Middle templar issue 55 michaelmas 2015 by Middle Temple

The Middle Templar Issue 55 Michaelmas 2015

The 800th Anniversary of Magna Carta: Special Edition

Treasurer: Stephen Hockman QC Deputy Treasurer: The Right Honourable Lord Justice Christopher Clarke Lent Reader: The Right Honourable Lord Justice Rupert Jackson Autumn Reader: His Honour Judge Paul Worsley QC Editorial Consultants: Adam Speker Carolyn Toulmin Editor: Colin Davidson Assistant Editors: Dimpy Sanganee Lauren McHardy Photographs: Chris Christodoulou Peter Jones And the Innâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own Design: Nrinder Dhillon John Good Ltd Printed by: John Good Ltd, Progress Way, Binley, Coventry, CV3 2NT Front Cover: Magna Carta Silver Bowl by Chris Christodoulou Contacts: General Enquiries The Treasury Office Ashley Building Middle Temple Lane London EC4Y 9BT T: 020 7427 4800 F: 020 7427 4801 E: members@middletemple.org.uk W: www.middletemple.org.uk Estates T: 020 7427 4840 E: estates@middletemple.org.uk Events T: 020 7427 4820 E: events@middletemple.org.uk Finance T: 020 7427 4800 E: finance@middletemple.org.uk Library T: 020 7427 4830 E: library@middletemple.org.uk Security (24 Hours) T: 020 7797 7768 E: security@middletemple.org.uk Temple Church T: 020 7353 8559 E: catherine@templechurch.com

Under Treasurer’s Foreword GUY PERRICONE Welcome to the 2015 edition of The Middle Templar. When I wrote my foreword in last year’s edition, I was barely nine months into my role as Under Treasurer, but was already able to reflect on a very wide range of experiences in that brief time: it had certainly been a very busy introduction to the Inn. However, any notion that last year was exceptional in the level of activity and diversity of experiences has been squarely rebutted by the past 12 months. I am beginning to sense that every year at the Inn will be extraordinary! Last summer, our Treasurer in 2014, Master Igor Judge, delivered his keynote lecture on the topic of ‘The Future of the Inn’. In this, he posed a number of fundamental questions, obliging us to focus on the role and relevance of the Inns of Court today. Since then, under the leadership of his successor as Treasurer, Master Stephen Hockman, we have been working on various fronts to address some of those questions. The main theme uniting all these initiatives has been the need for the Inn to remain in touch with, and relevant to, its members. To do this, we have to recognise that our membership is more varied today than it has ever been, as well as more geographically diverse. Master Hockman, and Master Judge before him, have both been very keen to involve our Hall members in this discussion, and the Hall Committee has been working hard to this end. Once again this year, Master Treasurer has travelled around the Circuits to meet our members and discuss with them challenges they currently face. We must also recognise that, as the profession changes, the needs of our members also change, and the Inn must adapt the range of membership services it provides. In order for the Inn to serve these needs as effectively as possible, we are of course extremely interested in knowing what services our members would want the Inn to provide. Over the past year, a number of new initiatives have been undertaken in response to our members’ requests. These have ranged from new menus and offers in our catering, to the provision of baggage storage for members and additional overnight accommodation. In the course of the last year, we have prepared a new Members’ Guide and also launched new E-newsletters for members and Benchers. I would encourage all our members, wherever they are, to read these and send us your thoughts and any feedback. We are in the process

of developing our strategic plan for the next five years and beyond, and having this information will be extremely helpful in formulating this plan. In my foreword last year, I also wrote of the forthcoming commemoration of the 800th anniversary of Magna Carta. This began with a very successful trip by a delegation from Middle and Inner Temple, with the Temple Church and Choir, to Washington DC last November, during which the Choir performed at the Supreme Court and the Library of Congress. The commemoration in the UK came to a climax on 15 June at a major ceremony at Runnymede attended by Her Majesty The Queen, the Prime Minister and numerous dignitaries, including The Master of the Rolls, Master John Dyson; the Master of the Temple, Master Robin GriffithJones; and the Temple Choir who performed wonderfully in this most beautiful setting. In this edition of The Middle Templar, you will find a number of Magna Carta-related articles, including a review of the trip to Washington DC, and Master Judge’s Magna Carta lecture. Elsewhere, you will find the usual diverse and fascinating range of articles, from Master Anthony Arlidge writing about the very generous donation by Master Mark Rylance of his Tony Award to the Inn, to an extract from Master Robert Lisvane's absorbing guest lecture on 'The Courts and Parliament'. The commemoration of Magna Carta has provided a very timely and inspiring reminder of this country’s contribution to the principle of the rule of law as the basis of a fair society. A healthy, independent and dynamic legal profession is integral to this, and to the proper administration of justice. The Inns of Court have played, and must continue to play, a key role in supporting the Bar, and in fostering and promoting its unique ethos, which is admired and respected around the world.

Under Treasurer's Foreword

Contents 1

Under Treasurer’s Foreword

Guy Perricone

30 Book Review: Easter Rising 1916 The Trials

4 7 8

From The Treasurer

Master John Mitchell

Master Stephen Hockman

32 Runnymede

The Inn’s Governance Structure ‘The Embankment Is Coming’

34 Security and Front of House

10 Temple Church Anniversary of the London Charter

Master Richard Chartres

12 Great Expectations

Master Anthony Arlidge

13 Theatre Review: Murder in the Cathedral by T S Eliot

Master Anthony Speaight

14 How Much Stress is Good for You?

Louise McCullough

15 Middle Temple Mentoring Scheme

Louise McCullough

16 How Much is Too Much? Privacy Damages and Phone-hacking

Adam Speker

18 A Dip Into The Archive: A Bibliophile, a Pirate and a Bigamist

Master Stephen Lloyd

20 The Impact of Magna Carta

Master Igor Judge

22 Bartolomé de las Casas at Middle Temple Library

Renae Satterley

24 Book Review: Magna Carta Uncovered

Master David Ormerod

26 The Tony Award

Master Anthony Arlidge

28 Honorary Bench Call

Master Michael Ashe

Master David Wurtzel

Master Christopher Clarke Ian Garwood

35 Issues Facing the Junior Bar

Juliette Levy

36 The Advocacy Training Council

The Hon Mr Justice Nicholas Green

38 Lent Reading: The Origins of Legal London

Master Rupert Jackson

40 Called to Bar: Royal Benchers

Jeffrey Hyland

42 Stories Behind the Portraits: Lord Lindley MR

Dandy Malet

44 Book Review: The Art of Persuasion Tradition and Technique

Master Derek Wood

46 The Vancouver Magna Carta Dinner

Master Alastair Sharp

48 Rare Gifts to the Inn

Lesley Whitelaw

50 Temple Women’s Forum Garden Party

Elaine Banton

52 The Hall Committee

Zoe O’Sullivan QC

54 The Magna Carta Bowl

Master Ian Burnett

55 MT Historical Society Supper Talks Calendar 56 Human Rights Act

Master Shami Chakrabarti

58 Litigants in Person

Master Angela Finnerty

60 OPO

Felicity McMahon

80 The Criminal Bar and the Inn: A Personal View

Master Geoffrey Rivlin

62 Magna Carta: The Norman Connection

82 Grab the Popcorn: UK Supreme Court launches ‘Video on-Demand’ Service

Catherine Rabey

Alexandra Little

63 The Four Jurisdictions Conference: Edinburgh

84 The Liberation of the Camps

86 Book Review: Send for Benson! A Life of Sir Christopher Benson

Master Guy Mansfield

Education Section 64 Middle Temple Scholarships 66 The True Value of the Middle Temple Scholarship Scheme

Emmanuel Fagbemi

68 The Anglo-Israel Scholarship 2014

Shannon Revel

69 Debating

Imogen Lawson-Cruttenden

70 Fox Scholarship

Matthew R Crowe

71 COIC Pupillage Matched Funding Scheme 72 MTSA

Irene Sriharan

74 Student Views from ‘the North’

Rebecca Carr and Stacey Coatman

75 Getting the Most From Your BPTC Year

Rachael Wake

77 My Middle Temple Journey

James Keeley

78 MTYBA

Karen Reid

79 Judicial Review Competition Final

Matthew Allan and Chucks Golding

Master Robin Griffith-Jones

Master Richard Hill

88 Gardeners Project

Kate Jenrick

90 The Middle Temple Garden Party 92 Big Voice London

Emily Lanham

94 Magna Carta: Runnymede to Philadelphia

Robert J Olejar

96 Waterloo and the Middle Temple

Lesley Whitelaw

98 Temple Church Choir Trips: Washington DC and Holland

Roger Sayer

100 Temple Church Calendar 2015-16 101 Temple Church Weddings 102 ABA Magna Carta Celebrations

Master Gerard McDermott

104 Guest Lecture: The Courts and Parliament

Master Robert Lisvane

106 New Masters of the Bench 110 Obituaries 119 In Memoriam 120 Staff News 124 Middle Temple Events Calendar 2015-16

Contents

From The Treasurer MASTER STEPHEN HOCKMAN The Middle Templar is now very well established as an annual compilation of reports about a range of activities carried out within or on behalf of the Inn. It is thus not only an important component in the Innâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s collective memory, but also an opportunity for individual members of the Inn, including the Treasurer, to communicate with colleagues as to their views and activities. A key current area of work is the upgrading of the Innâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s membership database; in broad terms, the Inn has at least 20,000 surviving members, of whom probably about half are in practice, employed or self-employed, in the UK or abroad. With these, we remain in substantial contact, but with others we may well have had little recent interaction. The Inn has set up an International Committee to strengthen links with our alumni abroad, and our Amity visit this year will be to Hong Kong. We are increasingly seeing the role of Middle Temple as being to support its members in their professional careers, and much thought is being given to the best way in which to fulfil that objective. It is noteworthy that, insofar as the members of the Inn practise at the publicly funded Bar, the way forward has recently been plotted by a committee under the chairmanship of our own Master Geoffrey Rivlin. Traditionally, however, the key function of the Inn was, and remains, in relation to access to the Bar, and this involves thinking about a number of distinct, albeit overlapping, problems. The first problem is how to ensure that young men and women from every part of society, and from any and every ethnic, cultural and religious background, have a fair opportunity to enter the profession. Our Equality, Diversity and Social Mobility Committee is concentrating on this issue, and it is increasingly clear that progress will depend, not only on the efficacy of our scholarship arrangements, but also on reaching out much more pro-actively to those parts of society (such as schools in less affluent areas) which have traditionally been relatively remote from practice at the Bar. This year, pupils from a considerable number of such schools

have attended our well established and successful guest lecture series, and this initiative has proved to be extremely worthwhile. But there are two further crucial stages in the process of access. The first is the professional training available to prospective barristers, which is subject to the regulation of the Bar Standards Board under the Legal Services Act 2007. Most people know that the existing Bar course has been heavily criticised on quality and cost grounds, and a key task this year has been to work together with those sharing such concerns (whether it be in the Inns of Court, the BSB or the schools where the course is delivered) to try to address the criticisms. The second outstanding issue is, however, perhaps the most important. Throughout my time at the Bar, the essential weakness in its recruitment system has been the mismatch between the number of those seeking to practise and the number of places available - whether in the employed or self-employed sector. I have never accepted the view that there is insufficient work available for the Bar to allow increased access to it by those young people who unquestionably have the talent to succeed. I believe that there is a huge unmet need for legal services today, just as there was when I started at the Bar in 1970. What is lacking is a co-ordinated system for organising the supply of professionals to deliver those services. I am pleased to say that the Middle Temple Hall Committee has this year made these issues a 'special subject'. Ideas being considered include expanding the number of pupillages in both the employed and self-employed sectors, and facilitating crossqualification between the two branches of the profession. I may add that all these problems, and others, have been the subject of intensive debate at an Open Meeting in Hall for the membership of the Inn, a precedent which I suspect will be repeated in the months and years ahead. This has been a year not only for looking forward, but also for looking back to some events which shaped the role of the Inn as it is today. Early in the year 1215, when the

Temple was still in the hands of the Knights Templar, King John met the barons in the recently consecrated Temple Church and embarked upon a series of discussions, which led to the issue of the Magna Carta on 15 June in that year; hence the Choir of the Temple Church played a significant role in the 800th anniversary celebrations which took place in Runnymede on 15 June 2015. When in 1608, King James I granted Middle Temple the right to occupy its land in perpetuity, he demanded that the land should be used for ‘the accommodation and education of those following’ the profession. In my foreword to the new edition of The Middle Temple: A Guide, I have tried to produce an expanded and updated version of our key purposes, which are set out alongside. It has been a huge pleasure and privilege to have the temporary stewardship of an institution with such an historic and fascinating position in our society.

Our Key Purposes he Middle Temple, as one of the Inns of Court, plays •T a key role in underpinning our democracy. Whilst it is Parliament which generally makes the law, the interpretation and enforcement of the law rests upon our independent and impartial judiciary, and our judicial system in turn depends on men and women of skill and integrity to advise, and when necessary to represent, those to whom the law applies. • The Middle Temple trains and calls its members (including those from overseas jurisdictions) to the Bar of England and Wales, and continues as their home or (in the word used in the traditional toast) Domus, throughout their careers. Overseas students, once trained and called to the Bar here, may decide to stay on, or to join the many Middle Temple alumni around the world, whose loyalty remains strong. • Like the Crown and the other institutions of government, Middle Temple has an ancient heritage, but whether here or abroad, performs a crucial service for the benefit of the community of today and tomorrow.

From The Treasurer

Committee Structure 2015 Parliament

Executive Committee • • • •

Education & Training

Membership

Related to being a member of the profession

Related to being a member of the Inn

•E & T strategy, policy & support • Conduct, Discipline & Regulatory Affairs (S-C) • Equality, Diversity and Social Mobility (S-C) • Scholarships & Prizes (S-C) • Advocacy training • Bar-related policy • Professional regulatory affairs • Other ( i.e. non-advocacy) training

•M embership-related strategy, services & support • Bar-related policy • Professional regulatory affairs • Development of social & professional services • Events and participation • Liaison with Hall Committee, MTYBA and MTSA • Scholarship Fund Appeal (S-C) • International (S-C)

Estates • • • • • • •

Estate strategy Lease policy Rents & Tenancies Security Car parks The House Garden

Other Statutory Committees: Appointments Committee Audit & Risk Committee BSAC Church Committee Choir Committee Hall Committee

Finance & Resources • • • • • • • • • • •

Financial planning & budgets Investments (S-C) Finance Audit Asset & Risk Registers Charitable Trusts (S-C) Pension Trustees (S-C) Staff remuneration (S-C Trust Fund Trustees (S-C) Archive IT Library

Master Andrew Hochhauser (Chairman) Master Bernard Richmond (Deputy Chairman)

Master Alistair Webster (Chairman) Master Adrienne Page (Deputy Chairman)

Master Stephanie Barwise (Chairman) Master Fergus Randolph (Deputy Chairman)

Master Richard Miller (Chairman) Master Philippa Whipple (Deputy Chairman)

Relevant Masters:

Director of MTA Moots Debating

Events Kitchen Music Revels Silver Wine (S-C)

House Garden

Archive IT Library

Director of Middle Temple Advocacy Master of the Archive Master of Debating Master of Events Masters of the Garden Master of the House Master of IT Master of the Kitchen Master of the Library Masters of the Moots Master Master Master Master Master

Oversight of the Inn’s business affairs Development of Inn-wide strategy Coordination of Inn policy Business Continuity Planning Master of the Statutes

of of of of of

the the the the the

Music Revels Silver Statutes Wine

Key: (S-C) Sub-Committee

Master Derek Wood Master Michael Ashe Master David Reade Master Michael Gledhill Masters Judith Parker and Stephen Lloyd Master Ian Mayes Master Robert-Jan Temmink Master Marilynne Morgan Master Peter Susman Masters Rachel Langdale and Kate Thirlwall Master Stanley Burnton Master Stephanie Farrimond Master Ian Burnett Master Rodney Stewart Smith Master Ian Mill

Chairmen of the other Statutory Committees Appointments Committee: Master Treasurer Risk Committee: Master Ros Wright Church Committee: Master Ian Mayes Choir Committee: Sir Anthony Hooper (Inner Temple) Hall Committee: Zoe O'Sullivan

The Inn's Governance Structure

‘The Embankment Is Coming’ MASTER JOHN MITCHELL Anything which threatens the peace of the Temple has always concerned its inhabitants. In 1604, for example, the Benchers of the Inner Temple noted that the Inn was ‘greatly grieved and exceedingly disquieted by many beggars, vagabonds and sundry idle and lewd persons who daily pass out of all parts of the city into the garden … and there have stayed and kept all the whole day as their place of refuge and sanctuary’. But until the Second World War nothing troubled the Temple more than the construction of the Victoria Embankment between 1863 and 1870. The growth in London’s population and the growing popularity of the water closet in preference to privies which discharged into cesspits, had turned the wide and slow flowing Thames into an open sewer and by 1858 the ‘Great Stink’ could no longer be ignored. However, Parliamentary progress on a Bill designed to remedy matters was slow until the summer heat made the use of the rooms of Parliament closest to the River impossible. On 18 June The Times reported that ‘A few members, bent on investigating the matter to its very depth, ventured into the Library but they were instantaneously driven to retreat, each man with a handkerchief to his nose’. Members of the Inn must have

only avoid the need for extensive construction work in the heavily congested Strand but would also provide alternative routes between the Cities of London and Westminster as well as allowing the river to flow more quickly. An engraving in the Illustrated London News in February 1865 showed the gargantuan and complex nature of the undertaking. Before the mile long road and the tunnels, which would carry the sewer and the permanent way, could be laid, coffer dams had to be built to allow about 50 acres of riverbed to be pumped dry and stabilised. Almost 30 million cubic feet of earth would be excavated, 6 million cubic feet of brickwork and cement used for the road and tunnels and 650,000 cubic feet of granite for building the river wall. Arthur Munby, a member of Lincoln’s Inn who had residential chambers in Fig Tree Court (now part of Elm Court) described in his diary in April 1863 the great mound of earth, an acre in extent, which carts were pouring on the Thames shoreline. A wall of scaffolding already impeded the view across the river from Inner Temple Gardens. ‘Oh Public Good, what private wrongs are committed in thy name!’ By May all he could see from the Middle Temple Gardens were scaffolding beams and dredging engines ranging far out

...until the Second World War nothing troubled the Temple more than the construction of the Victoria Embankment between 1863 and 1870. encountered similar experiences after its own new library opened in 1861. Its southern wall, approximately level with the present southern flank of Queen Elizabeth Building, ran so close to the river that it was possible to drop a stone into the water. By October 1858 the Metropolis Local Management Amendment Act was passed directing the construction of sewers for the improvement of the main drainage of the Metropolis and preventing the discharge of sewage into the Thames. Joseph Bazalgette, the Chief Engineer to the Metropolitan Board of Works devised a scheme for siting a low level sewer and an underground railway below an embankment running between Westminster Bridge and Blackfriars on land reclaimed from the river. This would not

into the river and acres of man-made land rising above the high water mark. ‘Carried off to make way for the monster’ were the ancient Temple Stairs, a jetty that had given access to river boats since at least the days of the Knights Templar. Gone too were the female mud larks Munby had seen crawling between the barges and wading in black mud even when it was covered by thick ice. It was not merely the noise, the dirt and the inconvenience which concerned the inhabitants, but also the permanent loss of their view. In the same month Munby recorded how he had enjoyed a view over the trees of the Gardens and the broad river to the Surrey shore beyond and the hills of Penge:

The little steamers have darted to and fro, brisk and noiseless; the stately hay-barges have swept upwards with the tide and the sun on their brown sails and grey-gold freight and green hills and at night the line of wharfs and warehouses on the further bank have seemed like a long façade of Italian palaces, lit by many points of red and saffron tint….Now it is gone for ever, not from me only but from all the Temple. For the Embankment is coming. Fine though this description is and genuine though Munby’s distress was, another view was possible. In the eyes of Charles Dickens, a former member of the Inn, the Thames was ‘a deadly sewer’ ebbing and flowing through the heart of London, carrying scum from lime works and bone-grinders and within it the floating remains of creatures from knackers’ yards. For scenery there was broken ground, a public house or two, and an old mill and a tall chimney. For him, the building of the Embankment was ‘a really fine work and really getting on’. After seven years the work was completed and on 13 July 1870 the Prince of Wales, the Inn’s Royal Bencher, declared the Victoria Embankment officially open. The Inns had successfully defeated a proposal to create new docks by the riverside and had gained an extra 200 feet to its depth of frontage. There was room for larger gardens and new buildings along Middle Temple Lane and for Temple Gardens to be built and shared with Inner Temple. The right of access to the river was preserved by the provision of granite landing steps marked with the insignia of the two Inns. However, once the Temple Underground station opened at the end of May 1870, the members no longer needed ferries to reach the Westminster courts although it must be admitted that a

journey by boat or on foot remained for a number of years preferable to the choking and sulphurous atmosphere of the tunnels. The Benchers had excelled themselves by securing a concession in the Metropolitan District Railway Act 1864 which prohibited locomotives blowing off steam and, save in an emergency, steam whistles being sounded within the limits of the Temple. Even Arthur Munby was satisfied. In January 1869, he described his journey to his work at the offices of the Ecclesiastical Commission at Westminster along the footway available to pedestrians for some time prior to the opening: The bright morning sun shone on the broad bright river, and on the white walls of the Embankment which stretch away in a noble curve to Westminster, under the dark contrasting masses of the bridges. There is silence, except for the tread of passers by; there is life and movement, almost noiseless on the water; there is infinite sky above. What a change from the vulgar riot of the Strand! One begins to feel that London is a City, like the cities of old when men knew how to build.

Master Mitchell is the Chairman of the Middle Temple Historical Society. Called to the Bar in 1972 and to the Bench in 2012, he was appointed District Judge in 1999 and Circuit Judge in 2006. He currently sits at the Central London Civil Justice Centre.

The Embankment Is Coming

Temple Church Anniversary of the London Charter: 14 May 2015 MASTER RICHARD CHARTRES Tonight we celebrate a significant moment in the ascent of London from the Roman ruin King Alfred knew, to our capital city. On 9 May King John was here at the Temple. The Master of the Temple in those days was the equivalent to Mark Carney, a central banker and representative of a sophisticated international organisation responsible for generating the enormous resources required for military action and state of the art fortifications in the remaining Crusader enclaves in the Holy Land. Serlo the Mercer was Mayor that year in 1215 and it is good to be commemorating the charter in which King John granted to the barons of the City of London the right ‘to choose to themselves every year a mayor’ in the presence of our own Lord Mayor. The charter stipulates that that the Mayor should, after election, be presented to the King ‘or our justice if we shall not be present’. As we all know, it is still the custom for the Lord Mayor at the beginning of his or her tenure to process to the Royal Courts to appear before the Lord Chief Justice. It is probable that the charter was all part of King John’s plan to bemuse and divide his enemies until his new ally the Pope could enter the lists and further demoralise the opposition coalition of barons and bishops. Indeed, as the King signed the charter here in the Temple, the rebellion was faltering and his tactics of delay and concessions, which could be repudiated later, appeared to be succeeding. There were Londoners, however, who were not conciliated by the new charter and in alliance with a rebel leader Robert Fitzwalter, Lord of Baynard’s Castle they took over the city on 17 May and barred the gates against the royal army. By doing so they changed the military balance of power. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Stephen Langton, was asked to arrange a truce and the road to Runnymede was opened up. Nevertheless, the charter represents an important milestone in the story of London’s progress from shell to shard. It was also the prelude to the assembly at Runnymede and the sealing of Magna Carta on 15 June 2015, 800 years ago. Once again the Master of the Temple was present, as

was my predecessor William de Ste Mere Eglise. Much work has been done in preparation for the anniversary, not least by Robert Worcester and his team, cheered on by our own judiciary and the American Bar Association. Distilling the significance and legacy of the Charter there are three notable principles in a mass of detailed prescriptions: 'There must be due process'; 'The monarch is answerable to the law'; 'Rights language is extended to “all free men” and not just an elite group'. So deeply embedded are these ideas in our own day that they can seem self-evident. Recent research, however, not least by Professor John Baldwin of Johns Hopkins University has illuminated the contribution made by the JudaeoChristian context in which the ideas of the Charter emerged. Professor Baldwin is a contributor to the recently published book of essays edited by the present Master of the Temple and Mark Hill QC; entitled Magna Carta, Religion and the Rule of Law. As a scholar at the University of Paris, Stephen Langton, Archbishop in 1215 used the Book of Deuteronomy to argue for a written form of law that would set out the rightful activity of kings and restrain their habitual excesses. Throughout much of the ancient world Caesar was god and political power was hedged with divinity. Law was regarded as the expression of the will of the ruler just as in more recent times it has been seen as the servant of the Party or the revolutionary avant garde. Religion too has often been tempted to turn this position on its head and proclaim God as Caesar. There are many examples from the strange mediaeval delusion that if political power were to be confided to clergymen all would be well. In fact Pope Innocent III was induced by his ally King John to denounce the Archbishop of Canterbury and those who were seeking to subordinate the monarch to the rule of law as accomplices of ‘the disturbers of the kingdom’. The Judaeo-Christian tradition derived from the Bible however not only sees royal power as limited by law but also opens up a space for secular life in which Caesar is not God and God is not Caesar. When

It is probable that the charter was all part of King John’s plan to bemuse and divide his enemies until his new ally the Pope could enter the lists and further demoralise the opposition coalition of barons and bishops.

Jesus was provocatively asked whether it was acceptable to pay taxes to the Roman occupying power, he pointed to Caesar’s head on a coin and said ‘render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s’. This has led to a dynamic culture in which there is a perpetual and salutary negotiation about the balance and relationship between the sphere of God and that of political power. Then again the concept of the equality of human beings which feeds into the principle that rights belong to ‘all free men’ has developed from one of the most explosive assertions of the Judaeo-Christian scriptures that all human beings are created in the image and likeness of God. There is no place for a caste system and the belief that human beings are all alike made in the image of God has proved over and over again subversive of notions of natural and inevitable hierarchy. In our own day when the possibility of developing enhanced human beings by genetic engineering has become conceivable we shall have to re-visit the foundations and the consequences of our belief in human equality. Other times and other cultures suggest that the notion of human equality is not at all self-evident. Part of the embarrassment of admitting the JudaeoChristian foundations of much of our culture is the understandable suspicion that those who claim a hotline to God are dangerously unaccountable. We have had to relearn in our own day what was obvious to the inhabitants of these islands in times when parts of the population had become obstinately metaphysical and religious fanaticism destroyed beauty and fuelled civil war, religion can be very dangerous. But there is another danger that in the absence of the God and Father of us all, people begin to regard themselves as so many little gods with a diminishing sense of accountability to anything outside their own pleasure. In the lesson read by our Lord Mayor, Solomon acknowledges that he has been chosen judge and ruler of the people yet ‘though a man be never so perfect among the children of men, yet if thy wisdom be not with him, he shall be nothing regarded’. Knowledge has given us power so great that more than any previous generation we could destroy our planetary home, rapidly by the power which comes from splitting the atom or slowly by losing respect for matter, seeing it as something simply to be exploited until it degrades and we leave our children a polluted and ravaged Eden. Solomon’s prayer is for the wisdom which transcends knowledge because it sets what we could do in the context of our accountability to God and other life forms as viceroys

and not masters of the earth, creatures of the dust who acknowledge the limits on our monarchical power. Jesus Christ, whose participation in the divine life we celebrate in this festival of the Ascension, taught that the very first step in becoming a human being is to refuse to be a little god. He came in the form of a servant and he was baptised in the river Jordan at the lowest place on earth, 1300 feet below sea level to be precise. For any civilisation to flourish; for any city to prosper, we need Kings and Judges and Mayors and even Bishops with a servant spirit, who know that far from being entitled to special treatment they are accountable to the Spirit who informs the Common Good and is expressed in the Law.

