Brick Court Chambers Scholarship, Catherine Plummer; Christopher Benson Scholarship, Bence Leb; Cunningham Award, Claudia Estephane; Gardiner Scholarship, Dolapo Ajibade; Godfrey Heilpern Memorial Prize, Kristina Goodwin; H.R. Light Bursary, Nicholas Truelove; HHJ Paul Clark Scholarship, Sanel Susak; Hubert Monroe Scholarship, Isabel McCann; Jamieson Award, Martin Jones; Jerry Parthab Singh Scholarship, Katie Dunn; Joseph Jackson Award, Natalie Appiah-Dwomoh; The Lord Lowry Scholarship, Bellavia Ribeiro-Addy; Luboshez Award, Christopher Harper; Malcolm Wright Award, James Greenwood; Mona de Piro Prize, Tamara Hodge; Nicholas

Diana, Princess of Wales Matthew Haveron

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

BPTC Scholarships Awarded 2013

Davidson, Victoria Empson, Lara Hassell, Georgina Messenger, Eleanor Sanders, Christopher Styles, James Yapp Jules Thorn Emily Albou, Daniel Black, Eleanor Davidson, Alexandra Dubois, Katharine Evans-Johns, Mansour Mansour, Jason Perrin, Sonja Polimac, Ricky Powell, Sarah Taylor Benefactors Thomas Beak, Lewis Bramford, Safiatou Jallow, Aisha Lysejko, Nicole McEntee, Janani Paramsothy, Adam Pogonowski, Alexandra Pountney, Margaret-Victoria Quarshie, Harry Whormersley, Jonathon Wright Individual named awards Archibald Safford Scholarship, Nicholas Foulis; Atkin Chambers Scholarship, Alex Cisneros; Blackstone Award, Helen Bowers; Brick Court Scholarship, Robyn Cunningham; Christopher Benson Scholarship, Shannon Revel; Cunningham Award, Sophie Zacharia; Gardiner Scholarship, Ellen Shaw; Godfrey Heilpern Memorial Prize, Catherine Jaquiss; H R Light Bursary, Rachel Kerr; HH Paul Clark Scholarship, Alexander Jones; Hubert Monroe Award, Ellen Lefley; J. B. Montagu Scholarship, Harry Taylor; Jamieson Pupillage Prize, David Jones; Jerry Parthab Singh Scholarship, Lucinda Wilmott; Luboshez Award, Thomas Acworth; Malcolm Wright Prize, Arya Mohit-Zadeh; Mona de Piro Prize, Olivia Holden; Nicholas Pumfrey Memorial Award, Nadia Rahman; Pump Court Tax Chambers Scholarship, George Dye; Quatercentenary Scholarship, Rachael Wake; R E & Florence Cooper Award, Sarah Jane Pyle; Robert Garraway Rice Scholarship, Laura Draper; Rose Scholarship, Harriet Tighe; Sir Joseph Cantley Memorial Prize, Azba Malluk; Sir Robert Micklethwaite Memorial Prize, Hester Fairclough; Stanley Levy Memorial Prize, Eminjeet Kaur Kandola; State School Award, Georgina Messenger; Terence Fitzgerald Pupillage Prize, Alessandra Scotto Di Santolo; The Lord Lowry Scholarship, Zoe Shuttleworth; Winston Churchill Pupillage Award, Esther Babalola

GDL Scholarships Awarded 2013 Diplock Joyce Arnold , William Asquith, Kabir Bhalla, Holly Clegg, Benjamin Gill, Jennifer Hirsch, Peter Jolley, Amil Khan, Tara O'Halloran, Anika Randawa, John Stables, Kristina Tailor, Simon Turnbull, Rupert Wickham

Queen Mother Andrew Bell, Emma Park, John Warriner Diplock Jon-Selous Borlace, Asiya Elgady, Zara McGlone, Ayisha Robertson

Harmsworth Rebecca Carr, Sahara Fergus-Simms, Sam Frost, Andrew Herd, Katya Hosking, Faegheh Jenabi, Araniya Kogulathas, Alexandra Little, Mary-Rachel McCabe, Nicola Peach, Colette Renton, Meera Rokad, Natalie Tenoria-Bernal, Harry Wiltshire

Harmsworth Gemma Noble

Astbury Christopher Adams, Kevin Brown, Leo

Benefactors Jordan Richardson

Astbury Camilla Draycott Jules Thorn Gerard Pitt

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

BOOK REVIEW

Islam and English Law Review by Natasha Hausdorff

slam and English Law, edited by Master Robin Griffith-Jones, Master of the Temple, was published by Cambridge University Press in May 2013. The book is a substantial contribution to an ongoing dialogue concerning the relationship between civil and religious law in this country. Its genesis may be traced back to Dr Rowan Williams’s 2008 lecture, ‘Civil and Religious Law in England: a religious perspective', which was given at the Royal Courts of Justice and which stimulated substantial media coverage of the issue of Sharia Councils in the United Kingdom. Many of the chapters have developed from public discussions held in the Temple Church following the 2008 lecture, and from a series of round-table conversations on English and Muslim family law. In his introduction to the book, Master Stephen Hockman explains that it begins with the Archbishop’s reflections on law and religion and ends with an examination by both David Ford, Regius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, and Master Nicholas Phillips, former President of the UK Supreme Court, of potential future work on these issues. Dr Williams’s main theme that a ‘defence of an unqualified secular legal monopoly in terms of the need for a universalist doctrine of human right or dignity is to misunderstand the circumstances in which that doctrine emerged’ opens the door, in the chapters that follow, for extensive scrutiny of the type of legal framework we, as a society, should aspire to. The book is enriched with diverse outlooks on the different concepts of legal pluralism and human rights. Professor Christopher McCrudden, of

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

Queen’s University Belfast, identifies the concept of ‘human dignity’ as key to the future debate in the interpretation of European Convention rights in light of Sir Nicolas Bratza’s account of the Refah case. Professor Shaheen Sardar Ali of the University of Warwick discusses the engagement of Muslims in the mainstream institutions of state, law and society and their rights and responsibilities as citizens, and Professor Abdullahi Ahmed AnNa'im, of Emory University, reflects on the relevance of Jihad in the context of the relationship between religion and the state. The volume also deals with wider themes of freedom of speech, legal principles, ‘fuzzy law’ and religious rights and the public interest. On Monday 3rd June a panel discussion for the book’s launch took place in Temple Church, which has played an important role as the venue for lectures and discussions leading up to the publication of this work. Master Hockman chaired a panel discussion between the now former Archbishop Rowan Williams, Professor Elizabeth Cooke of the Law Commission and Reading University, and Professor Maleiha Malik of King’s College, London. The audience comprised many of the academics who had contributed to the book and some of those directly concerned and active in some of the Sharia Councils which had prompted the Archbishop’s original speech in 2008. The presence of individuals so personally involved in the subject matter prompted an enlightening and in-depth public discussion of many of the key themes of the book, which will no doubt continue to fuel debate on the future relationship between Islam and English law.

It is a book bursting with knowledge, insight and analysis from some of the most respected academics and practitioners with experience in this debate, over the extent of the space that can be allowed for the customary or quasi-legal practice of faith groups alongside the secular law of the land. Its authors show no hesitation in tackling head on controversial issues, and in entering a very topical quagmire in an effort to prompt the formation in the not too distant future of practical solutions. Islam and English Law: Rights, Responsibilities and the Place of Shari’a, ed Robin Griffith-Jones, Cambridge University Press (2013)

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

STUDENTS

A Year in the MTSA by Karlia Lykourgou, President 2012-2013

homas Hobbes described the life of mankind as ‘nasty, brutish and short.’ As I sat with my friends in the aftermath of the civil litigation exam, many of us expressed similar sentiments about the BPTC. However, one aspect of this year that conjured good feeling for everyone is the time we have spent at our Inns. As President of the Middle Temple Students’ Association (MTSA), I was inclined to agree, as I have found my involvement with the MTSA Committee to be one of the best experiences I have had while studying law. When I was elected President in October 2012, I expressed three aims: to make the Inn as inclusive as possible for the students; to build upon the good work of the previous MTSA; and to encourage as much participation as possible. Members of this year’s MTSA Committee have worked together to achieve these goals by organising activities that have provided students with opportunities to develop their skills at the Bar while getting to know their fellow Middle Templars. In the same way Jason sought the golden fleece, the BPTC student seeks pupillage. I don’t know which is harder. You could argue that Jason had mythical beasts and only one shot at his quest, but equally there was less competition and no pupillage gateway. On this understanding, the MTSA invested much of our time and resources into providing opportunities for the students to improve their advocacy skills and to gain experience that they could put into their applications. The MTSA provided opportunities for students to debate in university competitions at UCL, Bristol and the Oxford Women’s Open. For those in

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

London, competitions were held at Middle Temple, including the InterInns Competition and the Monroe Cup, to select students for the European Championships. Our Debating Officer, Ellen Robertson also organised workshops throughout the year for students to improve their debating skills, with Master Reade QC and Charlotte Thomas, the current English debating champion. Middle Temple students have also been provided with ample opportunity to moot with teams sent to the Jessup and UKELA competitions, as well as the Willem C Viz competition in Vienna. Mooting training was also put on to improve students’ techniques and these were tested out in the course of the Kennedy ‘speed’ Moot, organised by our Mooting Officer, Steven Kennedy. In order to help the students to present their new, improved advocacy skills, the MTSA organised a Pupillage Evening in March. This event followed the success of previous MTSA career evenings where chambers were invited to speak on the subject of how to draft winning pupillage applications. The MTSA built on this formula by providing the opportunity for students to have their CVs and pupillage applications checked by pupillage committee members from over eleven different chambers. The students also gained insights into the chambers’ application processes over a Q&A session and during the reception afterwards. The MTSA also took an active role in organising social events for our members to get to know each other, which were spearheaded by our Social Secretary, Emma Spencer. The Winter Masquerade Ball was the main project for the first term and students

enjoyed a champagne reception, canapés, a live jazz band and a DJ. Particular help with the Ball was provided by Bilshan Nursimulu, our Treasurer; Roovisha Seetohul, our University of Law representative; and Jamila Bernard Stevenson, our parttime representative, as well as Hannah Gomershall, a lovely MTSA student volunteer. This event was followed by the Port, Wine and Cheese evening in January, where we enjoyed the fire in the Princes’ Room over a glass or two. Our Vice-President Oliver DeSilver also channelled Jeremy Paxman at the MTSA quiz nights and provided the students with an opportunity to flex their intellects and fight out the Inn rivalries. Conscious of involving our out-of-London members, pub trips were also organised after dining sessions so that students could have more opportunities to mingle with each other and the MTSA Committee. As the summer months shuffled in, the Committee fought against the dying of the light (or the year) by inviting the students into the Inn’s garden for Pimms. The students were kept fully informed of all the MTSA’s activities through updates on the MTSA website and through the monthly newsletter. The Committee also established a Middle Temple Students’ Association 2012-13 facebook page so that we could communicate with this year’s intake more directly and to facilitate communication between members. These means of communication were maintained by our Communications Officer, Iain Shirley, who took care of all the technical aspects that no one else on the MTSA understood. The MTSA has also represented

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

STUDENTS

the students at the Inn throughout the year on the Executive Committee, the Hall Committee, the Students’ and Barristers’ Affairs Committee, the Social Committee, the Library Committee and the Education Committee. The MTSA also redrafted our Committee constitution and have been working with other Inn committees on a scholarship for those intending to undertake internships abroad in their free year before pupillage. In order to encourage student involvement at the Inn in general, the MTSA also arranged for a list of Middle Temple groups and societies and specialist Bar associations to be

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

compiled for the students to join. Finally, the students were invited to express any of their views and ideas with me directly over coffee on the last Friday of every month. In addition to those already mentioned, the following members of the MTSA also contributed much of their time and energy to our efforts: John Oxley, Kaplan representative; Gillian Huston, BPP representative; Georgia Chapple, City Law School representative; Charles Brabin, Out of London representative; Catherine Sayers, Education and Welfare Officer; and Alexandra Benoiton, Equality and Diversity Officer. This team has been brilliant and I

am extremely proud of the MTSA’s work this year. I am honoured that I had the opportunity to head the Committee and I wish the 2012-13 intake the very best of luck in the future.

Karlia Lykourgou was called to the Bar in November 2013 and is now assisting the death penalty team at Reprieve.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

STUDENTS

Debating by Ellen Robertson

ebating in Middle Temple continued to thrive in 2013. As the MTSA Debating Officer I was responsible for organising debating activities throughout the year and am grateful to Master David Reade as Master of Debates for his support in this important area for the Inn’s students. Workshops have formed a central feature of debating activities, and Middle Temple students have participated in a variety of debating workshops throughout the year. These have included sessions on improving the structure of speeches, making effective opening speeches, and one on how to construct a wellanalysed argument. The workshops have provided an opportunity for novice debaters to test out their skills in a supportive environment and to learn from some of the experienced debaters who are currently students at the Inn. Experienced debaters have used the sessions to hone their skills for external competitions. At each workshop, students participate in a formal debate. Debating topics have embraced an eclectic range of subjects that have included issues such as abolishing the cab-rank rule, shutting down social media in emergencies and the legalisation of drugs. One of the most popular workshops was a lively discussion led by Master Reade about issues affecting the modern Bar. Students did their best to persuade Master Reade of their viewpoints on the role of chambers in controlling public statements by their members and whether barristers should always have to disclose minor criminal offences. A former student member of the Inn, now a pupil, Charlotte Thomas,

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

who is the current English Debating champion, also conducted a master class on competitive debating. To encourage student attendance at debating events a session was also run on pupillage interviews.

“Students did their best to persuade Master Reade of their viewpoints on the role of chambers in controlling public statements by their members and whether barristers should always have to disclose minor criminal offences” During the course of the year Middle Temple students have represented the Inn in a range of external debating competitions. In November 2012, Muhammad Syamil and Tracy Shuk Sien Tan travelled to Bristol to compete in the 2012 Bristol Inter-Varsity Debating Competition. Topics ranged from allowing victims of miscarriages of justice to sue expert witnesses to whether South Korea should provide unconditional humanitarian aid to North Korea. Two weeks later, Matthew Cassells and Nicole Thomas entered the prestigious 2012 John Smith Memorial Mace, a two-day competition organised by the EnglishSpeaking Union. They tackled debates on abolishing national school curricula and suspending employee rights in times of high unemployment, and enjoyed successfully debating against teams from Inner Temple and Lincoln’s Inn. Charlotte Thomas, who entered the competition representing Kaplan Law School, was a member of the winning team and

went on to represent England at the International Final. In March 2013 Jennifer Hirsch and Joshua Perry competed in the 2013 UCL IV Debating Competition and tackled the difficult issue of legalising the sale of organs. Jennifer and Joshua were very successful in their debate on whether it is morally permissible to target civilians during wars, and came first out of the four teams. In April 2013 Subashini Nathan, Hannah Somanathan and I entered the 2013 Oxford Women’s Open Debating Competition, and debated whether or not religious street preachers should be banned and whether or not feminists should join the army. Subashini and Hannah were the only first-time competitors at the entire competition, and I reached the semi-final. In addition to competing, all three of us participated in a forum about everyday sexism and methods of challenging misogyny in debating. On 25 June 2013 Rupert Lipton, Stuart Kennedy, Stanzie Bell and I competed in the Inter-Inns Debating Competition against Inner Temple, Lincoln’s Inn and Gray’s Inn students, debating whether or not we should welcome the recent revelations that the US government has been reading private emails. Stanzie Bell and I reached the Final, where we argued in favour of Scottish independence. The Inn’s internal debating competition is the Monroe Cup in which pairs of debaters compete for the cup donated by the late Master Monroe. Fourteen teams entered the 2013 Monroe Cup Debating Competition, debating in preliminary rounds on negotiating with terrorists, subsidising feminist pornography and

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

STUDENTS legalising performance-enhancing drugs in sports. The winning team from each preliminary debate went through to the Monroe Cup Final on 14 June 2013. The teams competing in the Final were Natasha Hausdorff and Stanzie Bell; Steven Kennedy and Rupert Lipton; Philip Anderson and Efe Ilguy; and Peter Kumar and Chris Liaw. The teams had only fifteen minutes to prepare their arguments on the motion â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;This House Would Limit Prison to Violent Offendersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. Each speaker had seven minutes to persuade the judging panel of Master Rodney Stewart Smith, Master David Reade and Charlotte Thomas. The judges were particularly impressed by the polished performances of all eight speakers in the debate as well as the high quality of the arguments, and announced Natasha Hausdorff and Stanzie Bell as the winners of the 2013 Monroe Cup. In August, Wendy Olsen and Christopher Styles represented Middle Temple at the European University Debating Championships in Manchester. She reported that the best debate of all centred on the claim that instead of demonising Muslims in general, the U.S. response to 9/11 should have been mainly to declare such acts individual crimes. Middle Temple came 180th out of 216 teams.

Ellen Robertson studied Jurisprudence at the University of Oxford. After graduating, she taught English in Japan for a year as a participant on the Japan Exchange and Teaching Programme. She is currently taking the BPTC at Kaplan Law School and hopes to practise in employment law and personal injury law.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

STUDENTS

Moot News Everyone! by Steven Kennedy

hen you order a strawberry sundae you are not impressed when your sundae arrives with strawberries, but you would be surprised should it arrive without them. This is how mooting on a pupillage application was described to me by a very colourful barrister in my first year at university. Mooting is an expectation on a pupillage application; it shows an ability to construct arguments, to analyse information and to present evidence orally in front of a judge:

Henry Bennett reports that the moot, which began as a competition between a small number of university law schools in 1992, today attracts nearly three-hundred teams from law schools and universities from around the world. the essence of being a barrister. With this in mind, my intention has been to bring mooting to as many people as possible during the BPTC course, and to ensure that those who missed out in the past were given every opportunity to take part. There were no set criteria for applications, no selection process based on experience or success. Students were selected based on their willingness to take part and to commit their time. This would not have been possible without the dedicated members of the Middle Temple Students' Association (MTSA) committee. Our President, Karlia Lykourgou, devoted an

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

incredible amount of time and effort to assist in mooting, and I suspect my role would have been far more difficult without her support. The entire MTSA committee gave their help throughout the year to ensure that last year's mooting did not fall below the high standards set in previous years, and my personal thanks go out to each and every one of them. The largest competition of the year was the Willem C Vis International Commercial Moot Competition, which initially involved ten Middle Temple Students. A considerable contribution from Lord Hacking and Master Stewart Boyd helped to prepare a group of five for the final oral stage of the moot held in Vienna. Henry Bennett reports that the moot, which began as a competition between a small number of university law schools in 1992, today attracts nearly three-hundred teams from law schools and universities from around the world. The competition comprises two phases: the research and writing of the memoranda for the Claimant and Respondent and oral arguments based on the memoranda. The 50page problem is designed to raise questions in relation to both the substantive and procedural law whilst further testing the teamsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; understanding of the arbitral process. Over four days the Middle Temple team competed against four different teams from around the globe, arguing twice for the Claimant and twice for the Respondent, with the scores awarded by the panel of arbitrators being collated across the competition. On a Tuesday evening a tense event was held in Austria Centre Vienna, where the teams were informed whether they had qualified for the

final rounds to be held later that evening or early the next day. Sadly, the Middle Temple team did not qualify, missing out by the barest of margins, much to the disappointment of coach and student alike. The MTSA also competed in a number of other significant moots throughout the year. The MTSA team at the Southampton National Moot Competition reached the semi-finals and the UKLSA moot competition team missed out on the semi-final by a single round in a strongly contested moot. A number of international, national and local moots were opened to Middle Temple students with the assistance of Studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Officer Richard Chapman who worked diligently to bring mooting and debating news to Middle Temple students with a bi-weekly newsletter. These moots present an excellent opportunity to develop the skills necessary for a career at the Bar, but many students on the BPTC are engaged in full-time employment while undertaking the full-time educational course, or are raising a family while studying. These students often found that the mooting competitions on offer were not accessible. They did not have the time to spend to research a legal problem, done on the Law degree, GDL and BPTC courses ad nauseam, for the ten minutes of advocacy offered by most moot competitions. For these students I wanted to design a new style of moot, something which was accessible and which they could put on their pupillage applications. To assist those students I created a moot for which students did not need to spend hours researching a legal problem yet would still gain a significant amount of advocacy

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

STUDENTS

experience. The students were presented with a moot problem and the cases that they must rely upon. Legal research was limited to the cases provided and all else was excluded. This allowed students to complete limited research and to spend their time practising their advocacy. The moot took place late in November before a panel of five experienced barristers in a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;House of Lordsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; style competition. Each of the barristers gave up their evening to give the students a once-in-a-lifetime mooting opportunity. The participants' submissions were not timed, each student had prepared roughly ten minutes of submissions; however, the bench made judicial interventions throughout, which resulted in each mooter speaking for roughly twenty to twenty-five minutes. The mooters had an opportunity to hone their responses to judicial interventions in a setting that only a very few finalists of the largest moot competitions ever get to enjoy. I would like to thank the Middle Temple for their help and for providing rooms for mooting competitions, often at very short notice. Without their assistance it would not have been possible to find the judges or venues required for competitions and training the MTSA organised this year.

The Middle Temple Mooting team for the Willem C Vis competition Back row: Lord Hacking, Husayn Symonds, Caislin Boyle, Henry Bennett Front row: Rosie Scott, Sam Haubold, Gabriella Savastano Moot finalists 2012: Rosalind Earis (winner), Anthony Clarke, Will Clerk (winner), Oliver Caplin, Steven Kennedy and Hannah Bill

Steven Kennedy was the 2012-13 MTSA Mooting Officer. He graduated from the University of East London with an LLB (Hons) and completed the BPTC at BPP Holborn. A recipient of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge Scholarship, he was Called in July 2013, and hopes to practise in Criminal Law.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

STUDENTS

Marshalling by Shazeeyah Akhtar

ith the help of the Assistant Students’ Officer, Sarah Hankinson, I had the opportunity to do marshalling with HHJ Mitchell, who sits in the Gee Street Court House and hears Family & Child Law cases, public and private. Judge Mitchell kindly emailed me a few days in advance to let me know what type of case he was hearing and how my week with him would pan out. I have sat observing in courts before, tucked away at the back, but now I was going to be sitting alongside the judge, experiencing all the courtroom

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

interactions as the judge sees them. Upon arrival at the courthouse, I was security cleared and then directed to a courtroom. Judge Mitchell welcomed me and took me to his room. I was introduced to his clerk, who in effect is the practical interface between the judge and the parties. When the client arrived in court, the clerk notified the judge that the parties were present and provided any last papers that were being submitted. The accessibility to the judge is limited by a distinct distance, which is necessary not only for security but also for justice, so I followed behind

Judge Mitchell as he walked through a judge's corridor to the courtroom. When the clerk said ‘All rise’, Judge Mitchell entered the courtroom and we all bowed our heads. We took our seats once he sat down. The judge has a key part to play in setting the tone of the proceedings. If counsel is being aggressive, he can calm the situation, or change the pace if he has heard things before. Witnesses have a protector in the form of the judge as all sides have their own agenda, whereas the judge is assessing the events in the interest of justice. Counsel always kept an eye on the judge - if he was writing, reading or pre-occupied in anyway, counsel paused until the judge was ready or indicated otherwise. The judge has the power not only to make decisions but also to issue them with a penal notice to ensure that actions comply with court requirements. For legal-aid funded cases, at the end of the hearing, counsel request a form to be signed by the judge. Besides this extra step, there is no difference in terms of case management. Family proceedings are often emotional and complex. Some cases have a relevant history spanning over ten years, which basically translates to more than eight full binders of papers (indexed and paginated). During the hearing these folders need to be efficiently navigated by counsel, the witness in the stand and the judge. On occasion papers are adduced late to the bundle on the day; maybe all parties will agree or perhaps the judge will disagree on the basis of ECHR Article 8. Subject to the case, the judge may choose to acknowledge the hard work of an expert and thank them, although I witnessed some cases where such

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

MARSHALLING

gratitude was not necessarily due. Cases are listed with approximate time allocations as agreed with the judge. These have become even more critical after the Public Law Outline (PLO) pilot implementation started this July. This is aimed at minimising expert witnesses and setting a maximum 26-week timeline for resolution in Family Law cases. To enforce these, the judge sometimes gave counsel gentle prompts and to others, strict instructions. To enable continuity and efficiency, certain cases can be reserved for a judge who has already heard the case before. After a time in the witness box, before releasing the parent witness,

the judge very kindly asked the parent if they wished to say anything outside of what had been discussed. On another occasion, in a joint parenting case, the judge acknowledged the difficulties of arriving at an acceptable solution and thanked the parents for their efforts. Judge Mitchell was very considerate throughout my time with him. He gave me papers to read of scheduled cases, and background references to help me understand the legal arguments being presented. Even in court he passed bundle folders to me so I could see what was being referred to. He made a genuine effort to ensure I had a good quality

educational experience. I am most grateful to him for this opportunity, as I have learnt an enormous amount about the work of a barrister and the role of a judge.

Shazeeyah Akhtar is a mature student who has just started the BPTC course at BPP this September. In 1993, she graduated from Imperial College with a degree in Computing Science (BEng) and pursued a successful IT career which ranged from being a programmer to managing international support teams. She has also taught Science and Maths to children for over 10 years.

Marshalling Judges on Circuit needed! Students love marshalling. It provides them with an opportunity to observe the rules of procedure and evidence in action, to observe live advocacy, to learn about the “do’s and don’ts”, what the judge finds helpful and persuasive, and how the judge reaches his or her decisions. In short, it helps students to see in practice what the Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC) teaches them (mostly) in theory. We are very fortunate: a good number of Middle Temple Judges are happy to take marshals on a regular basis. However, as an increasing number of students are undertaking the Bar Course on Circuit, we need more marshalling judges in or near where the courses are held, namely Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Leeds, Manchester, Nottingham, and Newcastle. If you sit within easy reach of any of these places, either as a Judge or as a Recorder, and would be willing to take a marshal once in a while, we would be delighted to hear from you. Sarah Hankinson, Asst Students’ Officer, looks after the scheme and would be able to tell you more. Contact her at s.hankinson@middletemple.org.uk.

Middle Temple Circuit Judges’ Dinner Saturday, 1 March 2014 The Inn’s bi-annual dinner for Circuit Judges and their partners will take place in Hall at 7.15 for 8.00 pm. Tickets cost £65 per person including champagne reception and wine, and dress is Black Tie. To book and for further information, contact Bench Administration, on 020 7427 4804 or by email at benchers@middletemple.org.uk.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

STUDENTS

Acid Violence: A Scorching Reality by Shabina Begum

“

Acid violence is the deliberate use of acid to attack another human being. The victims of acid violence are overwhelmingly women and children, and attackers often target the head and face in order to maim, disfigure and blind. The act rarely kills but causes severe physical, psychological and social scarring, and victims are often left with no legal recourse, limited access to medical or psychological assistance, and without the means to support themselves. Acid violence is a worldwide phenomenon that is not restricted to a particular race, religion or geographical location.”1 In the UK the horrific impact of acid violence was highlighted by the case of Katie Piper, a former model and TV presenter and the founder of the Katie Piper Foundation, whose identity was permanently changed after the malicious attack. ‘On March 31, 2008, the old Katie Piper disappeared forever. The acid, hurled into her face on a busy London street, disfigured her beyond recognition. Some slipped down her throat with further terrible consequences.’2 Unfortunately, this was not a one-off story and the ‘scorching reality’ is that there has been an increase in acid attacks in the UK. In 2009 it was reported in the Daily Mail that acid was used as a weapon for honour-based violence in East London3. In March 2012 the Guardian reported a racially motivated acid attack in Salford.4 This year there were two cases reported in London: 20-year-old Naomi Omi was attacked near her home in Dagenham5 and a 28-year old woman was attacked in Romford and chose to remain anonymous out of fear of reprisals6. Sadly, there are many other unreported cases and silent survivors in the UK. According to the NHS Information Centre, 44 people were admitted to hospital between 200607, after being ‘assaulted with a corrosive substance’; this

Shabina Begum graduated from the University of Greenwich in 2008. She was called to the Bar in 2009 and was also awarded the Lowry Scholarship. Since being called she has worked as a Paralegal and subsequently as an Independent Domestic Violence Advocate; she has eight years of collective experience within the domestic violence field. In 2012 she was awarded a Winston Churchill Travel Fellowship, which allowed her to travel to Sri Lanka, Cambodia and India to conduct research on acid violence.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

figure increased to 67 within a year and the numbers have continued to rise almost threefold within five years.7 In the UK there are no specific organisations that support survivors of acid attacks: any such cases are usually handled by the police or hospitals. If the crime is committed in the context of a domestic relationship the survivor is referred on to a domestic violence organisation. There have been some cases within the domestic violence remit, which have not resulted in acid attacks, but threats have been made to use acid against the vulnerable party of the relationship. These cases demonstrate that there is an increasing risk within the domestic violence sector of acid being used as a weapon, as the perpetrators, usually husbands or partners, threaten to throw acid on their female partners in order to assert control.8 The mere threat to use acid as a weapon is a grave concern, as not only is it suggestive of the destructive frame of mind of the perpetrator but it also raises the spectre of such an evil weapon actually being used. The nature of domestic violence is that the abuse takes place behind closed doors, and the effect of acid is that it can not only disfigure but also kill. So this raises the question: how do we prevent such a deadly weapon entering these deceptively quiet but violent homes? In countries where acid attacks have been branded a prominent issue legislative change appears to be the way forward. Bangladesh was the pioneering country to pass acid violence-specific legislation in 2002: The Acid Control Act and The Acid Crime Control Act. Cambodia and India are also united in the same stance of devising legislation, albeit at different stages. The Cambodian acid-specific legislation, the Law on Regulating Concentrated Acid, was passed in December 2011. In India the Government is considering a legislative amendment to the Indian Penal Code. The legislations serve two purposes: first to regulate the sale of acid; and second, to make ‘acid attacks’ a specific crime, with sentences which correlate to the severity of the crime. A good tool to measure the need for acid-violence specific legislation is the sentencing powers for the crime. Notably, the current maximum sentence in the UK for an acid attack (which does not lead to death) is 30 years. In Cambodia the new legislation which was passed increased the maximum sentence to 20 years. For this reason legislation for harsher sentencing in the UK is not

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

STUDENTS

necessary. The need for legislation to regulate the sale of acid in the UK is not an issue, as the UK does not commonly operate industries which utilise acid for occupational purposes; therefore, acid is not so easily available. In Sri Lanka, there is no legislative response to acid violence, but the need appears to be of a preventative one, which can be achieved by raising awareness and nationally acknowledging the issue. The UK stands closest to the situation in Sri Lanka, where acid violence is not nationally

Sonali Mukherji (28 years of age) with Shabina Begum in India November 2012. Sonali’s message: ‘I am alone, I made a sound alone, if there are more of us then we can collectively make some noise and make a difference – we should not silently sit at home, we have nothing to lose.’

recognised, but the problem seems to be increasing. If acid violence is viewed as an extension of domestic violence, this would open up avenues to combating this heinous crime. It is a well-known fact that separation is the most dangerous stage of an abusive relationship9 and therefore the risk of an extreme measure such as an acid attack will be the highest at this point. Although a survivor of domestic violence may obtain an injunction against a perpetrator, no court order alone would stand between the instantaneous decision of an enraged perpetrator to attack an innocent survivor, whose identity could be changed forever by a disfiguring substance. In order to eradicate acid violence the full extent of the crime needs to be recognised and requires a co-ordinated response from multiple organisations, such as medical professionals, legal professionals, domestic violence organisations and the police: only then can a fitting solution be successfully devised. The voices of many brave survivors, nationally and internationally, all echo one vision: they want to speak up against the crime, condemn it and act towards eradicating it. The UK is at a stage where it can prevent the crime from growing; therefore, it should not allow this scorching violence to become its new societal identity, but should act to eradicate the problem now. In order to read the full research report Acid Violence: Uniting for the Solution - Sri Lanka, India and Cambodia, please visit the following link: http://www.wcmt.org.uk/reports/1098_1.pdf

1 http://www.acidviolence.org/ (27 February 2013) 2 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1221077/Katie-Piper-Acid-attack-victim-bravelyshows-face-disfigured-boyfriend-Daniel-Lynch.html#ixzz2GXvGVufq (19 October 2009) 3 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1201625/Cheating-wife-face-honour-killing-acidpoured-lovers-throat.html (24 July 2009) 4 http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/mar/26/salford-acid-attack-racially-motivated (26 March 2012) 5 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21310263 (3 February 2013) 6 http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/05/12/acid-attack-romford_n_3263164.html (12 May 2013) 7 http://www.hesonline.nhs.uk/Ease/servlet/ContentServer?siteID=1937&categoryID=211 (7 August 2012) 8 This information was gathered from confidential case studies taken from Aanchal Women’s Aid, Solace Women’s Aid and Saheli Asian Women’s Project 9 http://www.womensaid.org.uk/domestic-violencearticles.asp?section=00010001002200410001&itemid=1277&itemTitle=Why+doesn%27t +she+leave

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

STUDENTS

Human Rights Lawyers’ Association Judicial Review Competition by Richard Reynolds

he decision of the Secretary of State for Justice to limit the time a person can apply for judicial review to 30 days is unlawful. Such was the decision of the Divisional Court, composed of Mr Justice Guy Newey and Judge Nicholas Cooke QC, sitting at Middle Temple Hall on Thursday 7th March. The United Kingdom's first student judicial review competition was won by Jelia Sane and Matthew Fraser, a team of two BPTC students from City Law School. The competition, run by the Human Rights Lawyers’ Association (HRLA), is ‘designed to increase awareness and understanding of the process of judicial review and its crucial role in the British constitution’, said Michael Polak of the HRLA’s Student Committee, which organised the competition. The winning argument was that the

new time limit of 30 days was irrational, in that it did not allow time for the claimants to follow reasonably the pre-action protocol, or to consider seriously alternative dispute resolution and was therefore selfdefeating given its stated intention of reducing costs and delay. Such a situation could lead to ‘Judicial review becoming the first place to look for a remedy rather than (as it should be) the last’ according to the City team. It was this point and its implications for access to justice and the requirements of Article 6 of the ECHR that led to the judgment of the court as detailed by Master Cooke. In awarding the prize of JUSTICE membership and annual conference tickets, Judge Cooke QC and Mr Justice Newey took note of the impressive standard of both sides’ submissions. They were particularly

impressed that the runners up, Yong Chong and Seraphina Chew, both undergraduates at the LSE, had reached the final after competing against over 40 other teams, many of them BPTC and LPC students. Both teams had already progressed through a written application stage and at oral permission hearings hosted by Hardwicke Chambers. The final of the competition was followed by a Private Guest Night at Middle Temple Hall, where both teams were invited to dine with members and Benchers of the Inn and their guests at a black tie dinner. This year the Human Rights Lawyers’ Association will provide around ten awards from a maximum annual bursary fund of £10,000. Further information in regards to applying for a bursary or joining the HRLA can be found at www.hrla.org.uk

The decision of the Secretary of State for Justice to limit the time a person can apply for judicial review to 30 days is unlawful. Such was the decision of the Divisional Court, composed of Mr Justice Guy Newey and Judge Nicholas Cooke QC, sitting at Middle Temple Hall on Thursday 7th March.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

HALL MEMBERS

MT Young Barristers by Ali Dewji

t has been another busy and successful year for the Middle Temple Young Barristers' Association (MTYBA). The association was formed three years ago in order to foster greater participation in the life of the Inn among junior members. Membership is currently open to all those who have been Called and are within their first five years of practice. Holding social events that appeal to the young Bar is a key part of MTYBA's function and is something our Tenants' Officer Lewis Preston enjoys doing. The MTYBA Christmas party is now an annual event and is fast becoming a highlight of the Inn's social calendar for junior members. 2012's party was the most well attended yet and, in the spirit of inter-Inn solidarity, the Inner Temple Young Bar were invited along as well. Earlier this year, MTYBA hosted a night out at Guanabara, a Brazilianthemed bar and nightclub in Covent Garden. As well having a chance to try out their dancing shoes, those in attendance enjoyed live musical performances, acrobatic displays, fireeating and even an exotic snake charmer. All told it was a spectacular change from a routine Friday night that I expect will be fondly remembered. In addition to MTYBAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s social role, we try to help our members deal with some of the particular challenges of this stage in their careers. For example, Pupils' Officer Karen Reid has taken over organisation of MTYBA's series of events targeted at pupils. One, in the autumn, focused on how to succeed in a first six and will have served to settle the nerves of those stepping into chambers for the first time. The second event in

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

the series was held in the spring. It was entitled 'What to expect when you get on your feet' and aimed to answer questions and boost confidence for those about to conduct their first hearings alone.