Master Chartres became the 132nd Bishop of London in November 1995 and is also Dean of HM Chapels Royal, a Privy Counsellor, Member of the House of Lords, President of Bible Society, an Honorary Bencher of the Middle Temple, a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries and associated with many other organisations both in London and nationally. He is appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury to chair the Board of Governors of the Church Commissioners and he is also responsible on behalf of the Archbishop for relations with the Orthodox Churches. He is founder of St Ethelburga’s Centre for Reconciliation and Peace and his publications include: The History of Gresham College 1597-1997 (with David Vermont) and Tree of Knowledge, Tree of Life and many articles and essays especially on religion and the environment. He is married to Caroline, a freelance writer, and they have four children.

Temple Church Anniversary of the London Charter: 14 May 2015

Great Expectations MASTER ANTHONY ARLIDGE

Dickens was admitted as a student at the Middle Temple in 1839. He regarded a career in the law as a possible alternative to writing, if he failed in the latter. I recently moved into a flat at 2 Garden Court, Top Floor South. It has lovely views over the Hall and gardens, with the dome of St Paul’s in the distance. Yet it has had an even more important resident than myself. Pip, in chapter 39 of Great Expectations, takes chambers in 2 Garden Court – the top floor in the last house before the river. Later the 19th Century library (destroyed in the Blitz) was built nearer to the river, about where Queen Elizabeth Building now stands. As Dickens, indicates the river was then much closer to the stairs beyond Garden Court. In fact my claim to live in his chambers is a trifle exaggerated – the building standing in 1860 was a different one, demolished in 1884 to make way for the current building. The general design of the two, however, was not so different. One night, when Pip is there on his own, there is a terrible storm with strong winds which extinguish the lamps in the Inn and blow the sounds of all the Church bells in London to his ears. Then he hears movements at the bottom of the staircase and goes out with a lamp. Someone answers his call and comes up the stairs. Pip does not recognise him but asks him in. After a few minutes he recognises the stranger as the convict who seized him in the graveyard on the edge of the Thames near Rochester when he lived with Joe Gargery and his wife. Gradually Magwitch describes how he built up a fortune as a cattleman when transported to Australia. He goes on to identify himself as Pip’s benefactor. Pip had always thought it was Miss Havisham who was responsible for the income he received in order that he should learn to be a gentleman and marry Estella. Now he realises that that dream has gone. Pip is in many ways a very unattractive man, who, when he comes into a considerable income, deserts those who brought him up. First he patronises and then is disgusted by Magwitch. He is told that when Magwitch was transported it was on terms that he never return to England; if he is caught he will be executed. Pip and Herbert Pocket hatch a plan to row him to Gravesend to take a packet ship

Great Expectations

to the Continent. They leave by rowing boat from the Temple stairs, collect Magwitch further downstream and take him to Gravesend. You will know Magwitch’s fate, or if you do not you should read the book. I still remember, at the age of nine, seeing David Lean’s film of Great Expectations and being absolutely terrified when Magwitch, played by Finlay Currie, appeared suddenly in the graveyard, grabbed a very young Pip and demanded victuals and a file. It still lives with me. In fact you can see the churchyard which is a model for the scene – St James’s Church, Cooling on the Isle of Grain near Rochester. It is identifiable because Dickens described five graves as small lozenges containing the remains of five infants from one family. They are still there, near a large slab grave on which Dickens used to picnic on his walks through the Thames marshes. More recently, Mike Newell made a film of the novel in which Robbie Coltrane played Mr Jagger and was filmed coming out of 2 Garden Court. Dickens was admitted as a student at the Middle Temple in 1839. He regarded a career in the law as a possible alternative to writing, if he failed in the latter. In 1855 he petitioned to withdraw from the Inn and asked for his deposit back. The Benchers generously allowed this.

Master Arlidge was Called to the Bar in 1962, took Silk in 1981 and became a Bencher in 1989. His practice is in general crime and fraud. He is the co-author of two leading text books, Arlidge and Parry on Fraud and Arlidge, Eady and Smith on Contempt of Court.

THEATRE REVIEW

MURDER IN THE CATHEDRAL by T S ELIOT

MASTER ANTHONY SPEAIGHT A Middle and Inner Temple production 30 January to 1 February 2015 The great west door of the Temple Church was flung open. We heard the scrape of steel on stone. This was a remarkably apt setting in which to perform the story of four armed men bursting into Canterbury Cathedral in 1170. The Round was then already in use, and one of the swords which carried out the murder later found its way into the Temple Church.

To stage Eliot’s verse drama here had been for some time the ambition of Master Treasurer, Stephen Hockman QC, who used his year as Treasurer of Middle Temple to do so. He assembled a mixed cast of six professional actors and 16 amateurs. The director was Joe Harmston, former Associate Director at Chichester. The Church is not an easy space in which to stage a play, with its long ranges of seating all facing a narrow central aisle, and the middle section of each side’s stalls so high as severely to limit sight lines. Harmston displayed ingenuity in creating a raised catwalk down the middle, and cleverly switching speech and action up and down so that no spectator felt deprived of a good view for long. He tackled the problem of lighting with many small spotlights at low level, thereby achieving striking effects at the same time as solving a technical challenge. It is the highest tribute to the amateurs that without the guidance of the biographies in the programme no observer would have hazarded with any confidence a guess as to who was in which category. This is not a straightforward play to stage, consisting as it does of long passages of verse, much of it in the collective mouth of the Women of Canterbury, who fulfil a role reminiscent of the chorus in a Greek

tragedy. On this occasion the Women, most of whom were practising barristers, were one of the highlights: speaking sometimes singly and sometimes in unison, they succeeded in combining a sense of poetry in delivery with an immediacy of meaning as the tension of the drama mounts. The close links between the Bar and the theatre were reflected in another way by the imaginative idea of transforming the knights into modern dress for the passage late in the play when Eliot has the murderers turn to the audience and attempt to justify what they have done. At this point the fourth knight reappeared in barrister’s robes. The arguments deployed have a worryingly contemporary echo, and made me feel a little nervous as to whether I might not have accepted a little too readily, some contemporary Western justifications for what was necessary in the interests of security. This is where the greatness of Eliot’s play lies – in the universality of its themes. At surface level it is the story of a great mediaeval saint. Probe a little more deeply, and amongst the discoveries are collisions between the secular and the spiritual, between pragmatism and principle, and explorations of the ambiguities of conscience. Hockman, in his programme note, says that he had found in the play, ‘the tension with which every advocate is familiar between the claims of personal integrity and the pressures of the public performance’. That programme, containing fascinating articles by Master Griffith-Jones, Sir John Baker QC and Professor Elisabeth van Houts, deserves an award, and will be cherished by me as a keepsake of an uplifting theatrical experience. Master Anthony Speaight was Called to the Bar in 1973 and took Silk in 1996. Master Speaight is in chambers at 4 Pump Court. He has a mixed civil practice. He is a Bencher of Middle Temple. He was a member of the Government Commission on a UK Bill of Rights (2011-2012). He has held various positions in the Bar Council, including Chairman of the Access to the Bar Committee at the time of the introduction of public access. He is a past Chairman of the Editorial Board of Counsel, journal of the Bar of England & Wales. He is married to the actress Gabrielle Lister.

Murder in the Cathedral

How Much Stress is Good for You? LOUISE MCCULLOUGH It is obvious that in order to perform optimally a certain degree of stress is good for you, but how much has not been the subject of much scrutiny until now. Ground breaking research was instigated and funded by the four Inns of Court, the Institute of Barristers Clerks and the Bar Council, with support from the Charlie Waller Memorial Trust this major piece of work is now known as ‘Wellbeing at the Bar’. A working group was set up by Sam Mercer (Head of Policy, Equality and Diversity at the Bar Council) and ably chaired by Rachel Spearing of Pump Court Chambers, which developed (in association with medical and psychology professionals) an online survey which was disseminated to members of the profession (both employed and selfemployed) in the Autumn of 2014. Rupert Macey-Dare and I from Hall Committee were deputed to the Working Committee on behalf of the Inn last summer. The online survey had a remarkably high response (nearly 2,500 responses) with data which, in some respects, was hardly surprising. They were as follows: Worry and Perfectionism – 1 in 3 find it difficult to control and stop worrying. 59% are very self-critical most or all of the time. Stress Levels – 1 in 6 tend to feel down or in low spirits most or all of the time. A quarter tend to feel nervous, anxious or on edge. 1 in 6 worry about their health most or all of the time. Cognitive Renewal – 54% enjoy refreshing good quality sleep only some of the time. 64% are not able to take breaks most or all of the time. Work Environment – 2 in 3 feel that showing signs of stress at work indicates weakness. 47% report work pressure as 8 or above. 62% are unable to integrate work and outside work most or all of the time.

How Much Stress is Good for You?

Engagement and Advocacy – 39% of the Employed Bar would recommend employed practice 'some of the time' or 'not at all'. The figure for the SelfEmployed Bar was 57%. Trust – 64% see role models at leadership levels ‘not at all’ or only ‘some of the time’. For 3 in 4 within the work environment in which they work, genuine mistakes are seen as opportunities for learning only ‘some of the time’ or ‘not at all’. Not content with simply recording this sorry state of affairs, the Working Group has entered into the next phase and has expanded beyond its original composition to include representatives of all Circuits, Specialist Bar Associations and other relevant interested parties. Master Paul Epstein has been recruited to bolster the Middle Temple Team. The Working Group will meet monthly from September to December 2015 and quarterly thereafter, with a view to creating and delivering useable tools and products for the profession. Six projects for development have been identified as: 1) Identify good practice across the Bar. 2) Work with the BSB to clarify/produce guidance over reporting members of the profession with mental health/wellbeing problems (i.e. ‘Fitness to Practice’). 3) Extend the Bar Mentoring Service beyond its current focus on Silk and Judicial appointment to ensure suitable mentoring (social support) is available to barristers whatever their life stage or need.

4) Develop Guides for Chambers, e.g. signs to spot and what to do, including guidance for Heads of Chambers and Clerks.

It is worth emphasising that the Wellbeing agenda is not simply about barristers in crisis but on building resilience and developing best practice.

5) Develop Educational resources for new practitioners and pupil supervisors, and for BPTC students.

Middle Temple is committed to ensuring that the Wellbeing agenda is promoted within the Inn and more widely. The work in hand is long term and any suggestions as to best practice will be gratefully received and passed on to the Working Group, alternatively you can email Sam Mercer at smercer@BarCouncil.org.uk or Rachel Spearing at r.spearing@pumpcourtchambers.com.

6) Work with stakeholders (like LawCare and MIND) to improve the quality of service and support provided to the profession, including for Heads of Chambers and Clerks.

Middle Temple Mentoring Scheme Last year I wrote an article on the benefits of mentoring in the Inn and the pilot scheme which was underway. Evaluation of anonymised questionnaires showed that 80% of the participants found being a mentor or a mentee valuable. Each of us at some stage in our careers has felt the need to speak on a confidential basis about a work-related issue to someone more experienced who can offer perspective and insight. Mentoring provides a safe, non-judgmental and confidential environment for such discussions to take place. Mentoring has become a widely used way of managing talent in many areas of business, industry and the professions. The Middle Temple Scheme has been developed to assist members with career development issues and with a collateral benefit to assist with both social mobility and retention at the Bar.

Research undertaken on behalf of the Wellbeing at the Bar Working Group showed that those who were mentored had approximately 30% less stress than those who were not. This is statistically significant and cannot be ignored. We are planning to develop the Innâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s mentoring scheme beyond the pilot stage and welcome those who wish to mentor or be mentored to identify themselves to Zoe Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Sullivan QC (zosullivan@oeclaw.co.uk) or myself (louisecmccullough@lambbuilding.co.uk). The Middle Temple Mentoring Scheme has been developed in conjunction with the Hall Committee and senior members of the Inn.

Louise McCullough was Called in 1991 and is a tenant at Lamb Building where she specialises in Criminal Defence and Family work, particularly cases involving vulnerable adults and children. She is a member of the Hall Committee, the Membership Committee and the Equality, Diversity and Social Mobility Sub-Committee.

Middle Temple Mentoring Scheme

How Much is Too Much? Privacy Damages and Phone-hacking ADAM SPEKER In May of this year the High Court ruled for the first time on the level of compensation to be awarded to victims of phone-hacking or voicemail interception (Gulati & others v MGN Ltd [2015] EWHC 1482 (Ch)). News International, the publishers of The News of the World, had settled all the cases brought against it in the courts before trial. MGN Ltd, the publishers of The Mirror and The Sunday Mirror, chose a different route. It decided to proceed to a hearing of eight test cases intended to establish guidance for settling or deciding future cases. In a 712 paragraph judgment, The Honourable Mr Justice Mann awarded a total of £1.2 million in damages to the eight claimants. These awards included £260,250 to the actress Sadie Frost and £188,250 to the former footballer Paul Gascoigne. The awards are the highest yet in privacy cases in this country. As the Judge put it towards the end of his judgment: It will be apparent that my awards of damages in this case are very substantial – far more substantial than in any hitherto reported privacy case. They are more substantial than in many libel cases. … The fact that they are greater than any other publicly available award results from the fact that the invasions of privacy involved were so serious and so prolonged. It is an open question whether the awards will be a one-off, confined to their unusual facts, or will set a new yardstick for future privacy claims. These days claimants faced with the publication of information about them often have a number of causes of action from which to choose. Many defamatory allegations are also allegations of a private or personal nature, for instance, that someone is having an adulterous affair. To found a claim in defamation, the accusation must be untrue and defamatory, requiring the individual now to surmount a statutory threshold of serious harm. Yet the same information can also found a claim in misuse of private information, whether true or false. Both causes of action can overlap with the Protection of Harassment Act if the accusation is repeated, perhaps online, or under the Data Protection Act 1998, a cause of action made more attractive by the Court

of Appeal’s recent ruling in Vidal-Hall v Google Inc [2015] EWCA Civ 311 that compensation must be available for a breach even if no pecuniary loss is shown. Previously, the attraction of suing in defamation was the size of the damages awards. Libel damages have been significantly reduced over the years but are still high. In 2000, Mr Justice Eady in Lillie & Reed v Newcastle City Council [2000] EWHC 1600 (QB), probably the worst case of libel ever to come before the courts, considered that there was a cap on general damages of £200,000 (now thought to be around £275,000). Damages under the other causes of action, however, have to date been very low and, if an interim injunction was not possible or successful, a claim for damages alone was seldom pursued. In Campbell v MGN [2004] 2 AC 457, the damages award was a mere £2,500 with an additional £1,000 in aggravated damages. In Douglas v Hello!, Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta-Jones, were awarded damages of £3750 each for distress, awards upheld by the Court of Appeal which described them as ‘very modest’. The folk singer Loreena McKennitt was awarded £5000 for hurt feelings and distress over the publication in a book of personal and intimate details acquired over the course of a friendship. This changed somewhat in 2008 when Max Mosley was successful in his claim against the publishers of The News of the World, the facts of which are well known. He received £60,000, significantly more than any previous award for misuse of private information but still much less than the highest libel award. Since then, the phone-hacking scandal broke and those awards have seemed too low given the gravity of the behaviour revealed. In Gulati v MGN, Mann J made two significant findings which led to the high awards in those cases. The first related to the factors to take into account when awarding compensation for invasions of privacy. The second to the number of awards that could be made to each claimant. On the first, the Judge rejected the defendant’s submission that compensation should only be for ‘distress and injury to feelings’ and accepted the claimants submissions that compensation for misuse of private

It is celebrities who tend to be the claimants who develop the law in this area to allow others to be protected. information has several elements: for loss of privacy or autonomy; for injury to feelings including distress; and, for damage or affront to dignity or standing. He concluded on this point that the purpose of the tort of misuse of private information is to give effect to article 8 and: those values (or interests) are not confined to protection from distress…. If one has lost 'the right to control the dissemination of information about one’s private life' then I fail to see why that, of itself, should not attract a degree of compensation, in an appropriate case. A right has been infringed, and loss of a kind recognised by the court as wrongful has been caused. Whilst previous case law ruled out ‘vindicatory damages’, it did not rule out, he found at [132], ‘compensation for the act of the misuse itself’. On the second issue, the defendants invited the court to make an overall sum to each claimant for all wrongs, compensating each of them for the overall distress caused by the totality of the wrongful acts. The claimants invited the Judge to make separate awards for the voicemail interception, for the blagging of personal information and for the fruits of the voicemail interception or the blagging activity. Mann J held that a single global sum was not required by case law and would not be appropriate because ‘the wrongs have too great a degree of separation for that’ [155].

the activity separately and assess its effect (in terms of compensation) separately from damage arising from publication. He then considered that he should ensure that the overall sum found appeared proportionate. Gulati may go on appeal (the judge refused permission but MGN has said it intends to seek permission from the Court of Appeal) but until it does this judgment is significant, as is that of the Court of Appeal in Vidal-Hall v Google. Whilst many people may not be sympathetic to celebrities receiving high awards of damages, the impact of hacking on these individuals has been real, damaging friendships and relationships and engendering mistrust. It is celebrities who tend to be the claimants who develop the law in this area to allow others to be protected. In recognising the high value of private information and the right of the individual to decide when or how to make information available, subject to defences such as public interest, the courts are further developing the weapons needed to protect privacy in an online world.

Adam Speker was Called to the Bar in 1999. He specialises in defamation, privacy, media law and harassment from 5RB

He found that: there are three areas of wrongful behaviour which need to be looked at separately... First there is the general hacking activity. Each of the individuals had their voicemails (and some of those whom they rang) hacked frequently (in their own cases daily), with most hacks not resulting directly in an article. Their private information was thus acquired and their right to privacy infringed, irrespective of whether an article was published. That fact makes it appropriate to take

How Much is Too Much? Privacy Damages and Phone-hacking

A Dip Into The Archive: A Bibliophile, a Pirate and a Bigamist MASTER STEPHEN LLOYD Now tell me, what do you have in common with a bibliophile, a couple of pirates, and an impoverished bigamist? The bibliophile was Robert Ashley (1565-1641). He was admitted to the Middle Temple in 1588 and sought to practise at the bar but he found that the practice ‘…had its ebbs and tides’ (no change there, then) and devoted himself to other interests. He lived in the Inn for most, if not all, of his adult life, building up an extensive library, including about 3,700 printed books, eventually taking additional rooms to house it. By his will, he left his library to the Inn (together with a legacy to pay for a keeper) for the express purpose of establishing a new library. The Inn’s earlier attempt to create a small library had foundered, as it operated an open door policy and all the books were stolen. Ashley’s library was eclectic reflecting, in addition to his law books, his other interests – travel, foreign cultures, languages, science, medicine and witchcraft. It included volumes that he had acquired from the library of John Donne the poet and Dean of St Paul’s. The importance of Ashley’s bequest cannot be overestimated. It was in its time one of the largest collections of printed books; it equalled that of Elias Ashmole (remembered by the Ashmolean in Oxford and another resident in the Inn) and indeed came to eclipse it, in numbers at least, when many of Ashmole’s printed books were lost in a fire. The Inn has been true to the bequest and preserved Ashley’s gift and it survives as an important and rare example of a gentleman’s library of the period. Belated recognition was finally given to Robert Ashley in 2011 when the building housing the Treasury, Library and Archive was renamed 'The Ashley Building'. A posthumous portrait of Ashley as a young man (by Thomas Leigh) was the first picture to be commissioned (as opposed to simply purchased) by the Inn; it hangs on the end wall of the library. The first of the pirates (if you are Spanish) or privateer and national hero (if you are English) is Sir Francis Drake, well known to the Inn in the 16th Century. A minute of the Inn’s Parliament for August 1586 records: Sir Francis Drake one of the Society of the Middle Temple, after his voyage, came into the Middle Temple Hall at dinner

time and acknowledged to the Masters of the Bench his old friendship with the Society, those present congratulating him on his happy return, with great joy.

The construction of the Hall had been completed about 10 years earlier and it replaced the old Hall inherited from the Knights Templar (situated roughly where Pump Court now is); the old Hall was then put to other uses and eventually fell into ruin and was demolished. Nowadays, when you go into Hall you pass under ‘Drakes Lantern’. This is a modern piece; its predecessor was destroyed when the east end of the Hall was blown out during an air-raid in 1940. It is said that the earlier lantern hung on the poop deck of Drake’s ship the Golden Hind; given that the glass was clearly Victorian, that provenance can, at best, only have been true in respect of the metal frame. At all events, the link with the pre-war lantern has been maintained as our Drake’s lantern includes metal salvaged from the earlier lamp. Sir Edward Maufe, the architect responsible for the post war reconstruction of the Middle Temple, commissioned the remaking of the lantern as his personal gift to the Inn. The glass is by Moira Forsyth (1905-1991) a noted stained glass artist who created a new design following the subject matter of the old glass. It is doubtful if Drake was in fact a member of the Inn (there is no record of his admission). However the other pirate (if you are Spanish), or national hero (if you are English, or still smoke tobacco, or eat potatoes) Sir Walter Ralegh, was admitted as a member, as was his elder half-brother Adrian Gilbert, both heavily involved in the exploration and colonisation of North America. Philip Amadas, a Middle Temple student, was fined by the Inn for being ‘out of commons’ (i.e. failing to eat his dinners or, in our more mundane language, failing to attend qualifying sessions). At the relevant time, Amadas was captaining one of Ralegh's ships on an expedition (the patent for which had been granted by Elizabeth I to Gilbert but which passed to Ralegh), which led to the establishment of the Roanoke Colony in what is now North Carolina, but then part of a larger area named Virginia. As excuses go, that one seems pretty solid, but these were unsympathetic times, as Ralegh

himself discovered when he was sentenced to death by Sir John Popham, a fellow Middle Templar (thereby lightening the mood of the Spanish). You can see the coats of arms of Ralegh and Popham in adjacent windows on the centre north side of Hall. That early connection between Middle Templars and the Americas continued and in the mid-18th Century a remarkable number of members came from North America to study law, several playing leading roles in the American Revolution. The Advocacy Training rooms at the top of the Ashley Building are named ‘The Rutledge Suite’ after the Rutledge brothers, Edward and John. Edward was one of the signers to the American Declarations of Independence. In all, no less than five Middle Templars were signers to that document. John chaired the committee that produced the American Constitution. Alas, not all members of the time brought credit on the Inn. Our bigamist is Robert Feilding, who was admitted 1673 at the age of 22, and was described at the time as a ‘Man of Fashion’ and known as ‘Beau’ Feilding. His first wife died. He subsequently married the first Duchess of Cleveland (a former mistress of Charles II) but was then prosecuted for bigamy, on the basis that, in between times, he had married and was still married to one Mary Wadsworth. The story of Feilding's marriage to Mary Wadsworth would have served well for a Da Ponte/Mozart opera. Having squandered his own fortune, and that of his first wife, Feilding (whilst courting the Duchess of Cleveland) had designs on a widow called Anne Deleau, a wealthy heiress. Having first checked the terms of the late Mr Deleau’s will to verify the suitability of his widow as a match, Feilding offered a bribe of £500 (nearly £100,000 in today’s money) to Deleau’s hairdresser to arrange an introduction; however, the hairdresser (suitably outraged) turned the tables and arranged matters so that Feilding mistook for Mrs Deleau a pauper called Mary Wadsworth. At only their second meeting, which took place at his lodgings, Feilding married Mary thinking she was Deleau. He subsequently continued to court and marry the Duchess of Cleveland

and it was that marriage which led to his appointment at the Old Bailey. He was convicted but pleaded benefit of clergy (bigamy was a capital offence) and was branded, but otherwise escaped punishment. His marriage to the Duchess of Cleveland was annulled. Feilding is described in the Dictionary of National Biography as ‘…a thorough reprobate, a gambler and a bully’ which, all things considered, seems a reasonable assessment. In opening the prosecution, the jury was told that Feilding, when outlining his scheme to the hairdresser, assured her that ‘... if the lady [i.e. Deleau] had but once sight of his very handsome person, she would have the same affection for him, that he had met with from other ladies’, however, his attempts in later life to impress the ladies with a minor wound sustained in a fight at a theatre reduced him to a figure of ridicule. Despite the fact that Feilding had treated Mary Wadsworth cruelly when the deception was discovered, she lived with and cared for him until his death in 1712 at the age of 61. The hairdresser never received her £500. An engraving of Feilding hangs in the library corridor on the first floor of the Ashley Building.

This article is adapted from Master Lloyd’s talk ‘Inn for the Duration’ given at Cumberland Lodge; sources: Middle Temple Archive; DNB Oxford 1975; Cobbetts State Trials; Thanks also to Renae Satterley Deputy Librarian for additional information on Ashley.

Master Lloyd was Called to the Bar in 1971 and to the Bench in 1996. He is a member of 13 Old Square Chambers, where he has a general Chancery practice with a strong emphasis on litigation. He is joint Master of the Garden with Master Judith Parker and was Lent Reader in 2014.

One of Ashley’s books in need of conservation is L’histoire de la nature des oyseaux : avec leurs descriptions, & naïfs portraicts retirez du naturel: escr[it]e en sept liures, by Pierre Belon, printed in Paris in 1555. This is a remarkable work with numerous woodcut illustrations of birds engraved by Pierre Gourdelle, most of which were made from live specimens. Robert Ashley has written some biographical notes about Belon on the title page and it also bears his signature. Belon studied medicine and travelled extensively. This work makes some comparisons between birds and other animals (including humans) as well, creating a more ordered system for the naming of birds which had, during this pre-Linnaean time, names in French, German and Latin, but no common terminology between them. Although the binding of the book is in a fairly good state, the textblock itself is in perilous condition and, given the nature of repair required, will cost approximately £1,500 to conserve. If you would like to sponsor this work, individually or as part of a consortium, please contact the Deputy Librarian, Renae Satterley on: 020 7427 4830, or r.satterley@middletemple.org.uk. The library currently has 10 other works that belonged to Robert Ashley that require sponsorship, with estimates ranging from £250-£500.