As well having a chance to try out their dancing shoes, those in attendance enjoyed live musical performances, acrobatic displays, fire-eating and even an exotic snake charmer Even with the best preparation in the world, it is inevitable that some pupils will need to seek out a third or fourth six before finding the right chambers for them. To that end, the third event in our series, which took place this summer, focused on how to get and succeed in third sixes. Each event featured a panel of people who had recently and successfully navigated the stage discussed and was driven by questions from the audience. Our feedback on the events has been good and we plan to start the series again in time for the next crop of young barristers. For those who have been Called but are yet to secure pupillage, MTYBA Pre-Pupillage Officer William Glover seeks to provide support and encouragement with the search. His first event, earlier this year, was about how to make successful pupillage applications. Attendees were able to ask questions and mingle and even had the opportunity to get individual feedback on their CVs or application forms. For those who hadnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t yet been able to secure pupillage, another event

showed them alternatives such as pro bono and paralegal work as well as career options outside the Bar. Will is also leading the push to create an intern scholarship programme to support those in the gap between the Bar course and pupillage. Encouraging excellence in advocacy is part of the core business of the Inn and MTYBA strongly supports this. The second annual MTYBA advocacy competition was held this year and featured three rounds of competition. In each round the format emphasised a different set of advocacy skills: firstly a plea, secondly a legal application, and finally a full mock trial. The competition was carefully and thoughtfully organised by our Advocacy Officer Ammina Khan. MTYBA benefits greatly from the experience and hard work of Treasurer Christopher Stringer, Communications Officer Mike Harwood, and Returning Officer Richard Main. They are integral to the overall organisation of the association and to its events. I thank them and the whole committee for all their hard work this year. If you have any questions about MTYBA or would like to get involved in any of its activities, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Ali Dewji studied International Relations and History at LSE before doing a law conversion course at City University and an LLM from University College London. He was called to the bar in 2010 and did 18 months' pupillage in the chambers of Andrew Trollope QC at 187 Fleet Street. He has been a tenant there since May 2012, practising exclusively in Criminal Law.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

HALL MEMBERS

Connecting with the Future by Gary Blaker

ast year in this publication I wrote about closing the gap between the Bench and Hall and I am glad to be able to write that those efforts have continued unabated in the past year. Hall Committee has been very involved in considering and implementing new ideas which we hope will lead to greater participation by members of the Inn. There are many examples of Hall Committee’s involvement and one which should bear great fruit is the development of a mentoring scheme which Hall Committee has been working on during the past year. A pilot scheme was launched in June and about 30 potential mentors and mentees attended the launch. It is hoped that this is going to be a successful pilot and that the scheme will be open to more people during 2014. I should like to thank the Secretary of Hall Committee, Louise

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

McCullough, for all the devoted hard work she has put into making this project a success. Hall Committee was also involved in developing ideas for the CPD weekend in November and giving that weekend a greater social content both for members of the Inn and also for their families, as it coincided with the weekend when the Children’s Concerts were held. We anticipate that this will particularly encourage members of the Inn who live outside London to attend. The Committee is at present working on setting up a Scholars’ Society. This is only in its early stages of development but is a very exciting idea. It would encourage those who have received a scholarship from the Inn to remain involved in the life of the Inn. I see this not only as a way to increase participation, but also as a means whereby academic

discussion can take place, thus providing a strong educational content. I mentioned last year that I had formed an Inter-Inn Committee for the chairmen and deputies of all four Inns’ non-Bench barrister committees. I am glad to say that we have continued to meet during the course of this year, discussing issues that are common to us all. We are also in the process of writing a constitution for the committee so that it will have a more permanent footing in the future and next year Middle Temple will be hosting a reception for members of all the four Inns’ non- Bench committees. This year’s Annual Dinner was attended by 200 members of the Inn, including Benchers, Hall members, students and guests. It was a fine example of a diverse range of membership of the Inn all dining together. We had the privilege of hearing Master Peter Hennessy speak about the Establishment, and his speech is reproduced in this issue with his kind permission. I should like to take this opportunity to thank my Deputy Chairman, Rebecca Richardson, for all her help and the entire Committee for their lively debate and enthusiasm. I was honoured to serve as the Chairman of Hall Committee for eighteen months. I am glad to say that the efforts to close the gap between Bench and Hall are bearing fruit. If you are interested in joining the Hall Committee and being central to the life of the Inn then please do stand for election in the autumn. It has been great fun being on the Committee for the past seven years and I thoroughly recommend it to all members of Hall.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

ANNUAL DINNER

16th MAY 2013

Annual Dinner Thoughts on the British Establishment by Master Peter Hennessy

“

Thoughts on the British Establishment.” This particular ‘ment’ is a problem. In comparison, most ‘ocracies’ are easy. We all have pretty adequate working definitions of them. Michael Young, that remarkable historical sociologist, who invented a new one when I was a boy in 1950s Britain, defined his ‘meritocracy’ partly by placing it up against its predecessors in his classic work The Rise of the Meritocracy published in 1958 as both a satire and a warning. Writing as if he were a historical sociologist of the 2030s, Michael declared, ‘Today we frankly recognize that democracy can be no more than aspiration, and have rule not so much by people as by the cleverest people; not an aristocracy of birth, not a plutocracy of wealth, but a true meritocracy of talent’. If Michael Young were with us in 2013 he might add the selfdefining ‘celebritocracy’ which is near ubiquitous and has spread like a fungus since The Rise of the Meritocracy was published. That word ‘Establishment’. A slippery term it may be. But it’s everywhere. Yet its mercurial quality makes cartography near impossible especially when it is used incontinently and imprecisely as in ‘Farage revels in shock to establishment’ when UKIP enjoyed its surge in the recent local elections. To lump the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat parties together as the ‘establishment’, instead of calling them the ‘mainstream political parties’, is absurd. Some even doubt if the establishment exists as more than a notion, a convenient piece of linguistic litter to deploy as a weapon of disdain, even denunciation, against individuals or clusters of people who you don’t care for, rather resent and wish to annoy. If it does exist in terms of institutions and real flesh-and-blood people, this lustrous Middle Temple and this Great Hall are a good place to think about it because some of it will be living and breathing amongst us tonight and perhaps experiencing a frisson of selfrecognition that dare not speak its name.

Lord Hennessy of Nympsfield, FBA is Attlee Professor of Contemporary British History at Queen Mary, University of London.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

Indeed, if the British Establishment does exist, part of me must be part of it. Why? I like clubs, especially the dining variety. I have a fondness for traditional institutions and, when Parliament is sitting, spend a good part of the week in the House of Lords which many might see as the Establishment’s debating chamber, canteen, broadcasting service and retirement home all folded into one. The Establishment notion does matter because, generation upon generation, so many intelligent and not always so intelligent people think it does exist – though the form it takes mutates and is always and everywhere immensely stretching to capture and define. As Jeremy Paxman, who wrote a good book about it in 1991 called Friends in High Places, puts it, ‘It is a harlot of a word, convenient, pliant, available for a thousand meaningless applications’. Yet we Brits have always had a certain idea of the Establishment as an inner track of people who fix things discreetly, unavowedly and unaccountably behind carefully painted camouflage giving it a whiff of genteel conspiracy, perhaps even with a dash of insider trading in the influence market. It is a concept that has stalked me for the bulk of my working life and, in return, I have stalked it especially when I wrote about Whitehall for The Times in the 1970s and 1980s. In the mid-1970s, for example, the incomparable David Butler introduced me to his fabled seminar on British government and politics at Nuffield College, Oxford as ‘The gossip columnist of the British Establishment’. I was faintly irritated by this at the time – but had to admit there was something in it. I acquired my first notion of the British Establishment by reading Anthony Sampson’s second Anatomy of Britain published in 1965 which I received as a sixth-form prize. In his first edition of 1962 Anthony set out to find it across a huge range of British institutions and professions. He reached an intriguing conclusion. Not only did he dismiss conspiracy theory but Anthony declared that, ‘My own fear is not that the “Establishment” in Britain is too close, but that it is not close enough, that the circles are overlapping less and less, and that one half of the ring has very little contact with the other half. In particular, the hereditary

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

ANNUAL DINNER

Establishment of interlocking families, which still has an infectious social and political influence on the Conservative Party, banking and many industries, has lost touch with the new worlds of science, industrial management and technology, and yet tries to apply old amateur deals into technical worlds where they won’t fit’. Anthony’s thinking was very much a pre-echo of the theme Harold Wilson made his own when he became Leader of the Labour Party in 1963. Anthony was drawing, too, on a revival of the Establishment notion in the 1950s fuelled by two powerful pens – those of the historian A.J.P. Taylor and the political commentator, Henry Fairlie. Taylor took up the theme in what was then still called The New Statesman and Nation in August 1953 in a review of a new life of William Cobbett, a great denouncer of the Establishment, which he called ‘The Thing’. Taylor’s opening paragraph remains, I think, a collector’s item: ‘Trotsky’, he began (it’s a while, I suspect, since that name was mentioned in this Hall), ‘Trotsky tells how, when he first visited England, Lenin took him round London and, pointing out the sights, exclaimed, “That’s their Westminster Abbey! That’s their Houses of Parliament!”… By them he meant not the English, but the governing classes, the Establishment. And indeed in no other European country is the Establishment so clearly defined and so complacently secure’. Wrote Alan Taylor. Henry Fairlie’s assault on the British Establishment in his Spectator column was triggered by the Foreign Office finally admitting in September 1955 that the diplomats, Guy Burgess and Donald Maclean, who had disappeared in May 1951 were, in fact, Soviet spies and were now living in Moscow. Fairlie convinced himself that the long, if nowbroken, official silence was an example of ‘the “Establishment” at work’ and by ‘Establishment’ he meant not ‘only the centres of official power – though they are certainly part of it – but rather the whole matrix of official and social relations within which power is exercised’. Such matrices are very difficult to trace. In the mid-1980s I tried to pin at least part of the Establishment matrix down when I wrote a pamphlet for the Policy Studies Institute called ‘The Great and the Good: An Inquiry into the British Establishment’. My cunning plan was to trace the tribe that had peopled the Royal Commissions and Committees of Inquiry since the Second World War and to pen mini-biographies of a trio of outstanding princes of greatness and goodness – John Anderson, Cyril Radcliffe and Oliver Franks, grand inquirers all.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

This was a promising approach at the time but soon became less so as successive governments rather gave up on Royal Commissions and committees of inquiry reaching for task forces, czars, focus groups and relying on the newer think-tanks of varying quality that bloomed in the late Seventies and early Eighties. The Establishment concept has been made still more elusive over the past quarter-of-a-century by the rise of a new political economy (the post-Big Bang City, hedge funds and all that) plus an electronic media explosion driven by new technologies alongside the grander newspapers, not to mention the ‘New Britain’ ‘young country again’ banalities of ‘New Labour’ which held the field and tempted the credulous (as did something I could never grasp called the ‘Third Way’) for a few years after 1997. These novel and sometimes proudly and avowedly nonEstablishment developments intrigued me afresh last month. The first occasion was when Jonathan Hill, the Leader of the House of Lords, opened the tributes to Lady Thatcher by recalling 1975 when, as Jonathan put it, ‘this nonestablishment figure had become leader of the establishment party’. Later in the month, while on a visit to my submariner friends at the Faslane base in Scotland, a young officer, a touch nervously and apologetically, asked if I was a member of the Establishment. I replied: ‘If it exists, I must be’. A couple of weeks later I was walking with a man I hugely admire, a scientist and a member of the House of Lords who has run great institutions and yet has that modesty and quietness that can go with great scientists – we were walking between his Club, the Athenaeum, and Brooks’s where we were to join an ancient dining club to which we both belong that was once described as ‘the Establishment at play’. I told him about my submariner friend’s question. ‘I don’t believe there is such a thing as “The Establishment”’, he said. ‘If Anthony Sampson went looking for it now he would find it completely different – in the hedge funds; in the media; the sort of people who would think that academia and the clubs are the ancien regime’. My greatly admired friend set me thinking. I told him that ‘if the Establishment does exist, you and I are part of it’. In fact, I reckon there is a permanent element at the core of the British Establishment – a kind of gyroscope – which embraces the grand old professions like the Law and the Civil Service (though the latter is a tad tattered at the moment), the House of Lords (especially sections of the crossbenches where sit the former Cabinet Secretaries, Law Lords, Chiefs of the Defence Staff and Queen’s Private Secretaries), the Royal Society, the British Academy, the learned societies generally, the scientific and engineering

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

ANNUAL DINNER

institutions and the great medical colleges. The reach and clout of these institutions and tribes may fluctuate but they never truly fade, let alone disappear. While around this rooted, inner core there swirl the transient elements in the media, the financial world and the celebritocracy in constellations that vary generation upon generation. If I were planning a book on the British Establishment (which I’m not) that permanent/temporary divide would govern my approach. That great lawyer, Cyril Radcliffe, was profoundly irritated by the Establishment notion. Writing in 1961, when the satire boom – Beyond the Fringe and all that – was getting going, he said, ‘Let a fairy grant me my three wishes, I would gladly use them all in one prayer only, that never again should anyone using pen or typewriter be permitted to employ that inane cliché “Establishment”’. I fear Lord Radcliffe, up there in the Supreme Court-inthe-sky, is doomed to disappointment. We Brits will never give up on the Establishment as a notion. It’s deep within us. As a theme it’s had more comebacks than the Rolling Stones. For all the angry words, the denunciations, the parodies and the conspiracy theories we nurture it – almost cherish it. Why? Because quite apart from the fun of trying to determine who is or isn’t in it in each generation, it brings fascination to the curious, a target for venting and, therefore, catharsis to the resentful and stimulus to the conspiracy theorist. The British Establishment, like that great cathedral of a British Constitution which it serves as a kind of flying buttress, is Cobbett’s ‘Thing’. But it’s also a thing of magic, mystery and fantasy. Long may it remain so with its talent to amuse and to annoy and to evade description and capture even within the walls of this noble Hall.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

REVELS

Directorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Note by Rebecca Richardson

hen I first auditioned for Revels as a Bar student in 2002, little did I know that I would find myself, eleven years and twelve shows later, stepping down as Director of the show. I certainly could never have anticipated this would also be following such a special and successful production as Revels Gold on 7 June 2013, a one-off charity show of some of the best material from the past ten years, reuniting former Revellers and old favourites. I took over from our former director Deshpal Panesar in 2006, having been Producer for the two previous years, and have since directed eight shows, including Revels Gold. I loved my first few years in the show, and felt great affection for the production, so there was really no doubt in my mind about accepting the offers to become Producer and then Director. Year on year, as we have tried to top the previous yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s performance, the time and work involved certainly seemed to grow exponentially, but so, too, did the wonderful memories and the deep friendships with Revellers both past and present. Revels is a fantastic way to become involved with the Inn and, as my own experience shows, members often return year after year once they have become involved, regardless of whether they have gone into practice at the Bar, employed practice, or moved into other fields. There is real camaraderie and friendship amongst the cast, and whilst a huge amount of hard work goes into the show, it has invariably been worth it every year. The fun and friendship of Revels are definitely something which I will miss a great deal, although I must be honest and say that I will not miss 7am Sunday morning starts in December quite so much! There are so many who have helped and supported Revels, and me personally, over the years; to try and name them all would be an almost impossible task. Master Peter Cowell, Master of the Revels, has been a huge support over the years, and I will miss working with him. My thanks go to all the staff of the Inn, particularly Colin Davidson; to the cast and crew, and our loyal audiences.

Outgoing Revellers, technical director Aqeel Kadri and producer Paul Haut

So many talented people have taken part in Revels, but particular mention and thanks must go to my various assistant directors over the years: David Sandeman, Morgan Sirikanda and, most recently, Jamie Johnston. Alex PriceMarmion, Catherine Ellis, Louisa Nye and, currently, Emma Waldron, have all been fantastic musical directors and friends. Our producer since 2009, Paul Haut, also retired down from Revels following Revels Gold, as did our technical director Aqeel Kadri, who retired in 2012 but was persuaded to come back for Revels Gold! Both have been a huge support and great friends, and I know they will be missed by all. I retire as Director of Revels with mixed emotions but happy memories. The past eight years have had highs which far outweigh the lows, and will always hold a special place in my heart. I look forward to being a part of the audience this Christmas, and I am sure you will all join me in wishing the best of luck to Jamie Johnston, who takes over as director; Lucie Broad, who takes over as Producer, and the cast in their future endeavours. I am sure they will do us all proud.

Photographs courtesy of Alex Brenner

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

C I RC U I T N E W S

4th OCTOBER 2012

Liverpool Legal Walk by Rachael Robinson

ponsored by Scott Rees and Co, the First Liverpool Legal Walk took place on Thursday, 4 October 2012, and was a great success. More than 100 walkers, grouped together in 19 teams, participated and raised over ÂŁ2,500. The lead walkers are pictured right and were joined by walkers from 7 Harrington Street, Canter Levin and Berg, Cheshire West CAB, Exchange Chambers, Jackson Canter, Merseyside Civil and Family Judges, MSB Solicitors, Scott Rees and Co, Weightmans LLP, Bar Pro Bono Unit, EAD Solicitors, Liverpool Law Society, KUC, St Johns Buildings, Tracey Miller Family Law, Young Legal Aid Lawyers, SJL Quality, The Law Academy and the College of Law Chester. The evening was concluded with a short speech from the Recorder of Liverpool, who highlighted how important it was to give our support to the North West Legal Support Trust to help those who need it most. He encouraged us all to triple our interest next year and thus increase the amount raised to make the second walk an even greater success something I hope I am able to achieve with the help of the Liverpool Legal Community.

Our Lead Walkers (left to right): His Honour Judge David Aubrey QC; Richard Pratt QC, Leader of the Northern Circuit; Alistair Fletcher, Vice- President of the Liverpool Law Society; Steve Cornforth, President of the Liverpool Law Society; The Recorder of Liverpool, His Honour Judge Clement Goldstone QC; Rachael Robinson, Middle Temple Student; Chris Walker, Partner at Scott Rees & Co Solicitors and NWLST Trustee

If you would like to get involved next year, please contact enquiries@nwlst.org.uk for more details.