A Dip Into The Archive

The Impact of Magna Carta MASTER IGOR JUDGE My starting point is to reject the tendency, here in England at any rate, to write Magna Carta off as a ‘myth’ or not very valuable because only three of its clauses are still in effect, or just a deal between a mediaeval king and his barons, remote from the interests of the common man. If you would take the view that Magna Carta has no impact in the modern world, then it obviously would have no future. If however the study of the Magna Carta tells us anything, it is that this vellum should never have survived at all. As a contract it was void on the grounds of duress. As a peace treaty it was doomed to failure because the king was simply buying time for himself to strengthen his military position, and he had no intention of abiding by it. Over and above all that, the king’s feudal lord, the Pope, annulled it and prohibited the king from observing it. The entire content of the Charter was utterly abolished and had 'no validity at any time whatsoever'. All of this within a few weeks, before the wax on the seal had had time to dry. Nevertheless, this agreement, doomed to go the way of the Charter of King Henry I and the Oxford Charter of King Stephen into oblivion, survived. That was luck, or accident, or the wheel of chance. Despite being doomed to failure, survive it did. It still speaks to us down the ages. Human kind wants 'justice', 'rights', 'lawful judgment', 'liberties' and 'security'. These are all words from the Charter. These provide the foundations for what are today called human rights. But the Charter proved to be much greater than the individual words. It was the first Charter that proved to be much greater than the individual words. It was the first 'living instrument'. The ‘law of the land’ became ‘due process’ and the ‘common counsel of the realm’ came to be known as ‘Parliament’. The ‘security clause’ was the ‘rule of law’ in the making and the agreement by the barons that they should be bound to observe the conditions to ‘all men of our kingdom’ represented ‘equality before law’ in gestation. All this is overlooked by those who talk of the myth of Magna Carta. Similarly with the justice provisions. The enforcement officials of the king, like the sheriff and bailiffs, should not

Human kind wants 'justice', 'rights', 'lawful judgment', 'liberties' and 'security'. These are all words from the Charter. be judges and the judges should be professionals who would apply the law of the land (the first indication of the separation of powers). If all this is myth, there are unhappy countries throughout the world which would welcome some myth making. In our constitution and in that of the United States of America, the evolutionary process led us down different paths. For us sovereignty ultimately lies in Parliament. For the USA sovereignty rests with the constitution itself. But, however we argue the theoretical weaknesses of these constitutional arrangements, and we can, we live in mature democratic countries in which those in power can be removed, and indeed if they commit criminal offences, can be prosecuted. In the English speaking world and in the world where common law principles have come to take root, whatever the term of the constitution, Magna Carta has a resonance. In England, Magna Carta remains a symbol or banner for us. It will continue to do so. When we perceive that our liberties are threatened the cry will be to Magna Carta. For the USA, Magna Carta is entrenched in the constitutional provisions. They may not need to refer to Magna Carta, because the constitution itself now provides everything they need for the preservation of their liberties. What I believe the lesson of history teaches us about the future is that what we think of as rights and principles derived from Magna Carta are in fact of universal application. You do not need Magna Carta to prove that the rule of law and equality before law and universal suffrage and limitations on the exercise of power are desirable and salutary. Ultimately in relation to what I shall describe as societal contentment and peace, these are necessary ingredients. The best proof of all this is that the words ‘Magna Carta’ or ‘Great Charter’ do not appear in the document itself.

There are different ways of achieving these desirable objectives. Witness the arrangements of Canada, Australia, post-apartheid South Africa and India, the most populous democracy in the world. The way in which these rights are preserved is reflective of the history of each nation. And before we get utterly carried away with Magna Carta, can we please remember that there are democratic countries throughout the world where the rule of law applies which do not derive or see themselves deriving their constitutional arrangements from Magna Carta. The real future of Magna Carta will be found in those countries, which even if they have constitutions which declare the most noble of principles, have no system for ensuring their application, or where indeed they are abused or cast aside. Old democracies like our own must be tolerant and patient of new countries where the principles that we embrace are not entrenched. It took hundreds of years for universal suffrage to be established in our countries. We must give countries which do not enjoy them the kind of time it took us. There is not a country in Western Europe, with the exception of the United Kingdom, which in the last century did not have at least one and in some cases more than one dictatorship, whether Nazi Germany, or civil war, as in Spain, subversion of the democratic processes, as in Nazi Germany, or invasion as a result of Nazism. It is not always as easy as it seems to maintain these principles. And those of us who enjoy them, have to be alert to threats to them. And that is where Magna Carta would return to greater provenance. For me, Magna Carta represents both achievements and aspiration. The principles are of universal application. Those of us who have achieved them must guard them. And we must understand and support those who have never heard of Magna Carta, but aspire to the ideas, of which it is probably the greatest symbol. So perhaps aspiration is not strong enough. Perhaps it should be achievement and ambition. Master Judge was Treasurer in 2014. He was the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales from 2008 to 2013. He was previously President of the Queen’s Bench Division. He joined The Dickson Poon School of Law at King’s College London as a Distinguished Fellow and Visiting Professor in 2013. Master Judge was the President of the Selden Society from 2009 to 2015.

The Impact of Magna Carta

Dominic West, Stephen Fry and Mark Rylance rehearsing the reading of the play

Bartolomé de las Casas at Middle Temple Library RENAE SATTERLEY On Thursday 8 January 2015, Middle Temple Hall and the Library hosted a fundraising event for Survival International and the Library’s Rare Book Sponsorship Programme.

Title page to Bartolomé de las Casas’s Tratado, Seville, 1553

The event was the reading of a new play written by Bruce McKay performed by a stellar cast consisting of Master Mark Rylance, Stephen Fry, Ben Miles, Ben Miller, John Sessions and Dominic West. The play was a ‘black comedy’ focusing on Bartolomé de las Casas, a sixteenth century Spanish priest who campaigned for indigenous rights in the Americas. Las Casas accompanied his father on Christopher Christopher Columbus' third voyage to the Americas in 1498. In 1502 he travelled with Nicolas de Ovando to Hispaniola where he became the first priest to be ordained in the Americas; in 1511 he moved to Cuba. Las Casas became wealthy in Cuba due to the repartimiento and encomienda systems, whereby land was allotted to settlers and they were given dominion over its inhabitants. While these inhabitants were vassals, according to Spanish laws, they were in fact serfs or slaves. Las Casas’s disquiet about this system,

combined with his distress over the brutal massacres of the native peoples committed by the Spaniards, led him to release his serfs and preach against the encomienda system. By 1517 he had returned to Spain and started to campaign for indigenous rights in an attempt to establish a way of protecting the native peoples. Although he originally put forth the idea of substituting African slaves for the indentured peoples, he later rejected that idea and advocated against all slavery. His first campaigns for equal rights failed, but he nonetheless earned the title of protector, or ‘apostle of the Indians’. In 1522 he entered the Dominican order in Hispaniola and devoted the rest of his life to the abolition of slavery and the peaceful evangelisation of the indigenous peoples. He wrote a number of treatises in defence of the rights of the American peoples, exposing the cruelty and greed of the colonisers, often depicting the indigenous cultures as virtuous and peaceful but corrupted by the presence of Spain. His activism eventually paid off, as his work is acknowledged as influencing Spain’s 1543 revision of the New Laws of the Indies, which applied a policy of nonenslavement. According to Lawrence A. Clayton in his book on Las Casas, five 'basic principles and actions were clearly articulated': 1. The dignity of the Indian as subjects of the crown. 2. The elimination of Indian slavery. 3. Provisions for the extinction of the encomienda as a principal form of exploiting the Indian as labor and vassal. 4. Prohibiting further wars of conquest. 5. Strict and detailed laws and decrees for the enforcement of all of the above.

Tratado, and it probably formed part of the original bequest made by Robert Ashley to the Inn in 1641. In addition to this work by Las Casas, the library holds a total of 23 works on the early Americas and their cultures. Of these works, six require repair (as does the book by Las Casas): • Cieza de Leon, Pedro de, La prima parte dell’histoire del Peru, 1560 (Peru, Columbia). Cost of repair : £200 • Ens, Gaspar, Indiae Occidentalis, 1612 (History of the West Indies). Cost of repair £400 • Novis orbis, 1616 (bound with a separate work by Varrerirus discussing whether ‘Ophyr’ was Peru). Cost of repair: £350 • Lopez de Gomara, Histoire generalle des Indes, 1580 (Mexico, Peru and exploration of the Americas). Cost of repair: £350 • Vargas Machuca, Bernardo de, Milicia y descripcion de las Indias, 1599 (America and military art & science). Cost of repair: £225

If you would be interested in sponsoring the repair and conservation of any of these books, please get in touch with the author: r.satterley@middletemple.org.uk; 020 7427 4830. If you sponsor a book, you will receive before and after photos of the conservation work done, and a bookplate commemorating your donation will be placed in the book.

Ben Miller, Ben Miles and John Sessions during the performance

One of the treatises that Las Casas wrote in favour of indigenous rights is a 1553 essay printed in Seville entitled Tratado co[m]probatorio del imperio soberano y principado universal que los reyes de Castilla y Lyon tienen sobre las indias, which translates into English as: A Treatise which proves the sovereign empire and universal dominion by which the kings of Castile and Leon hold the (West) Indies. This tract formed part of a series which includes his well-known A short account of the destruction of the Indies. While the main purpose of the treatise was to prove the dominion of the kings of Castile and Leon over the West Indies, it also argues that there was no legal or moral basis for the enslavement of the indigenous peoples. The Library holds a copy of the

Renae Satterley has been working at Middle Temple since January 2006. Following the retirement of Vanessa Hayward this year, Renae took over as Acting Librarian. Renae is originally from Canada, having completed her BA at Concordia University in Montreal and her Master’s of Library & Information Studies at McGill University in 2004. She came to London via Cambridge, having worked at Emmanuel College for a year.

Bartolomé de las Casas at Middle Temple Library

Magna Carta Uncovered by Anthony Arlidge and Igor Judge BOOK REVIEW BY MASTER DAVID ORMEROD

We have been fortunate this year to be treated to so many fascinating insights into the Magna Carta including unique displays of the four original Charters at the British Library, as well as countless lectures and seminars. Of the numerous publications on the subject, Magna Carta Uncovered by Masters Arlidge and Judge stands out. It provides a clear and accessible account of the terms of the great Charter, its dramatic genesis, and its far reaching significance in the development of the constitutions of this country and the USA. This is an engaging and easy book to read and the presentation and style should guarantee its appeal to a wide audience. The authors succeed by drawing the reader in immediately with short early chapters providing vivid potted biographies of the key players and focusing on the obvious introductory questions: ‘Who made the Magna Carta?' 'What was Magna Carta?’ etc. Subsequent chapters examine the content of the Charter before turning to its impact and influences through the centuries. Valuable appendices include also the Petition of Right 1628, the Bill of Rights 1689 and the Bill of Rights 1789 (United States), and there is also a useful introductory timeline of the key events. Historical, legal and technical terms are explained as they arise, and quotations from commentators of the day are skilfully integrated into the prose throughout. Although the research and scholarship are obvious from the text and referencing, the reader is never distracted or daunted by lengthy or excessive footnotes. The book is packed solid with information. The authors bring their formidable forensic skills to bear, synthesising vast amounts of material and presenting it in a fluent style. As one would expect, the text of the Charter is explored in considerable detail (it also appears in full translation in an Appendix). In examining the text, numerous myths and misunderstandings are debunked – it was not called ‘Magna Carta’ until much later; King John never signed it; there were

various versions issued until 1225 and it was not until 1297 that a final version was placed on the statute books; it does not provide for trial by jury (although the analysis of clauses 39 and 40 is especially fascinating). What makes this book so successful is how effectively the discussion of the Charter is set in context. The dramatic background to the events at Runnymede is brought to life through the analysis of the legendary characters (not only King John and the Rebel Barons but note also the chapter on Robin Hood) and their political, commercial and religious struggles. The reader is left with a clear sense of the mistrust, corruption, instability and brutality pervading the court of King John. The themes of the Charter are examined in separate chapters – law and order, trial by peers, the King under the law, taxes, commerce etc. This approach ensures the reader gains a thorough understanding of why particular clauses were included, why the Charter was so significant in its day in tackling a specific mischief and how it has since achieved its ‘talismanic’ status. The same is true of the discussion, in later chapters, tracing how the Charter was soon restored and recast and how it fared under the Plantagenets, Tudors, Stuarts and Cromwell’s Commonwealth. Equally significantly, these chapters examine how the Charter was used by lawyers such as Coke and Selden to become embedded as a cornerstone of liberties in the UK (Wales and Scotland receive special attention in chapter 14), to

serve as the inspiration for the Bill of Rights 1689 and influence the guarantees in the US Constitution. Given that King John, with support from Pope Innocent III, sought to repeal it within a month of its being sealed at Runnymede, it now seems rather remarkable that:

'Magna Carta continues to carry huge, intuitive emotional weight in our national consciousness, rousing us when our liberties and rights appear to be threatened and symbolising our commitment to their preservation’.

Anyone seeking to understand why need look no further than Magna Carta Uncovered. Even those who think they know about Magna Carta are likely to be richly rewarded by reading this work.

Professor (Master) David Ormerod QC is a Law Commissioner. He is the author of numerous articles and books including Smith and Hogan’s Criminal Law and is the editor of Blackstone’s Criminal Practice. He lectures regularly for the profession and the Judicial College. He was Called to the Bar in 2002 and elected a Bencher in 2009.

Magna Carta Uncovered: Book Review

The Tony Award MASTER ANTHONY ARLIDGE Way back in 2000 I went with Theresa Lloyd (wife of Master Timothy Lloyd) to Shakespeare’s Globe Theatre to see if we could persuade the Globe Company to recreate the 1602 performance of Twelfth Night in our Hall in 2002. The company’s director, Mark Rylance (now Master Rylance) was immediately enthusiastic. I had to persuade the Globe to take all the risk and Mark persuaded the trustees to do so. Mark likes to follow original practices and created a production as close to the original as possible. It was all male and the modern lighting was hidden in box trees. The costumes were hand made in the Globe wardrobe. The action was played out against our Italianate screen as it probably was only 30 years after the Hall was built. Mark played Olivia. A very pretty young man, still at university, played Viola. The gender confusions worked perfectly – everyone could quite reasonably have fallen in love with him. His name was Eddie Redmayne. The production ran later in the Globe. It was revived there and transferred to the West End. It was too expansive to copy our Hall screen so they used that of Wadham College, Oxford instead. The production transferred to Broadway and in 2014 Mark won a Tony award for his Olivia. When congratulating him, I disclosed that the awards were named after me and he had only won on my recommendation. Further investigation revealed that they were in fact named after Antoinette Perry

Master Mark Rylance presenting the Tony Award to Master Judge on 13 November 2014.

who founded them. Gender confusion continues. When I wrote to congratulate him, Mark asked if Middle Temple, where the story started, would like to have the award. On 16 November 2014 he came to dinner and presented it to Master Treasurer (Lord Judge), together with the card which states ‘and the winner is’. It is now in our silver vault – anyone who would like to take a selfie should apply to Colin Davidson. When I last met him Mark suggested that we should ask Eddie Redmayne for his Oscar. Unfortunately Eddie has only one Oscar, whereas Mark has three Tonys.

MIDDLE TEMPLE COUNSELLING FOR STUDENTS The Inn is pleased to announce that starting from Autumn 2015 we are able to offer a free and confidential counselling service on site to all student members of the Inn. The service will offer support with both personal and professional issues from a qualified and experienced therapist. If you feel you would benefit from meeting the Counsellor please contact Christa Richmond, Director Of Education Services at c.richmond@middletemple.org.uk for further information.

The Tony Award

BRITISH BESPOKE TAILORING FOR MEN AND WOMEN Individually styled and measured by Susannah Hall Built by craftsmen in British workrooms

SUITS SEPARATES SHIRTS AND ACCESSORIES VISITING SERVICE AVAILABLE

110 CLERKENWELL ROAD LONDON EC1M 5SA 0207 253 4055 susannahhall.com All UK Made

Honorary Bench Call 16 June 2015 MASTER DAVID WURTZEL

Call to the Bench is usually associated with distinguished English practitioners and members of the judiciary. Honorary Bench Call acknowledges achievement by others - often, but not always, with a legal background of their own - and thus makes them part of Domus. On 16 June 2015, the honour went to six remarkable men. That evening, Magna Carta was on everyone’s mind. The ceremony at Runnymede in the presence of Her Majesty the Queen and the Choir of the Temple Church had taken place the previous day. Another anniversary loomed: in two days time it would be the bicentenary of the Battle of Waterloo. As it happened, five distinguished French legal guests were visiting that evening, and were warmly welcomed by Master Treasurer. The Call ceremony begins before dinner. The new Benchers stand in a line by the dais, and one by one are asked to take their place at the High Table, which they do amidst applause. It is after dinner, when the Cupboard and microphone are brought forward, that each takes his turn in delivering a speech. The purpose, traditionally, is to justify his own election. This has taken place in Hall for all new Benchers since November 2001. Taking them in the order in which they spoke, Jonathan Ruffer started his working life as a stockbroker. He was Called to the Bar in 1976, and was a pupil to Master Simon Brown. He eventually returned to the City, where Ruffer LLP manages some £20 billion of client funds. As a philanthropist, he is well known, amongst other things, for saving Auckland Castle, the palace of the Bishop of Durham and the 12 Zubaran paintings of Jacob and his sons, which the Church of England was going to sell but which had hung there for 250 years. In a speech of polished succinctness he confessed, ‘I can’t stop talking’, although he added, ‘one needs to know what you’re talking about’. Looking around the Hall which he first saw 40 years ago, he said that in a sense, ‘nothing has changed but everything has. I am glad to be back’. Patric Dickinson LVO FSG, Clarenceux King of Arms at the College of Arms, is another Middle Templar who, as Secretary of the Order of the Garter, had also attended the Runnymede ceremony. During his time at the College of

Arms he has designed 25 coats of arms for Treasurers and Readers of the Inn, from Judge Mervyn Griffith-Jones QC, up to and including the current Treasurer. He recalled that he has been Hon. Treasurer of the Bar Theatrical Society for many years, even after it has sadly ceased to function. As a performer himself, he appeared in Middle Temple Revels. Although unwilling to sing now, he recited the lyrics he wrote in December 1980, celebrating Lord Roskill (the then Treasurer) and Lord Denning (then Master of the Rolls) to Cole Porter’s song, You're the Top, with apologies for the cultural references which may have mystified the younger members of Hall in 2015:

Sung to Lord Denning: You’re the top, you’re the Master Roller. You’re the top, you’re a Pepsi-Cola. You’re a clash of swords with the House of Lords, a star, You’re a champagne party, you’re Russell Harty, You’re JR. You’re sublime, you’re a Grand Night dinner, You’re the time of a Mastermind winner, I’m a worthless hack who’s lost the knack, a flop, But if, baby, I’m the bottom, you’re the top. Sung to Lord Roskill: You’re the top, you’re the Inn’s Head Master, You’re the top, there’s no law lord faster. You’re a side of beef, you’re the Middle’s chief, you’re ours, You’re Fortnum and Mason, you’re Larry Grayson, You’re Fawlty Towers. You’re the sun, you’re the best judge we know, You’re just one for the road in El Vino, I’ve not written the end and don’t know how to stop But if, baby, I’m the bottom, you’re the top.

On 16 June 2015, the honour went to six remarkable men. That evening, Magna Carta was on everyone’s mind.

Mr Justice Sean Ryan, first President of the Court of Appeal of the Republic of Ireland, also recalled his youth at the Bar. His pupil master seemed to have plenty of time to go racing, a false dawn for him in terms of how much work a barrister in fact has to do. He told Hall that he had first encountered the Inn at the Four Jurisdictions conference which is now an annual event. He is part of our tradition of Calling the Irish judiciary to the Bench - amongst those also present on 16 June were his Court of Appeal colleague, Master Mary Finlay Geoghegan and Master Hugh Geoghegan, now retired from the Irish Supreme Court. It happened to be Master Mary Geoghegan’s birthday and to add to the notable dates, it was Bloomsday, the annual celebration in Dublin of James Joyce’s Ulysses, which is set there on 16 June. Professor Ansgar Ohly is Visiting Professor at Oxford University and Chair of Civil Law, Intellectual Property Law and Competition Law at the Ludwig Maximilian Unversity of Munich. He said that he had been told that his speech should be light hearted, which, reminding us of his academic titles, is not what we might expect from a German professor of law. He then proceeded, with great charm, to deliver a light-hearted speech. He thanked us for the honour of being made a Bencher. Considering the upcoming anniversary of Waterloo, it was perhaps modest of Master Ohly not to remind us of his countryman Blucher. Europe is now a very different place and he is looking forward finally to the successful conclusion of a long saga and the establishment of a European patent court. Crispin Odey was the only true non-lawyer. He went straight to the City from Oxford where he founded Odey Asset Management. He did tell us of his flirtation with the law as an undergraduate (and in fact, he afterwards joined the Inn as a student member in 1981). He attended a moot in his college which came to an unexpected and abrupt end. The presider, Lord Justice Sachs, asked to see the authorities on which the students relied. While they searched for them, he lit up a cigar - thus setting off the library sprinkler system. Master Odey was awarded the Sachs Prize in law but has postponed his legal connection until now.

William C Hubbard, President of the American Bar Association, was another veteran of Sunday’s Runnymede celebration, during which the ABA's pavilion commemorating Magna Carta was re-dedicated. He recalled that he had grown up in modest circumstances in a small town in South Carolina - a state which had produced several signers of the Declaration of Independence who were also Middle Templars. Although not many of the locals had a ‘global view’ he had noted that during the years of the civil rights movement, it was the lawyers who were the peacemakers. His theme was that the justice system should be accessible to all. His message, which resonated to those in Hall, was that the rule of law depended on an independent judiciary and on a strong and organised Bar.

Master Wurtzel was Called to the Bar in 1974 and to the Bench in 2001. He practised at the criminal Bar for 27 years and for 12 years was involved in training, particularly in respect of vulnerable witnesses. He was consultant editor of COUNSEL. He is a door tenant of Red Lion Chambers.

Honorary Bench Call: June 2015

Easter Rising 1916 The Trials by Judge Seán Enright BOOK REVIEW BY MASTER MICHAEL ASHE In his poem Easter 1916, WB Yeats wrote:

‘All changed, changed utterly, A terrible beauty is born’. On Easter Monday, 24 April 1916, a band of rebels occupied several buildings in Dublin and proclaimed a republic. In the four days following there was mass destruction of property, 450 deaths and 2,600 casualties, the majority civilian. Martial law was proclaimed on 26 April, the rebels unconditionally surrendered on 29 April, 1,000 immediately being taken prisoner. On 4 May 1916, the Irish Independent thundered: ‘No terms of denunciation that pen could indict would be too strong to apply to those responsible for the insane and criminal rising of last week’. In fact the Rising had little popular support but Yeats’ ‘terrible beauty’ was to shake an Empire. Judge Enright looks at trials that were hastily conducted immediately after the surrender. There were 160 military trials held in camera with no Judge Advocate, no defence legal representation which resulted in 90 death sentences being passed between 2 and 17 May, 15 of the defendants being executed. It was this reaction that began to turn public opinion against the Government. As one of the first to be executed, Padraic Pearse, had said the previous year in a funeral oration: ’the fools, the fools, the fools – they have given us our Fenian dead’. Judge Enright has engaged in painstaking research, drawn on trial records that had previously been thought lost or destroyed and produced an impressive reappraisal of events, at the heart of which is the proclamation of 26 April 1916 suspending the right to trial by a civilian court. His thesis might well be summed up in the words of the Duke of Wellington: ‘Martial law is neither more nor less than the will of the General who commands the army. In fact martial law means no law at all'. The General concerned was Sir John Maxwell, who was despatched to Dublin to put down the

Rising. Judge Enright says ‘Maxwell utilised a crude system used by the army to maintain discipline on active service, to try civilians in Dublin in the aftermath of the Rebellion'. This crude system was the Field General Court Martial. Under the Defence of the Realm (Amendment) Act 1915 civilians could be tried by court martial ‘in the event of invasion or other special military emergency arising out of the present war’. The death penalty could only be imposed if the charged act was carried out ‘with the intention of assisting the enemy’. At a General Court Martial there would have been a Judge Advocate, public trial and the right to defence counsel. Maxwell decided that such a Court was not practicable and convened two military courts to sit in camera with none of these protective features. Judge Enright conveys well the sense of urgency that prevailed. Huge numbers had been arrested. Lack of space led to a haphazard system of deporting many to England. Most trials lasted 15 minutes or less. The need to prove that

each accused acted with the intention of assisting the enemy was simply overlooked in many trials. This last point may be explained by Padraic Pearse having volunteered that he had negotiated with Germany – he had in fact sought, but not obtained German troops. Pearse was ‘a man’ said Yeats ‘made dangerous by the vertigo of self-sacrifice’ and his confession probably sealed the fate of others. Judge Enright explains that it was General Maxwell who personally decided whether or not to confirm the death penalty. While the author is critical of the basis of some of his decisions, Maxwell commuted the great majority of death sentences. Some leading participators escaped execution, among whom, the author mentions Eamon de Valera and my own kinsman, Thomas Ashe. They were tried and sentenced to death on 8 May 1916 but Maxwell commuted both sentences to life imprisonment a couple of days later. However, by this time, public opinion in Ireland had begun to swing against the Government! This is a fascinating work. It is not only a legal assessment of evidence but also tells very human stories about many individuals, military and republican, who were involved. Sir John Maxwell does not fare well. His own view at the time was, as recounted by his biographer:

Judge Enright, however, makes this point: ‘Derogations from due process are always easiest when there is an identifiable class of defendants who have struck at the foundations of society. Although it is then that the rule of law is most needed’. In this compelling account the author also comments sadly about the aftermath: ‘The Irish Free State brought about by revolution, found itself dogged by politically inspired violence. Like many states formed by revolution, it was sometimes all too ready to abandon or abrogate the rule of law'.

Master Michael Ashe was Called to the Bar in 1971 and Called to the Bench in 1998. He is Master of the Archive. Master Ashe is Queen's Counsel in England and Wales and in Northern Ireland and is Senior Counsel in Ireland. He is also a Recorder. His practice is Commercial Chancery.

Open rebellion occurred at a time when the Empire is engaged in a desperate war involving the safety of the Realm…Supposing the bulk of [the rebels] believed they were called out for manoeuvres only. Does that exonerate them for keeping out when they saw what was… think not. When Dublin is still smouldering and the blood of the victims of this mad rebellion is hardly dry is this the moment for clemency to win the rank and file?

Easter Rising 1916: The Trials. Book Review

Runnymede 15 June 2015 MASTER CHRISTOPHER CLARKE I do not know how long it took the barons and King John to get there in 1215 or when they set off. Most of the visitors from the Temple, including the Temple Church choir, had to get the 6:30 am coach, in order to get there for the early hour when we were required to be on parade (or, more accurately, hanging about). It was a glorious day. I dare say there were some modern barons in the audience, but the lineal descendants or successors of those who were there in 1215 were probably limited to Her Majesty the Queen, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Master of the Temple, and the Temple Choir. Absent in 1215 was anyone from the as yet undiscovered, let alone colonised, continent of America. Not so 800 years later. A very large number of our American cousins were there, for whom Magna Carta is a greater icon than it is for many of us. The weather was good and we all assembled in the vast water meadow which is Runnymede. One can see why it might have been chosen. Once you get there everything is out in the open. It would be difficult to organise an ambush, which may have been important to a, no doubt, jittery monarch. Towards one end of the field there was a large bandstand with two enormous screens on either side. Music was played, very finely, by the London Philharmonic Orchestra.

HRH The Duke of Cambridge arrived and unveiled the work of Hew Locke, whose sculpture consisted of 12 intricately worked bronze chairs of jurymen. Each chair incorporated symbols and imagery representing concepts of law and key moments in the struggle for freedom, rule of law and equal rights.Then the royal limousine glided up and out got HM The Queen with HRH The Duke of Edinburgh, HRH The Princess Royal, and Vice Admiral Sir Timothy Lawrence. King John would no doubt have been rather grumpy, but Her Majesty was her usual radiant self. When she reached the stage, the festivities began with speeches from the Master of the Rolls (Master Dyson), the Prime Minister and the Archbishop. Master Dyson spoke of the importance of Magna Carta, reminding us that the barons had been dealing with a despot, whereupon he introduced the Prime Minister. What the PM said was, if I recall, noticeable in retrospect, since his reference to the importance of human rights inherent in the Charter seemed to be absent from the quotes made by the Downing Street Press Office for the

newspapers the following day. The Archbishop cut a lean and impressive figure, in a plain cassock and pectoral cross which were, I suspect, a good deal less ornate that the garb of his predecessor, Stephen Langton. The Orchestra played some more and, most importantly of all, we heard the world premiĂ¨re of the anthem specially composed by John Rutter, Give the king thy judgments, O God, which was magnificently sung by the Choir. After this the celebration passed to the American Bar Association Memorial to Magna Carta, which is on slightly higher ground. The rededication was led by The Princess Royal and there were short speeches from the Chairman of the American Bar Association, the US Attorney General and the Foreign Secretary, in whose constituency Runnymede lies. On one side of the hill, behind the Memorial (in the rotunda of which were four very smart US Soldiers) the Temple Church choir sang again, and further up stood an assortment of persons with the Robes of Knights of Malta around their suits (although some seemed to have a certain Mafioso aspect â&#x20AC;&#x201C; it was the sunglasses that did it). Then we began to disperse; collected our free picnic provided by the National Trust (but donations gratefully received) and watched the Red Arrows fly past. All in all a great day of celebration of a seminal moment in our history.