Rachael Robinson studied Law at Lancaster University, graduated in 2008 and was awarded the Diplock Scholarship in 2010. She has just completed the part-time BPTC at Manchester Metropolitan University, whilst working full-time as an Executive Assistant. She was Called to the Bar in July 2013 and hopes to practise public law.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

C I RC U I T N E W S

20th OCTOBER 2012

MT Northern Circuit Dinner by Elisabeth Cooper

n 20 October 2012 more than 125 members of Middle Temple and their guests gathered in black tie at the Imperial War Museum North in Manchester. Members attended mainly from the Northern and North Eastern Circuits, welcoming the opportunity to dine, make new friends and celebrate old friendships in the accustomed tradition of the Inn. Attending the event were eighteen Benchers of the Inn including the Master Anthony Clarke in his then role as Master Treasurer. The event was also well attended by student members studying outside of London. Guests included the Junior of the Northern Circuit. The setting of the Imperial War Museum North was an unusual choice given its modern architecture, which contrasts with the age and tradition of

Middle Temple Hall, but its ninemetre high walls allowed for the projection of a number of photographs upon the walls, contributing to an atmospheric setting commented upon by all. Some of the photographs were from the archives of the Inn recording the war era and of course the bombing of Middle Temple Hall. Other photographs were of Middle Temple as it now stands; thus the eveningâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s speeches were given against the backdrop of the High Table of Middle Temple Hall giving the illusion that speakers and attendees were in the Hall itself. The photographic projections enabled a visual link between the Manchester venue and Domus. Given the war era theme of the evening, several members unable to attend wrote with apologies reflecting upon their own memories of this time.

One member reminisced about his Call night in which the workers rebuilding Middle Temple Hall following the devastating bombing in World War II, downed tools temporarily to allow for the ceremony. Master Treasurer and Master Clem Goldstone, Recorder of Liverpool, were speakers at the event, both welcoming new faces and celebrating the organisation of the event by Master Sarah Singleton and Jane Cross QC, both of the Northern Circuit. Attendees spoke about their continuing pride in their membership of Middle Temple and their wish to continue to build the links between London and the North by ensuring that events such as this take place on a regular basis.

Left: A view of the east end of Middle Temple Hall before the war

Right: a painting by Frank Beresford of the bomb damage it suffered later

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

C I RC U I T N E W S

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

C I RC U I T N E W S

15th MARCH 2013

Wales and Chester Circuit Dinner By Natalie Sandercock

ames Tillyard QC and I were delighted to host a dinner for Middle Templars on the Wales and Chester Circuit on 15th March of this year in Cardiff, at which Master Treasurer Christopher Symons QC was our guest. In organising the event, which we hope will become an annual celebration, our aim is to strengthen links between members of the Middle Temple practising on the Wales and Chester Circuit, student members and Middle Temple members of the judiciary in Wales –as well as to foster greater engagement on the part of those out on Circuit with our Inn. We were extremely grateful to Master Treasurer for travelling to Cardiff to be our guest at the dinner, which was well attended by both members of Circuit and student members alike. We were also pleased that His Honour Judge Andrew Keyser QC, Resident

After graduating from the University of Oxford (Christ Church), Natalie Sandercock was Called to the Bar in 2000. She practises family and civil law at 30 Park Place Chambers.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

Judge of the Commercial Court at Cardiff, was able to join us.

As the dinner took place the night before a certain ‘decisive’ Six Nations Rugby match held in the Millennium Stadium the following day, the menu was suitably patriotic, with leek and potato soup topped with Welsh rarebit and Welsh lamb On Circuit this year, members of the Middle Temple, both from the Bar and the Judiciary, have been assisting with advocacy training and career guidance for the many Middle Temple student members who undertook the Bar Professional Training Course / Bar Vocational Course in Cardiff for the academic year 2012-13. Our experiences in answering the students’ questions about different aspects of legal practice, and in helping them develop their skills as they prepare for a career at the Bar, has been fascinating and rewarding. The students’ enthusiasm and willingness to absorb information has been striking. Of particular note in Cardiff are the large number of students from Malaysia, most of whom will return there once they have been called to the Bar –- which is testament to the appeal and international reputation of the BPTC / BVC at Cardiff. As the dinner took place the night before a certain ‘decisive’ Six Nations Rugby match held in the Millennium

Stadium the following day, the menu was suitably patriotic, with leek and potato soup topped with Welsh rarebit, and Welsh lamb being amongst the delicacies sampled by those attending! Master Treasurer addressed the gathering and engaged in lively discussions with members of Circuit about the challenges presently facing the Bar, and the criminal Bar in particular. The dinner raised the profile of the Inn on Circuit, and we hope, by making it an annual event, that this will encourage more members on Circuit to visit the Middle Temple when in London, as well as engaging in supporting Middle Temple student members here in Wales.

A graduate of Leeds University, James Tillyard was Called to the Bar in 1978 and was a Pupil Supervisor for the Inn before taking Silk in 2002. He practises family law from 30 Park Place Chambers.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

I N T E R NAT I O NA L S O C I E T I E S

The MT Society in Hong Kong by Master Kamal Bokhary

asters John Griffiths and Barry Mortimer have put the Middle Temple Society in Hong Kong on so sound a footing that it continues to thrive even though they have ceased to be residents in Hong Kong. True it is that we should all hold ourselves debtors to our profession. In the case of Masters Griffiths and Mortimer, any account stated between them and their profession would leave the law heavily indebted to them. As it is now constituted, the Middle Temple Society in Hong Kong was founded in 1998 - so it was one year after the handover on 1 July 1997. And Master Griffiths's leading role in the founding of the Society may be seen as a continuation of the part which he, as the Attorney General of Hong Kong at the time, played in securing a smooth transition from British to Chinese sovereignty — a transition in which the preservation of the rule of law as we understand and treasure it occupied its rightful place. Membership of the Society is not confined to Middle Templars. This inspired inclusiveness has worked to ensure that the Society achieves in full measure that part of its objectives which is directed to fostering a collegiate spirit between the whole of

A Permanent Judge of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal from 1997 to 2012, Justice Bokhary is now a NonPermanent Judge of that Court. Called by the Middle Temple in 1970, he became a Bencher in 2001. Appointed a Queen's Counsel in 1983, he was in the High Court from 1989 to 1993 and then in the Court of Appeal until going to the Final Court. He became Chairman of the MT Hong Kong Society in 2012.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

the Bench and Bar in Hong Kong and to strengthening the link between them and the Middle Temple. As one would expect, all of this has contributed much to the effective administration of justice in our courts. At these gatherings, members of the Bar gain considerable insight into life on the Bench and, perhaps even more importantly, those on the Bench are reminded of what it is like at the Bar. Still on these occasions, no one who knows Master Griffiths would be surprised to hear me say that his presence (even when the Treasurer of the Inn was present) was always the highlight of the evening — especially when he (Master Griffiths, not Master Treasurer) wore a kilt. Long indeed is the list of reasons why we all miss Master Griffiths so much and long so much for a visit from him. As for the other hero of this story, Master Mortimer, he visits Hong Kong regularly to sit with us on the Court of Final Appeal. We all — none more than I — always look forward to his visits (kiltless though they are). There are other ways in which the Society serves the administration of justice in Hong Kong. One of them is the awarding of scholarships. Initially these were paid for by a few senior members. They are now paid out of a fund generated by a highly successful fundraising event held in 2002. By these scholarships the Society sends six barristers per year from Hong Kong to London, there to receive the training in advocacy provided by the Middle Temple. The only thing I do not like about this scholarship scheme is the unpleasant task of having to turn down so many highly qualified applicants for no reason other than

Master Mortimer and Master Griffiths. This photo was taken in Hong Kong — at the Hong Kong Club to be precise.

that there are six other even more deserving applicants. As is only to be expected, the successful six derive very considerable benefit from the training that they receive. And the Society’s experience is that they always put what they learn to excellent use. This is something which I am particularly happy to report. The scholarship scheme by which members of the Bar are sent from Hong Kong to London is complemented by a scheme which flows in the other direction, under which scholarships are awarded to young Middle Templars for them to come from London to Hong Kong, here to serve two weeks' minipupillage and spend two weeks placed in an international law firm. These scholarships are annual, and have been awarded over the past two years. I have twisted Master Scott's arm into permitting me to declare here that this extremely worthwhile scheme is funded by him. I knew of course that I had an impossibly hard act to follow when I became the Society's Chairman. But I knew, too, that I had excellent colleagues to work with and to be helped by every step of the way.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

I N T E R NAT I O NA L G R A N T R E P O RT

UK Supreme Court judicial assistants’ visit to Washington DC by Michael Bolding

eorge Bernard Shaw once famously described Britain and America as ‘two nations divided by a common language’. Having studied for a master’s degree in America two years ago, I am well aware that the differences between the two nations extend far beyond the way in which the words ‘aluminium’ and ‘tomato’ are pronounced. As a former judicial assistant at the UK Supreme Court this year, I was given the opportunity to assess the extent to which appellate litigation in the US differs from that taking place in England. Each year the judicial assistants at the UK Supreme Court are offered the chance to spend a week in Washington DC learning about the US legal system and, in particular, federal appellate litigation. Most of the events are organised by the American Inns of Court. COMBAR, together with the Bar Council, kindly provided funding for my trip as part of the International Legal and Professional Development Grants Programme. Whilst in Washington DC, we attended the oral arguments in three cases in the US Supreme Court. One of those cases concerned the constitutionality of Proposition 8, an amendment to the California state constitution providing that marriage for the purposes of state law must be between a man and a woman. The case attracted publicity on a level Michael Bolding was Called to the Bar in 2010. He is a pupil at Brick Court Chambers and is currently working as a judicial assistant to Lords Anthony Clarke and Robert Carnwath.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

unimaginable in England. A significant number of people camped outside the Supreme Court for five days in order to be able to attend the hearing. On the day the case was heard, a crowd of well in excess of a thousand people gathered outside. The questions asked by the Justices during the hearing were reported on the front page of almost every national newspaper. Extracts from the audio recording of the hearing (unlike the UK Supreme Court, no cameras are permitted inside the US Supreme Court) were played on many television and radio shows. It was against the background of that publicity that we spent several hours chatting with Justice Scalia and Justice Breyer, two of the most charismatic members of the court. Whilst they fiercely disagree with each other on almost every question of law that comes before them, Justices Scalia and Breyer were, somewhat surprisingly, equally confident that the UK would adopt a politicised method of appointing judges in the near future. Whilst the enactment of the Human Rights Act 1998 may have led the courts in the UK to determine far more politically sensitive issues, it is hard to imagine the UK adopting a procedure similar to the Senate confirmation hearings that all Supreme Court nominees must endure. It is also hard to imagine the creation in England of a specialist Supreme Court Bar, whose members are instructed in cases before the highest court in the land because of their familiarity not with the specific subject matter of the case but with the members of that court. To English

eyes, the practice of members of the US Supreme Court Bar attending moot courts to rehearse their oral arguments prior to the hearing of their case seems equally alien. Although the two courts perform essentially the same function, viz. the final resolution of important questions of domestic law, there are countless differences between the US Supreme Court and its namesake in Parliament Square. Unlike the beautiful but somewhat understated building occupied by the UK Supreme Court, which is dwarfed by Westminster Abbey, the Palace of Westminster and the Treasury, the US Supreme Court occupies a magnificent marble edifice on Capitol Hill. We were told that the architect of that building, Cass Gilbert, intended it to elevate the judicial branch of the Federal Government above the executive and legislative branches, both physically and symbolically. Apart from the resources available to the US Supreme Court (there are 25 librarians and around 40 law clerks, compared to the 2 librarians and 8 judicial assistants at the UK Supreme Court), perhaps the most noticeable difference between the two courts is the length of each hearing. Even the most significant and complex cases in the US are unlikely to last for longer than 90 minutes. When the time allotted to a particular attorney has expired, a red light at the front of the court is illuminated and he continues to speak at his peril. The hearings take the form of an aggressive question-and-answer session, not wholly dissimilar to a Jeremy Paxman interview. We were

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

I N T E R NAT I O NA L G R A N T R E P O RT

told that oral argument is the first opportunity for the Justices to let their colleagues know their initial views on the merits of each case. It is hard to avoid the impression that the Justices, with the exception of Justice Thomas (who has not asked a question since 2006) also regard the hearings as an opportunity to entertain an audience, sometimes a very large one indeed. By contrast, hearings in the UK Supreme Court are far less dramatic and frequently last for three or four days. Despite the disparity in the length of hearings, the skeleton arguments filed in English appellate courts are often longer than the written briefs filed at the US Supreme Court. The late Professor Delmar

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

Karlen, writing from an unmistakably American perspective in 1979, stated that ‘[to] one observing an English civil appeal, the proceedings appear very slow and leisurely’. Justice Scalia would agree with that observation. He told us that he would not give attorneys any more time for their oral arguments because ‘they would only regurgitate their written briefs’. Whilst we may not want to import many aspects of the US Supreme Court to the UK, reducing the length of hearings might well be a valuable reform in light of the length of most skeleton arguments. We met several other federal judges during our stay in Washington DC, one of whom was wearing

cowboy boots (unsurprisingly, he was not appointed by President Obama). We attended a hearing at the DC Superior Court, a local court tasked with confronting the US capital’s problems of domestic violence and gun crime. The trip also gave us the opportunity of getting to know many former US Supreme Court law clerks and attorneys working in Washington DC. One law firm even took us to see the New York Yankees in a pre-season baseball game. The trip proved to be an excellent opportunity to understand the way in which courts operate across the Atlantic. I am extremely grateful to COMBAR and the Bar Council for providing funding for the trip.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

I N T E R NAT I O NA L S O C I E T I E S

30th NOVEMBER 2012

The Official Launch of TMMTA (The Malaysia Middle Temple Alumni Association ) by Shaun Paulian

he radiant red and white colours of Middle Temple were in abundance on the auspicious evening which marked the official launch of The Malaysia Middle Temple Alumni Association or ‘TMMTA’. The gathering of generations of Malaysian members of the Middle Temple inaugurated the establishment of a Malaysian Chapter of Middle Temple alumnus and completed the presence of all four London Inns of Court in Malaysia. The night was vibrant with laughter, reminiscent tales and fond memories of Middle Temple, as

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

practitioners, members of the Malaysian judiciary and masters of industry dined and danced the night away. Those attending including the former Lord President of the Supreme Court of Malaya, Tun Mohamed Dzaiddin bin Abdullah, and Bencher of the Middle Temple, Tan Sri Dato’ Cecil Abraham. The event held steadfast to the traditions of the Qualifying Sessions with pronouncements of the Middle Temple Graces and the Loyal Toasts, as well as the modern twist of a commemorative display marking the launch and a video presentation,

which allowed members to take a visual walk down memory lane as it showed the architectural beauty of the Middle Temple Hall and surrounding grounds. Speeches from the President and Deputy President of TMMTA, a mixture of anecdotes and informative snippets told by the two hosts, and a swinging jazz band ensured that the event was a resounding success and will be long remembered by all who attended. TMMTA (pronounced ‘tim-ta’) is the acronym for The Malaysia Middle Temple Alumni Association, a name

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

I N T E R NAT I O NA L S O C I E T I E S

that has gained much fondness in the hearts of its members. There are over 600 Middle Templars in Malaysia with an ever-growing number of Malaysian law graduates choosing Middle Temple as the Inn where they wish to be admitted to the Utter Bar of England & Wales. TMMTA has a number of plans for the future enrichment of its members

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

as well as for all other Malaysian Middle Templars who join. At the forefront of these plans is the intention of active collaboration with the other three Malaysian Chapters of the Inns of Court; it is envisioned that a larger community of fellow barristers sharing their respective experiences while carrying on the legacy of the Inns will achieve more

than the individual associations acting on their own. TMMTA and members of the Malaysian Judiciary and Bar enjoyed welcoming the Treasurer, Christopher Symons QC, and other delegates from Middle Temple during their visit to Malaysia in September 2013.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

MASTER

OF THE

HOUSE

Sir Christopher Turnor by Master Anthony Boswood

he Inn has recently acquired this portrait of Sir Christopher Turnor (1607 – 1675), by Michael Wright. Turnor was admitted to the Middle Temple in 1926, Called to the Bar in 1633 and made a Bencher in 1654. A royalist, he was admitted as a Serjeant-at-Law in 1660, sponsored by Sir Edward Hyde, and in the same year he was made a Baron of the Exchequer and knighted. He was a member of the commission of oyer and terminer, charged with bringing the regicides to trial. He seems to have been a good and popular judge. The Dictionary of National Biography tells us that during the Gloucester Autumn Assizes in 1661 he displayed a degree of circumspection unusual at that age. One William Harrison was missing under suspicious circumstances, and John Percy swore that his mother Joan and his brother Richard Percy had murdered him. The grand jury found a true bill, but Turnor refused to try the case until Harrison’s body could be produced. At the next Lent assizes the case came before Sir Anthony Boswood QC practised for over 40 years at the Commercial Bar, specialising in insurance and reinsurance, banking, and more recently, international arbitration. He was Master of the House from 20062012. He writes, “I have greatly enjoyed my work; but the chief aim and object of work is to provide for one’s family and, thereafter, for the pursuit of leisure – in my case, the arts (particularly music and opera), horseracing and hunting and country life generally. It was enjoyable (though not hard work) being Master of the House on account of the interesting people I met, and the high calibre of the MT staff with whom I dealt.”

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

Robert Hyde, also a Middle Templar, who became Chief Justice of the King’s Bench in 1663. He was less cautious than Turnor, and allowed the case to proceed. The jury convicted the prisoners, and they were hanged. But some years afterwards their innocence was established by Harrison’s reappearance. The admirable Sir Christopher Turnor must have smelled a rat, but Sir Robert Hyde’s nose was less sensitive. In the portrait, Turnor is holding his commission as a judge of the Fire Court, set up under the Act (18 & 19 Charles II, c.7) ‘For Erecting a Judicature for Determination of Differences touching Houses Burned or Demolished by reason of the Great Fire which happened in London’. The court sat from 1668 to 1676, based at Clifford’s Inn, deciding some 2,000 cases. The Act, drafted by Sir Matthew Hale LCB, conferred on it radical powers for settling and determining ‘all Differences and Demands whatsoever ... betweene Landlords, Proprietors, Tennants, Lessees, Under-Tennants or late Occupiers ... touching the repairing, building and rebuilding’ of firedamaged property, including the power to order the ‘surrender, increase, curtailment or charging’ of estates in the property. To modern eyes, the Fire Court looks like an ideal tribunal: there were no pleadings, and no formality, the Act charging the judges to sit ‘sine forma et figura judicii’. Every effort was made to promote agreed settlement. Delaying tactics were not allowed: ‘Nor shall any writt of error or certiori lye for removall or reversall of’ the court’s decisions. There were no fees and the judges

were not paid for their work. The court’s work met with universal approval. In an address to the King at the court’s prorogation the Speaker stated: ‘... the exemplary charity of your Majesty’s judges is fit with honour to be mentioned before your Majesty’. The City Corporation commissioned Michael Wright to paint portraits of all 22 of the Fire Court Judges at a cost of £60 each, and our new acquisition is one of these. They hung in Guildhall until they were dispersed in circumstances that are unclear. The Turnor portrait was spotted by Philip Mould in an auction sale, unnamed and misattributed. Michael Wright (1617 – 1694) was one of the most important British painters of the 17th century. He trained first under George Jamesone in London, and later in Rome, where he was elected a member of the Academy of St Luke, amongst whose members at the time were Velazquez and Poussin. Wright returned to England during the Protectorate, and prospered following the Restoration, although some contemporaries considered him inferior to Lely. Following a visit to Lely’s studio Samuel Pepys (who was, however, no judge of painting) wrote: ‘Thence to Wright the painter’s; but Lord the difference there is between their two works’. Nowadays, there are some who prefer Wright’s more restrained style to Lely’s. His most well-known portraits are the state portrait of Charles II (Royal Collection) and those of Sir Neill O’Neill in Celtic costume (Tate) and Lord Mungo Murray (Scottish NPG). Turnor’s portrait is the only example of Wright’s work in the Inn’s collection.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

MASTER

OF THE

HOUSE

The Innâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s recently acquired portrait of Sir Christopher Turnor, by Michael Wright, (1617-1694) was discovered unnamed and misattributed at auction by portrait specialist Philip Mould

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

T H E E D M U N D P L OW D E N T RU S T

The Edmund Plowden Trust celebrates 50 years by John Duddington

he strong connection between Middle Temple and the continuing debate on the relationship between law and religion was emphasised in the celebratory event to mark the 50th anniversary of the journal Law and Justice, the Christian Law Review, held in Middle Temple on May 9th and preceded by Evensong in Temple Church. It was co-sponsored by THEOS, the religion and society think-tank.