Master Christopher Clarke was Called to the Bar in 1969, took Silk in 1984 and was Called to the Bench in 1991. In 1975 he was an Attorney of the Supreme Court of Turks and Caicos Islands. He was a Judge of the Court of Appeal of Jersey and Guernsey from 1998 to 2004. He was Counsel to the Bloody Sunday inquiry from 1998 to 2004. Master Clarke sat as a High Court judge in the Commercial Court from 2005 to 2013. He was appointed a Lord Justice of Appeal in 2013 and will be Treasurer in 2016.

Runnymede 15 June 2015

Security and Front of House IAN GARWOOD We have made important changes by replacing the previous Porter’s department with two new dedicated sections covering Security and Front of House operations. Some of you may have noticed a certain amount of activity recently in the corner of Brick Court Car Park. This has centred on refurbishment and conversion of the single story building, known as 4a Essex Court, to provide a new Security Office for Middle Temple’s area of the Temple. Systems testing and staff training are currently in progress. This office will become operational in September. To give you some background, in the latter part of last year, the decision was taken to form two new dedicated sections covering Security and Front of House to address changing needs. Whilst the Porters had provided a very comprehensive and valuable service to our tenants and visitors to the site, they were often pulled in too many directions at the same time, particularly when large events were taking place in Hall or in other areas of the Inn. Coupled with this, the outside world continues to change, not only in the increased threats to our security and safety, but also regarding people’s demands and expectations of the service we provide. In April this year we appointed Alexander Williams to the position of Security and Front of House Manager. Alex brings with him a wealth of experience from his former role as a counter terrorism security advisor in the City Police, in charge of their counter terrorist section. He will be based in the new Security Office and will, I am sure, make himself known to as many tenants and members as possible over the coming months. From the outset our intention was to retain existing staff and, where necessary, to engage new staff to provide sufficient personnel to operate cover on a rota basis. You will therefore see a mixture of new and familiar faces in both sections. Over the last few months, there has been a considerable amount of work to relocate or mirror all of the various security and fire detection systems from the existing Porter’s Lodge to the new Security Office. With the Security Office almost complete, we are turning our attention to the Porter’s Lodge, which will from now on be called Hall Lodge. Here the intention is to provide an area which focuses on providing Front of House reception facilities for the Hall. The Front of House team will be responsible for this Lodge and the reception area in Ashley Building. Both of these reception areas will only operate when the respective buildings are open and in use, at other times the Security Office control these areas and will arrange access, if needed.

Security and Front of House

To assist, I have set out below the main areas of responsibility for each of the new sections together with relevant contact information. Security Office (In operation 24/7 throughout the year) T: 020 7797 7768 (including emergencies) E: security@middletemple.org.uk • Management of all Security on the Middle Temple site • Liaison with Inner Temple Security • Regular site patrols (day and night) • Monitoring all Security CCTV screens and fire detection systems (day and night) • Out of hours emergencies • Out of hours control of contractors on site • Coordination and contact point for emergency services • Coordination of fire evacuation • General Security assistance to tenants • Key holding for residential units • Key holding for professional tenants if requested. Front of House (Operation corresponds with Hall & Ashley Building opening hours) T: 020 7427 4814 E: frontofhouse@middletemple.org.uk • Access control and front of house services to Hall • Access control to Ashley Building • Car Parking control • Duty cover for events in Hall and Ashley Building • Ceremonial duties, including Temple Church • Guided Tours of Middle Temple Hall • Merchandise sales • Internal Post distribution Alex Williams may be contacted on: T: 020 7427 4848 or 07950 889242 E: a.williams@middletemple.org.uk As with all new arrangements, there may need to be some fine tuning and in the coming months we will be introducing a number of new procedures to enhance both Security and Front of House operations. If you have any questions or would like more detail on the new arrangements, please contact me at: i.garwood@middletemple.org.uk Ian Garwood Director of Estates.

Issues Facing the Junior Bar JULIETTE LEVY Sitting comfortably in chambers, having survived Bar School, pupillage and junior tenancy, I was blissfully unaware of the struggles faced by my 21st Century equivalents seeking a career at the Bar. I felt deeply embarrassed by my ignorance of their plight. Luckily for Hall Committee and Middle Temple, we had several members who had the courage and good sense to speak out, and bring this chronic problem to our attention. At Hall Committee, we believe our junior members deserve a fair opportunity of pursuing their dreams and we have made it one of our missions to tackle this issue head on and assist them. As a result, we set up a self-appointed Working Group and set our own terms of reference. We are 10 strong and made up of barristers at the Independent and Employed Bar. We are a fearless bunch on a crusade!

The problem There are thousands of aspiring barristers who are unable to obtain pupillage, without which they cannot obtain the practising certificate which will enable him or her to practise as a barrister at the Independent or Employed Bar. These are not no-hopers, these are highly qualified and talented graduates who dream of becoming barristers but have little chance of doing so, not because they lack the skills or talent, but because the current system of vocational training and pupillage is wholly unsuitable for a 21st Century Bar and the diverse opportunities available in a rapidly evolving and dynamic legal services sector. Without a pupillage, these talented individuals cannot pursue legal careers either in this jurisdiction or abroad. They cannot even cross-qualify as solicitors (due to a rule change in 2010). Instead, these BPTC graduates are left unsupported and are forced to abandon their ambitions or be exploited by law firms or other organisations as paralegals. The problem is chronic and if not addressed soon, the future Bar risks being one comprised primarily of members who come from privileged backgrounds armed with the best opportunities to compete for pupillage. In short, the Bar’s efforts at diversity and equality will fast fade away as it drifts into an elitist future divorced from the 21st Century needs of the people and businesses it is supposed to fight for and assist.

of finding a pupillage is 1 in 4 or 1 in 5 in any given BPTC year. Added to those BPTC students seeking pupillage in their qualifying years are the huge numbers from previous BPTC years (the rules permit people to apply for pupillage for up to five years after they leave Bar School (and after that, they can apply for a waiver)) chasing the same pupillages. We estimate that that there may be another 2,000 to 2,500 further applications per year, meaning that there may be more than 3,000 people chasing 400-450 pupillages in any one year. The Inn and indeed the Bar, has many members in that position. Leaving aside the loss of talent, there is a huge amount of anguish, not to say despair, amongst our junior members.

Our Objectives One of the main objectives of the Working Group is to examine ways of increasing pupillage opportunities for our members. As luck would have it, the BSB recently issued a consultation on the Future Training of the Bar which, remarkably, encourages fresh thinking on the issue of pupillage and training.

You have a Voice – Use It! Our first task is responding to this consultation. We invite any of you to share their struggles with us, together with any ideas, so we can change the current system for you. Please contact Juliette Levy at: Juliette.Levy@selbornechambers.co.uk Juliette Levy was Called to the Bar in 1992, and has been Vice-Chair of the Hall Committee since January 2014. She is a tenant at Selborne Chambers and specialises in commercial, chancery and telecommunications law.

Am I exaggerating? Let’s look at the figures An aspiring barrister, fresh from university and already weighed down with debt, is now expected to find a further £14,000 to £18,000 for the privilege of sitting the vocation stage of training (the BPTC). Once completed, the prospect

Issues Facing the Junior Bar

The Advocacy Training Council THE HON MR JUSTICE NICHOLAS GREEN The Advocacy Training Council (ATC) is responsible for providing leadership, guidance and coordination in relation to the pursuit of excellence in advocacy. It was established by the Council of the Inns of Court (COIC) and consists of barristers, judges and others drawn from the Inns of Court, Circuits, the Bar Council of England and Wales, Specialist Bar Associations and from other representative bodies and organisations. The ATCâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s primary role is to oversee the development and delivery of advocacy training for the Bar of England and Wales and is also often asked to assist overseas. During 2015 the ATC has been involved in the creation of training films on Appellate Advocacy and Skeleton arguments. These have proven to be a useful resource for the Inns of Courts and Circuits, where they have been used as part of the New Practitioner advocacy training. The Appeal Advocacy film includes talks on the principles of appeal advocacy from a judge, civil practitioner and criminal practitioner, followed by demonstrations of both civil and criminal appeals. The Skeleton Argument film similarly provides guidance on the drafting and use of Skeleton Arguments in both Criminal and Civil Cases. The ATC also embarked upon a project to research the effective use of foreign languages in courts and the use of interpreters. This was undertaken by the Research and Development Committee. A training film was created to raise awareness of the communication challenges for an advocate working through an interpreter. The scenario used a Romanian language speaker witnessing a crime and subsequently summoned to court to give evidence. The film details the three way process of using an interpreter and provides guidance surrounding the techniques of examining a witness through such a medium. The film conveys some key messages as to how advocates can work effectively with interpreters in court, from maintaining eye contact to putting your case in a straightforward manner avoiding the use of acronyms. The ATC incorporated the training film as part of a pilot training day. The day provided participants with the opportunity to practice the examination, cross examination and re-examination of the foreign language speakers, using three newly developed exercises; â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Family with a Turkish

During the 2015 Review on Efficiency in Criminal Proceedings, The Right Honourable Sir Brian Leveson, President of the Queen’s Bench Division, referred to the ‘excellent work of the Advocacy Training Council’ and ‘the importance of the Advocate’s Gateway’. Witness’, ‘Criminal with a Polish Witness’ and ‘Civil with a Mandarin Witness’. The foreign language speakers were played by bilingual interpreters under the supervision of experienced advocacy and interpreting trainers. The day was deemed to be a great success. The Advocate’s Gateway success has continued as it carries on its work in researching the skills required to address the needs of a vulnerable person in the justice system. The Advocate’s Gateway website provides free access to practical, evidence-based guidance on vulnerable witnesses and defendants. There are now 16 toolkits readily available to all on the website, which identify common issues encountered when examining vulnerable witnesses and defendants, together with proposed solutions. Other toolkits are in the process of being drafted and the ATC has been working with family law practitioners and judges on developing toolkits for use in the family courts. During the 2015 Review on Efficiency in Criminal Proceedings, The Right Honourable Sir Brian Leveson, President of the Queen’s Bench Division, referred to the ‘excellent work of the Advocacy Training Council’ and ‘the importance of the Advocate’s Gateway’. In addition, the work of the ATC and The Advocate’s Gateway has also been endorsed by the Court of Appeal and in the Criminal Practice Directions. This confirms the instrumental success of ‘The Gateway'. The Advocate’s Gateway inaugural International Conference on ‘Addressing Vulnerability in Justice Systems’ was held at The Law Society on Saturday 20 June. About 150 individuals attended from various professional backgrounds, including: members of the judiciary, legal practitioners and advocates, academics, police, intermediaries and charity workers. Delegates came from various jurisdictions including Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Ireland and Scotland. The Conference facilitated the exchange of perspectives, ideas and strategies between countries, regions and sectors, and focused on: defining vulnerability, case management, principles for planning and questioning vulnerable adults and children and using technology to create a fairer justice system. During the course of the day a variety of keynote addresses, panel sessions and breakout sessions discussed the importance of the topic of vulnerability. Key speakers included, Sir James Munby (President of the Family Division), Professor Penny Cooper (Chairman of the Advocate’s Gateway Committee), His Honour Judge Rook QC, Professor (Master) David Omerod and Mr Justice Green (Chairman of the Advocacy Training Council). The ATC is committed to assisting overseas Bars, particularly in the developing worlds, where improving standards of advocacy training helps help to maintain the rule of law. The ATC adopts a ‘seed corn’ approach, whereby Inn and Circuit accredited trainers work alongside local members of the legal profession to develop and implement their

own advocacy training provision. A great example is that of Zimbabwe. The ATC has a long standing relationship with the Law Society of Zimbabwe, and has delivered five rounds of training in the country between 2011 and 2015. The series of training, consisted of a programme of advocacy training followed by training the trainer training, reflects the success of international training. During the initial rounds, local practitioners were selected, based on their enthusiasm, skills and natural flare for advocacy, to become suitable candidates to assist the UK trainers in the delivery of the later rounds of training. The most recent training delivered in Zimbabwe in 2015 completes the success story of the jurisdiction. The Law Society of Zimbabwe now has its own pool of trainers as a result of the training programme delivered by the ATC. It was agreed that, moving forward, only two ATC trainers would need to attend to oversee and monitor the training, as the training there is effectively now self-sufficient. This year the ATC is delivering training in such varied jurisdictions as Trinidad, Ghana, The Hague, Singapore, Pakistan, Ireland and Poland. The ATC looks forward to expanding and evolving into the Inns of Court Advocacy College (ICAC). Mr Justice Green was appointed to the High Court in October 2013. He practised from Brick Court Chambers from 1989 until 2013, and acted as joint head of chambers in 2011. He was Chairman of the Bar in 2010 and has been Chairman of the Advocacy Training Council since 2011.

The Advocacy Training Council

Extract from Reading on 17 February 2015:

The Origins of Legal London MASTER RUPERT JACKSON

Two thousand years ago the Iron Age in Britain was drawing to a close, although no-one knew that at the time. Historical geeks call this period the ‘LPRIA’, meaning Late Pre-Roman Iron Age. The Celtic tribes who lived here were prospering. See, for example, the Snettisham hoard in the British Museum. France and Belgium became Roman provinces in the 50's BC and were linked into the Roman road system. Although Britain remained independent for another century, there were now splendid opportunities for trade with the Empire. The principal tribes in south east England were the Cantiaci in the area round Canterbury, the Atrebates in the area round Silchester, the Trinobantes in the area round Colchester and the Catuvellauni in the area round St Albans/ Verulamium. Those four towns were centres of economic activity, each with their own coinage. But here on the banks of the River Thames there was nothing. There is precious little evidence of any Iron Age settlement in this region. That remained the position in AD 43, when the Romans invaded. Yet less than twenty years after the Romans arrived there was a thriving town here with major public buildings and much commerce. And a few years after that London became the capital city of the province. Why did this happen? Before tackling this question, we must first note some oddities. First, London was not built on the site of any existing Iron Age centre or ‘town’. Secondly, unlike the other major Roman towns in Britain, London did not become a centre of tribal administration. The local élites of the Iron Age became officials who administered their tribal areas and collected taxes on behalf of the Roman Government, but this didn’t happen in London. The explanations for these oddities fit together. London may have been located on the banks of the Thames precisely because it was not an existing Iron Age centre. This site straddled tribal boundaries and therefore was neutral

territory. London was ideally located to be a supply point for the occupying army and the main base for Roman administration. London was designated as the capital city from an early stage. We know from Tacitus that the Procurator (chief financial officer) was based in London by AD 60. A famous Procurator who died in the late 60's was Gaius Julius Classicianus. His tombstone has been found in London and is in the British Museum. The Governor of the province was installed in London slightly later in the 1st Century, but we do not know precisely when. Both the Governor and the Procurator required a bevy of clerks to support them. The Governor also required about 200 soldiers to serve on his staff. They were based in a fort at Cripplegate. Because of its strategic location, London rapidly became a major centre for traders and merchandise. There is evidence of metal working, wood working, pottery production, butchery, grain dealing and other trades during the 50's. Numerous coins from the Claudian period have been found in the area to the north of London Bridge. By AD 60 three high status buildings were standing in London: a proto-forum building, an aisled hall and an apsidal building with a complex substructure. Not bad for a new town less than 12 years old. Tacitus says that by AD 60 (just 17 years after the Romans arrived!) London was, ‘an important centre with

...mechanisms for investigation and enforcement were somewhat primitive. Many victims of crime resorted to self help. a large number of businessmen and much merchandise’. This remains the position today, as London approaches its 2000th anniversary. Sadly, Queen Boudicca of the Iceni tribe was not a supporter of the Roman administration. In AD 6061 she took the opportunity to invade London, slaughter the inhabitants and set fire to all buildings. Archaeological evidence suggests that everything was burnt to the ground. This was not a good start for the Londoners of that period. But the strategic and geographical considerations identified above meant that the city had to survive. The Romans set about re-building it on a grander scale. The Roman authorities constructed a forum at the heart of the new city. They created a timber amphitheatre in the area where Guildhall now stands. They developed the waterfront to create a major port. They established public baths on higher ground just above the waterfront. They built a palace nearby, as well as numerous other public buildings. A cynic might say that Boudicca had done the Romans a favour. By carrying out such a thorough demolition job, she had cleared the ground for comprehensive redevelopment. The Romans brought with them a mature legal system. The magistrates who sat in the newly created urban centres of 1st Century Britain were expected to administer Roman law. The towns in which veteran soldiers settled were used as show cases for Roman law and civil administration. It must be admitted, however, that mechanisms for investigation and enforcement were somewhat primitive. Many victims of crime resorted to self-help. The new town of London was not only the commercial, military and administrative centre of Britain. It was also the legal capital. The governor was the top judicial authority of the province. He had the power of life and death. His decisions were final. Little is known about the judicial qualities of the governors who served in 1st Century Britain. The one exception is Agricola, who became Governor in about AD 77. Tacitus tells us that Agricola’s policy was, ‘parvis peccatis veniam, magnis severitatem commodare’. In other words he gave conditional discharges for minor offences, but heavy sentences for serious offences. Not bad for a judge who was hearing cases in London 2,000 years before the creation of the Sentencing Council. Everyone in the province was subject to the law, including the governor. Any provincial governor who abused his powers was liable to subsequent prosecution. When the provincial governor was too busy to discharge his judicial functions personally, he appointed a lawyer, known as ‘iuridicus’, to take on this role. The first recorded iuridici in Britain were appointed during the Flavian period. Gaius Salvius Liberalis served between AD 78 and AD 81 or possibly between AD 81 and AD 83. Lucius Javolenus Priscus served between AD 84 and AD 86. They were jurists of high repute, particularly Javolenus.

Javolenus was both a practising lawyer and a law teacher. He was probably the first man to deliver law lectures in London. He was also an eccentric. One issue which Javolenus was called upon to decide in Britain was a contested probate. Seius Saturninus, chief helmsman of the British Fleet, died leaving his estate to Valerius Maximus, a ship’s captain, on trust to be passed on to Seius’ son when he attained the age of 16. Sadly the boy died. The issue was who should get the goods – Valerius Maximus (the trustee) or Mallius Seneca (the boy's uncle, who would have inherited upon Seius’ intestacy). Javolenus found in favour of the uncle. Thus London became the legal capital of Britain and the rule of law was established here eleven centuries before King John affixed his seal to Magna Carta. Furthermore, Javolenus was probably giving law lectures in London some 14 centuries before the first Reader addressed Middle Temple! Master Rupert Jackson was Called to the Bar in 1972 and took Silk in 1987. He was appointed to the High Court Bench in 1999 and to the Court of Appeal in 2008. He was Master of Moots between 1998 and 2004. Rupert made himself a trifle unpopular in certain quarters by proposing reforms to abolish recoverable success fees, PI referral fees and certain other Spanish practices. But he remains cheerful.

The Origins of Legal London

Called to the Bar: Royal Benchers JEFFREY HYLAND Known as ‘Royal Benchers’, the Royal Family have long taken an active interest in the education of the legal profession through the ancient Inns of Court. Jeffrey Hyland looks at this ongoing relationship. The Inns of Court are the ancient seats of learning for the legal profession and the Royal Family have been at the heart of these institutions since their earliest days. In the 12th Century, the Temple Church was constructed for the Military Order of Knights Templar near to the River Thames in central London. When the order was abolished in the early 14th Century, the area around the church in Holborn began to be occupied by lawyers. Following a decree of Henry III in 1234 that institutions providing legal education should not be located in the City of London as they would be unduly influenced, Holborn was chosen for the legal profession as it was on the boundary of the city and close to Westminster and the law courts. The four mediaeval Inns of Court (Inner Temple, Middle Temple, Lincoln’s Inn and Gray’s Inn) were established from this period in the same way as the colleges at Oxford and Cambridge Universities for educational purposes but also offering accommodation to the legal profession and their students. The term ‘Inns of Court’ appears to have been adopted as a result of the hospitality offered to those associated with the law courts. The Inns of Court grew in influence and they became the only institutions that were able to call qualified practitioners to the Bar as well as educating future barristers and influencing common law. During the 16th Century, the Inns of Court prospered greatly and this attracted the patronage of the Monarchs and the court that surrounded them. Many members had no intention of becoming barristers, but used the Inns as meeting places to influence the great figures of the day. Edmund Dudley, a financial agent and adviser to Henry VII, was a fellow of Gray’s Inn until he was beheaded on the orders of Henry VIII in the first year of his reign. Thomas Cromwell, Henry VIII’s persecutor of the old religious order, was also a member of the Inn and was to suffer the same fate later in the King’s reign. Queen Elizabeth I became a patron of Gray’s Inn and her key aides became members including Lord Burleigh, the Queen’s First Minister; Sir Francis

Walsingham, the Queen’s Chief Spy and Lord Howard of Effingham, the Admiral who defeated the Spanish Armada in 1588. It is rumoured that the decorative screen that still sits at the west end of the Hall at Gray’s Inn was made from the wood of a captured Spanish galleon during the Armada which was a gift from Elizabeth I. The Inns of Court in Tudor times were also renowned for their patronage of the arts and Gray’s Inn was the location of the first known performance of William Shakespeare’s play The Comedy of Errors as part of the Inn’s Christmas festivities on 28 December 1594. There is some dispute as to whether the performance was by Shakespeare’s own company of actors, however, his patron, Lord Southampton was a member of Gray’s Inn. A contemporary account of the performance, Gesta Grayorum, also contains the script of a masque titled the Masque of Proteus which was performed in front of Queen Elizabeth I at Shrovetide in 1595. In 1956, the masque was revived for Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II at a special performance in Gray’s Inn Hall that the Queen attended with her uncle and aunt, Prince Henry, Duke of Gloucester, then the Senior Royal Bencher of Gray’s Inn, and Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester. Today, the present Duke of Gloucester, HRH Prince Richard, has followed his late father as a Royal Bencher of Gray’s Inn and HRH The Duchess of Cornwall followed HRH The Prince of Wales becoming a Royal Bencher in 2012, 37 years after her husband. After Charles II was restored to the throne in 1660, he paid a number of visits to Lincoln’s Inn, with the most famous occasion recorded on 29 February 1672, when he visited the Inn with his brother James (the future James II), Prince Rupert, the Duke of Monmouth and the Duke of Richmond. The story goes that the royal party were entertained in style and the beer and wine was very free flowing . When it came to proposing the Loyal Toast to the King, there was some difficulty in finding a bencher able to rise to propose the toast and so the King granted the Inn the privilege of drinking the

Loyal Toast while sitting down. Whatever the truth in the legend, Lincoln’s Inn has continued the tradition ever since and the Loyal Toast was proposed sitting down when the future George V was Treasurer in 1904, and again when the The Queen and HRH The Duke of Edinburgh dined at the Inn in 1967 when Princess Margaret was Treasurer. Lincoln’s Inn has a strong tradition of Royal Benchers and Queen Mary was appointed as the first woman Bencher of any Inn in 1943. The current Royal Benchers of Lincoln’s Inn are HRH The Duke of Kent, who follows his father, Prince George, Duke of Kent, and HRH The Duke of York who was elected to the bench in 2012. King George VI and Queen Elizabeth were Royal Benchers of Inner Temple and Middle Temple respectively. On 6 July 1949, Queen Elizabeth formally opened the restored Hall of Middle Temple, following extensive damage sustained from the bombing of London during the Second World War. A fortnight later the Queen’s treasurership of Middle Temple and the King’s treasurership of Inner Temple were celebrated by a famous joint Bench Dinner of the two Inns, captured in an oil painting by Terence Cuneo that today hangs in the Queen’s Room at Middle Temple, near to a portrait of Queen Elizabeth II wearing the robes of a Master of the Bench by James Gunn. Today, the Royal Bencher of the Honourable Society of Middle Temple is Prince William, HRH The Duke of Cambridge, who was called to the Bar as an honorary barrister and also to the Bench, the Inn’s governing body in July 2009. Succeeding the Queen Mother in 1944 and Diana, Princess of Wales in 1988, Prince William became the sixth member of the Royal Family to be called to the Bench as a Royal Bencher of Middle Temple. The Prince’s grandmother, the Queen, sent a message of support to be read out as she was unable to attend the ceremony in person, which said:

to rededicate the church organ at a service of choral evensong, five years after their previous visit to the church to celebrate the quatercentenary of the Inns’ Letters Patent. The churches of the Inns of Court - the Temple Church along with the chapels at Lincoln’s Inn and Gray’s Inn - are peculiars or extra-diocesan churches, but they are not considered Royal Peculiars. Royal Peculiars, like the Chapel Royal at St. James’s Palace, are exempt from the jurisdiction of the diocese in which they are situated and are subject to the direct jurisdiction of the monarch rather than the bishop of the diocese. However, the non-royal peculiars are subject to the jurisdiction of an archbishop direct or, in the case of the Temple Church, to the Middle and Inner Temple, although the land on which the church sits was granted to the Inns by King James I in 1608 and the church continues its relationship with the Crown today. The Middle and Inner Temple were granted the land on condition that they keep up the church and its services and they continue to maintain the church and its choir of men and boys.

I regret that I am not able to be with you this evening for your call to the Bench which follows in the tradition of Royal Benchers established at Middle Temple for my great-grandfather, the Prince of Wales in 1861.

In a reference to the Queen Mother who referred to herself as the ‘woman of the Domus’ or house after she became a Royal Bencher - the Queen continued: I should not wish this message to be an unwelcome intrusion into this evening’s proceedings. However as the daughter of the ‘first daughter of the Domus’ and the proud grandmother of your latest Royal Bencher, I would simply ask that my warmest wishes be extended to all present for a most successful and memorable occasion.

In 2011, in celebration of their current Royal Bencher’s wedding, the Middle Temple established two scholarships named ‘The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge Scholarships’ which along with the Diana, Princess of Wales Scholarship and the Queen Mother Scholarship, are awarded to deserving candidates in order to help them to finance studying at Middle Temple. The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge Scholarships were first awarded in 2012 and the royal couple met holders of all of the royal scholarships on a visit to Middle Temple later that year. Study scholarships are also awarded by Inner Temple in the names of their current Royal Benchers, the Duke of Edinburgh and HRH The Princess Royal. In 2013, the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh visited the 12th Century Temple Church of Middle and Inner Temple

The Queen also showed her continued interest in the law becoming patron of the Magna Carta Trust to commemorate the 800th anniversary of the sealing of Magna Carta in 2015, the document upon which the laws of many democracies, English Common Law and the American Constitution are based. Although you would rarely, if ever, see a member of royal family in a court of law or acting as a barrister or lawyer, the Royal Benchers continue the traditions of the Inns of Court and promote these seats of learning for the legal profession. Jeffrey Hyland is a royal freelance writer specialising in various subjects including British royalty, travel, London and food. His work has been published a number of times including in Majesty Magazine on the subjects of the Royal Red Cross and Royal Chancellors. He is currently researching a new book on government houses around the world. jeffreyalexanderhyland@hotmail.com

Called to the Bar: Royal Benchers

Stories Behind the Portraits:

Lord Lindley MR DANDY MALET

Nathaniel Lindley, later Lord Lindley MR, was Called to the Bar by Middle Temple in 1850. He is memorialised by the Inn with an excellent portrait by Sir George Reid RA that hangs in the Benchers’ apartments. Lindley began practice on his own account at 16 Old Square in 1854 and energetic activity in the subsequent decade ensured that his reputation rose early and rapidly with the 19th Century tide of intensified technical positivistic law. Among other projects, he translated some of the work of a harbinger of the new jurisprudence, Anton Thibaut: the resulting Introduction to the Study of Jurisprudence quickly became a Bar exam set text. He was also dissatisfied with the accuracy of subsisting work on partnerships and companies and spent five years writing what has become (in its present 19th edition) Lindley and Banks on Partnership. By the mid1860s the slightly happenstance materialisation of the old nominate reports was badly out of step with the times. Lindley had hardly begun his second decade of practice when, in 1865, he and others founded the ICLR, a revolution that continues to provide a unitary set of fundamental reports at a far lower price than had been achievable by the old ad hoc system. These remarkable achievements were doubtless very visible: Lindley was a Silk in his early forties, a Bencher a couple of years later in 1874 and in 1875 he was asked to become a Judge of the Court of Common Pleas, receiving at the same time elevation to the disappearing rank of Serjeant. He was still protesting to ‘great astonishment’ at his first judicial appointment decades later in his memoirs (which are retained in the archive at Middle Temple). This humane man admitted that he had never liked being on Circuit, citing inter alia, ‘the trial of prisoners and passing sentence upon them which was often very painful to me’. But his time as a judge was vigorous. His Court of Appeal judgment in Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1893] 1 QB 256 pioneered consumer protection. He also worked at improving the Chancery and Crown Office Rules and attempted to rationalise the Council of Legal Education (where he was Chairman).

He served his Inn as Treasurer in 1891 and quickly found himself in tricky diplomatic waters because the then Master of the Temple, the Rev C J Vaughan, had no intention of relinquishing a tradition of taking precedence over every guest, barring members of the royal family, at the feast of Grand Day. Lindley had a guest coming who was also a distinguished priest, albeit of a slightly different species, in the form of the Bishop of Oxford, the Rt Rev William Stubbs. Lindley sent an anxiously tactful letter to the Bishop, who replied, 'My Dear Treasurer, Make your mind easy. I never object to walk after an old lady in her own drawing room'. Lindley became Master of the Rolls in 1897 and, within in a few years, a Fellow of the Royal Society, a Lord of Appeal in Ordinary and an honorary LL.D of Oxford. As an FRS he sat on the committee that despatched Captain Robert Scott to the Antarctic. Scott’s appreciation of the old jurist takes physical form at 81°46’S/159°5’E, a point on the expedition’s route, where a massive shape rises to 7,283 feet. It is Mount Lindley. The last created and last surviving Serjeant-at-Law died in December 1921. He should be remembered as one of the great high technicians of English law in its Brunel-era period. Dandy Malet read Theology at Durham University (St Chad's College). He was Called in 1992 at Middle Temple and undertook criminal pupillages with Walton Hornsby and Aftab Jafferjee QC. He is a member of Holborn Chambers and is a former Incorporated Council of Law Reporting (ICLR) reporter and a former private soldier of 68 Inns of Court & City Yeomanry (The Devil's Own). He writes occasionally for the academic journals including the Law Quarterly Review (LQR) and Lloyd's Maritime and Commercial Law Quarterly (LMCLQ).

Stories behind the Portraits: Lord Lindley MR

The Art of Persuasion Tradition and Technique by Adrian Whitfield QC BOOK REVIEW BY MASTER DEREK WOOD

15207 MT Book FC.indd 1

06/05/2015 14:13

Advocacy is the core business of the Bar. Training in advocacy lies at the heart of our professional education. We deliver advocacy training to our students, to our pupils and to new and established practitioners. But our advocacy training, as Adrian Whitfield’s brilliant monograph shows, is the descendant of a much more distinguished ancestor: the art and practice of rhetoric. First developed in classical antiquity, skill in rhetoric was identified in Homer’s Iliad as one of the key attributes of the warrior-hero. Aristotle analysed it in depth. His Roman followers - Cicero, the contemporary anonymous author of Rhetorica ad Herennium, and Quintilian in the 1st Century AD - dissected the subject with subtlety and at length. In the Middle Ages, sustained by study of these classical authors and later commentators, rhetoric, together with logic and grammar, formed part of the trivium, the foundation of learning in the humanities. The veneration accorded to rhetoric as a distinct discipline continued in England well

into the Tudor period. The many works published in the 15th and 16th Centuries on the education of the young stress its importance. In one of these, Thomas Elyot’s The boke of the Governour, referred to by Whitfield, we are told that the future ‘governour’ must begin to acquire the skill at the age of fourteen. Elyot was a member of the Middle Temple. He considered that the training exercises undertaken in the Inn followed the classical model (See Baker in History of the Middle Temple Ed. Havery, Hart 2011, p.51). Professor Skinner in Forensic Shakespeare (OUP 2014) demonstrates how deeply Shakespeare’s own writings were influenced by his study of the subject at grammar school. Whitfield lays a new path through this body of learning. He naturally focuses on the type of rhetoric recognised even in the ancient world as the most important: forensic, adversarial advocacy. As a skilled trainer in his own right he picks out themes developed by the classical writers which have particular resonance for the way in which we both practise and teach advocacy today. To travel along this path, elegantly traced, is to experience a number of different and colourful impressions. First, there is the fascination of seeing how some of the outstanding intellects of the classical age get to grips with exactly the same practical problems that we face in the daily exercise of our trade. Structure is the key. Do you put your good points first? How and when do you smooth over the less good (aka. bad) points? How and when do you deal with the opposing case? Cicero disagrees with Aristotle. Quintilian, who continually comes over as the wiseacre in chambers or the robing room that every young barrister needs to consult from time to time, is more flexible. For all of them, burning midnight oil is unavoidable. That has been going on for at least two thousand years. There are some entertaining surprises too. The orator should not sully his reputation by representing unworthy clients: there is no ‘cab rank’ rule. Moreover, according to Quintilian (and at this point regulators please look away) it is permissible to mislead and indeed lie to the court, if one’s cause is noble and just.

The second impression is different. The ancient writers dissected the practice of rhetoric with an extraordinary enthusiasm for categorisation, division and sub-division which at first sight seems to give precedence to quasiscientific theory over the practical realities of the case in hand. Aristotle distinguishes three types of rhetoric: forensic, display or ceremonial, and deliberative. There are three qualities which he says the successful orator must demonstrate: ethos, which we would perhaps describe as demeanour, pathos, the ability to move the audience, and logos, the proper arrangement and treatment of the subject matter. Cicero specifies five skills which must be deployed in the preparation of an effective speech: invention, arrangement, style, memory and delivery. Arrangement alone has a number of sub-headings, although the authors cannot agree on how many – anything between four and six. It typically includes a prologue, a narration of the facts of the case, and the identification of the issues which have to be decided. This is followed by submissions – both positive and in response to the other side – and an epilogue. There are three styles of oratory: grand, plain and medium. And so on. When you get beyond the taxonomy you cannot but admire the quality and depth of thought which these writers

up on the white board at Cumberland Lodge on a Friday evening. Good arrangement cannot happen without it. Aristotle recognises the difference between written and oral submissions. Both must be crafted with care; but they are not the same. Standing up in court and reading from a written script is the ultimate turn-off. Hence the importance of memory. Plain speaking, employing words in common usage, is at a premium; but delivery must be lively and bright, exploring the full range of linguistic expression. Eye contact is vital. And we return to the mystery of ethos, the demeanour of the advocate – a mixture of attractive speaking, the air of authority which comes from total command of the subject matter, reliability and ethical probity. But our instruction is still a pale reflection of what the ancients achieved - or at least aspired to. Classical rhetoric was embedded in a deep knowledge of language, literature and philosophy, generously deployed by Whitfield himself throughout his text. It gave life and beauty to the written and spoken word. In court, John Mortimer’s Horace Rumpole, quoting Wordsworth at Snaresbrook, may be the last exemplar of that in our days. A good law degree would not be enough for Quintilian. Much less would he admire the negative Hampel method, with its nit-picky critical

Adrian Whitfield, in this lively , fascinating and neatly illustrated piece, shows us a glorious other world. We look at it through glass in envy. have invested in their subject. Much of the advice finds its echo in what we try to convey in our own training today. Cicero’s ‘invention’ – inventio – is the process of discovering what the case is or might be about. What are its interesting or special features? This is the close relative of the freethinking, brainstorming ‘case analysis’ process which pops

headlines and segmented demonstrations. He knew that encouragement and praise was the way to bring the best out of the young. Adrian Whitfield, in this lively , fascinating and neatly illustrated piece, shows us a glorious other world. We look at it through glass in envy.

Master Wood has been Director of Advocacy since October 2011 and was Treasurer in 2006. He has worked extensively with the Bar Standards Board in the interests of the profession. He is a member of Falcon Chambers and specialises in commercial and residential property law.

The Art Of Persuasion: Tradition And Technique: Book Review

The Vancouver Magna Carta Dinner MASTER ALASTAIR SHARP On Monday 15 March 2015 a Middle Temple delegation consisting of Masters Anthony Arlidge, Alastair Sharp and Ann Hussey attended the Magna Carta Octocentenary Dinner followed by ‘A Thespian Appreciation of the Magna Carta'. This took place at the British Columbia's Lawyers Inn Society's stupendous roof level Hall and Terrace at the Court of Appeal Building in central Vancouver. The occasion was also chosen to mark a renewal of the bonds between Middle Temple and the British Columbian legal fraternity, which hark back many years and include visits by a number of former Benchers and the donation of certain Middle Temple floor boards from Hall, which have been constructed into a ceremonial table. The current delegation arrived bearing a Declaration of Good Will and continued Amity from the Inn, signed by Master Treasurer and Master Arlidge as a past Treasurer. It was signed on behalf of the British Columbian Lawyers by the Chief Justice and a number of other Office Holders It was a marvellous evening attended by some 250 of British Columbia’s lawyers and judges. The guests were piped into dinner by a kilted piper and the Middle Temple Grace was delivered with aplomb by Master Hussey. During the course of the dinner one of the host’s most senior and distinguished practitioners, Bruce Fraser QC, welcomed the Middle Temple representatives and celebrated the close ties, both in the past and present. Master Sharp responded on behalf of the Master Treasurer, emphasising the warm welcome that any member of the Lawyer’s Inn Society would receive on any visit to London, and, in particular from Domus. He also presented a tangible gift to the Inn Society from the visitors, consisting of a Scottish Drinking Quaich inscribed as ‘The Middle Temple Quaich’ and dated 15 May 2015. The culmination and highlight of the dinner, after the Loyal Toast by the Attorney General Suzanne Anton QC, was the highly entertaining, witty and erudite address by Master Arlidge on the Magna Carta itself. We were taken on a high speed tour of his book co-authored by Master Judge, with a number of irreverent and occasionally scurrilous diversions. The address went down brilliantly, as evidenced by the fact that Master Arlidge later disappeared under a crowd of admirers anxious to purchase the book and obtain his autograph. After the dinner there was a theatrical performance of 1215 And All That by a group of lawyers, transcending the

The Vancouver Magna Carta Dinner

centuries from the 13th Century to the present. It was a most original, lively and, for much of it, hilarious performance. It was a fitting end to a highly successful evening after which further drinks were enjoyed by the water feature on the roof terrace surrounded by skyscrapers – a somewhat surreal experience. The whole event was organised by a Committee chaired by Christopher Harvey QC who was the Master of Ceremonies for the evening. He did a superb job. He is a Middle Templar having been Called to the Bar in 1968 and practised in London for some five years before returning to his native Canada, where he specialises in environmental law. He and Master Sharp were pupils together in the then 2 Garden Court. By interesting coincidence it transpired that Bruce Fraser QC was not only in the same Chambers as a pupil a few years earlier but also had the same Pupil Master as Master Sharp. After the formal evening the Middle Temple delegation took some time to explore the beauties of Vancouver and its environs before spending a few days with Christopher and his artist wife at their summer retreat on Savary Island. We may not have been expecting to travel by canoe for the last leg or to have to gather our supper from the sea bed and beach – clams, oysters and prawns – but we mucked in in pioneering spirit and great fun was had by all. Master Alastair Sharp was Called to the Bar in 1968, made a Recorder in 1992, a Legal Assessor to the General Medical Council, in 2001, a CEDRE accredited Mediator in 2002 and was a Tribunal Judge from 2003 to 2014. He then returned to Lamb Chambers as a Mediator and is currently completing his Masters Degree in Mediation and Conflict Management at Strathclyde University.

As a leading accountancy practice, our professional reputation among barristers stems from providing a consistently high standard of financial support to members of the Bar. At Lawrence Grant, Chartered Accountants, we have a specialist team of highly dedicated personnel that barristers can rely on and trust. Our collective knowledge and experience in advising barristers totals over 40 years. Our barrister clients are able to enjoy taking advantage of the FREE services we offer, including an initial consultation, our easy-to-access tax deductible expenses checklist or our Excel cashbook template for the preparation of VAT returns and accounting information.

ÂŠiStockphoto.com/Thomas_EyeDesign

We are also able to tailor our fixed scale of charges to fit your individual requirements, thus offering real value for money. As an incentive, discounts are offered to encourage our barrister clients to provide us with their accounting information in good time.

www.lawrencegrant.co.uk/specialist | T: 020 8861 7557 | marketing@lawrencegrant.co.uk LG Horizontal Advert Jul12.indd 1

16/07/2012 11:33

Rare Gifts to the Inn LESLEY WHITELAW MASTER JUDGE HAS PRESENTED TO THE INN HIS SUPERB COLLECTION OF 17 MEDIAEVAL AND EARLY MODERN DOCUMENTS DATED BETWEEN 1386 AND 1536, WHICH HE HAS ASSEMBLED OVER MANY YEARS. Master Judge has presented to the Inn his superb collection of 17 mediaeval and early modern documents dated between 1386 and 1536, which he has assembled over many years. The documents have been selected with an expert eye: all are very significant for the famous names which appear in them, in many cases accompanied by signatures and seals. Several Plantagenets who were central characters in the Wars of the Roses and are familiar as dramatis personae in Shakespeare’s history plays are represented. One example is a document of 1470 in the name of George, Duke of Clarence (1449-1478), releasing to Sir Thomas Littleton title to a manor. Clarence was the son of Richard, Duke of York (1411-1460) and was brother to Edward IV and Richard III and uncle to the Princes in the Tower. He was Shakespeare’s ‘false, fleeting, perjur’d Clarence’ (Richard III, Act I scene iv), drowned in a butt of malmsey. Littleton (1407-1481) was the famous judge and legal writer whose Treatise on Tenures was the earliest treatise on English Law and the first law book printed in England in 1481. It remained influential into modern times. Clarence’s seal is damaged, but the part of it which displays his coat of arms is in perfect condition. There is another document relating to Littleton in the name of Edward IV signed by the Chancery Clerk Morton, granting him continued possession of his manor. A 1462 letter of Privy Seal of Edward IV, confirming the Governorship of Calais to the Earl of Warwick (the Kingmaker), refers to ‘Henry the Sixt in dede and not of right King of England’. A document signed by Louis XI of France on 6 March 1471 instructs his Chancellor that Margaret of Anjou’s pension be paid. Margaret (1430-1482) was Queen Consort to Henry VI and mother of Edward, Prince of Wales. Within three weeks of the King of France signing this document she had embarked for England, allied to Warwick the Kingmaker. The disastrous defeats in the battles of Barnet on 14 April and 4 May resulted in the deaths of Warwick, Tewkesbury and her only son, the Prince of Wales. This left Margaret broken. She is given a fearsome character by Shakespeare in Richard III. Sir James Tyrell is another character made infamous by Shakespeare in Richard III. Tyrell is represented in the collection in an indenture of 1493 between him and Richard

Document in name of George, Duke of Clarence ’false, fleeting perjur’d Clarence’ together with a portion of his seal releasing to Sir Thomas Littleton (1422 – 1481) (Littleton on Tenures) title to the Manor of Arkley, internally described as sealed in the forty-ninth year of Henry VI, that is when Edward IV was in exile and Clarence had allied himself with the Lancastrians.

Wase. In Act IV scene ii Tyrell is approached to murder the young Edward V in the Tower because of the grim assessment of his character: ‘A discontented gentleman, / Whose humble means match not his haughty spirit:/ Gold were as good as twenty orators,/ And will, no doubt, tempt him to anything’. One of the earlier documents is an inspeximus of 11 January 1403 with the Great Seal of Henry IV confirming charters in Norfolk and Suffolk relating to Sir John Fastolf (1380-1459). Fastolf was to serve under Thomas of Lancaster, 1st Duke of Clarence, in campaigns in Ireland and Aquitaine and under Henry V at Harfleur and Agincourt in 1415. He was generally regarded as a successful and apparently sober and chivalrous soldier, despite accusations of cowardice, later refuted, after defeat by Joan of Arc at Patay in 1429. Fastolf acquired extensive lands in France and the Boar’s Head tavern in Southwark. In the original draft of Henry IV Part I, Prince Hal’s companion was the historically correct, dissolute Sir John Oldcastle. Following objections from Oldcastle’s

Indenture between Sir James Tyrell, 'a discontented gentleman whose humble means match not his haughty spirit', and Richard Wase, by which Wase agreed to take civil proceedings, and provide Tyrell with half the proceeds after judgment. A small seal in dark red is attached.

descendants, Shakespeare adopted (and adapted) Fastolf’s name, but not his characteristics, to create the roistering rogue, Sir John Falstaff. Also among the collection is a 1429 document in the name of John, Duke of Bedford (third son of Henry IV and brother of Henry V), as Regent of France addressed to Thomas Blunt, Treasurer of Normandy; a receipt for monies received by Richard, Duke of York as Henry VI’s Regent in France in 1441; and a document signed in 1446 by Sir William Oldhall, who four years later was Speaker of the House of Commons which decided that Richard Duke of York should succeed Henry VI. A 600-year-old Court Roll, (1422-1481), from the Abbess of Burnham gives an insight into mediaeval life. A document of manumission from villein status of William Carter granted by Margaret, Abbess of Shaftesbury, in 1439 is a very late example of its kind. The later (Tudor) documents include one of 1496 in the name of Henry VII with the Seal of the Court of Common Pleas. A contemporary document of 1503 gives the text of the vows exchanged in the ceremony of proxy marriage by the Earl of Bothwell, representing James IV of Scotland, and Margaret Tudor. A century later, in lineal descent from this union, James VI of Scotland succeeded Elizabeth I and ascended the throne of England as James I. In 1608 his Letters Patent conveyed the lands of the Temple to Middle and Inner Temple. The final document, chronologically, is dated 1506 and is a bond signed by Ralph Warryn, Lord Mayor of London, and Sir John Fitzjames, later Chief Justice of the King’s Bench (which office he held 1526-1538). Like the donor of this collection, he not only held the office of Chief Justice, but also served as Treasurer of the Middle Temple (1509-1510). It was this document which Hilary Mantel greatly admired – she said she coveted it – on her recent visit to the Middle Temple. Rather like a fisherman recalling a big one that got away, Master Judge rues not having acquired a letter written by a merchant in Italy in 1415 reporting the latest news of the rout of a large French army by a smaller English one at a place

called Azincourt. That particular potential purchase lost out to the competing claims – undeniably strong – of carpet and curtains for the bedrooms of his young children! Some items from this wonderful collection so generously given to the Inn will go on display in October 2015.

Signature of Louis XI of France ordering payment of the Queen of England's pension, 1471.

Lesley Whitelaw graduated from St Andrews University in 1981. Subsequently she was Archivist to the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, Archivist to the Lothian Health Board and held curatorial posts in the National Archives of Scotland. She has been Archivist to the Middle Temple since 1990.

Rare Gifts to the Inn

Temple Women’s Forum Garden Party 8 June 2015 ELAINE BANTON

The Temple Women’s Forum’s Cross-Profession Networking Garden Party took place on the evening of Monday 8 June. Over 400 attended and the sight of so many female barristers, solicitors, judges, academics and students streaming towards Inner Temple Garden was something in itself to behold. The event was organised by the Temple Women’s Forum which seeks to address the serious issue of retention of women at all levels of the Bar and their under-representation at the upper end of the Bar in the judiciary. The Temple Women’s Forum was established to develop a culture of mutual support outside of chambers and the courts by bringing women practitioners and colleagues together through events and networking. Temple Women’s Forum regularly holds events so that female legal practitioners from differing backgrounds can share their experiences at the Bar. Some of the events focus on career development, such as applications for Silk and judicial posts, including how to manage busy career and family commitments alongside a change in role. Set up in 2012, the Temple Women’s Forum is now a joint venture between the Middle and Inner Temple under the chairmanship of Master Langdale and Her Honour Judge Deborah Taylor. The party on 8 June commenced in Inner Temple garden with good food and drink ensuring the conversation flowed. Master Langdale introduced The Right Honourable Baroness Hale of Richmond who gave a rousing opening speech delivered with much wit and verve. Baroness Hale’s speech covered the lack of female representation amongst the very highest echelons of the judiciary. She spoke of the comparatively seemingly fluid transition of male practitioners to the Court, as opposed to herself being the only female Justice of the Supreme Court for over 10 years, despite several male appointments made during that time. She poignantly highlighted that if she retired there would be no female judge in the Supreme Court. A truly inspiring and thought provoking opening to the evening.

This issue of lack of diversity was all the more topical with a number of initiatives currently being undertaken to encourage diversity in the judiciary. A recently launched programme by The Right Honourable Lady Justice Hallett aims to attract more high quality lawyers and legal academics from non-traditional backgrounds to sit in the High Court. As the rain came down a hasty retreat was made into the comfort of the Inner Temple Hall where a trio played on to accompany guests as the networking continued to full effect. It was a time for the well-established and wellknown to mingle with the newly qualified and aspiring alike, to exchange ideas and be inspired by each other. Old friends swapped details and others made new connections. Many also took the opportunity to continue discussions with Baroness Hale, who very generously gave her time on a more informal level. This well organised and enjoyable event has surely sealed its place as the highlight of the female legal networking season.

The event was organised by the Temple Women’s Forum which seeks to address the serious issue of retention of women at all levels of the Bar and their under-representation at the upper end of the Bar in the judiciary.

Elaine Banton was Called to the Bar in 1996 and practises at 7 Bedford Row Chambers. Elaine has specialised in employment, discrimination law and human rights from the outset of her career. She is a co-author of the chapter on Human Rights and Employment Law for Tolley’s Employment Law. Formerly Treasurer of the Discrimination Law Association for 6 years. Elaine was named a ‘Pro Bono Hero’ for 2009 by the Attorney General’s Office. Elaine is a member of the Bar Councils Equality Diversity and Social Mobility Committee.

Temple Women's Forum Garden Party - 8 June 2015

The Hall Committee ZOE O'SULLIVAN QC The Hall Committee is elected annually by members of the practising Bar working in London and on Circuit to represent their interests within the Inn. We are working barristers who come from a diverse range of practice areas and are drawn from both the self-employed and the employed Bar. We also have representatives from Middle Temple Young Barristers Association (MTYBA) and the Middle Temple Students Association (MTSA). We meet about six times a year to discuss issues of particular importance to members of Hall. Members of Hall Committee also serve on the Inn’s four Standing Committees with a mandate to represent the interests of Hall. You can see the current Committee members’ profiles and pictures on the Hall Committee page of the website (to be found on the ‘Committees’ tab in the Members' area). Committee elections are held annually in November/ December. We have had a busy year so far. With the support and encouragement of last year’s Treasurer, Master Judge, and this year’s Treasurer, Master Hockman, we have played a full role in the work of the four Standing Committees. Our members have also served on the Library Review Group, the Review Group on Scholarships and Funding and are helping to organise the Equality Diversity and Social Mobility Stand at the Temple Open Weekend in September. We meet four times a year for a discussion and drinks with our equivalent committees in the other Inns to debate issues of common interest and find out what other Inns are doing for their members. Members of the Committee have also taken part in Circuit visits to Cardiff, Newcastle and Liverpool. Our big project this year is our Working Group on the Junior Bar. As we all know, there are large numbers of wellqualified people graduating from the BPTC who are unable to qualify as barristers and obtain a practising certificate because they cannot find pupillage. The aim of the Working Group is to research and suggest potential solutions to the problem, with the particular aim of persuading the BSB to adopt a more flexible approach to meeting the requirements for a practising certificate. Whilst it may not be possible to increase the number of pupillages offered by chambers, we believe that there must be other means of providing candidates with the necessary practical training while at the same time protecting the public interest in being represented by properly qualified and experienced lawyers. I spoke about our Working Group at the Open Evening held in Hall on 15 July 2015, and I repeat my invitation issued then for anyone who feels that they can contribute the benefit of their experience or views to get in touch with the Working Group via myself or Juliette Levy. We have also been active in campaigning for the restoration of a Members’ Common Room. We think it is critical for the collegiate spirit of the Inn that there should be a social space where members can meet, relax or work quietly. As I

The Hall Committee

write, there is a live debate about the possibility of converting a currently under-used space opposite the entrance to the Library into what promises to be a very pleasant common room with views over the garden and Middle Temple Lane. I hope that by the time this article is published, this project will have received the go-ahead. I am glad to say that the Inn has already implemented the requests made by the membership for secure storage facilities. The Library also provides working facilities for visiting members with free Wi-Fi. This year, when we held our Annual Dinner in April we made a break from the traditional format. Instead of a guest speaker, we heard from four members of the Inn in increasing order of seniority about their experience of the Inn and why it was important to them, followed by questions from the floor. There was a lot of positive feedback on the dinner, with people expressing their appreciation of having a chance to raise their views about what the Inn should be doing for its members. Over the weekend of 19-20 September 2015 the Temple is hosting an Open Weekend for the general public, who will be welcomed inside the Hall, Library and Temple Church. The last Open Weekend in 2008 attracted over 25,000 visitors, and this one is expected to be even more successful. On both days there will be an extensive programme of events, displays and food stalls aimed at families, people who love gardens and architecture, or who are interested in the history of the Temple or the law. The Hall Committee will be staffing the Equality, Diversity and Social Mobility stand, where we hope to shatter a few myths about the legal profession by chatting to visitors and showing short films about a career at the Bar (and will be giving people a chance to dress up in wigs and gowns). We have been working with Inner Temple to organise the Employed Bar Forum on 10 November 2015. The Hall Committee is very keen to reach out to our employed Bar members and encourage them to be fully involved in the affairs of the Inn. The Employed Bar Forum will follow the format of the successful Temple Women’s Forum, with a keynote speech from Robert Webb QC, an expert panel and networking opportunities over drinks afterwards. We have amended the Constitution to increase the size of the Hall Committee this year, to give us a louder voice and the opportunity to participate more fully in the Standing Committees. The number of elected members will rise from 15 to 20 from January 2016, and we are entitled to co-opt up to 10 additional members. The mentoring scheme is still running under the care of Louise McCullough. Feedback has been positive, and we hope to expand the scheme. The difficulty is always in finding enough people willing to act as mentors: most people want to be mentored. Louise is also the Inn’s point of liaison with the Bar Council’s Working Group on Wellbeing at the Bar, a subject of great interest to all members. Please get in touch

with a member of Hall Committee if you are interested in being a mentor or mentee. I would like to thank all the members of the Hall Committee for their work this year, and in particular the following for their tireless effort and support: Juliette Levy (Vice-Chair), Klentiana Mahmutaj (Secretary), Louise McCullough, and Dimpy Sanganee from the Treasury Office. Zoe O'Sullivan was Called to the Bar in 1993 and took Silk in 2015. She practises from the chambers of Lord Grabiner QC at One Essex Court, where she specialises in commercial litigation and arbitration. She particularly enjoys the opportunities offered by the Hall Committee to work with barristers from different areas of practice.