As a Roman Catholic, he refused all offers of professional advancement, including, it was said, the office of Lord Chancellor, and maintained true to his faith The Edmund Plowden Trust, which publishes the journal, is named in honour of the great Elizabethan lawyer who was Treasurer of the Middle Temple in 1561 and who built its magnificent Hall. As a Roman Catholic, he refused all offers of professional advancement, including, it was said, the office of Lord Chancellor, and maintained true to his faith. He was the subject of the Autumn Reading by Master Andrew Longmore for 2010 which appeared in the Spring 2011 issue of The

Called to the Bar in 1976, John Duddington was Head of The Law School, Worcester College of Technology until his retirement and is now an Associate of the Centre for Law and Religion, University of Cardiff. His interests lie in Property Law and Law and Religion and he has published widely in these areas. He has been Editor of Law and Justice, the Christian Law Review, since 1991.

100

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

Middle Templar. This Middle Temple connection was continued, as the main event was the Richard O’Sullivan Memorial Lecture, named in honour of our Master Treasurer in 1952 who, in addition to his own interest in Plowden, was a leading figure in Roman Catholic legal circles and who founded the Thomas More Society of Catholic lawyers. The present editor of Law and Justice maintains the Middle Temple connection as a member. It is the tradition of the journal, in a way in which both Plowden and O’Sullivan would have approved, to encourage vigorous debate on the relationship between law and religion, and this event was in that tradition. It was delivered in the Parliament Chamber by Lord Mackay, Lord Chancellor from 1987 to 1997, who considered the topical question of whether we should still maintain the principle of an established church. He felt strongly that the principle of establishment should continue and emphasised that, unlike in the past, the Church of England now saw its position as the established church as giving it a duty to protect all faiths. He referred to a speech made by the Queen at Lambeth Palace during her Diamond Jubilee celebrations when she said, ‘The concept of our established Church is occasionally misunderstood and, I believe, commonly under-appreciated. Its role is not to defend Anglicanism to the exclusion of other religions. Instead the Church has a duty to protect the free practice of all faiths in this country’. He pointed to the growing opposition from the secularist lobby to the establishment of the church. But he said, ‘The secularist position

Lord Mackay and John Duddington

represents a commitment to a relativistic approach to religious truth and assumes a radical split between the public realm of “facts” and the private realm of “values” with religion finding its place entirely within the private domain’. Lord Mackay argued that it is sometimes forgotten that the position of ideological pluralism, espoused by secularism, itself involves a claim to absolute truth. He also looked beyond the establishment debate to the wish on the part of some Christians to be popular or acceptable to public opinion and asked: are we to go along with the tide or stick to our principles? It is usually easier, he said, to go along with the tide. Swimming against it involves strength of commitment. This is a lesson for all lawyers, whether or not our commitment springs from religion. The lecture was followed by a lively discussion, with trenchant views coming from those of all faiths and none, and ended with a splendid reception in the Queen’s Room. The Edmund Plowden Trust is enormously grateful for the very generous assistance, both financial and otherwise, given by the former Under Treasurer Catherine Quinn and her staff and which helped so much to make this a memorable event.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

L I B R A RY

The Ecclesiastical Collection by Master Roy Martin

he Library at Middle Temple offers a wide range of resources, both domestic and international. Along with the libraries of our fellow Inns, legal scholars and practitioners have access to virtually all that is legal in the common law world. But there is one aspect of Middle Temple Library which is unmatched anywhere else and that is the Ecclesiastical Collection. The Ecclesiastical Collection was initiated in 1991 when the Ecclesiastical Judges’ Association donated to the Library a set of mostly unpublished court reports dating from 1891. Since then the Collection has been enhanced and now includes a set of the Ecclesiastical Law Journal from Volume 1 of 1987 to date; Church Assembly Measures, Crockford’s Clerical Directory, standard works such as Davies’ Law of Burial, Cremation and Exhumation, Mark Hill’s Ecclesiastical Law, Gwillim on Tithes, the Code of Canon Law, and handbooks such as the Parish

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

Councillor’s Guide and a Handbook for Church Wardens. Useful though these works are for those who practise and research in ecclesiastical law and church affairs, there is one part of the Ecclesiastical Collection which is truly unique. This is derived from the original donation of judgments of the

The value of the Collection was acknowledged in November 2003 when the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, visited Middle Temple Library Commissary and Consistory Courts which relate to all aspects of the work of these Courts, such as churchyard maintenance, the use of church property, exhumations, stained glass window design and disciplinary cases. Since their receipt by the Library, these Reports have been indexed and bound in chronological volumes thus making them accessible for reading

within the Library. The first 29 volumes, bound in purple, cover the period from 1891 to 2010. Each volume has a contents page; index of churches by name and by diocese, list of citations, list of abbreviations and a subject index. A consolidated index of Volumes 1 to 25 covering 1891 to 2006 has also been completed. While the transcripts of these judgments are only available in the Library, the indices as well as précis of recent unbound judgments can be accessed via the website of the Ecclesiastical Law Society www.ecclawsoc.org.uk and photocopies of transcripts can be requested by email, fax or telephone from Middle Temple Library. Since the original donation, it has been the practice of Diocesan Registrars to send copies of judgments to the Library and, under the excellent direction of Hilary Woodard who is responsible for the Ecclesiastical Collection, a small group consisting of Michael Goodman, Ted Wills and Peter Moore have worked to collate, index and bind the cases. Ray Hemingray has taken on the task of co-ordinating the receipt of ecclesiastical transcripts and the Ecclesiastical Law Society has taken responsibility for the financing of the binding. Through the generous work and support of these contributors, the Inn has a unique resource, which is available both to our members and to those beyond. The value of the Collection was acknowledged in November 2003 when the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, visited Middle Temple Library to open the Ecclesiastical Collection formally and to bless it. The Collection is to be found on the gallery floor in the Library.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

101

L I B R A RY

Duelling, Fencing, Arms & Armour by Renae Satterley, Senior Librarian

iddle Temple contains a variety of treasures that are displayed throughout the Inn - from silver in the Prince’s Room, to armour in the Hall, to items from the rare books, manuscripts and archive collections on display in the Library. The current Library display focuses on the theme of duelling, fencing, arms and armour. The exhibition opened on 6 June with a small event which attracted over 60 people. Two guest speakers were invited to discuss the collections on display: Professor Sydney Anglo and Dr Tobias Capwell. Professor Anglo is Professor Emeritus, University of Wales Swansea and Fellow of the British Academy. He has published widely on historical subjects and is an expert on the martial arts and pageantry of the Renaissance. Dr Capwell is Curator of Arms and Armour at the Wallace Collection and is an expert on Renaissance weaponry and armour.

Duelling The idea of killing your fellow man to defend your honour has been an unusual practice throughout human history. An early form of the duel was sanctioned in English law – the ‘trial by combat’ (or trial by battle) introduced by the Normans. It was a way to settle disputes through single combat and was eventually supplanted by trial by jury. One of the earliest of these trials by combat took place in 1096 between Geoffrey Baynard and William, Count of Eu. The former had accused the latter of treason, and William II (Rufus) ordered a trial by combat to determine the truth. Baynard won, and Eu had his eyes torn out and was castrated. While duels largely died out by the 20th century, there are still references to them in case law. The most recent such case is R v Ashley Bowen, [2013] EWCA Crim 376: the offence ‘arose out of what in earlier times would have been called a duel’. Bowen was the second to his brother Dominic, who injured but did not kill the other duellist, Christian Farrugia. The large number of books published on the Continent outlining codes of honour, chivalry and courtesy helped to disseminate the unofficial codes governing the duel throughout the 16th and 17th centuries. Duels were bound by strict but unofficial codes, which differed from country to country, and from era to era. While duelling was originally mostly the preserve of the aristocracy, the improvement in firearm technology in the 19th century meant that it became widely practised amongst all classes. While technically illegal, few upper class duellists were found guilty in trials; the opposite is true for those amongst the lower classes. Fencing The library contains a magnificent manuscript on fencing: Luis Pacheco de Narváez’s Libro de las grandecas dela espada,ca. 1600. The copyist has reproduced all of the 157 woodcut diagrammatic illustrations. Narváez was a pupil of Jerónimo Carranza and a well-known fencing master in his own right. Both men wrote important treatises on the destreza style of Spanish fencing, using mathematical notations and illustrations. During the 19th and early 20th century there existed an Inns of Court School of Arms, although details about this fencing club, or school, are scarce. It remains present to this day in the form of the Inns of Court Gold Cup, which is awarded by the Epée Club every year.

102

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

L I B R A RY

Arms & Armour Middle Temple owns an important collection of arms and armour. There are eighteen half-suits and helmets displayed in Hall, and many pieces of weaponry and armour on display in the Armoury by the Benchers’ Entrance. The first study of the Inn’s collection was carried out in 1862 by James Anderson QC (Treasurer, 1860). Highlights of the collection include five pieces believed to have belonged to Robert Dudley, 2nd Earl of Leicester, displaying an acidetched ‘snails and dragon flies’ style of decoration. The collection also contains a 1.5 metre German crossbow, dated roughly to the mid-17th century, and an 18th-century Highlander’s claymore, or great sword. Some of the items on display in the current Library exhibition are: • Jean Chenel, (fl. 1614-1617): Les revelations de l'hermit solitaire, 1617 •

G. de Chevalier (1564-ca. 1620): Discours des querelles et de l'honneur, 1598

•

GD28, Court Dress Sword belonging to Sir John Macdonell

•

Samuel Rush Meyrick (1783-1848): A critical inquiry into ancient armour, 1824

•

John Selden (1584-1654): Table-talk, 1819

•

Andreas Vesalius (1514-1564): Chirugia magna, 1569

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

103

A RC H I V E

Saving the Past by Siobhan Prendergast, Conservationist

t’s been a busy year in the conservation studio. As well as ongoing programmes to preserve the archive and rare book collections, there was a series of exhibitions and loans to other institutions which involved a lot of planning and cooperation. The department was proud to be asked to contribute Middle Temple’s two Molyneux Globes to the British Museum’s Shakespeare: Staging the World exhibition, which ran from July to November 2012. The Globes were the first to be made in England and the first to be made by an Englishman, Emery Molyneux, said to be a ‘rare gentleman in his profession’. Molyneux knew the explorers Francis Drake and Walter Raleigh. His globes were the first to be made in such a way that they were unaffected by the humidity at sea, and they came into general use on ships. Even at the time they were seen as wonderful examples of cartographic design. Only six are believed still to be in existence, and Middle Temple owns two of them: the Celestial Globe is dated 1592, the Terrestrial Globe is dated 1603. The department worked with specialist globe conservator Sylvia Sumira to ensure their safe transportation and display. More than one hundred thousand people saw our Molyneux Globes at the British Museum - so many people, in fact, that the Globes were found to be vibrating in their display cases due to the impact of all the feet on the hollow floor. We requested an analysis of the vibrations and added additional support, both in the cases and to the floor! It is fascinating and a privilege to work with so many priceless artefacts with such historic and cultural

104

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

significance. The Rare Book and Manuscript Collection at Middle Temple contains approximately 9,000 early printed books and 300 manuscripts, including prints, paintings, photographs and films. A formal preservation system for the Collection was first introduced six years ago with the creation of the

Molyneux knew the explorers Francis Drake and Walter Raleigh. His globes were the first to be made in such a way that they were unaffected by the humidity at sea, and they came into general use on ships. Even at the time they were seen as wonderful examples of cartographic design. Only six are believed still to be in existence, and Middle Temple owns two of them Archive Department and the installation of new storage units and a Trend Control System to monitor and control environmental conditions. Today a preventive conservation programme is in place to ensure safe storage generally for the Collection and to protect it from hazards like incorrect temperature and relative humidity, fire, flood, pests, pollution and light. For example, when the Light Monitoring Meter showed that UV levels were higher than recommended, a UV filtering film was placed over the windows of the Parliament Chamber and Queen’s

Room. This year there is a plan to rehouse all the items still stored in acidic boxes to acid-free ones. Conservation techniques, materials, standards and best practice are always evolving so it is important to stay informed. Some items need particular individual attention and care so we have a rolling programme of interventive conservation to keep these in good condition. This includes the binding of hundreds of meeting minutes, papers, bills and publications. Sometimes certain items are sent out to accredited conservators for specialist treatment. The conservation department supports four internal exhibitions at Middle Temple every year. The most recent was the exhibition Duelling, Fencing, Arms & Armour, which is featured in this magazine. The Molyneux Globes are back on display in the Middle Temple library so do have a look if you haven’t seen them already. Meanwhile, part of our collection is again being seen by thousands of people as Ortelius’s Atlas has been loaned to the Museum of London for the Cheapside Hoard: London’s Lost Jewels exhibition. Abraham Ortelius was a 16C Flemish cartographer and geographer, generally recognised as the creator of the first modern atlas and believed to be the first to speculate that the continents were once joined together before drifting to their present positions. The archive is an important part of the nation’s heritage, and of Middle Temple’s status and reputation. It’s important to preserve and conserve it for now, and forever.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

BOOK REVIEW

Legal Research: A Practitioner’s Handbook Review by Hilary Woodard, Librarian

eter Clinch, with 35 years’ experience in law information work, has produced a thoroughly updated second edition of this highly popular work aimed at legal practitioners. It is a book that is designed to be dipped into when a research problem arises, rather than for reading from cover to cover, and evaluates both print and online sources. It is comprehensive in its examples of research trails, giving the most reputable sources available and is interspersed with clear figures and handy research tips highlighted in boxes. Divided into four parts, the first deals with research strategy, how to conduct a search, selecting the best sources for your search and more importantly, when to stop. The second part focuses on the types of sources available including law encyclopaedias such as Halsbury’s Laws of England, and legislation such as Halsbury’s Statutes and Halsbury’s Statutory Instruments with flow charts demonstrating their use both in hard copy and online. UK and EU case law is comprehensively covered using free

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

and subscriber-only sources and with useful warnings as to the acceptability and use of unreported decisions. Part three is all about presenting the results of your research in a manner that will show the quality and authority of the work. The author lists general guides to legal writing aimed at pupils and style manuals for legal citations for use by pupils and practitioners. The final part is a new addition and considers the advantages and disadvantages of buying legal information from different types of commercial law publishers. The book is well supported by extensive appendices giving popular case names, the meaning of technical terms not usually found in general law dictionaries, and court directions relating to legal research and abbreviations. As well, there is an index to databases and to published materials but also, new to this edition, is the inclusion of a short subject index designed to make the dipping in and out a little easier, although for me it wasn’t detailed enough. In an age where cost cutting has become a necessity to get by, I

believe the author has succeeded in making us aware of the existence of a great deal of free information at our fingertips and has also taken on board past criticism by including material on the use of social media in legal research. It certainly is not an easy task to teach legal research skills through the medium of a handbook, but it is clear that the author has worked hard to make research techniques that are so well known to librarians relevant to the audience for which it is intended.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

105

L I B R A RY

25th JUNE 2013

Visit of Sir John Major to the Library by Vanessa Hayward, Keeper of the Library

n 1975, an incomplete set of portraits of Prime Ministers was donated to the Inn by Michael Philips of Nottinghamshire. The photographs were eventually hung on the walls of the Library, not entirely in chronological order, some twenty years later. Although the Keeper of the Library was aware of this, and had always hoped to rectify it by completing the collection, it remained as it was until Lord Hacking joined the Library and Archive Committee in January 2012 and pointed out the discrepancies. Over the next year, Lord Hacking and the Keeper worked to complete the set, bring it up to date and hang the photographs in the correct order. This was completed in February 2013 and Master Major, as a former Prime Minister, was asked to open the collection officially. On Tuesday 25 June, over 50 guests, including Benchers, members and other interested individuals, attended the official ‘opening’ ceremony. Upon arrival at the main floor of the Library, guests were given a booklet which included biographical information and

106

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

fascinating facts about each of the Prime Ministers. Master Major arrived at the Ashley Building entrance and was welcomed by Master Colin Edelman, Chairman of the Library and Archive Committee, and the Under Treasurer, and then escorted up to the main floor of the Library, where Lord Hacking and the Keeper were introduced to him. Master Edelman welcomed the guests and said a few words about the background of the collection of portraits before introducing Master Major, who gave an interesting and very amusing talk about former Prime Ministers including his favourite, Pitt the Younger, who would consume up to six bottles of port a day to help him deal with the stresses of the post. Master Major also read out a letter from the Duke of Wellington to the Foreign Office, written from Central Spain in 1812, in which he had carried out, as ordered, a requisition of supplies he had received for his army. He had accounted for every farthing, except the regrettable exceptions of 1s 9d in one battalion’s petty cash, and ‘a hideous confusion

as to the number of jars of raspberry jam issued to a regiment during a sandstorm in Western Spain’, adding that ‘this reprehensible carelessness may be related to the pressure of circumstance, since we are at war with France.’ Master Edelman, Lord Hacking and the Keeper then showed Master Major around the collection on the Gallery floor, pointing out portraits of interest such as that of Lord Rosebery, who we mistook for a young Churchill. Archivist Lesley Whitelaw said a few words about the Molyneux Globes. Guests gathered for a champagne reception in the Prince’s Room, and Master Major met the members of the Library and Archive Committee and other guests before lunching in Hall on High Table with his fellow Benchers. It was a memorable day for the Library and all the guests, and Master Major was as delightful as he was charming. All members are welcome to visit the Library, pick up a booklet about the Prime Ministers and view the permanent display of portraits.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