The Hall Committee is elected annually by members of the practising Bar working in London and on Circuit to represent their interests within the Inn.

The Temple Employed Bar Forum On Monday 10 November 2015 at 6pm, Inner Temple Hall will host the first session of the Temple Employed Bar Forum, a joint venture between Inner and Middle Temple. The title of the Forum is The Employed Bar: Opportunities for Established and Aspiring Practitioners. Both Inns are very keen to encourage their Employed Bar members to feel welcome at and participate fully in the activities of the Inn. It is hoped that the November event will be the first of a series. All barristers and aspiring barristers are welcome to attend. The Employed Bar Forum is aimed at three groups: 1. Employed barristers who would like the chance to meet and network with their colleagues both at the employed and the self-employed Bar; 2.

Students, BPTC graduates and pupils who would like to widen their knowledge of potential opportunities at the Employed Bar by learning from the experience of others;

3. Self-employed barristers interested in meeting and learning more about the work of their colleagues at the Employed Bar and developing some professional contacts. The format is modelled on the very successful Temple Womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Forum events. The evening will kick off with a keynote speech from Robert Webb QC. Robert Webb left a highly successful aviation practice at the Commercial Bar to move in-house as General Counsel to British Airways, and is currently General Counsel at Rolls Royce. There will then be a panel discussion chaired by Master Vivian Robinson QC, Inner Templeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Master of the Employed Bar. Panellists will include Master Andrew Clarke, General Counsel of Exxon Mobil, Lucinda Orr, a barrister at Enyo Law and current Chair of the Bar Association for Commerce, Finance and Industry, and Eden Legesse, currently a pupil at the Financial Reporting Council. After questions from the floor, there will be drinks with plenty of opportunities for networking.

The Temple Employed Bar Forum

The Magna Carta Bowl MASTER IAN BURNETT The British like anniversaries. They provide an opportunity to learn a little of our history, mark significant past events which have a continuing impact, often to revel in past glory and to have some very good parties. 2015 has enabled us to remember Waterloo (1815), Agincourt (1415) and Magna Carta (1215). The 800th anniversary of Magna Carta has been celebrated with new works of scholarship, with academic lectures, services of commemoration and some magnificent events involving lawyers and politicians from around the world. But the idea took root that it would be fitting for the Inn to mark the anniversary with something tangible which might be enjoyed for centuries. Our earliest piece of silver is approaching 500 years old. With the encouragement of the then Master Treasurer, we commissioned John Doubleday to design and make a silver bowl to mark the event. That was made possible by the generosity of a number of Benchers. John Doubleday is a renowned sculptor, artist and silversmith, one of whose previous brushes with the law saw him fashion a bust of Lord Woolf for Fettes College. His public sculpture includes Sherlock Holmes, both at Baker Street and near the Reichenbach Falls, Nelson in Gibraltar (commissioned to mark the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Trafalgar) and Mandela in South Africa. We fixed upon a large fruit bowl which could be used practically and also as a display piece. John Doubleday and I spent happy hours over sketches and models before the design was agreed. The Crown sits at its centre. Around the rim is engraved one of the most enduring principles which derives from Magna Carta: â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;To no one will we deny, to no one will we delay right or justiceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. The engraving was undertaken by Barry Green, one of the few hand-engravers still working on silver in England, using a script with a mediaeval flavour he and John Doubleday devised. The bowl sits on a frame supported by four cast sculpted figures representing the Barons, the Church, the Law and the People. The base has at its centre the Lamb and Flag of Middle Temple with the engraved dates of Magna Carta and the anniversary. The

The Magna Carta Bowl

band around the base is stippled to reflect a style found in a number of our early pieces made shortly after the Restoration. The bowl and base are gilded to echo the magnificent Jacobean pieces in the collection. The specialist gilding work was carried out by Stanley Brittell. The sculpted figures provide contrast by being left as plain silver. The result is a spectacular piece of silver. Already there have been many opportunities to display and use it and I hope it will continue to feature regularly on high table in Hall. Subject to earth shattering events which none of us can predict, there is every reason to suppose that for centuries our successors will enjoy the Magna Carta bowl. That is one of the joys of silver. It does not deteriorate. It is not easily broken. With reasonable care it will endure for as long as we do. If proof of that is needed look no further than the spectacular Roman pieces in the British Museum, many of which look as though they were made yesterday. Master Burnett was Called to the Bar in 1980 and to the Bench in 2001. He was Head of Chambers at Temple Garden Chambers from 2003 to 2008. He has been Master of the Silver since 2002. He was appointed as a Lord Justice of Appeal in October 2014.

MT Historical Society Supper Talks All members and staff of the Inn are warmly welcomed at the meetings and outings of the Society. Talks are preceded by drinks and a buffet supper (£30pp, £15 for students) in the Bench apartments. Supper bookings should be made by email to mths@middletemple.org.uk no later than seven days before the event. Cheques made payable to the Society should be sent to the Middle Temple Historical Society c/o The Treasury by the same date. Students should note that meetings are not qualifying sessions. Membership enquiries should be sent to the Society’s email address.

2015 Tuesday 3 November 6:30pm

Master Igor Judge The Great Siege of Malta 1565 In May 1565 Ottoman forces lay siege to the Knights Hospitaller in their base at Malta. For five months the fate of the garrison and, it was feared, of Western Christendom itself hung in the balance.

Tuesday 1 December 6:15pm

Annual General Meeting - Professor Linda Mulcahy The Banning of Photography in English Courts in 1925 Professor Mulcahy is Professor of Law at the LSE and the co-manager of the Legal Biography Project. Her publications include Legal Architecture: Justice, Due Process and the Place of Law. She will discuss how a number of sensational trials between 1904 and 1925 resulted in the statutory prohibition of photography in court.

Sunday 6 December 10:15am

Outing to Spencer House, St James’ Place SW1A Built between 1756-1766 for John, first Earl Spencer (an ancestor of the late Master Diana, Princess of Wales), Spencer House has been sumptuously restored and is London’s finest surviving eighteenth-century town house. Please book and pay in advance (£15 per person) by contacting Dr Katie Plummer at mths@middletemple.org.uk by no later than 3 November.

2016 Tuesday 19 January 6:30pm

Master John Colyer The Life and Work of the Rev John Townsend John Townsend (1757-1826) was a Congregationalist minister who was a member of the Clapham Sect and perhaps London’s most noted preacher at the end of the 18th and in the early 19th Centuries, His legacy survives in the two schools he founded, The Royal School for Deaf Children Margate and Caterham School.

Tuesday 22 March 6:30pm

Professor Simon Wessely Shell Shock or Cowardice? The Life and Death of Private Harry Farr. Professor Wessely is the President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, Professor of Psychological Medicine and Director of King’s Centre for Military Health Research and Honorary Civilian Consultant Advisor in Psychiatry to the Army. Harry Farr was executed in France for cowardice on the 18 October 1916. He was granted a Royal Pardon in 2006. What happened? What was the historical context? What has changed?

Tuesday 21 June 6:45pm for 7pm Outing to the College of Arms, 130 Queen Victoria St, London EC4V The College of Arms was founded in 1484 and has since then created and maintained official registers of coats of arms and pedigrees. It has been on its present site since 1683. Please book and pay in advance (£20 per person) by contacting Dr Katie Plummer at mths@middletemple.org.uk by no later than 7 June 2016.

2015-2016 MT Historical Society Supper Talks

Human Rights Act MASTER SHAMI CHAKRABARTI In 1998, an energetic and popular government enshrined the European Convention on Human Rights into law with cross-party support. The Human Rights Act: an elegant yet simple piece of legislation that allows ordinary people – soldiers, journalists, bereaved families, victims of domestic violence, slavery and rape – to hold the State to account. Fast forward 17 years and the landscape of Parliament is radically different; some political parties have been pruned back to their roots whilst others - truncated and reeling from the shock of the election - stand at a crossroads, torn on their future direction. The new Conservative Government, elected with only a small majority, ploughs on, blinkered, with its long-held desire to scrap the Human Rights Act and replace it with a so-called ’British Bill of Rights and Responsibilities’ - a chilling proposal for those of us who have seen this legislation in action. From the outset the Government’s intention is clear. The omission of ‘human’ and addition of ‘British’ is no mere rhetorical flourish or insubstantial PR trick. It is an expression of its desire to undermine and dilute the universality of human rights – allowing those in authority to pick when and to whom they apply. It has also embarked on a campaign to promote dangerous and legally illiterate misinformation about the Act. Spokespeople from the Conservative party and beyond have filled column inches and the airwaves with misrepresentations of the HRA, including that it undermines parliamentary sovereignty; binds British courts by the European Court of Human Rights; has allowed ‘mission creep’ of the Convention; gives too much power to unelected judges – and in any event, the Common Law and Magna Carta protects our rights, regardless of any other legislation. Our Human Rights Act has actually increased British sovereignty. Before, cases went to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg without any judgment from a British court. Post-HRA, British judges now rule on all claims arising in the United Kingdom – and help to influence Strasbourg case law. This ongoing dialogue between our courts and Strasbourg helps to protect UK sovereignty – and the European Court is also respectful of British decisions. The number of cases decided against the UK has steadily decreased since our HRA came into force; in 2014, there were only four new judgments finding a violation against the UK.

The Human Rights Act is also very clear on the issue of British courts being bound by Strasbourg – clear that they are not in fact required to follow the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights blindly, but only ‘take account’ of them. Domestic judges can - and often do - depart from Strasbourg case law, to take account of the United Kingdom’s own laws and traditions. Where our Supreme Court and the European Court disagree, the latter has the opportunity to revisit its conclusions. Repealing the Human Rights Act would mean Strasbourg judges would be denied the chance to consider a British interpretation of European Convention rights. And it’s worth remembering that, when our HRA was being passed, it was actually the Conservative Party who argued that British courts should be bound by Strasbourg but its idea was rejected by Parliament. As for the oft-repeated nonsense about ‘unelected judges’- unlike most Bills of Rights around the world, the HRA doesn’t give the courts power to strike down laws. It adopts a compromise instead - maintaining parliamentary sovereignty and setting up a discourse between the courts and Parliament. If one of the higher courts finds legislation to be incompatible with human rights it can only issue a declaration of incompatibility - leaving it up to Parliament to decide how best to respond. One of the cornerstones of our democracy is our independent judiciary, interpreting and applying the law. Judicial decision-making is fundamental to the rule of law, and the powers given by the Human Rights Act to the courts fall squarely within this historic function. Of course it’s true that the UK has a long and proud history in leading the development and recognition of fundamental rights and freedoms. And it’s also true that many of the rights in our Human Rights Act originated in principles emerging from Magna Carta, the 1689 Bill of Rights, and the Common Law. However, the Common Law is liable to be overridden at any time by statute. It offers no possible recourse when rights are undermined. There’s also nothing in Magna Carta or other historic legislation to protect free speech, personal privacy or the right to protest. Many of the rights we have

Of course it’s true that the UK has a long and proud history in leading the development and recognition of fundamental rights and freedoms. long taken for granted found no protection in domestic law until our Human Rights Act came along. As a result, pre-HRA, instances of British law failing to provide sufficient protection for people in this country were not uncommon and our country’s record before the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg was not overly favourable. Fear-mongering that the HRA has expanded rights protected by the Convention in ways its founders didn’t intend is yet more nonsense. When the Convention was drafted in 1950, homosexuality was still illegal across much of Europe. Marital rape, corporal punishment and discrimination against illegitimate children were still legal, and developments like the internet, IVF treatment, DNA profiling and the prevalence of human trafficking couldn’t even have been envisaged. Is it really ‘mission creep’ to have legislation that can keep pace with the modern world and contemporary attitudes? As the Conservative Government continues its experiment of appointing a non-lawyer to the post of Justice Secretary, the legal community has a duty to address these perilous myths, when and wherever we find them. They serve only one sector of society and it is not the victimised and the vulnerable, who we see every day relying on the HRA for justice and redress. The law can often seem opaque and distant to the uninitiated - it’s our job to act as translators for the public and communicate how important this battle for our rights and freedoms is. After all, as the Government knows, the inconvenient thing about human rights is that they are for everyone.

Master Chakrabarti was Called to the Bar in 1994 and worked as a lawyer in the Home Office from 1996 until 2001 for Governments of both persuasions. She has been Director of Liberty since September 2003, having joined Liberty as In- House Counsel in 2001. Since becoming Liberty’s Director she has written, spoken and broadcast widely on the importance of the post-WW2 human rights framework as an essential component of democratic society. She is Honorary Professor of Law at the University of Manchester. Shami’s first book, On Liberty, was published by Allen Lane on October 2014.

Human Rights Act

Litigants in Person MASTER ANGELA FINNERTY In June 2015 the Law Society, General Council of the Bar and the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives jointly published very helpful guidelines entitled ‘Litigants in person; guidelines for lawyers’. Those guidelines are essential background to this article which focuses upon some aspects of hearings involving litigants in person (LiPs) from the perspective of a family judge, hearing children’s cases. In care proceedings the parents and the subject child or children have non-merits, non-means tested public funding, and so while other family members may not be legally represented, the remaining parties including the Local Authority usually are. The greatest impact of LiPs in the children’s courts is in private law cases. LiPs, as with all litigants, are not a homogeneous group. The first and most obvious distinction is between Applicants who have chosen to engage with the court process, and Respondents who have been brought to court, often reluctantly. In the family jurisdiction people represent themselves for many different reasons. After the dramatic changes to public funding in recent years, many represent themselves because they simply cannot afford a lawyer. Some can afford a lawyer but would rather not be represented. They too can fall into many groups, for example those who think they can do a better job than a lawyer, or those who want to be in the position of directly challenging the other parent without the filter of an advocate. Thus the first task of any family advocate faced with a LiP, and indeed any judge, is to reflect before going to court on what he or she is dealing with, and to think about how to approach the LiP in an appropriate and constructive way. The guidelines refer to the expectation that the judge will explain to the LiP how the hearing will be conducted. This is an essential prerequisite to ensuring that everyone in the case understands what is expected of them. In my experience this exercise is most clearly explained by reference to the overriding objective set out in s1.1 Family Procedure Rules 2010, which provides a compass to guide the judge, the parties and any legal adviser. Procedure within the Family Court is flexible and can be varied according to the justice of the case. Formal evidence is often unnecessary and would be disproportionate to the, ‘nature, importance and complexity of the issues’ r1.1(b) Family Procedure Rules 2010. Often LiPs feel more comfortable speaking to the judge from the well of the Court rather than giving formal evidence on oath from the witness box.

Family hearings are commonly preceded by discussion between the advocates. The guidelines point out that it would be wise for any advocate speaking to a LiP to do so in the presence of another or to keep a note of the discussions. I suggest that a note should always be taken of any out of court discussions, which the LiP should be invited to sign as an agreed note. The guidelines give helpful advice in respect of McKenzie Friends (MF). The family courts do not view MFs with disfavour. There are many MFs who spend much of their time, sometimes on a remunerated basis, assisting LiPs. They can be of considerable assistance to the court. I would suggest, however, that there is a need to be more cautious, and to make fuller enquiry where it is suggested that a family member act as a MF. Firstly, there may be some family members whose presence in the courtroom would simply raise the temperature of the case unnecessarily, and whose presence would therefore be unhelpful. Further, it is always sensible to establish whether the family member proposed as a MF might turn out to be a witness at this hearing or later in the proceedings. It is far from unknown for a LiP, not understanding the procedure, to suddenly announce half way though a case that they wish to call a witness. If it is the MF, there may well be difficulties. Finally, in those cases in which formal evidence is necessary, there is the difficult issue of cross examination of one parent by another. The point has been made that in the family courts we can allow cross examination which would be unlawful in a criminal court. The family courts are, on occasion, faced with a situation where the cross examination of one parent by another would be unhelpful, or even abusive. How can this be handled?

The family courts are, on occasion, faced with a situation where the cross examination of one parent by another would be unhelpful, or even abusive. How can this be handled? There are particular cases where an advocate can be brought in to conduct the cross examination, but such cases will be rare. Special measures can be used such as allowing the parents to give their evidence by way of video link so as to reduce the immediacy of the cross examination, or perhaps from behind a screen so that they cannot see the questioner. Another solution might be for the judge to ask the parentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s questions. Two examples of when this has been done will help. In one case the mother was a sensible professional woman. She had formed a genuine fear that the father had sexually abused their child in contact. She was unrepresented. The judge recognised that for the mother to cross examine the father direct would be unhelpful going forward. The judge gave the mother time to write down her questions, he went through them with the mother and then asked the questions of the father himself. In another unreported case Mr Justice Ryder (as he then was), was dealing with a father, in care proceedings. The father

dismissed his legal team on the morning that the mother was due to give evidence and sought to cross examine her himself. The concern expressed by the motherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s team was that this was a deliberate act intended to intimidate the mother. Ryder J ruled that the father would not be permitted to ask questions of the mother direct but could put questions through the Court. In both of those cases the process, used for quite different reasons, was a success. Access to justice is a right not a privilege. Family litigation is not an easy process, either in procedural terms or emotionally. Where persons are representing themselves and are unfamiliar with the court and its procedures it is incumbent upon those in the legal system to assist LiPs so far as is appropriate. LiPs are not themselves a problem, but they can create different case management issues which courts may have to approach innovatively. At the end of the day with LiPâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, as with all litigants, our aim as judges is to strive to achieve justice for those who appear in front of us.

Litigants in Person

OPO FELICITY MCMAHON The tort in Wilkinson v Downton began with an ill-advised practical joke in the late 19th Century. After a brief revival as part of a case which became a cause célèbre, the Supreme Court’s decision in Rhodes (previously ‘MLA’) v OPO has largely sounded its death knell. The case centred on a book written by James Rhodes, a concert pianist, author and television filmmaker. The book gives a searing and honest account of the serious sexual abuse he suffered as a child. His son, through his litigation friend, sought to prevent publication. The son suffers from significant disabilities, and a medical report (disputed by Mr Rhodes) concluded that if the child read the account of his father’s abuse and other distressing material it would have a devastating effect on him psychologically. The claim was brought in (1) misuse of private information, (2) negligence and (3) deliberate infliction of emotional harm under the tort in Wilkinson v Downton. Wilkinson v Downton, as many will recall from their student days, is a case from 1897 in which Mr Downton, as a practical joke, told Mrs Wilkinson that her husband had been severely injured in an accident. She, not surprisingly, did not see the funny side and suffered severe shock. When her case came before Mr Justice Wright, Mrs Wilkinson succeeded in a claim against Mr Downton. The Judge found that he had wilfully done an act with the intention of bringing about a particular consequence. Whilst Mr Downton did not intend to cause Mrs Wilkinson a serious illness, he did intend to frighten her. The tort has been little used since, although other common law jurisdictions have developed a tort of infliction of emotional harm. At first instance The Right Honourable Lord Justice Bean refused the child’s request for an interim injunction and struck out the claim. The Court of Appeal found the claim had sufficient prospects of success under the tort in Wilkinson v Downton for it to grant an interim injunction. That decision caused much public and press concern about whether the tort would be resurrected and used to restrict freedom of expression. Famous faces including Stephen Fry argued against such pre-publication restrictions. Before the Supreme Court, Article 19, English PEN and Index on Censorship were given permission to put in written submissions as interveners. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, refusing an injunction and restoring the order of Bean LJ. In doing so they drew the bounds of the tort in Wilkinson v Downton very narrowly. The Right Honourable Baroness Hale of Richmond and The Right Honourable Lord Toulson in the leading judgment set out the elements of the tort (albeit expressed to be obiter dicta):

OPO

a) The conduct element requiring words or conduct directed at the claimant for which there is no justification of excuse b) The mental element requiring an intention to cause at least severe mental or emotional distress, and c) The consequence element requiring physical harm or recognised psychiatric illness. The Court found that Mr Rhodes had not directed his book towards his son: whilst it was dedicated to him, it was clearly directed at the public at large. Nor did Mr Rhodes have any intention to cause psychiatric harm of severe mental distress to the claimant. It emphasised the very high level of protection afforded by the law to the telling of the truth. This is what Mr Rhodes was proposing to do, and as such his conduct was not without justification. Whilst the court recognised that vulnerable children should be protected from harm as far as is reasonably practicable, it concluded that using the tort in Wilkinson v Downton was not the way to do this. In Glanville Williams’ Learning the Law, the case of Wilkinson v Downton is analysed in detail to explain the difference between the ratio decidendi and obiter dicta. As the current author, our own Master ATH Smith notes in the latest edition, ‘If, however, a case ever arises in which Wright J’s wide rule is thought to carry the law too far, the decision can be restrictively distinguished’. And that is what the Supreme Court has done in Rhodes. Indeed, the boundaries of the tort are now so narrowly drawn that the decision will be of more interest to academics than practitioners. A part of the judgment that will be more useful in practice will be that on how tightly injunctions preventing publication must be drawn. The Court of Appeal had sought to prevent publication of ‘graphic’ descriptions. However, what is graphic and what is not is surely a matter of impression not susceptible to the necessary precision for an effective injunction. The Supreme Court said as much, referencing the fact that the right to freedom of expression applies not just to what is said, but the way in which it is said. Felicity McMahon was Called to the Bar in 2008. She is a barrister at 5RB specialising in media law, including: defamation, privacy, data protection, harassment and related areas.

The Four Jurisdictions Conference: Edinburgh May 2015

Magna Carta: The Norman Connection CATHERINE RABEY Those fortunate enough to have visited the British Library’s excellent exhibition will be aware of Magna Carta’s influence on Britain’s former colonies. Its links with a territory much closer to home, the ancient province of Normandy, are perhaps less well known. On one view, if it were not for Normandy Magna Carta would never have come into being at all. John refused to accept the loss of continental Normandy to Philippe Auguste of France in 1204, and his need to raise funds to support an unsuccessful campaign to reclaim it was a principal motive for the arbitrary actions that made him so unpopular in the years leading up to Magna Carta. Magna Carta may in turn have had an influence on Normandy. Interestingly, this does not seem to be true of the only part of Normandy that John retained, namely the Channel Islands, which are still attached to the crown today. John’s policy of establishing a distinct administration system for the Channel Islands after 1204, while preserving their existing laws and customs, appears to have protected the islands from any real involvement in the events leading up to Magna Carta and its aftermath. There is, however, reason to believe that the influence of Magna Carta was felt in continental Normandy, exactly 100 years after Runnymede. In taking Normandy, Philippe Auguste acquired a territory which had been an independent duchy for some 300 years. The Normans were fiercely protective of their customary law, which was set out in two coutumiers during the 13th Century and which regulated legal and fiscal matters to an extent unknown in most of Europe at that time. Relations with the French monarchy from 1204 onwards were uneasy, and things deteriorated sharply during the reign of Philippe le Bel. His attempt in 1292 to tax Normandy on the same basis as the rest of France was seen as an attack on Norman autonomy and led to a violent insurrection, culminating in the assassination of the Mayor of Rouen. After negotiations in 1304 Philippe guaranteed the Normans’ ancient rights, and in 1315 his successor, Louis X, granted the Charte aux Normands which confirmed Normandy’s customary law as set out in the Grand Coutumier, the second of the two 13th Century coutumiers. The Charte aux Normands addressed subjects such as justice and taxation which were common to charters granted by other European rulers of the age, and it is highly likely that it was inspired to a considerable extent by Magna Carta. Little is known about the circumstances in which the

Magna Carta: The Norman Connection

Charte was drawn up, but given the 140 years of shared history between England and Normandy before 1204 it seems inconceivable that the Norman rebels would not have known of Magna Carta’s existence, and we know that their draftsmen almost certainly had access to its terms because of a 13th Century French translation in the cartulary of a Norman leper hospital. The clearest indication that the Charte drew on Magna Carta is perhaps a clause which prohibited the King from raising any new taxes except in cases of ‘grand necessité’ and only after consultation with an assembly of the province which he was obliged to convoke for the purpose. The parallels with Chapters 12 and 14 of Magna Carta are striking. The Charte was used to justify resistance to the monarchy until the French revolution. Therefore, Magna Carta, a challenge to the English throne that indirectly resulted from events in Normandy, may later have assisted Normandy in challenging England’s great rival. One feels John would have approved.

Catherine Rabey read Modern History at St Hugh’s College, Oxford, and after being Called to the Bar in 1987 she practised at 2 Temple Gardens for a number of years. She returned to her native Guernsey in 2004, where she now works as legislative counsel in the chambers of the Attorney General. Catherine has a Certificat d’Etudes Juridiques Françaises et Normandes from the University of Caen and is an Advocate of the Royal Court of Guernsey.

The Four Jurisdictions Conference: Edinburgh 2015 MASTER GUY MANSFIELD In May next year (6-8 May) the Four Jurisdictions Conference comes to Middle Temple. It will follow a wonderful event in Edinburgh in May this year. The standards set by our Celtic cousins over the last three years have been the highest. They have put us on our mettle. The conference is the occasion when members of the Inn get together with members of the three other Bars and their Judiciary. The venue rotates: next year is London, 2017 will be Dublin and after that, Belfast. The event is open to all members of the Inn, Bench and Bar alike. The event is a serious legal conference. We learn from the perspectives of others. It is fun. There is a strong social side – partners are most welcome, and there is party time on Friday and Saturday nights. This year’s event began with dinner in the Signet library, rightly described by George IV as the most elegant drawing room in Europe! We caught up with old friends and made new ones, a process which continued over the weekend. On Saturday morning the serious work (CPD accredited) began; we had three sessions. These took place in the Advocates’ Library. Each session lasted an hour and a quarter, was chaired by a representative from one jurisdiction and received papers from someone from each of the other three. These were followed by contributions from the floor. The overarching theme of the conference was ‘Conflicts and Tensions’. There were three subjects that day. The first was ‘Victim’s Rights v. Prosecutor’s Objectivity?’. Master McGowan gave a masterly overview of the tensions which can arise with modern press-led pressures on prosecutors. The tensions these can create for the judicial independence of decision making (in particular decisions not to prosecute in high profile matters) have not necessarily been helped by the courts’ willingness not just to review decisions not to prosecute, but to require the prosecutor to gives detailed reasons for such decisions. After this we moved to ‘Judicial Accountability – Why, How and to Whom v Judicial Independence?’. Master Thirlwall entertained us with an explanation of some of the misconceptions on the part of well-meaning members of the Court Service (not just the press or wider public) of the role of the judge: what is and is not appropriate intervention in administration of justice. The debate brought to the surface concerns about an effective appointment system, which promotes diversity but keeps out political meddling. There was no appetite for preappointment hearings by legislatures. Our final session on Saturday was: ‘Client’s Wishes v. Advocate’s Duty?’, chaired with his customary wit and erudition, by Master Jackson. This session revealed subtly

different approaches to this delicate topic among the four jurisdictions: just what is an advocate’s duty when faced with a client who insists on advancing a hopeless case? When is the line crossed? When should the court impose sanctions on the lawyer? Saturday afternoon was free. That night saw a fantastic party with dinner and dancing in the Hall of the Advocates’ Library. Members of Domus were much impressed that the energetic lead guitarist of the rock band was none other than the Lord Justice Clerk, Scotland’s second most senior judge! Sunday morning brought our final formal session: ‘Public Safety and Security v. Fundamental Freedom?’. Master Grieve produced a wonderfully clear overview of the issues faced by Government, the security services and the courts. We were all better informed and (it is to be hoped) the wiser. The conference concluded with a splendidly theatrical talk by Donald Findlay QC on the trial of Madeleine Smith, who, in the Victorian era was the fortunate beneficiary of a verdict of ‘not proven’ on a charge of murder by poison. After lunch we all departed. We all (not for the first time) enjoyed ourselves greatly, many of us with partners. Next year in London I want to involve members of Domus from a range of ages and seniority. I hope members of Hall will come and enjoy a great mix of learning and fun. It is a great opportunity to meet our legal ‘cousins’ from the other jurisdictions and, importantly, to meet and have fun with members of our Inn. It is especially a chance for those who are Circuit based to have a jolly good weekend with those from London and vice versa. I urge our Members from out of London seriously to consider joining us in Domus. Dress for the Conference is smart/casual. Dress for the Dinners on Friday and Saturday is Lounge Suit. Mark the date in your diary. Booking will be first come first served. Details of the programme and registration will be circulated in February 2016.

Master Mansfield was Called to the Bar in 1972 and to the Bench in 2000. He practices from One Crown Office Row, where he focuses on legal and medical professional issues, appearing in many reported cases. He was Chairman of the Bar Council in 2005.

The Four Jurisdictions Conference: Edinburgh May 2015

Middle Temple Scholarships Middle Temple has always prided itself on its commitment to encouraging the most talented students, regardless of background. We were the first Inn to make the decision that all candidates for scholarships should be given an interview. The selection process relies heavily on volunteers: typically, six panels of three will spend the week after Easter interviewing about 250 candidates – but we feel that each applicant should be given the opportunity to demonstrate their aptitude for advocacy. The awards are intended to alleviate the burden, but will not usually be sufficient to cover all expenses for the year. Although financial need is an important factor in setting the size of award, scholarships are awarded on merit alone. Merit is determined against the criteria of intellectual ability, motivation to succeed at the Bar, potential as an advocate, and personal qualities. This year the Inn awarded a total of more than £1.07 million in scholarships. The majority of funding is granted to students undertaking the Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC). The remainder is split between scholarships for the law conversion course (GDL) and other smaller awards for postBPTC activities. Below is a list of award winners this year; we offer them all our congratulations.

BPTC Scholarships Awarded 2015 Queen Mother Scholarships Annabel Barrons, Elizabeth Boulden, Luke Browne, Robert Dunn, Shannon Farrelly-Treanor, Ruaraidh Fitzpatrick, Roseanna Lagram-Taylor, Karl Laird, Thomas Lowenthal, Ralph Morley, Aleksandra Nelia, Julian Ranetunge, Shaylla Shabbir, Juliet Stevens, Joseph Tomlinson, John Williams, Amy Woolfson, Jennifer Youngs Duke & Duchess of Cambridge Scholarships Natalie Cargill & Joannitah Kabera Diana, Princess of Wales Scholarship Anita Dowman Astbury Scholarships Rebecca Butler, Thomas Morris, James Shaw, Kathleen Shields, Sarah Wilmshurst Diplock Scholarships Sophia Baig, Jon-Selous Borlace, Amanda Bottomley, Katherine Macleod, Oliver Small Harmsworth Scholarships Emma Cross, Lawren Dobson, Michael Gadd, Adam Gulliver, Jack Horlock, Matthew Knowles, Diana Miller, Faisal Muhammed, Aaliah Muhmood, Thomas Richardson, Bethenie Sadler, Lorna Secker, Lesley Stevens, Minal Supri, Scott Willey, Sarah Woodall Jules Thorn Scholarships Sarah Bennett, Cristina Cozma, Daniel Grutters, Annelise Johns, Sophie Kay, Aphra Mcleod Bruce-Jones, Benjamin Millward, Anaum Riaz, Dale Timson

Individual named awards

GDL Scholarships Awarded 2015

Atkin Chambers Scholarship, Christopher Bates

Queen Mother Scholarships

Blackstone Award, Alice Francis

Hugo Bell, Joshua Happe, Philip Judd

Brick Court Scholarship, Andrew Pope Christopher Benson Scholarship, Kavita Sandhu

Diplock Scholarships

Connor Scholarship, Andrew Horner

Nicola Barnett, John-Paul Mccarthy

Cunningham Award, Ian Mcdonald Gardiner Scholarship, James Robertson

Harmsworth Scholarship

Godfrey Heilpern Memorial Prize, Helen Longworth

Samuel Hartman

H. R. Light Bursary, Ashley Collins HH Paul Clark Scholarship, William Charlesworth

Astbury Scholarship

Hubert Monroe Scholarship, Samuel Peake

Philip Hughes, Frederica Onslow, Rachel Schon,

J. B. Montagu Award, Nirvan Gopalan-Krishnan

Leora Taratula-Lyons

Jamieson Award, Bethan Hall Jerry Parthab Singh Scholarship, Amy Oke

Jules Thorn Scholarships

Joseph Jackson Award, Emma Heath

Farhana Daly, Emily Heggadon

Leolin Price QC Scholarship, Miriam Manning Lord Lowry Scholarship, Joshua Purser

Benefactors Scholarships

Luboshez Award, Christopher Fleming

Christopher Bevan

Malcolm Wright Award, Ruth Broadbent Mona de Piro Prize, Hannah Thomas Nicholas Pumfrey Memorial Award, Courtney Bent

Entrance Exhibitions Awarded 2015

Pump Court Tax Chambers Scholarship, Jamie Hill Quatercentenary Scholarship, Emily Lanham

Nicola Barnett, Annabel Barrons, Hugo Bell,

Readersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Scholarship, Hannah Larsen

Sarah Bennett, Amanda Bottomley, Elizabeth Boulden,

Robert Garraway Rice Award, Kate Newson

Luke Browne, Rebecca Butler, Cristina Cozma,

Rose Scholarship, Thomas Griffiths

Emma Cross, Hannah Daly, Anita Dowman, Robert Dunn,

Rosina Hare Scholarship, Tara-Lynn Poole

Shannon Farrelly-Treanor, Salmaan Hassanally, Jamie Hill,

Safford Award, Salmaan Hassanally

Andrew Horner, Philip Hughes, Helen Longworth,

Sir Joseph Cantley Memorial Prize, Daniel Scott

Katherine Macleod, John-Paul Mccarthy,

Sir Robert Micklethwait Memorial Award, Rachael Glover

Yvonne McCorriston, Benjamin Millward, Ralph Morley,

Stanley Levy Memorial Award, Georgina Griggs

Aaliah Muhmood, Aleksandra Nelia, Kate Newson,

State School Award, Thomas Beamont

Usman Qureshi, James Robertson, Laura Shepherd,

Terence Fitzgerald Award, Jacqueline Dankyi

Minal Supri, Leora Taratula-Lyons, Joseph Tomlinson,

The 3 - 4 South Square Scholarship, Reece Lewis

John Williams

Winston Churchill Award, Usman Qureshi

Scholarships

The True Value of the Middle Temple Scholarship Scheme Recipient of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge Award (2013)

EMMANUEL FAGBEMI The Middle Temple Scholarship scheme is a valuable and special resource that should never be taken for granted. For many would-be barristers it is not just a prestigious honour, it is a crucial resource that gives students the opportunity to pursue their dream, in spite of financial restraints. This is certainly true in my case. My journey hasn’t been the easiest, but compared to some of my peers perhaps it hasn’t been the hardest either. I attended primary school with many of the children that I had grown up with, in an area of London that was particularly known for its high crime rates. However, once my family made the move to Kent I was fortunate enough to attend an extremely good secondary school and sixth form. Whilst visiting childhood friends who I had lost contact with, I was shocked to learn what had happened to some of them. Many were unemployed; a few had made some really bad life choices, which had led to their deaths, which were well documented in the news. Upon learning this I made a vow to myself not to end up the same way and to do something that I would one day look back on and be extremely proud of. It was for this reason I decided to pursue my passion of law and ultimately become a barrister. However, the journey hasn’t been particularly cheap and although my family offered to cover the cost of the BPTC, I refused. This was something I needed to do myself, I wanted to prove that I was as good as everyone else, and to do this I set myself the goal of winning a Middle Temple Scholarship. Little did I know that being awarded the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge award would be the beginning of what has been an amazing journey thus far. The highlight of which was being invited to Kensington Palace for tea with HRH The Duke of Cambridge earlier this year. The day was one filled with excitement and nerves all at the same time. I remember arriving at Middle Temple feeling calm yet excited and as we made our way towards Kensington Palace, the nerves began to kick in. When we arrived at the Palace we were escorted to the room where we were to have tea. Whilst walking through the palace I couldn’t help but admire its beauty. As we waited for The Duke, it suddenly hit me that this was really happening. I was so excited and nervous at the same time. I remember having a cup of tea in my hand but being too nervous to drink it in case I spilt it on myself. Finally, as the Duke entered, the room fell silent. As he walked around, introduced himself to each of us and shook

our hands, you could feel the nerves melt away. We all sat down and began to give a brief summary about ourselves. Everyone seemed very relaxed and that was mainly down to the easy-going manner of the Duke. He even laughed at one of my jokes, something I will never forget. He was so welcoming and receptive and took the time to find out more about us. The Duke was aware of the challenges facing the Bar and expressed a keen interest in finding a way to overcome these challenges. After we had taken a few photos the Duke left the room and I couldn’t help but feel a sense of amazement. Never in a million years did I think this would happen. We all left with massive grins on our faces. This was an unforgettable experience and the greatest day of our lives.

The True Value of the Middle Temple Scholarship Scheme

Emmanuel has recently passed the BPTC and is to be Called to the Bar in November of this year. He is currently assistant to Katherine Apps, of Littleton Chambers. He hopes to one day build a practice at the Bar specialising in Public law.

Do more with

ebooks

books cd-roms

looseleafs

subscriptions

forms

newsletters

online services

Hammicks

law reports

+44 (0)1784 423 321 customerservices@hammicks.com

hammickslegal.com

The Anglo-Israel Scholarship 2014 SHANNON REVEL In April 2014, I was fortunate to be awarded the Anglo-Israel Scholarship by Middle Temple. I subsequently flew to Tel Aviv in October for a period of five weeks. The bulk of my stay was to be spent with Michael Hunter & Partners in association with Nukrai Blilious, a leading international commercial law firm based in Tel Aviv. The remainder of my stay was divided amongst marshalling criminal law judge, Judge Ido Druyan, learning about the Public Defenders’ Office and exploring Israel. This is an article broken into sections of the work I experienced, detailing my observations and comparing the two systems throughout. Placement with Michael Hunter & Partners in association with Nukrai Blilious

I was keen to discover how Israel funds defence work in crime. Judge Druyan subsequently introduced me to two members of the Public Defender’s Office. Although funded by the Government, the Public Defender’s Office is an independent and prominent institution with great force. They campaign for prisoner rights and conduct scrutiny of all aspects of the legal system that affect their clients. I was mindful of the ongoing debate around prisoners’ rights to vote in the UK and learned that inmates in Israel can already vote. This, alongside discussions with Judge Druyan around the custody threshold and community sentencing unveiled a progressive, rehabilitating system. Perhaps due to my own ignorance, I was not expecting this at all; it was an eye-opening experience. Day-to-day life

During my placement with Michael Hunter & Partners, the work I undertook was extremely varied. I had the opportunity to draft a will, prepare documents for the US IRS Offshore Disclosure Programme, draft a USD $1 million loan agreement and much more. My involvement with notarisation of documents included visiting the Chinese Embassy on many occasions and liaising with the UK Home Office regarding documents for use in the UK. The atmosphere was active, fast-paced and friendly, providing a day-to-day working life that I thoroughly enjoyed. Criminal Law & The Public Defender’s Office During my stay in Israel, I was welcomed into the Magistrates’ Court in Tel Aviv by Judge Ido Druyan. One of the concerns Judge Druyan has about the Israeli system, is the absence of sentencing guidelines and the subsequent risk of judicial fragmentation that arises therefrom. Instead, attorneys often pass up judgments that have been handed down by the sentencing judge in the past for similar offences. Judge Druyan felt that too much discretion is left to the sentencing judge and spoke of a need for legislative guidance. The most obvious difference in the courtroom was the lack of formality. Advocates wore casual clothing and walked around whilst speaking, creating a rather excitable atmosphere. Witnesses seemed more comfortable than we often experience in our courtrooms and made me question whether our relative formality taints the quality of evidence in proceedings back home.

The Anglo-Israel Scholarship 2014

My understanding of day-to-day life in Israel was based on what I had seen on western news channels and as a result, part of me thought I was entering a war zone. Instead, I discovered a very cosmopolitan city surrounded by beautiful beaches. The community that lives underneath the international politics inspired me. There is a fast-paced and progressive legal system. Alongside this is a society of humble and welcoming people who remain determined to be inclusive, determined to live each day as close to normality as possible, and who remain hopeful for prospects of peace in the future. I am extremely grateful to Master Wright for funding such an educational trip, to Michael Hunter and his team at the firm for their hospitality, to Judge Druyan for hosting me in his courtroom, to the Public Defender’s Office, and to the people of Israel for welcoming me into their country.

Shannon Revel was Called to the Bar in July 2014. She is currently in her second six months of pupillage at No.18 Barristers’ Chambers in Southampton and regularly appears in courts on the Western Circuit. Shannon has a mixed practice of civil/commercial, immigration and criminal work.

Debating IMOGEN LAWSON-CRUTTENDEN Imagine you walk into a room and you are told that in 15 minutes you will not only be speaking on a subject that you know virtually nothing about, but you will be doing it in front of an audience. This is frequently what debaters have to do. Being thrown into the deep end teaches us to think clearly under pressure, plan our speeches rapidly and express our thoughts logically. We believe this highly pressured environment will prepare us for the courtroom, particularly when representing clients whose circumstances seem alien to our own. We, in the Middle Temple Debating Society, have had a fantastic year debating in the Inn and at external debating competitions. Debating kicked off with an introductory session where the rules and strategies were explained and the first debate of the year took place. We have enjoyed representing Middle Temple at 10 external debating competitions. Jamie Batchelor was a finalist at the Inner Temple Debating Competition and Juliet Stevens and Tom Morris won the title of ‘Best Novice Team’. At the competition based at Liverpool University, Megan Curzon and Jamie Batchelor won the final and came 8th overall. Throughout the year we’ve had various members of the Jamie Batchelor and friends legal profession speak to us on at the Inner Temple IV. their area of expertise. We are extremely grateful to them for giving up their time to do this. Our first talk was given by Master Reade. He spoke on the relationship between social media and employment law. Interestingly, we learnt that Snapchat (a video messaging application where the messages can only be viewed for 1-10 seconds) is commonly used to harass people. Presumably because the receiver has no record of the conversation once the message has been viewed. We then went on to debate whether employers should view employees’ postings on social media sites. Tim Lawson-Cruttenden discussed the topic of harassment law before we considered whether the Harassment Act should be used to prevent protest. This debate highlighted the importance of putting your own beliefs aside and arguing passionately for a motion, even when you disagree with it. Rhodri Price Lewis QC spoke to us on access to justice, after which we debated whether access to justice is not a right but a privilege. Remarkably the proposition team won because of a clever construction of the term ‘right’. Master John Mitchell addressed whether children should have the right to know their parents. He covered

Master John Mitchell speaking at a debating session.

disputes between separated parents about contact, as well as contact with birth parents post-adoption. We particularly enjoyed having four sixth formers from Addey & Stanhope School, where Judge Mitchell is a governor, participate in the subsequent debate. Our last event was the Monroe Cup where 48 teams from universities around the UK competed at Middle Temple in our own debating competition. Incredibly, within half an hour of publishing the event we were full and had a waiting list of nearly as many participants. The day Monroe Cup Winners: Srishti was a great opportunity Krishnamoorthy and George Clay. to represent the Inn. We would like to thank all those who helped organise the event and in particular, the Inn for its continued support and Jamie Batchelor, without whom this competition would not have been possible. We are very pleased with how the debating society has flourished this year and with the enthusiasm and dedication of its members. Thank you to all those who have been a part of it and to Master Reade, our Master of Debating, for all his help and support.

Imogen Lawson-Cruttenden studied Theology at Durham University, graduating in 2012. Imogen then underwent the GDL and BPTC at BPP Law School. She hopes to be Called to the Bar in November 2015.

Debating

Fox Scholarship MATTHEW R CROWE 'Well Mr. Lenczner’ said Justice MacPherson ‘it seems there is no case law on this, are there any publications you can point me to?’ Without pause, the commanding Alan Lenczner QC retorted robustly ‘There will be after this!’ The Court of Appeal descended into laughter. I did too. This was a hearing in my first few weeks with Alan - a founding partner of Lenczner Slaght Royce Smith Griffin LLP. This firm was my home for a year in Toronto as a Fox Scholar. My mentor was David Quayat and my principal was Will McDowell, both akin to pupil supervisors. The Harold G Fox Scholarship gives many Scholars the chance to travel some 4000 miles and experience a foreign jurisdiction, work at a firm, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada. In my first week at the firm, I felt as though I was an imposter; it is no exaggeration to say Lenczner Slaght LLP is the intellectual, legal and litigation powerhouse of Canada. In my last week at the firm, I may have been miles away from England, but I felt as though I was home. It is difficult to convey my experiences; however, a select few always stick in my mind: The ‘mega-inquest’: a Coroner’s inquest into the deaths of Sylvia Klibingaitis, Reyal Jardine-Douglas and Michael Eligon. Each of the three were shot and killed by the police when in a mental crisis. I was fortunate enough to cross-examine some witnesses; The Jarvis v. Swan’s Tours Case: assisting in a case involving a $300,000 holiday which was not as advertised; India: bringing a defamation case against Indian newspaper organisations for allegations of criminal conduct made about two Canadian businessmen; The Other Side: I was cross-examined after a dispute about supposed submissions that were made to the Ontario Court of Appeal; and Toronto University: This world-renowned institution welcomed me as a visiting researcher to use their facilities to write some book chapters. I spent time at the Court of Appeal of Ontario too, attached primarily to Justice MacPherson, and at the Supreme Court of Canada, attached to one of Canada’s foremost jurists – Mr. Justice Cromwell – which was humbling. My trip to Kingston and the ‘Rob Ford Appeal’ were two of my most memorable moments while there:

Fox Scholarship

The Rob Ford Appeal: an Appeal which did not concern drugs, but did concern defamatory remarks made by Rob Ford. I was tasked with considering the merit to the appeal and advising the Justices accordingly. He was successful on appeal. Kingston: Canada makes good use of their judicial assistants to help those incarcerated in Ontario to write and perfect appeals against conviction and sentence. The appeals were heard in Kingston – the former capital of Canada. I was allocated various appeals to consider and advise the Justices on. I had some time to travel too. Canada, as a country, is resoundingly beautiful. I had the chance to visit Algonquin National Park, Montréal, Ottawa and the incredible Toronto Islands. Overall, the Fox Scholarship was an adventure of firsts: my first time in Canada, watching hockey, working as a Judicial Assistant, cross-examining and being crossexamined. The sheer amount of gratitude I owe is impossible to recount here. I would be remiss if I forgot to thank six particular people who helped me and led me astray for an adventure. They are eminent lawyers, but more importantly, fantastic friends: David Quayat, Will McDowell, Danielle Glatt, Chris Kinnear Hunter, Julia Brown and Jaclyn Greenberg. I must also thank every individual at Lenczner Slaght, at the Court of Appeal of Ontario particularly Justice MacPherson, everyone at the Supreme Court of Canada, mainly Justice Cromwell and the Fox Scholarship, principally Joseph Markson and Karen Lane. To all those in Canada, for the experiences you afforded me, thank you; they stay with me every day whilst I attempt to find my feet in England. Can I fault Canada and the Fox Scholarship? Well, yes. Arriving at work after a gauntlet run and work in -32°C is something to behold.

Matthew R Crowe is a Pupil Barrister at Trinity Chambers, Newcastle and Consultant at Global Rights Compliance LLP. He is a Queen Mother's Scholar, Harold G. Fox Scholar and Fellow of CILS. His practice focuses on international and domestic criminal law.

Pupillage Matched Funding Scheme The Council of the Inns of Court is pleased to announce the launch of the 2016 & 2017 Pupillage Matched Funding Scheme. The scheme encourages the provision of additional pupillages in those chambers (and other approved training organisations) whose work is predominantly publicly funded. In short, the Inns will match the first six funding already provided by chambers. If, but for this scheme, a chambers would offer one pupillage, then the chambers can apply for a matched funding grant of £6,000 to fund the first six months of a second pupillage. If a chambers would, but for this scheme, have offered two pupillages then it can apply for up to two grants of £6,000 to fund up to two additional pupillages, and so on (hence matched funding). Applications for a grant of £3,000 will also be considered from those chambers which have not recently provided a pupillage and would like to do so; chambers would provide £3,000 towards the first six months of pupillage. Subject to the permitted set-off of the pupil’s earnings, the second six months of the additional pupillage(s) would be funded by chambers.

How and When to Apply For further details please visit www.innsofcourt.org.uk and submit the online application by 5pm on Tuesday 1 December 2015. Please contact Julia Hawkins at jhawkins@coic.org.uk for further details or any questions.

PUPILLAGE MATCHED FUNDING SCHEME The Pupillage Matched Funding Scheme was set up in 2013 and has been very successful in helping an increased number of students to qualify as barristers. The Scheme encourages the provision of additional pupillages in those chambers (and other approved training organisations) where work is predominantly publicly funded. Under the Scheme the Inns will match the first six funding already provided by chambers with a matched funding grant of £6,000 to fund the first six months of a second pupillage. If a chambers would, but for this scheme, have offered two pupillages then it can apply for up to two grants of £6,000 to fund two additional pupillages (i.e. four pupillages in total), and so on, hence matched funding. Applications for a grant of £3,000 will also be considered from those chambers which have not recently provided a pupillage and would like to do so; chambers would provide £3,000 towards the first six months of pupillage. In 2014, the first year of operation, an additional 14 pupillages were funded. 41 grants have been agreed for pupillages commencing in 2015 and, so far, 31 for pupillages commencing in 2016. The Inns will continue to fund the Scheme into 2017 and 2018. The Scheme is advertised on the Inns’ websites and in-house newsletters and in Counsel magazine. Applications for grants are invited between 1 September and 1 December by way of an application online on the COIC Matched Funding website www.innsofcourt.org.uk . A Grants Committee considers the applications on behalf of the Inns and decides which applicants are to benefit from a grant. It is not possible to say precisely how many tenancies have arisen out of the funded pupillages, because of the way the Scheme was set up. However, the Scheme has successfully provided an increased number of students with the means of qualifying, which is what it set out to do.

MTSA IRENE SRIHARAN When I ran for President of the Middle Temple Students’ Association (MTSA), it was impossible to comprehend at the time the responsibility I would be given and the privilege it would be to serve as an Officer of the Middle Temple. This is a Student’s Association like no other, as we are not only the student voice within the Inn, but also the strongest student voice within the Profession. Sitting on the various Standing Committees of the Inn has allowed the MTSA to take part and voice its views on issues relating to how the Inn should spend its money, what can be done to help the junior Bar survive and grow, how to improve the quality of the BPTC and how to shape and develop the next generation of advocates. We have had this year in Stephen Hockman QC, a Master Treasurer who has envisioned a long-term investment into the future of the Inn by being a support for the younger members of Middle Temple. He has dedicated his tenure and worked tirelessly to strategise how best to secure the future of the students and the junior end of the profession. It has been a humbling experience for the MTSA to work under his leadership and the seeds he has planted with our year will ensure we cultivate a long-term commitment and relationship with Middle Temple. As the publicly funded Bar experiences its current turmoil, it would be fair to say that for a Bar student the only safe and reassuring place is the Inn. As the MTSA has had monthly meetings and events in the Inn, frequented

blood, sweat and tears (and endure the many stumbles and rejections!) it takes to get there. This year in particular has been of great historic importance for Bar students and for the Inn. Being President in the 800th year of the Magna Carta has been an honour and members of the MTSA have attended lectures and events with some of the greatest minds of the legal profession. From watching an amusing and informative account of the origins of the Rule of Law by the great Master Rupert Jackson, to listening to a speech at Runnymede by the President of the American Bar Association, and hearing a great writer of our generation, Sebastian Faulks, tell the story of his journey into the literary world despite his legal heritage, Middle Temple has provided the MTSA with the opportunity to rub shoulders and learn from great pillars of our society. Whilst most people would - and did during the filming of Mission Impossible 5 on our grounds - gawp senselessly at celebrities such as Tom Cruise or Anthony Hopkins; Middle Temple is the place you will find students huddled together over a glass of wine gasping at the sight of Master Judge, Master Nicholas Phillips or Former Attorney General, Master Dominic Grieve. These are the celebrities for us legal-minded young people, and in that moment amidst the constant worry, concern and selfdoubt, being in such close proximity to those we look up to and aspire to be, we remember what we are doing this for and why we were called to this vocation.

Being President in the 800th year of the Magna Carta has been an honour and members of the MTSA have attended lectures and events with some of the greatest minds of the Legal Profession. more than our 12 required dinners and studied in our peaceful library, we have made Middle Temple our home. For Oxbridge students this feeling is not new; the collegiate spirit is at the very heart of attending Oxford or Cambridge. For those who did not study at Oxbridge, this has been a revelation and a refuge. Given how demanding the year can be, how sterile the Providers can feel and how frighteningly bleak the future is portrayed, this aspect of the year is of paramount importance. There is nowhere better to learn and grow to be a great advocate than at an advocacy weekend at Cumberland Lodge. Even after you have signed up for a career at the Bar, and spent money and time getting to this point, you will still hear naysayers telling you what a dire state the profession is in and question why on earth you opted for this ‘unstable and irrelevant’ area of the profession. There is nowhere better than Middle Temple to feel reassured that, in spite of its difficulties, pursuing a dream of being a barrister is a worthwhile endeavour if you are willing to put in the

Middle Temple Student’s Association (MTSA)

If asked for one piece of advice to give the next cohort of Bar Students, it would be to make the most of your Inn. Get involved with MTSA, attend as many events as is financially possible, eat lunch in Hall, and study in the Library. Middle Temple is packed full of people and mentors from all levels of the profession who have been through what you are about to experience, take genuine interest in your studies and career, and will give you advice that will feel like nuggets of gold when you are anxious and concerned about the future. Irene Sriharan is President of The Middle Temple Students' Association 2014-15.