O B I T U A RY

Gillian Kalitsi

illian began work at Middle Temple on 18 July 2007. I remember interviewing her and it was very close between her and another candidate in terms of experience, but the reason Gillian was way ahead of her rival was that she sparkled, which is one of the main characteristics I look for in a candidate and she continued to sparkle throughout her six years at Middle Temple. She became ill just after she started work in the library but made a good recovery, until in 2012 the illness came back. Her bravery was remarkable, choosing not to undergo treatment, and keeping her condition private from her colleagues, friends and family and telling only a handful of people. Even when she was exhausted and in obvious pain, she came in to work, lying down between jobs to rest, because she wanted to be here and to be normal. I believe it was her way of coping by allowing herself to carry on working at a job she adored for as long as possible, which she did until a few weeks before her untimely death on 11 April this year. Among Gillian’s notes, I found a reference to Purcell’s Dido’s Lament from his opera Dido and Aeneas, 1688. It is sadly appropriate: When I am laid, am laid in earth, May my wrongs create No trouble, no trouble in thy breast; Remember me, remember me, but ah! forget my fate. Remember me, but ah! forget my fate. She loved her lunches in Hall and always found them exciting and enjoyable, piling her plate very high, despite which she never put on an ounce of weight. Her favourite was carrot cake, which she often had with custard! It made us all very jealous. She also loved parties, receptions and anything else that involved eating and drinking, especially champagne and she loved coming on the library’s summer annual educational visit (works outing) which invariably involved a large picnic with champagne. Gillian was an excellent cook and always contributed something appetising and tasty. At Christmas, she would come to the Temple Church to sing carols with me, always saying she couldn’t sing, but after a few lessons in breath control, I discovered she could easily hit higher notes than I can manage. She was brilliant at her job,

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

conscientious, diligent and thorough. She spoke a number of languages and went to extra French classes after work. She also lived in Japan for some time and always impressed any Japanese visitors with her fluency when chatting to them. At home, Gillian loved her garden and grew lots of fruit and herbs. She also kept chickens, which she rescued from battery farms. Because they had often been badly treated they rarely had many feathers, so Gillian went to an evening class to learn to knit so that she could make little coats for them. She often spent her tea breaks knitting chicken coats, much to everyone’s amusement. Gillian should be remembered for what she enjoyed doing, travelling, dancing, going to the gym and laughing a lot. She had a wicked sense of humour, which made her very popular with both staff and library users. She will be remembered for her commitment to work, drive, determination and focus. The saddest part about her passing, is that she was so full of life. But, like Purcell’s aria, most of all she will be remembered. Vanessa Hayward Keeper of the Library

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

107

TECHNOLOGY

Pencil to Keyboard 40 Years in the Law by Master Sir Stephen Laws

suspect that every generation of lawyers has been retrospectively amazed by the transformation in the legal world occurring in the course of a legal career. I have just passed the 40th anniversary of my Call to the Bar; and my generation and I are no exception. Even allowing for the magnification caused by the change of perspective from that of legal ingĂŠnu to that of hardened veteran, the changes have been remarkable, not only in the law itself, but also in the way legal work is done. Most of my career was spent in the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel. I joined it in 1976 and led it from 2006 until my retirement in 2012. Throughout, my focus was on writing new law. Unusually perhaps, my day to day work in the law made me both familiar and comfortable with the idea of constant legal change. Nevertheless, though changes in the substance of the law were the order of the day, they probably had less impact for me than for others in the profession. My understanding of many areas of the law was acquired temporarily for the purpose of changing it, rather than for the purpose of practising in it on a regular basis. Over my 40 years in the law, no more than three or four changes of legal substance required the day to day working assumptions of statutory drafters to be re-assessed. The European Communities Act 1972 and the Human Rights Act 1998 were our own work. A third was the non-statutory introduction of judicial review (with the related and continuing explosion of administrative law). Devolution is, arguably, the fourth. While every year we laboured on new primary legislation for the rest of the profession to get to grips with, other changes were having a more profound impact on our own working lives. Of these, the most significant involved information technology. Statutory provisions were needed to facilitate its use (e.g. the liberalisation of the telecommunications market), or to respond to its use (e.g. provisions for the recognition of the electronic service of notices). But, while influencing what we did, it was having an even greater effect on how we did it. The work of the law, at its most basic, consists in the collection of information, the processing of the information and the communication of the outcome from that processing. For the statutory drafter these are part of a loop because the principal outcome of the processing is the

108

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

communication of something to be fed back into the sources from which information about the law is collected in future. The technological revolution of the past 40 years has been all about the collection, processing and communication of information. Initially, new technology was seen as a way to help us to do the job; but, we used to say, it must not get in the way of it. In time, though, its effect was so pervasive as to redefine the job itself. It is well known that computer projects have a tendency to go wrong â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a tendency that has been shown to extend beyond the public sector. In my experience, the time when a computer project is most at risk is the time - which occurs in nearly every project - when the prospective users acquire enough understanding of the technology to realise that it can do more than remove some wrinkles in existing working practices. The realisation comes that it could facilitate an entirely new and better system of working. It is like the moment when you stop translating your own language and start speaking a foreign language. It is very common to find that working on a computer project clarifies how far the disciplines and habits in current working practices have an inherent value and how far they have been dictated by the limitations in the previously available technology. It is only then that you can decide what you want from the project. Getting computer projects right is largely about anticipating and managing that phenomenon â&#x20AC;&#x201C; but that is another article. IT has had, and is likely to continue to have, at least as great an impact on the law as the development of printing. Volume VI of the magisterial Oxford History of the Laws of England (which covers the period from the accession of Richard III until the death of Mary) explains how the force of precedent was a development that occurred in the way it did largely as a consequence of the invention of the printing press and the related growth of legal publishing. Before, legal sources were in manuscript and largely in the personal legal notebooks of practitioners. And for some while afterwards, many sources continued to be produced in that form. In earlier times, copies of statutes were not in general circulation. Neither the judges nor counsel had desks or lecterns in Westminster Hall and there was no tradition of producing books in court. A legal argument was not backed by a string of citations but by examples which showed its correctness. The History also explains how a perverse

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

TECHNOLOGY

aspect of the change from personal, manuscript reports to the use of printed publications was that it was the unusual cases that first appeared in print, while the more orthodox and usual rules remained unprinted because they were in everyone’s manuscript notes. As a result, the latter became less easily accessible – and, after a while, less well known – to subsequent practitioners. This history seems to have relevance for our own time. I have often joked that new technology in the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel when I joined in 1976 consisted in a propelling pencil and a plastic rubber. Typically, in a government department, there was only one file containing all the documents on a particular issue. It was carried from person to person by the ‘indoor messengers’, and each successive recipient would add their contribution, often in manuscript. Knowing the location of the file was sometimes a problem. Version control and multiple, inconsistent and contemporaneous email comments were not. Letters and drafts were produced by an army of typists (in some departments – but not ours – located in a distant provincial town). The limit on copies was dependent on the forcefulness of the typist and the age of the carbon paper. The photocopier was regarded as an expensive luxury to be called into use only as infrequently as your grandmother’s best tea service. A Bill in preparation was produced in typescript from a manuscript, generated, in my case, with a propelling pencil on ever thinning paper. There were, though, some legendary intellectual giants who dictated their drafts straight to a short hand typist. When a draft reached the stage that required copies in sufficient numbers for distribution within the instructing department the typescript, with multiple, manuscript changes, was sent to the Parliamentary press. There it was typeset and then printed overnight in linotype on ‘hot metal’ printing presses. Between 25 and 50 copies of the draft Bill would arrive by van the following morning and be taken by hand to the client department by the ‘outdoor messengers’. The drafter would revise the proof for subsequent drafts with a view to getting the text and the type-setting as settled as possible before the final print. An important factor was a desire to minimise the risk of typesetting or other printing errors in the introduction copy, and in that way to avoid unnecessary amendments in the House.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

This technology, or lack of it, had a profound effect on the way the work was done. In subsequent drafts, all clause, subsection, et cetera numbers would be changed by the printer only if they had been changed in manuscript by the drafter on the printer’s copy. The same was obviously true of cross references. The incentive not to change or rearrange something was very strong indeed, as indeed was the incentive to be as concise – or, some thought, as cryptic – as possible. The physical production of the text and the technology used for that purpose had a profound effect on its contents, and most importantly, on the willingness of the drafter to revise it as the process progressed. As Marshall McLuhan put it, ‘We make our tools, and thereafter they make us.’ The skills that were sought and then developed in those who did the job, and all thinking about the process of drafting, were based on the unavoidable fact that the whole process was confined to the use and production of physical documents, and that the processes for accessing, producing and modifying the master document were subject to physical constraints. Could the printer do it? In addition, all the assumptions that drafters made about the audiences to which statutes were addressed were founded on the supposition that they would be accessing the law by taking down a volume of statutes or loose Acts from a shelf and looking at a printed page. The process of communication included having regard to the size and shape of the book, and the arrangement and formatting of the text on the page. In the same way, the process was tied to the physical location of documents. Physical access to a set of statutes and, more generally, to a law library was essential, as was the proximity to each other of the individuals involved in the work in the Office and in the instructing department. Rapid exchange of documents was possible only if they could be delivered by hand. The existence of a single master copy of the next print of the Bill, which would have to be marked up in manuscript, ensured that the drafters of a Bill would often sit down together at the same table to work on the draft. Past practice of the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel was captured in bound volumes of the correspondence and other papers for each Bill and was comprehensively indexed by skilled clerks with a remarkable understanding of the process.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

109

TECHNOLOGY

All this has now changed. The outside messengers, the typists, the skilled indexers have all gone from the Office. Research techniques using the Index to the Statutes, the Chronological Tables and the Tables of Effects are moribund, just as, I suspect, many fewer lawyers now research case law by turning to the published indexes to the Law Reports. What is important is expertise with a search engine. The National Archives in their work to keep the legislation.gov.uk site as up to date as possible are using software that not only captures but also processes amending text. Indexing, not only in the Office but also more generally in the law, is becoming less necessary and skills are being lost. When it comes to past learning and practice, and to making it available to colleagues, all that will count in future is whatever has been saved in the Office’s electronic records and knowledge management system, and can be found there. Editing, indexing and digesting legal sources is less necessary the more electronic access is made available to the original sources and to other more contemporary sources of comment on legal developments. Human indexing is less reliable in the light of the exponential growth of legal material. Also, electronic searching is more efficient than using an index – if only because it does not require the question to have been predicted. The library is seldom visited, because the essential sources can be accessed on line from your desk, or often from home. Latest developments and academic commentary can be followed most effectively by setting up specialised personalised web alerts. The latest commentary on the law can often be found in academic blogs, or referenced through social media, some time before it can be found in a published journal. The same techniques can be used for following developments in Parliament on a Bill. The Parliamentary proceedings can be watched via live web streaming, and Hansard can be searched on the Parliament website. When it comes to the actual drafting, legislative drafters in the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel now type their own draft Bills using a system that automatically updates the numbering and the cross references and generates a table of contents. The printer is provided with an electronic text. That can be used to produce a print without further significant human intervention and for publishing it on the web almost immediately. For all practical purposes typesetting at the printers no longer exists. The drafters can

110

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

manipulate their texts until the last minute. The drafters need to structure their work in the knowledge that the vast majority of readers will be accessing it on screen rather than on the printed page. All these changes have their equivalents in the work of other lawyers. It is possible to feel real regret for systems and disciplines that have disappeared as a result of these developments – quite apart from one’s feelings for the individuals whose hard-won skills are no longer valued. Change of any sort is seldom cost free. However, these changes cannot be reversed. Ultimately, they result from collective choices about priorities made by the profession as a whole in the light of new technology. All the technology has done is to make choices about priorities possible that were not available before. How those choices are made is often dictated by market forces. Social changes – some of which may themselves have been facilitated by new technology – are also a factor. But the harsh truth is that once new technology provides the opportunity for working methods that are more efficient or otherwise more attractive to the profession, it will cease to supplement the old systems and will tend to supplant them. Seeking to preserve old systems and methods when most of the profession is abandoning them is both futile and wasteful. Once new systems are in place, the best thing to do is to commit resources to smoothing the transition and getting the best out of them – until, that is, they themselves need to be replaced in their turn.

Sir Stephen Laws KCB Stephen is the First Parliamentary Counsel and runs the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel (OPC) in the rank of Permanent Secretary. Educated at St Dunstan's College, Catford and Bristol University, he worked as a lecturer in law at Bristol University from 1972 to 1973 and was Called to the Bar in 1973. Stephen joined the general Government Legal Service in the Home Office in 1975 and became a Parliamentary draftsman in the OPC in 1976, becoming a “full” Parliamentary Counsel in 1971. He is currently the Deputy Chairman of the Cabinet Office’s Operating Committee and is a member of the Inn’s Estates Committee.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

GARDEN

Garden News by Kate Jenrick, Head Gardener

he theme of my article in last yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s edition of The Middle Templar was the start of the gardening year. I look forward to the winter months â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the ideas that have formed over the summer are brought together and I start to make the changes alongside all the routine, satisfying tasks of improving the soil, pruning trees and shrubs work. Between September and April it rained, nearly every day. The ground was waterlogged much of the time. The luxury of money in the budget to renovate the lawn after the many thousands of visitors to Belgian House during the Olympics turned out to be just an aspiration - the ground simply never dried out until May, too late to start major aerating and top dressing. Only a small section where significant damage occurred was completed. I did at least succeed in my mission to cull the Ceanothus. No area of the garden has escaped these vigorous lumpy shrubs. Over time, the gaps in Fountain Court near the

Butia palm, in two of the beds on the main terrace and one of the beds below Temple Gardens, will be filled by mixed plantings. Even planting a two-metre evergreen magnolia in Fountain Court has made little impression on the new space. But the gaps may have drawn attention to the changes. A hugely rewarding moment to alleviate what has been a demoralising winter was to be awarded a Certificate of Excellence for Fountain Court by the Worshipful Company of Gardeners in May. The annual Autumn bulb planting day, with help from the joint Masters of the Garden, members of the Inn, and staff members is usually a fun few hours planting thousands of bulbs. However, torrential rain which started at about 3 am on the Sunday morning put an end to the planned activity. On Monday morning I was faced with over 3,500 tulip bulbs and a pressing deadline, as winter bedding plants were becoming pot bound and urgently needed planting out. By the end of the week all were planted

Elm Court

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

(although the primroses just sat and sulked for their first two months, unresponsive to the dampness). This hectic week of work was typical of all planting activities throughout the winter and even the summer change over - every task has been a race against the clock because a few hours of rain soon reduced the ground to unworkable conditions. On the plus side, the cool spring did provide a wonderfully prolonged tulip display. There are quite different varieties of tulips throughout the garden and tulips with varied flowering times. On the main terrace, the display started on 15th April, and kept going until the end of May. Most shrubs have been late to flower this year, on average three weeks delayed. No one was close to guessing the flowering time of the Magnolia this year. Another interesting effect of the weather, particularly among the roses, is that the flowering time has been staggered. In previous years all the roses seemed to start flowering more or less at the same time. This year some started flowering at the end of May but other roses were still not flowering in the middle of June. The Paeonies were short-lived (as usual) but only a couple of weeks late. Like many other beekeepers my colony of bees did not come through the winter. The devastating figures across the country (more than one third of colonies across the country were lost) have been attributed to the continual poor and changeable weather through last summer, continuing into 2013 and exacerbated by the late arrival of spring. It was all the more disappointing as my selection of new plants this year has had bee food in mind. Despite a very cold day, a record

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

111

GARDEN number of visitors - over 900 - came to Middle Temple during the Open Garden Squares Weekend on 9 June. In past years, roses and summer flowers have been on show. This year, the highlights were spring flowers including plenty of foxgloves, the edibles in Elm Court, the wisteria and the plantings underneath looking fresh green and lush and the great cakes on offer. With contributions from many individuals the cake sale raised nearly £1,000 and the proceeds have been split between Middle Temple’s Rare Book collection, to enable another book to be repaired, and a charity

112 T H E M I D D L E T E M P L A R

called Gardening Leave. Anyone reading this who would like to help out, perhaps baking a cake or coming along to help serve the teas and cakes, please make a note in your diary for 15 June 2014. Closure on this long winter came about when I was given the key to the new greenhouse. The garden now boasts a beautiful Victorian-style greenhouse, at the end of the garden near to Queen Elizabeth building. This will provide the opportunity to raise my own plants for containers and to extend the variety of plants so that tender exotic plants can be over-

wintered as well as being a beautiful new asset to the garden as a whole. There have been a few other brighter moments for the garden in recent months. Joint Master of the Garden Stephen Lloyd collected the Cutlers Prize from the Worshipful Company of Gardeners for best Winter garden and a Certificate of Excellence for Elm Court. Master Lloyd has also authored a new publication The Courts and Gardens of the Middle Temple, which is a walker’s guide through the Inn and gardens with plenty of stunning photographs and informative text.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

GARDEN

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

115

S TA F F T R AV E L S

Six Beards and a Bird in Antarctica by Hannah Baker, Archivist

‘No, it is not the goal but the way there that matters, and the harder the way the more worth while the journey. Who after all would dispute that it is more satisfying to climb to the top of a mountain than to go there on a funicular railway?’ Wilfred Thesiger, Arabian Sands

ontrary to some of the bizarre comments which arose from a variety of insurance call centres, there are no funicular railways on, in or indeed around Antarctica (except for an interesting 55-metre pulley system invented by the Ukrainians at Vernadsky (previously Faraday) and neither are there pistes. The way there did certainly matter, not without a certain degree of trepidation do people embark on a voyage through the Drake Passage, and I was no different. It was indeed immensely satisfying to climb to the top of untouched and pristine mountains and camp on glaciers never previously explored. The seven of us Alpine Club members (plus two French sailors) travelled further south than has been possible in the past few years, that is, further than other yachts of its type

114

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

(Spirit of Sydney is 60 feet and built to endure round-the-world challenges). We had fortuitous ice conditions, although there were occasions when we became brutally aware how quickly a change in wind direction could pack in large rafts of ice, leaving one a bit ‘Shackletoned’. Our landfall from the French passage to Vernadsky met with glorious sunshine, but from a distance it was difficult to decipher land from cloud, due to the land being framed by lenticular clouds, harbingers of the poor weather every mountaineer fears. From that point onwards the weather did its best to thwart our endeavours, but we were a relatively thrusting crew and a little bit of cloud wasn’t about to corale us on the boat. This set the scene for an audacious and early landing from Collins Bay

on what I would call Towering Snout Point. Perhaps I should have named it Teetering Snout Point, because once we had ferried our equipment up the easy snow slope a thundering great crash came bellowing up the way we’d come and a sizeable chunk of ice had calved into the sea. It was tremendous to watch but cautionary for our return. The area has names which hark back to the ‘heroic age’ of Antarctic exploration; Adrien de Gerlache, the Gerlache Straits; Roald Amundsen the

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

S TA F F T R AV E L S

Amundsen Sea and the person about whom we would hear the most, JeanBaptiste Charcot. Charcot was instrumental in the mapping of the area of the west side of the Antarctic Peninsula and the area we sailed to had names relating to his exploits. Beascochea Bay was named by him after the Argentine naval commander; Mount Français after his ship of the first expedition Le Français; and Marguerite Bay after his wife. Charcot’s second expedition in 1908 – 1910 in the Pourquoi Pas? achieved much in terms of mapping and science but Amundsen’s respect for this diffident man is highlighted when he said, ‘...The point that compels our special admiration in Charcot’s voyages is that he chose one of the most difficult fields of the Antarctic zone to work in’. Unlike Charcot, we

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

had the benefit of instruments and although this takes some pressure off, the four-hourly watch system can be a strain if you’re feeling the effects of the battering waves and your eyes have to get accustomed to identifying ‘growlers’. These are small pieces of ice, which can pack a dirty great punch; they don’t turn up on the radar and at speeds just shy of 20 knots this had the potential to be catastrophic. Charcot’s ever presence in our psyche during the trip meant that questions such as: shall we get the sea kayaks out? shall we hop over that crevasse? shall we have custard for pudding? met with the resounding retort ‘pourquoi pas?’. This long-lived joke received a mixed response from our indomitable French crew – I think they hoped that we would branch out and try some conversational French.

Perhaps because of the favourable ice, our small team had some of the most awe-inspiring contact (and I mean that almost literally) with the most incredible array of creatures; three kinds of Penguin: Gentoo, Chinstrap and Adélie; Orca, Minke and Humpedbacked whales; Leopard, Weddel and Crabeater seals, a single and dead Krill, a plethora of birds from the black-browed Albert Rosses (as my almost fossilized Uncle George calls them) to the acrobatic Cape Pigeon (an offensive, and as it happens wrong, name for a bird with a huge amount of pluck – it is in fact a Petrel). The birds were surprisingly constant companions during both sails and even regular Antarctic ‘beards’ were commenting on the clarity of the water south of 65th parallel, so perhaps it was the quality of the water

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

115

S TA F F T R AV E L S that elicited such a profusion of wildlife. Although I can’t claim a vast wealth of expedition experience, I have worked out (with pretty dodgy maths) that between the seven of us we must have accumulated about 300 years’ worth of mountain escapades, so we weren’t short as it turned out. This great experience of ‘the beards’ as I’ve called them in my log, for that is what they became after four days at sea and eight days on Antarctica, meant that we were able to pick our way up five unclimbed mountains and one hill, each of varying difficulty, ranging from a trudge (facile) to some really fantastic mountaineering (assez difficile). When we returned to Spirit, the clouds were bearing down on us in a way not dissimilar to Scotland. This would usually not have bothered me because, just as in Scotland, you can expect a huge variety in the weather in Antarctica; however there was foreboding in this particularly watery

sky; one which was to scupper our plan to move south and gain another few days amidst the crevasses and mountains. We used the time well and scouted out another supreme landing spot for a foray which was to culminate in the summit of Rio Branco, only to hear, once we returned to Vernadsky that the French had made an icy landing on the north side of this spectacular mountain and summited the day before our return. No one begrudged them their valiant effort, because they hosted a most spectacular party on their yacht the following evening. My foremost, or perhaps only, memory of which was that there was a lot of rum. Leaving the ice brought with it a thrill of disappointment; the time on it was fabulous but to a mountaineer the place is so full of promise, so remote, so challenging that its icy grip is vicelike. So I absolutely understand why Shackleton said, ‘...the longing for the Ice, the sadness of departure ... it is as if I cannot after all bear to

S TA F F T R AV E L S leave this bleak waste of ice, glaciers, cold and toil’. It’s the only place I’ve ever been which has left me with a deep longing to go back and a sadness that I never might. The Expedition received funding from: some Middle Temple friends, for which many thanks; the Mount Everest Foundation; and the Alpine Club Climbing Fund. As the only female member of the team I was generously given a grant from the Julie Tullis Memorial Fund www.thebmc.co.uk/the-julie-tullismemorial-award For anyone who is interested in trying out the Southern Ocean and Antarctica, there is now a way; Phil, Cath and Darrel have joined forces and are looking to recruit interested parties for the forthcoming season and beyond. www.skiantarctica.com/pastExpeditions.html

S TA F F

Staff News The Inn warmly welcomes the following members of staff who have started their career with the Middle Temple this year.

Mark Taylor IT Manager Joined 5 September 2012

James Snape Plumber Joined 24 September 2012

Olusanya Sanusi Night Security Joined 24 September 2012

Lenka Steflova Library Support Assistant Joined 13 November 2012

Fiona Nie Accounts Assistant (Events) Joined 7 January 2013

Elissa Gold Administration Assistant Joined 21 January 2013

Robert Meyer Business Systems Analyst Joined 28 January 2013

Francesca Trevisan Events Co-ordinator Joined 25 February 2013

John Darley Data/Website Administrator Joined 26 February 2013

William Windsor Head Of Facilities Joined 7 May 2013

Kevin Walker Porter/Cleaner Joined 28 May 2013

Erin Gow EU Librarian Joined 15 July 2013

Monique Kagan Estates Help Desk Administrator Joined 1 August 2013

Amy Mason Administrative Officer Joined 2 September 2013

Mark McFeely Events Supervisor Joined 16 September 2013

The Inn is grateful to the following members of staff for their long and valued service, and wishes them happy, healthy futures. Charlie George Halpin, Nicola Duggan, Joe Nascimento, Luiz Alonso, Karen Hebb, Fergal Altman and Adrian Jones.

118

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

TEMPLE MUSIC

Farewell to James Vivian by Robin Griffith-Jones, Master of the Temple

ames Vivian arrived at the Temple Church in 1997, straight from his organ scholarship at King’s College, Cambridge. He was invited by Stephen Layton, then our newly appointed Director of Music, to assist with chorister rehearsals and services. James leaves us, sixteen years later, as a Director of Music and Organist to whom we owe an enormous debt of gratitude, to become the Organist at St George’s Chapel, Windsor. It speaks volumes for his achievement here, that he is moving on to such a prestigious post. Our loss is Windsor’s gain. In 1998 Stephen Layton told the Inns that James was without question the man they should appoint as Sub Organist. With Stephen and James together in harness, youthful energy and drive were once more in charge of the Church’s music, as they were when E.J. Hopkins was appointed (aged 25) in 1843 and George Thalben-Ball (aged 27) in 1923. Stephen and James transformed our music in those early years; Stephen generally conducting the choir and James dazzling us from the organ loft with his virtuoso skills and profound musicianship. By the time Stephen left in 2006, James was more than ready to take the helm; and for the last seven years he has worked tirelessly to recruit, encourage and train boychoristers as talented as any in London. Just as important has been the steady stream of lay-clerks from Oxbridge, some of the choral foundations’ finest singers, who come to London to build their musical career and enjoy singing here for James whenever they can. We can hardly complain when they leave. Iestyn Davies sang here as counter-tenor until he starred as Apollo in the ENO’s Death in Venice – and became, overnight, one of the most sought-after counter-tenors in the world. It remains to be seen how often we will now be able to call on Gareth John who has just won the Kathleen Ferrier Prize; and we have many other rising stars in our back rows. It is a tribute to James that such wonderful soloists want to sing as choir-men here. During his time as Director of Music, the choir and James have recorded and broadcast widely from the church:

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

in particular, the choir’s CDs have won high praise from the international music press. James has proposed, arranged and conducted some memorable concerts in the Church and in Middle Temple Hall. Dido and Aeneas in 2008 with the Temple Players – once more starring several of our choirmen – was a triumph. More recently the choristers appeared at the Aldeburgh Festival. James’s most recent production was Walton’s Henry V, performed this year in Church with the Aurora Orchestra on Shakespeare’s birthday; it lifted the spirits of everyone there. And in May he conducted our Choral Evensong for Her Majesty The Queen. His appointment to Windsor had been confirmed the day before; we wonder if that was a particularly warm smile Her Majesty gave him when he was presented to Her after the service. Her Majesty and The Duke of Edinburgh were here to celebrate the refurbishment of the Church’s organ. Unsung hero throughout that long process was James himself, who drew up and oversaw the specifications (and the budget!) for the work. James took a daily interest in the work, and his partnership and shared vision with Andrew Scott, Harrison’s Head Voicer, has ensured that the organ is now one of the finest in London. Accolades from visiting organists have been pouring in; for as long as the Glentanar organ lasts, so long will James’s legacy to the Temple endure. Hopkins stayed at the Temple for 55 years, Thalben-Ball for 58. Sadly, we say Good Bye to James, Ann Elise and little Emilia after the mere twinkling of a Temple eye. They go with our great gratitude, our love and our best wishes for the happiest of futures.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

119

T E M P L E C H U RC H

12th JUNE 2013

Temple Church and Magna Carta On 12 June, before our Amity Dinner with Inner Temple, Choral Evensong was sung in the Temple Church to celebrate both the amity between the Inns and the sealing of Magna Carta on 15 June 1215. Master Igor Judge gave the address. He bid us let our imaginations fly, as he told the story of 1214-15, of the Temple’s part in the vital – and fraught – negotiations that led to Runnymede and of William Marshal, 1st Earl of Pembroke, loyalist, mediator and hero of the hour. The Marshal would reissue the Charter in 1216 and 1217 under his own seal, and so ensure its survival. It was not hard to envision him pacing the Round where now, nearly eight centuries later, his effigy still lies. Master Judge’s speech is reproduced below with his kind permission.

Magna Carta 39. No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land 40. To no one will we sell, to no one deny or delay right or justice

n 15 June 1215 two sides in a forgotten English Civil War met at Runnymede by the banks of the Thames to see if they could, at long last, negotiate a peace. A document was prepared, but it was never signed. It was simply sealed. Although it is dated 15 June, its terms were probably not concluded until 19 June. No one called it the Great Charter, or Magna Carta. It was just another Charter. As a peace-keeping settlement its prospects were negligible. It was no more destined for success than the Munich agreement of 1938, which was supposed to bring ‘peace in our time’ (an observation of Anthony Arlidge QC). Like hundreds of Charters before it, it was destined for oblivion. Do we remember the Charter of Henry I? Do we remember the Charter of King Stephen? What is more, within a few weeks it was declared null and void by Pope Innocent III, who, King of England or

120

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

not, had been acknowledged by John as his feudal lord. (Can I be naughty, and wonder what the Euro sceptics would have made of that?) Pope Innocent abolished the Charter itself. All the obligations and safeguards contained in it were declared invalid for all future times. The rebel barons were excommunicated, a condition which our secular age cannot begin to comprehend, but which would have penetrated even the thickest of barons’ skulls as a lock on the door to eternal salvation. King John had not the slightest intention of abiding by any of it. The Pope killed it off. That was meant to be that. And yet this document, or more accurately, the ideas symbolised by this document have become deep rooted in our way of life. They have travelled to what in 1215 were unknown worlds. They have had a direct influence, and continue to resonate in countries far, far away from these shores. The United States of America and Canada, Australia and New Zealand, were undiscovered lands, but Magna Carta is a document which is common to them and it is common to us. Through it the Common Law has penetrated the world. The ideas derived from it have underpinned all the great declarations of human rights. It is a universal document, continuing to have a universal impact. There are many myths about Magna Carta. It did not give us the

right to trial by jury, but in the concept of trial by one’s peers, one’s equals, it provided the foundation for trial by jury. Magna Carta did not offer statements about personal liberty or fair trials, but in the promise that justice would not be delayed or denied, it underpinned the right of the individual not to be kept in custody indefinitely without trial, and carried the consequence that a hearing or trial would always be required. Magna Carta did not create parliamentary sovereignty, but it underlined that the subject’s allegiance did not constitute an absolute and unconditional obedience to the King. And this implied that the King himself was subject to the law, and that if he failed to abide by that understanding, he was not entitled to claim an obligation of loyalty. Magna Carta was the banner with which the divine right of Kings was contested in 17th century England, when the foundations for our democracy were laid. The Pilgrim Fathers took it with them to the new colony in North America. This was the banner carried into battle by the then colonists in what was to become the United States of America, protesting in the 18th century when Parliament sought to impose taxation without representation. On these foundations that great democracy was built. To this day all our rulers are subject to the law: Presidents and Prime Ministers, whoever we are, we

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

T E M P L E C H U RC H all are. What has all that to do with this beautiful Norman church? The short answer is that many of the key moments in the two years leading up to the sealing of the Charter took place here in the Temple Church, here in what was then a very new building, consecrated in 1185. In 1213 the King had two London headquarters: to the east, the Tower, and to the west, the Temple. It was from here that in 1213 he went to the old St Paul’s Cathedral to confirm that the Pope was his feudal lord. It was from here in November 1214 that he guaranteed the freedom of the English church, which became the very first clause in the Charter a few months later. It was here in January 1215 that the barons met with the King. Please try to imagine it. By now deadly, equally treacherous enemies, tramping up and down, up and down, trying to do a deal, each side trying to secure what it saw as its rights. And the crisis of 7,000 French troops here in England, and the City about to open its gates to them. It was indeed a time of national emergency. Is it any wonder that the Master of the Temple was rather frightened? But history was being made in that tramping up and down, the march of history not just of this country, but of the world. And from the Temple in May, yet another Charter issued which guaranteed the City of London the right freely to elect its own Lord Mayor, a concession born out of the King’s weakness, and offered unreservedly. And so on to Runnymede, and after Runnymede and the nullification of the Charter what then? And, I am sorry to have taken so long to get here: one of the ultimate saviours of the great Charter is buried here. William Marshal, Earl of Pembroke, is not a name anyone can conjure with today. Yet he is one of our major heroic historic figures. In the Charter his name is the first mentioned of the non-clerical men noted in the Charter as advising the King. And indeed he did. He was a

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

rare creature, trusted for his integrity by the Barons as well as the King. Fortunately for history King John died in 1216, leaving a small boy as his heir. William Marshal was elected Regent. Within a short time he had reissued new versions of the Charter. He did this in 1216 and 1217. And then, 70 years old or so, he returned to the field of battle and drove the French out of England. And just before he died shortly afterwards, he became a Templar. Gradually, but very quickly bearing in mind there were no newspapers or television or telephones or emails or Twitter or Facebook, the requirements of the King for tax were negotiated in Parliament by his confirmation of the great Charter and the Charter became embedded in the consciousness of people. Over the next couple of hundred years these confirmations followed on numerous occasions. And yet as early as 1226 we have the records of a case in which a group of knights from Lincolnshire criticised the High Sheriff for the way in which he was administering justice behaving, ‘contrary to their liberty which they ought to hold by the Charter of the Lord King’. In other words this was a direct appeal to the

Charter as the guardian of law and liberty, and gradually, whatever its actual terms might have been, becoming an iconic symbol of cherished freedoms. William Marshal is buried in this church. In May 1219, at his funeral the Archbishop of Canterbury described him as ‘the greatest knight that ever lived’. We are proud to call this church the cradle of the Common Law. As you leave you will find his effigy. Pause to acknowledge the debt which we all, and many generations all over the world, owe to him for infusing life into what otherwise would have been just one more piece of vellum. We are in a church. A medieval man with a deep faith, we know that Marshall died hoping to find eternal salvation. If any one of you here with a faith of his or her own offered a short prayer for the repose of his immortal soul, he would have appreciated it. A newly published illustrated booklet, Magna Carta, 1215-2015: London’s Temple and the Road to the Rule of Law, by Robin GriffithJones, Master of the Temple, is available at the Temple Church (£5).

Middle Temple and Magna Carta. Masters Ian Mayes and Robin Griffith-Jones set the American ball rolling for the Octingentenary of Magna Carta in 2015 with their visit to Master John Roberts, Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court, in his Chambers in November 2012. (Master Roberts was wearing his Middle Temple tie for the occasion!) Master Mayes went on to discuss 2015 with representatives of the American Bar Association, while Master Griffith-Jones flew up to Chicago to address the American Inns of Court there. America’s enthusiasm for the Charter and its celebration is palpable. The ABA is due to visit London, 12-14 June 2015; we hope to collaborate closely with the ABA on this run-up to Magna Carta Day itself, 15 June.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

121

F L E E T S T R E E T G AT E H O U S E

The Fleet Street Gatehouse by Master Eric Stockdale

he great fire of London in 1666 swept into the Temple from the east and fortunately stopped just short of the Middle Temple, by the Church and Inner Temple Hall. Our Inn was not so lucky with the next major fire, which broke out on 26 January 1679 in Middle Temple Lane at the junction of Pump Court and destroyed a large number of chambers. At about 10pm Roger North, a 27-year-old barrister in his chambers in Essex Court, heard the cry of ‘Fire!’ and was soon on the spot. He was a very talented young man and prolific writer, who gave a full description of the event in his autobiography Notes of Me, most skilfully edited by Peter Millard and published by the University of Toronto Press in 2000: ‘About midnight the lord mayor and sherriffs came downe, but the gentlemen of the Inner Temple affronted him, not owning his authority there, according to old tradition among them, and would want his help rather than connive at such a president to be made in derogation of their libertys, whereupon they beat down the sword, and would not permit it to be borne erect. At this he went over the way to a taverne, where some say he first gat drunk, and then returned, dismissing the engins he mett coming from the City. And some of his company were so kind to say, “Let’s blow ’em up round, and save Fleet Street.”’ Some buildings were indeed blown up to create firebreaks. The fact that much of the water in the Inn had been frozen had hampered the fire fighting. After he had cleared his chambers of his possessions, North invited the Duke of Monmouth (the King’s son) to demolish the building with

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

explosives. ‘I told the Duke if he thought it for the publik service to blow up there, he was free to doe it; and going out I heard him say he never mett with people so willing to be blowne up as these lawyers, so the train took, and my affair was at an end’. The fire was eventually extinguished after some fourteen hours, during which much damage had been done to Elm Court, Pump Court and the Cloisters, as well as to the Lane. The 100-year-old Hall had been spared. North made the interesting comment, ‘There were great endeavours to save the Midle Temple hall, which burnt had bin an irreparable loss, almost to dissolve the society’. The fire had started in the chambers adjoining those of the noted collector, Elias Ashmole, who had already promised to give his collection of valuable objects to Oxford University for what was to become the Ashmolean Museum. The most grievous losses caused by the fire were to his collections of coins, books, paintings and prints. Although a Cambridge man, the scholarly North doubtless sympathised with Ashmole and Oxford over their losses more deeply than many others. However, he was not greatly concerned about the loss of the old buildings, commenting, ‘The losses were not great, save the fabricks (which to say the truth, were better burnt than left, being for the most part such ragged deformd stuff)’. North had an inquiring mind and a wide range of interests, including mathematics and music. He was not only a versatile musician but an early musicologist. Before the fire he had not displayed any great interest in architecture, but after its extinction he

became fascinated by the subject, starting by sketching his own chambers and then contemplating a replacement of the old northern gatehouse, even though it had escaped destruction by the fire in the Lane. His collected thoughts on architecture were made readily available when Of Building – Roger North’s Writings on Architecture, edited by H. Colvin and J. Newman, was published by the Clarendon Press in 1981. In their introduction the editors quoted Lord Clarendon’s startling statement that he had regarded North ‘as one of the only two honest lawyers whom he had ever met’. North had been admitted to the Inn in 1669 and Called to Bar in 1674. His progress was greatly assisted by the success of his much older brother Francis, who had been Called by the Middle Temple in 1661 and appointed Chief Justice of the Common Pleas in 1675, after serving as AttorneyGeneral. Roger North was elected Lent Reader and a Bencher in 1682 and in October of the following year he became Treasurer, at the early age of 32. The present gatehouse at the top of Middle Temple Lane, repaired and redecorated in 2011, was erected during his year in office. Immediately after its completion, North was elected as the Member of Parliament for Dunwich in Suffolk, his home county – fortunately before the sea had completely swallowed up the constituency. Master Bruce Williamson stated in his 1925 history of the Temple that Christopher Wren had both designed the formal entrance to the Inn and had supervised its construction, but he was mistaken. Wren, who had come to architecture via mathematics, science and astronomy, certainly played a part, but

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

123

F L E E T S T R E E T G AT E H O U S E

it was a minor one, compared with North’s contribution. Wren had several links with the Inn. On 7 December 1669, the year in which he had been appointed the King’s Surveyor, he was married in the Temple Church to Faith, the daughter of his near neighbour, Sir Thomas Coghill, who had been admitted to the Inn in 1646. In 167072 Wren was responsible for the design and erection of Temple Bar, the formal entrance to the City of London, which was located in Fleet Street, just outside the top of the Lane. Wren’s wife died in 1675; their son Christopher, born shortly before his mother’s death, was admitted to the Middle Temple in 1693. As the recently published encyclopaedic history of the Inn shows, Wren immediately after the fire designed the replacement for the destroyed Cloisters and also worked on improvements to the Temple Church. The reredos that he then designed was ripped out by Victorian ‘improvers’, but fortunately returned after the post-1945 reconstruction of the bombed-out church. However, it was North and not Wren who designed the replacement gatehouse and his elevation drawing was included in their book by Colvin and Newman. Wren suggested that North could reduce the cost of construction by using some wood and plaster in the pediment and entablature, but North deliberately ignored that advice, writing later that in doing so he had acted ‘out of a proud high spirit, and made the whole of stone’. On 6 February 1684 the Benchers of the Inn agreed that the craftsmen who had built it should receive the amounts ‘allowed by Sir Christopher Wren and Mr. North’. Wren had

124

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

presumably declined to charge for his services in relation to the Cloisters and the gatehouse, for in the summer of 1684 the Benchers thanked him with a gift of a dozen silver trencher plates, at a cost of some £48. North was rewarded by being granted possession of ‘the uppermost chamber over the Great Gate.’ The present façade is very close to that shown in North’s drawing, with one significant difference. North drew, and had built, a single large carriageway opening, flanked by a single shop window on each side. The Inn records show that in 1733 the eastern shop was let to Francis Coggan and the western one to Benjamin Motte. Both tenants were booksellers and presumably supplied some law books. At some stage, possibly because Middle Templars did not care to share the sole opening with horse-drawn traffic, the eastern shop became the present-day pedestrian entrance and the western one a part of the chambers there. That arrangement may be contrasted with the Carey Street archway of Lincoln’s Inn, which started out with a central carriageway and two flanking pedestrian openings, both later converted into Wildy’s bookshop, with the carriageway being converted to pedestrian use only. The writer recalls that the Fleet Street carriageway gate used to be kept open during working days until about 6pm. Taxi drivers and other motorists often used Middle Temple Lane as a shortcut from the Embankment to Fleet Street and the Strand, partly because newspaper traffic, and especially the delivery vans of two evening papers, made the small roads to the east of the Temple almost impenetrable. Traffic emerging

into Fleet Street proved to be a nuisance, especially if turning right, and so the Inn decided to close the main gate permanently for vehicles. Although the Temple suffered grievously during the bombing of London, with worse fires than those of the 17th century, the narrow gatehouse survived unscathed and in January 1950 it was listed under the Town and Country Planning Act of 1947 as being of special architectural or historical interest. The bombers had failed to destroy the building, but a post-War tenant nearly succeeded. At a date unknown to the Inn’s surveyor, a tenant of the room above the central support over the carriageway decided to enlarge the space available for a kitchen sink. He chipped away a significant amount of the structure at its most crucial point. Fortunately, his home improvement was discovered and repaired in time. The Inn has recently renamed the library building by giving it the name of the donor of its first library; it is now the Ashley Building. Perhaps the time is now ripe for the Inn to acknowledge the name of the true architect of the Fleet Street entrance, the remarkable young polymath Treasurer of 1683-4. ‘The North Gatehouse’ would seem to be an appropriate tribute to the man. There is in addition, of course, the compass point. Eric Stockdale was a barrister of the Middle Temple for 22 years and a Circuit judge for another 22. After taking the California Bar exam and being admitted as an attorney, he was Chairman and President of the Society of English and American Lawyers in England. He has written books on legal and historical subjects and is a visiting professor at the University of Hertfordshire.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

M I X E D R AC E G E O RG I A N F L E E T S T R E E T

What Dr Johnson Knew by Julie Flavell

‘

How is it,’ wrote Dr Johnson in 1775, ‘that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty among the drivers of Negroes?’ Georgian London’s famous author was outraged to see American colonists demanding their freedom while denying it to their slaves. A year before the Declaration of Independence, he pronounced the American rebellion a sham. But where, exactly, did he see these hypocritical American rebels while living and writing from his home near Fleet Street? Johnson scholars have guessed that he picked up knowledge of Britain’s slave colonies from plays and newspapers. In fact some of Dr Johnson’s best friends were slave owners, and there were many slaves living in and around Georgian Fleet Street. A new historical walk from the Temple to Lincoln’s Inn recreates the mixed race look of the district as Dr Johnson knew it in the eighteenth century. To walk it, begin at the George, a pub in the Strand where Dr Johnson occasionally stopped for a drink.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

Duck into Devereux Court, the narrow passageway just beside it that takes you directly into the warren of ancient buildings that make up the Inns of Court. A couple of turnings lead to the Devereux, a popular pub for barristers from the nearby Royal Courts. In Dr Johnson’s day it was a coffee house called the Grecian. American icon Benjamin Franklin used to come here to drink with the Learned Club, a convivial spin-off of the Royal Society. Franklin, who spent seventeen years between 1757 and 1775 in London as spokesman for the colonies, had moved up in the world since he was a bustling Philadelphia printer. Now a colonial gentleman, he brought with him to London his slave Peter. The two Pennsylvanians blended in well in a precinct where wealthy white Americans escorted by slaves were an everyday sight. Turn left out of the secluded courtyard and enter an open space where broad stone steps descend into Fountain Court, the spacious heart of

the Temple. Here stands the famous Middle Temple Hall, a striking Tudor building where Shakespeare produced the first performance of Twelfth Night. In the eighteenth century, West Indians and Americans from Britain’s New World colonies could be seen coming and going from Middle Temple Hall with their African slaves. Scores of plantation owners came to the Inns of Court to study law, including four signers of the American Declaration of Independence. Many colonists brought slaves with them to save the expense of a London servant. One of them was William Franklin, son of the famous Benjamin, who brought his slave King with him when he studied here in 1757. When King ran away, the Franklins discovered him working for a lady in Suffolk. King’s new employer taught him to play the French horn and other skills ‘more useful in a servant’ grumped Ben Franklin, who hoped the troublesome King could be sold to the Englishwoman.

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

125

M I X E D R AC E G E O RG I A N F L E E T S T R E E T

From Fountain Court, exit into narrow Middle Temple Lane. Turn left and left again and enter Brick Court, where Johnson’s friend, the novelist and playwright Oliver Goldsmith, once lived. Goldsmith loved company, and befriended some of the young Americans in London. He threw legendary parties in his Brick Court rooms. Don’t look for them now; they were obliterated in the Blitz. If you explore a little further into Brick Court, you will find traces of a ghostly doorway that marks the entrance to Palsgrave Court, one of the many lost alleyways of the Temple. Go to the far right corner of the yard, where an ornate stone entrance to 4 Essex Court sports the lamb that is the emblem of Middle Temple. In the adjoining brick building to the left, where there should be a window, you can detect the outlines of the blocked up entrance. In 1762 student Ralph Weekes of Barbados lived in Palsgrave Court with his slave George Stewart. When George ran away, Ralph was forced to advertise, promising a reward to anyone who would return his ‘property’. In a country that had no slave codes, George and King were not the only slaves to abscond. Advertisements for the return of runaway slaves were everyday sights in London pubs and newspapers. Leave Brick Court and re-enter Middle Temple Lane, where on your left you will see a passageway marked ‘To Lamb Building’. Go in here and pass through the tiny garden of Elm Court. Straight ahead is one of the oldest buildings in the precinct, the fourteenth century Buttery. The steps beside it take you up to an arcade constructed of white arches.

126

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

Just beyond it is the famous Temple Church. This ancient building was founded in the twelfth century by the Knights Templars, the soldier monks who gave the Temple its name. Sunday attendance at Temple Church was mandatory for law students in the eighteenth century. One of them was John Laurens of South Carolina, whose father was a slave trader. When John began his studies in 1774, he befriended English poet and fellow Templar, John Day. The two would have seen black and white Americans attending service in Temple Church. Day – as outraged as Dr Johnson by the sight of slaves – wrote, ‘If there be an object truly ridiculous in nature, it is an American patriot signing resolutions of independency with one hand, and with the other brandishing a whip over his affrighted slaves.’ John Laurens returned to America to fight and die for his country’s independence, but Day’s words stuck. The young American risked his reputation promoting an unsuccessful scheme to offer South Carolina slaves freedom in return for military service. Turn right as you leave Temple Church and walk into Inner Temple Lane. Through its arched gateway is busy Fleet Street, where pubs from Dr Johnson’s day – the Bell Tavern, Ye Olde Cock, and Johnson’s favourite, the Cheshire Cheese – are still serving. In 1764, over 50 black servants held a ball in a Fleet Street pub, dancing and drinking until four in the morning. No whites were allowed. To visit Dr Johnson’s only remaining London residence, head for the Cheshire Cheese, and duck down narrow Wine Office Court on its left. Follow the signs to Dr Johnson’s House in nearby Gough Square.

While Dr Johnson was living here in 1752 Francis Barber, a ten-year-old slave boy, joined his household. Francis belonged to Richard Bathurst, a Middle Templar from Jamaica and one of Dr Johnson’s dearest friends. When Bathurst fell on hard times, Johnson took the lad in, and two years later Francis was set free. Richard Bathurst, like his famous friend, had no stomach for slavery. But not everyone in Johnson’s circle objected to slavery. James Boswell, the Doctor’s famous biographer, opposed the anti-slavery movement, and wrote bad poetry on the idyllic lives of West Indian slaves. But Boswell should have known better. The harsh realities of slavery could be seen much closer to home, in the streets and taverns around Fleet Street, and in the homes of Georgian Londoners, many of whom had no scruples about owning slaves. If you walk a short distance up Chancery Lane off Fleet Street, you will come to massive Lincoln’s Inn Gatehouse with its Tudor oak doors. In Dr Johnson’s day a fourteen-yearold slave boy was sold from a pub beside this gate. ‘His price is £25,’ ran the advertisement, ‘and would not be sold but the person he belongs to is leaving off business.’ Just through the gate stands the bell tower that inspired poet John Donne to write For Whom the Bell Tolls. Walk through the quiet precinct of Lincoln’s Inn into green and peaceful Lincoln’s Inn Fields, since the 1630s London’s largest public square. Originally published in the Yale Press Log, © 2011 by Julie Flavell, Fellow of the Royal Historical Society and author of When London Was Capital of America, Yale University Press.

M I C H A E L M A S 2013

F O RT H C O M I N G E V E N T S

Burns Night Saturday, 25 January 2014 Champagne Reception, four-course Dinner, and Reeling. Dining ticket prices from £85.50 per person (groups of 10) and non-dining tickets from £40.50 per person (groups of 10). Discounted prices for Middle Temple students. Reception at 7 pm, non-diners 9.30 pm, carriages 1 am. Highland Dress or Black Tie. Tickets are available from the Treasury Office on 020 7427 4800 or members@middletemple.org.uk.

Clerks’ Dinner Thursday, 6 February 2014 The Inn hosts a Clerks’ Dinner every 5 years. This is a fantastic opportunity for all Barrister and Judicial Members of the Inn to entertain their Clerks in Hall on Thursday 6 February 2014. It is a very popular event and we urge members to purchase tickets early to avoid disappointment. Dress is Black Tie and the cost is £65 per person, to include reception wine, three course dinner, wine and port. Tickets are available now from the Treasury Office and are offered on a first come, first served basis. For further information please contact the Treasury Office on 020 7427 4800 or email members@middletemple.org.uk.

Music Night Friday, 14 February 2014 Music Night Performance by Callum Au Big Band with Emma Smith on vocals after Dinner. 6.30 for 7.00 pm. Day suit with gown. Tickets are available from the Treasury Office on 020 7427 4800 or members@middletemple.org.uk.

2014 MT Historical Society Supper Talks MTHS talks are preceded by drinks and buffet supper (£25 or £15 for students). Members of the Inn and their friends are warmly welcome and are invited to join the Society for a £5 annual subscription. If you wish to attend a meeting, please contact us at least a week ahead. Bookings and enquiries about joining the Society should be addressed to Paola Kovacz by email to: mths@middletemple.org.uk Tuesday, 4 March 2014 Professor John Miller The Glorious Revolution and the Rule of Law John Miller is the Emeritus Professor of History at Queen Mary, University of London. His many publications include acclaimed biographies of King Charles II and King James II. King James did not set out to destroy the constitution and believed that his interpretation of the law and his prerogative was the correct one. Did the Bill of Rights impose new restrictions on the monarchy or did it seek merely to clarify grey areas? Wednesday, 9 April 2014 Master Eric Stockdale Roger North: A Seventeenth Century Treasurer, Architect and Polymath Master Stockdale has a wide knowledge of the Inn and its former members and contributed to the History of the Middle Temple (2011). He will be talking about Roger North, who was not only a lawyer and former Treasurer of the Inn, but also a philosopher, a Fellow of the Royal Society and the architect who designed the present north gateway to Middle Temple Lane. Tuesday 24th June 2014 7.15pm for 7.30pm A musical tour of the London Charterhouse, Charterhouse Square, Smithfield, a former Carthusian priory and, later, a Tudor mansion. The cost is £40 each (no food included). Please book by 14 June. M I C H A E L M A S 2013

THE MIDDLE TEMPLAR

127

INN EVENTS January 2014

April 2014

Tuesday, 21

All Inn Dining

Friday, 24

Reduced Shakespeare Company Performance

Saturday, 25

Thursday, 3

Bench Call

Tuesday, 8

Music Night: South Bank Sinfonia

Sunday, 13

London Marathon

Tuesday, 15

TMF Concert: Benjamin Grosvenor and the Escher Quartet

Burns Night Friday, 18 – Sunday 20

February 2014 Saturday, 1

Hamlet Performance

May 2014 Cambridge University MT Society Dinner at Clare College

Friday, 9 – Sunday, 11

Thursday, 6

Clerks’ Dinner

Monday, 12

Middle Temple Oxford Society Dinner

Tuesday, 11

Honorary Bench Call

Thursday, 15

Private Guest Night for Younger Guests

Friday, 14

Music Night: Callum Au Big Band, with Emma Smith on vocals

Monday, 19

London Legal Walk

Tuesday, 20

Temple Women’s Forum

Saturday, 15

Ordinary Dining

Thursday, 22

Annual Dinner

Sunday, 16

Sunday Lunch

Monday, 17

Guest Lecture

Tuesday, 18

Reader’s Feast

Thursday, 27

Private Guest Night

Four Jurisdictions Law Conference (Belfast)

June 2014

March 2014 Saturday, 1

Circuit Judges Dinner

Thursday, 13

Call Day

Sunday, 16

Sunday Lunch

Monday, 17

Guest Lecture

Tuesday, 18

Monday, 9

TMF Concert: Sir John Tomlinson and Julius Drake

Tuesday, 10

Moot Semi-Final

Thursday, 19

Private Guest Night

Monday, 23

Moot Semi-Final

Wednesday, 25

BACFI/Employed Bar Reception

July 2014 Tuesday, 1

Middle Temple Garden Party

Tuesday, 8

Music Night: Elias Quartet and Simon Crawford Phillips

TMF Concert: My Dearest Hedgehog: the tempestuous marriage of Richard and Pauline Strauss

Wednesday, 9

TMF Concert: Ian Bostridge, Sophie Daneman and Julius Drake

Sunday, 13

Temple Family Picnic Day (at Inner Temple)

Monday, 24

Temple Women’s Forum

Monday, 14

All Inn Dining

Tuesday, 25

Evensong Service and Dinner in honour of The Lord Mayor, Sheriffs and Aldermen of the City

Wednesday, 16

Private Guest Night

Tuesday, 22

Bench Call

Thursday, 24

Call Day

Events in Bold are Qualifying Sessions. Events and dates may change. For the latest information, please check the Inn’s website

www.middletemple.org.uk To book tickets for events please contact the Treasury Office on 020 7427 4800 or email members@middletemple.org.uk Benchers please contact Bench Administration on 020 7427 4804 or email benchers@middletemple.org.uk for TMF and Temple Song Concerts, contact 020 7427 5641 or book online at www.templemusic.org