Student Views from ‘the North’ REBECCA CARR AND STACEY COATMAN As student members living in the North, (or let’s face it beyond the hallowed M25), we’ve often come up against the perception that it is perhaps just too difficult for us to fully engage with the life and real community of our Inn. Our own experiences, however, go some way in batting some of these preconceptions off; and is due in no small part to Middle Temple’s laudable efforts to ensure that its out of London student members are truly able to benefit from being a part of the Inn. Our first real taster came from the special Out of London Students' Introductory Weekend that was laid on for us in September. Here, we were given a tour and treated to some of the rich history of our Inn; met other BPTC students and Middle Temple members; and discovered for ourselves just what all the (deserved) fuss about Middle Temple’s port was. Next, and keen to learn as much advocacy from our peers as we could, in October we attended the Final of the Rosamund Smith Mooting Competition. Having, at that point, just started the Bar course, we were extremely impressed by how persuasive and moreover calm the mooters were, despite the obvious pressures of mooting before such a packed Hall and distinguished Bench. As out of London students, Middle Temple paid for the qualifying session meals that we came down for which, apart from making our fellow, non-Middle Temple member course-mates slightly envious of us, made coming down to the Inn much more affordable and thus appealing. In November, and just before our first BPTC advocacy assessment, we were fortunate to be able to attend one of the excellent advocacy weekends that Middle Temple runs at Cumberland Lodge; an experience we will never forget. In small groups, we were able to practice our case analysis, witness handling, and closing speech making skills, all under the close guidance of experienced practitioners who were all so very kind and helpful to us over the days. The advocacy, of course, was supplemented with social events, informative lectures (particularly enjoyable was the ‘My First Case’ or perhaps more aptly, ‘war stories at the Bar’ session), and opportunities to enjoy Cumberland Lodge’s surrounds. Inspired by what we’d earlier seen, and enticed by the prospect of receiving further top-notch advocacy feedback, in January we decided to throw our own hats into the ring and entered this year’s Rosamund Smith Mooting Competition. Helpfully, for students studying out of London, Middle Temple will reimburse travel expenses for coming down to compete at the Inn, something which again made our full participation possible. During nearly every month

Student Views from 'the North'

between February and June we therefore travelled to Middle Temple in order to compete, meet other students and gain further insight into what life as an advocate might eventually be like. Each time, we proudly honed in on our frantic, on-the-train bundle making skills before ritually rehearsing our submissions in what felt like Middle Temple’s magical grounds. In an ostensible attempt to foster a sense of community out of London too, Middle Temple appoints student representatives in each of the BPTC providers, who are duly charged with the task of arranging up to three more local qualifying sessions for its students. Our representatives, Max Melsa and Jessica Randell, did a fabulous job of recruiting members of the Inn to come and speak to us in Manchester about pupillage, life at the Bar, and the current hot-potato topic of whether the Human Rights Act should be scrapped. Middle Temple also runs a mentoring scheme that enables students to make contact with and seek guidance from barristers who have volunteered their time to help. Both of us have been able to take advantage of this opportunity and would like to thank our mentors, Elaine Skitrell and Georgina Wolfe, for all their encouragement and help in this regard. Safe to say, our ‘view from The North’ is a positive one, and we can’t thank Middle Temple enough for all its help in ensuring that as out of London student members, we have still been able to feel a real part of the Inn. Rebecca Carr undertook the BPTC at BPP Manchester and is one of the finalists in this year’s Rosamund Smith Mooting Competition. As part of the finalists’ prize, Rebecca will be travelling to North Carolina in September 2015 in order to moot at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Rebecca is currently working as a public law caseworker at Duncan Lewis Solicitors and writes for the health news website, Bionews. Stacey Coatman undertook the BPTC at BPP Manchester and is one of the finalists in this year’s Rosamund Smith Mooting Competition. As part of the finalists’ prize, Stacey will be travelling to North Carolina in September 2015 in order to moot at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Stacey is a volunteer for The Law Society’s International Action Team which supports human rights around the world.

Getting the Most Out of Your BPTC Year RACHAEL WAKE It is easy for students to underestimate the relevance of the Inn in their BPTC year. Many students go to their dining sessions and advocacy workshops with the sole objective of crossing off another qualifying session from their lists. By doing this, students are missing out on some incredible opportunities. So here are some tips for making the most out of your BPTC year at the Inn. The best tip I can give you is this: do not see your qualifying sessions as a chore. Dining at the Inn is always really good fun, and where else in London can you have a fancy three-course dinner for £16.50? Dinners are a great way to network, and more than anything, it is a good way to remind yourself why you are there, which can help keep you motivated during an intense and difficult year. Further, advocacy training at the Inn far surpasses any equivalent the BPTC providers have to offer. But there are so many sessions to put towards your twelve, so I’d like to give you some insight, as someone who did more than their dozenminimum. The best dining sessions are, in my experience, All Inn Dining. During these dinners, Benchers and students are sat together. It is always a very relaxed evening where you can mingle with some of the most senior members of the Inn, as well as meeting lots of other students. Bench Call is another great way to meet some really interesting people. I attended this session in June and was able to meet the President of the American Bar Association and the Clarenceaux King of Arms, amongst others. Each new Bencher gives a speech after dinner, sharing funny anecdotes or food-for-thought on current legal issues. This year’s music nights saw performances from Callum Au’s Big Band and the South Bank Sinfonia, offering some great after-dinner entertainment. The most expensive dining session is Grand Day, but don’t let that put you off. Grand Day is a huge event in the Inn calendar and one you should not miss out on if possible. This black tie event sees all of the Inns finest silverware out on display, with Benchers and students dressed to impress. While you are a student member of the Inn you enjoy discounts on qualifying sessions, and so during your BPTC year is the best time to attend. But qualifying sessions are not all about wining and dining. In one day of advocacy training at the Inn you can see yourself improve more than in one month of the BPTC. As a witness on the New Practitioners’ Training Programme, you can watch baby barristers practicing their advocacy and improve your own by observing and listening to their

feedback. Cumberland Lodge – a whole weekend of advocacy exercises – can be quite intense, but combined with the socialising and the beautiful setting, it’s an incredible weekend. You can even attend the Royal Chapel on Sunday morning. Moreover, by the time you leave on the Sunday afternoon you will have seen your advocacy skills improve a great deal in a relatively short space of time. Aside from your qualifying sessions, there are other ways to get involved. The BPTC is a tough course, and sometimes it’s helpful to remind yourself of what your end goal is. Using the Inn's Library for class preparation and revision groups is a great way to stay focused. From my experience, getting involved with the Middle Temple Student's Association (MTSA) is the best way to get the most out of your BPTC year. Whether you do that by joining the committee, and contributing towards the student experience, or by taking part in the events they organise, it can give you some incredible opportunities. This year we have had a Christmas Ball, a pupillage application evening, a post-exam drinks celebration, an Inn cricket match and an incredible calendar of debating events, as well as revision groups. Being a part of the MTSA has given me an incredible year on the BPTC, and I hope next year’s students will get involved and make the most out of their year. Rachael Wake is the Vice President of MTSA 2014-2015. She completed her undergraduate degree at the University of Nottingham, where she was President of the Bar Society. In 2013 she spent a year teaching English as a foreign language in the south of Italy, where she spent some time observing the work of an Italian law firm. She has now moved Liverpool to work as a paralegal whilst continuing her search for pupillage. She will be Called to the Bar in November 2015.

Getting the Most Out of Your BPTC Year

READING IN MIDDLE TEMPLE HALL AEADING KINGDOM FOR A STAGE R IN M IDDLE T EMPLE HALL A KINGDOM FOR A STAGE READING IN MIDDLE TEMPLE HALL READING IN MIDDLE TEMPLE HALL

600TH ANNIVERARY OF THE BATTLE OF AGINCOURT

600TH ANNIVERARY OF THE BINGDOM ATTLE OF AGINCOURT FOR

A KINGDOM FOR A STAGE

A STAGE

Sir Nicholas Hytner and Simon Russell Beale (both Honorary Benchers of Middle Temple) will discuss their extensive experience of Shakespeare on stage. HH Sir Nicholas Hytner Simon Russell Beale (both Honorary Benchers of Middle EADING INand ALL Judge Philip Bartle QC, IDDLE a friend of bothEMPLE speakers for many years, will chair the Temple) will discuss their extensive experience of Shakespeare on stage. HH discussion. READING IN MIDDLE TEMPLE HALL Sir Nicholas Russell Beale (both for Honorary Benchers of Middle Judge PhilipHytner Bartle and QC,Simon a friend of both speakers many years, will chair the SirTemple) Nicholas and Simon Russell Beale (both Benchers of Middle willHytner discuss their extensive experience of Honorary Shakespeare on stage. HH discussion. This is a remarkable opportunity to listen to two of the country's outstanding Temple) will Bartle discuss their experience offor Shakespeare stage. Judge Philip QC, a extensive friend of both speakers many years,onwill chairHH the theatrical talents talking about their experience of Shakespeare in performance. Judge Philip Bartle QC, a friend of both speakers for many years, will chair the discussion. This is a remarkable opportunity to listen to two of the country's outstanding ARY OF THE BATTLE OF AGINCOURT Don't miss it. theatrical talents talking about theirdiscussion. experience of Shakespeare in performance. This is a remarkable opportunity to listen Don't misstoit.two of the country's outstanding NGDOM FOR STAGE This is atalents remarkable listen to two the country'sinoutstanding theatrical talkingopportunity about theirtoexperience of of Shakespeare Sunday 25 October 2015 - 14.30 performance. theatrical talents talking about their experience of Shakespeare in performance. Don't miss it. G IN MIDDLE TEMPLE HALL Don't miss it.2015 - 14.30 Sunday 25 October

Sunday 25 October £25 / £152015 - 14.30 Sunday 25 October 2015 - 14.30 £25 / Honorary £15 Benchers of Middle

Sir Nicholas Hytner and Simon Russell Beale (both Honorary Benchers of Middle Temple) will discuss their extensive experience of Shakespeare on stage. HH Judge Philip Bartle Sir QC,Nicholas a friend of Hytner both speakers many Russell years, will Beale chair the(both and for Simon discussion.

Temple) will discuss their extensive experience of Shakespeare on stage. HH £25 / for £15 viaspeakers www.templemusic.org Judge Philip Bartle QC,of the aTickets friend of outstanding both many years, will chair the This is a remarkable opportunity to listen to two country's £25 / £15 discussion. theatrical talents talking about their experience of Shakespeare in performance. Tickets via www.templemusic.org Don't miss it.

imon Russell Beale (both Honorary Benchers of Middle This isona stage. remarkable opportunity to listen to two of the country's outstanding ir extensive experience of Shakespeare HH a friend of both speakers fortheatrical many years, talents will chair the talking about their experience of Shakespeare in performance. discussion.

Tickets via www.templemusic.org Sunday 25 October 2015 Tickets - 14.30 via www.templemusic.org Don't miss it.

pportunity to listen to two of the country's outstanding about their experience of Shakespeare in performance. Don't miss it.

£25 / £15

Wildy & Sons Ltd

Sunday 25 The October 2015 14.30 specialist legal bookshop- for the Bar

y 25 October 2015 - 14.30

Whether would like us to provide comprehensive information on new and forthcoming titles or offer Ticketsyouvia www.templemusic.org advice on subscription products, Wildy’s unrivalled expertise enables us to offer individual barristers and £25 £15 chambers’ libraries a bespoke service second to none./We provide information and impartial advice on all law £25 / £15 publications, regardless of publisher, enabling you to make the right purchasing decisions.

via www.templemusic.org We have an extensive range of books in stock – over 11,000 titles Tickets via www.templemusic.org

Our website is quite simply the best in the business; an invaluable reference source, giving instant access to the latest information about books, eBooks, law reports, loose-leafs and journals Our two shops, in prime positions for Chambers in Central London offer free, same-day delivery in Central London, including hand deliveries

Whatever you need, talk to us Find out more about how we can help you with all your information needs, call 020 7242 5778; fax 020 7430 0897; email abbie.sinkins@wildy.com

www.wildy.com 76

My Middle Temple Journey JAMES KEELEY My parents were from Dublin. They left school early and came to this country in search of a better life. As a result of some bad luck, from the age of 11 until I went to University, I was brought up in abject poverty. For a week or so we had to effectively squat in the council flat that we used to occupy. Furniture was provided by the Church and our gas and electricity was paid for by slot meters. In the last two days before my father received his state pension there would be no money to pay for electricity and heating. I clearly remember studying in candlelight. At one stage I became anorexic, feeling my life was out of control. However, I obtained good results in my O levels and went on to study A levels. I will never forget the day of my A level results, which resulted in an offer to study Law at Kingston. I could not believe it. University meant hope and a real sense of independence for me. Unfortunately my father, whose ill health deteriorated considerably while I was doing my A levels, died during my first year at university. It was a difficult time as I was an only child and had to support my mother. However, we survived and I graduated. Getting into the Inns of Court School of Law, which was the only Bar course provider at the time, was not easy with a 2:2. However, I managed it and thoroughly enjoyed the eight months I spent at Bar School. My time there opened my eyes to a new world. I clearly remember the qualifying sessions the Inn organised for us, not least the wonderful nights I spent in Middle Temple Hall. In December 1992 I attended the Cumberland Lodge advocacy weekend where I met the late Sir Stephen Tumin, who was then the Chief Inspector of Prisons. It was under his watch that slopping out in prisons was brought to an end. Subsequently, I was fortunate enough to be able to accompany him on prison inspections. I was Called to the Bar on 14 October 1993, a wonderful day which will stay with me forever. At the time I was working as a clerk to the Industrial Tribunals in Woburn Place where Master Barbara Calvert worked. Then followed the long hard road to obtaining pupillage and tenancy. Whilst I was doing this I completed two stints as a Judicial Assistant, one to Master Phillips on the Maxwell case and the other with Master Rivlin on Brent Walker. I will never forget how inspirational and helpful these two Benchers were to me.

My parents were from Dublin. They left school early and came to this country in search of a better life. I was delighted to obtain a pupillage in London, and grateful to Middle Temple for awarding me a scholarship, which made it much easier financially. I obtained a tenancy in Leeds and practised on the North Eastern Circuit for 17 years. In 2013 my family relocated back down to London, meaning I have effectively had to start my practice again. Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m very much enjoying this new venture. I have always tried to fight for the poor, the weak and the vulnerable. I hope I have given some sort of voice to the voiceless. Middle Temple, through its support and the help of many of its members, has been vital in my own journey. To the young men and women who may be reading this thinking of the many obstacles in their way, I would like to say this: I am nothing special, I only had the nerve to dream. I have been let and put down so many times in my life, however, I have always fought on. Nothing is impossible. Believe in yourself. Knock down the barriers. A life at the publicly funded Bar is not easy. However, after 23 years, I wake up virtually every morning with hope in my heart wanting to do the very best for my client. To me, it still is the best job in the world. Never stop thinking you can change the world and in some way you will.

James Keeley, was Called to the Bar in 1993. He began his career in London as a judicial assistant in two of the biggest fraud trials in history. Whilst in London he was involved in Serafinowicz, the first ever War Crimes Trial. He has recently moved back to London as a tenant at 15 New Bridge Street, after practising in Leeds for a number of years where he developed his practice in serious criminal matters.

My Middle Temple Journey

MTYBA KAREN REID Following our AGM in December last year, the new Middle Temple Young Barristers' Association (MTYBA) committee has had a busy 2015 already. The year got off to a competitive start in February with a Pentanque social. Many of our budding boules players transferred their sporting skills to a cricket tournament. Our pupillage application series has already been completed. This year we added mock interview training to our programme in addition to an evening providing advice and feedback on applications and a training session on ‘Pupillage Interview Advocacy’. We have received a lot of positive feedback about the programme and are grateful to the practitioners who have assisted us in giving up their time to support those who are seeking a pupillage. Our pupillage programme has also continued this year with two informal evenings providing advice on second six, tenancy and third six applications. On 24 September we will hold an event for soon to be first six pupils to ask all their burning questions of those who have recently completed pupillage. April saw MTYBA run our first Cocktails and Professional Development evening which was a huge success. Junior tenants were given advice on best practice in court from senior practitioners from both a civil and a criminal background, over themed cocktails and sushi. Those who attended found the evening useful and enjoyed the battle tales of more experienced practitioners. We will hold a further two CPD sessions later in the year. Our International Internship Award scheme has continued this year, providing £500 awards to individuals who have not yet secured pupillage and are undertaking or intend to undertake an internship abroad. Instead of offering four awards in the summer as we did last year, this year we decided to have two application windows, with two awards being made in each. The deadline for the first set of awards was in April and we congratulate James Gould and Grace Forbes who were successful in their applications. In May, we hosted our annual advocacy competition which was kindly sponsored by Hammicks Legal. The

competition has two short preparation rounds – a plea in mitigation and an application for an interim injunction – with the top four advocates progressing to the final, which was a mock criminal trial. We congratulate Lia Moses and Shazeeyah Akhtar who were this year’s winners. Members of the Committee have travelled with Master Treasurer to Circuit events in Cardiff, Newcastle and Liverpool; and we also attended the BPTC dinner in Nottingham. Members on Circuit raised concerns about the difficulties faced by the growing number of people seeking pupillage and the financial issues faced by those at the junior Bar. MTYBA intends to run our pupillage application series in a one day session in Manchester next year. If this is successful we will repeat this on the other Circuits too. This year has also seen the launch of our website www. mtyba.org, where members can find out about upcoming events and keep up to date with MTYBA’s news. Our plans for the future include launching a journal (either print or online) to publish articles written by junior members of the Inn and we are currently exploring the possibility of launching a Pro Bono Scheme. We hope to see many of you at our events later in the year, in particular our Christmas Party, which will take place in Middle Temple Hall on 27 November. If any members of the Inn who are looking for pupillage, about to start or on pupillage, or are in their first five years of practice and would like to get more involved in MTYBA, please email enquiries@mtyba.org or visit www.mtyba.org to join the mailing list.

Middle Temple Young Barristers' Association (MTYBA)

Karen Reid was Called to the Bar in 2010 and is a tenant at 1 Gray’s Inn Square. Her practice comprises predominantly Immigration and Social Housing law. Karen is the 2015 MTYBA President.

Human Rights Lawyers Association: Third Annual Judicial Review Competition Final Thursday 25 June 2015 at Middle Temple, London

MATTHEW ALLAN AND CHUCKS GOLDING On Thursday 25 June 2015 the third annual HRLA Judicial Review Competition final took place in Middle Temple Hall. This was the culmination of a competition that began in April 2015 and had seen teams from across the UK fighting for the chance to argue their case before a distinguished bench. The Right Honourable Lady Justice Arden, of the Court of Appeal, acted as chair for the final. With her sat Master Louis BlomCooper, a barrister specialising in public and administrative law, along with Professor Maurice Sunkin of the University of Essex, who is also editor of Public Law. The competition followed the format of a judicial review application from permission stage whereby teams were first required to apply for permission. The provision around which the problem was based was a fictitious amendment to the Education (No2) Act 1986. The amendment was that: where a university has reasonable grounds to believe that allowing a speaker or student to put across a particular point of view will lead to other students being drawn into terrorist activity, the university could exclude that speaker or student; and that any member of staff at a university who has reasonable grounds to believe that a student holds beliefs that, if expressed, will lead other students to be drawn into terrorist activity, has a duty to report this to the Vice-Chancellor of the university. The application was to be brought on behalf of the University and College Union on the basis that the amendment would be contrary to Articles 8, 9, 10, 14 and Article 2 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights. The defendant was the Secretary of State for the Home Department. Over 20 teams, each comprising two law students, submitted written applications for permission. The best eight teams were selected to renew their application at an oral hearing at Doughty Street Chambers in early May. From the oral hearing two teams were recognised by the judges from the HRLA Executive Committee for their outstanding submissions and chosen to progress to the substantive hearing stage. In the final held before a crowd of student members of the Inn, Mathias Cheung and Zara McGlone of City Law School acting for the Claimant, submitted that the alleged breaches of the ECHR represented a disproportionate response from the Secretary of State in combating terrorism and radicalisation. The Claimants argued that the proposed amendment was indirectly discriminatory towards minority groups and should be quashed. Scarlet Milligan and Ami Jones, of Inner Temple, robustly defended the amendment. They relied upon the requirement that a university or member of staff must have ‘reasonable grounds’ before

any action could be justified. Drawing on a range of domestic, European and international authorities, they argued that the nature of the threat was addressed proportionally by the Secretary of State and allowed sufficient safeguards for both staff and students to express themselves within universities. Finding in favour of the Defendant, Lady Justice Arden agreed that the proposed amendments were both proportionate and necessary and therefore the application to quash the amendment was unsuccessful. She expressed support for the legal definition of ‘terrorism’ as laid down by Parliament and considered this to be a suitable ‘working definition’. She did not agree with the Claimant’s attempts to discredit it by branding it so broad as to become nebulous. In handing down her judgement, Lady Justice Arden applauded all of the finalists for their able submissions. She suggested that all aspiring barristers should seek to be as concise as possible, and that a good bench mark for this is whether one’s entire argument could be distilled into no more than five sentences. Both teams’ efforts demonstrate that they have the ability to succeed at the Bar. This observation was echoed by Michael Polak, Chair of the HRLA Young Lawyers Committee, who stated that ‘the ability of the teams to condense sophisticated arguments into clear and engaging submissions was very impressive’. Thanks go to our sponsors who generously donated prizes for this year’s final: Justice, Rights Watch (UK) and Penfriend. We also express thanks to Middle Temple for facilitating yet another excellent final. If you are a student and interested in taking part in next year’s competition or in any of the Young Lawyer’s Committee’s other activities details can be found at www.hrla.org.uk.

WILL PLACE FILLER PIC OR SINGLE PAGE ARTICLE HERE

Matthew Allan is Communications Officer of the HRLA Young Lawyers Committee. He also sits on the Law Society Council as the LPC student/Trainee Member. He is studying the LPC part-time at BPP University and works as a paralegal at Stewarts Law LLP. Chucks Golding is a member of the HRLA YLC and a postgraduate student at the University of London, Institute of Commonwealth Studies studying for an MA in Understanding and Securing Human Rights. She is also a Company Secretary at a multi-academy trust and ensures that the MAT is compliant in regards to their company and charity obligations.

Human Rights Lawyers Association – Third Annual Judicial Review Competition Final

The Criminal Bar and the Inn: A Personal View MASTER GEOFFREY RIVLIN ‘In my youth,’ said his father, ‘I took to the law And argued each case with my wife;  And the muscular strength which it gave to my jaw Has lasted the rest of my life’. Lewis Carroll, Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland.

Last year I was asked by the Bar Council to chair a report into the current state of the criminal justice system and the Bar. The result was Criminal Justice, Advocacy and the Bar, published in March 2015. Although this has come to bear my name, I am happy to acknowledge the input and assistance of many fine criminal barristers from around the country, Leaders and Juniors, Circuit Leaders and representatives of the Bar Council and Criminal Bar Association. I believe the Report represents the consistent views of a wide spectrum of the Bar; it brings to the surface problems of deep concern to those who love the profession and value its vital contribution to criminal justice. The current landscape of criminal justice and advocacy appears to bear so many fault lines that it is difficult to imagine how, if we were not in Wonderland, we ever reached such a state. After all, only someone wearing a hat labelled 'In this style, 10/6’ could come up with the system of legal representation we have now. In his excellent Review of Independent Advocacy in England and Wales, Sir Bill Jeffrey says very good things about the criminal Bar. He describes it as a ‘national asset’, but he voices his impression that it is ‘inward looking, and uncertain of its future … and failing to retain young barristers’. He fears that before long it will become an ‘ageing profession’. This is a serious charge indeed, and everything I have seen this last year convinces me that it is well founded.

What can the Inns do? I suggest there are two ways in which it is imperative and urgent that the Inns become involved on behalf of the junior Bar. The first is through education. The second is by providing much-needed, meaningful pastoral care to those who are suffering the effects of neglect, or practices referred to in our Report, which are damaging, and sapping the profession of morale. Education: The excellent History of the Middle Temple, skilfully edited by Master Havery, describes how, at least since the early 16th Century, the Inns of Court were regarded as ‘The Third University’. Sadly, the Bar no longer has a reputation for excellence in the field of education. It is no secret that the current system has been severely criticised: for its lack of a sensible selection process, for its exorbitant fees, and for its poor standards of education, in particular in the field of advocacy. The Inns can do something about this. Along with the Advocacy Training Council, they already provide training, but there can be no better teachers in the ethics of the Bar and art of advocacy than the highly experienced and skilled advocates who are members of the Inns. With the assistance of the Council of the Inns of Court, they need to combine their very considerable forces, and take over the education and supervise the mentoring of these two vital subjects lock stock and barrel. I believe that this training should be rigorous, matching the importance of the work in hand. It must aim at high

standards in the interests of the public. It should lead to a qualification that only the Inns could give, and which any aspiring criminal advocate would be proud to possess. This might even be accompanied by letters after the name, or some distinctive title which would be recognised within the profession, and by the public at large, as a benchmark of excellence. It should create an awareness and demand for a high level of competency, which is presently being badly undermined. Pastoral care: We might wonder at the paradox that there are still queues of young people wanting to join the criminal Bar, but that too many who have the good fortune to do so – often those with excellent prospects – find that they have no choice but to leave. This is, perhaps, easily explained. The work of the criminal Bar, even in the most mundane case, can in human terms be exciting, dramatic and endlessly fascinating. It is also immensely important. This is a powerful attraction, but it is no longer sufficient. Although Professor Martin Chalkley demonstrates in our Report that the Bar can still be financially viable, once installed in chambers too many barristers find that their financial commitments are so great that they have no option but to leave. It is not that they are getting no work, although work may be thin on the ground, but that they are not receiving pay for the work they do. Hence the recommendation in the Report that: ‘In publicly funded work junior members of the Bar should never be required to appear in court without the same remuneration which would be received by any other advocate‘. How does this ever come about? Think how very difficult it is to get a pupillage and then a tenancy at the independent Bar. How can it happen that so soon afterwards junior barristers are leaving, and what are the consequences? When discussing the problem I have sometimes been met with the plaintive: ‘T’was ever thus’. But this is not so. At one time newly called barristers were able to take the finances of the early years in their stride, for they were likely (as was I, and many others for some time afterwards) to have the good fortune of private support to keep them going. The situation is now very different. The Bar has rightly encouraged diversity, and the Inns generously succeed in assisting less wealthy men and women to come to the Bar. However, they are likely to be saddled with massive student debt, and subject to expenses of a different order. The hard facts of life dictate that unless they can make ends meet, they have no alternative but to leave – and, may I say, leave unhappy and disillusioned by the way in which they have been treated. For example, I have met many barristers on secondment who are owed very substantial sums for work they have done, and who have felt utterly helpless when it comes to getting that money in. Working on secondment is no bad thing, but those who are forced to seek work outside the Bar often find that their regular income now becomes an essential part of their lives. They simply cannot afford to take the step backwards into the profession they felt obliged to leave.

Chambers must take responsibility for this situation. The BSB should immediately re-instate the rule that ‘Heads of Chambers must ensure fees are collected for all members past and present’. The Inns can give money, and might think of a scheme to help support the junior Bar, at least until their fees have been collected, but this should not be necessary. Chambers should look to the future of the profession. They need to be aware of individual circumstances; despite the difficulties, they might also be able to offer temporary support to those in desperate need of their outstanding fees. The Inns, working with the BSB, should provide a helpline to ensure that the most vulnerable in the profession are not exploited. As to the consequences of the present state of affairs continuing, they will be far-reaching. It should be a matter of real concern that when a promising junior leaves the Bar, at a stroke the Inns and chambers may well lose their investment in that person – many thousands of pounds of carefully judged funding. Worse still: the criminal Bar will become an ageing profession, and sink into decline. There will not be the people with the experience and skills to prosecute and defend in the ever-growing number of difficult and serious cases; the public will suffer the effects of sub-standard performance. As many fear, lack of these skills will impact upon the future of the judiciary. No one doubts that this is a critical period in the history of the criminal Bar, or the important role the Inns must play if its future is to be assured. I am delighted that Master Treasurer, Stephen Hockman is in the forefront of those who are presently wrestling with the challenges. For the immediate future I regret the best, if not the only answer, will likely be seen by practitioners, weary of the problems and deeply anxious about their livelihoods, as naïve and idealistic, but it must be outward looking. Surely it cannot be a retreat into Wonderland for the independent Bar to appreciate that its strength lies in providing a vital, high quality and irreplaceable public service, and that this depends upon all its members demanding from themselves and others the high standards that have come to be expected of them.

WILL PLACE FILLER PIC OR SINGLE PAGE ARTICLE HERE

Master Rivlin was Called to the Bar in 1963. After his appointment as a Circuit Judge and Deputy High Court Judge, he went on become Resident Judge at Southwark Crown Court and Recorder of Westminster. In 2007 he was Autumn Reader. Following retirement from the Bench in 2011 he became Chair of the charity Fine Cell Work, adviser to the Director of the SFO and a Member of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. He recently chaired the Bar Council’s Report into the Criminal Justice System. His introduction to the law, First Steps in the Law is now in its seventh edition.

The Criminal Bar and the Inn: A Personal View

Grab the Popcorn:

UK Supreme Court launches ‘Video on-Demand’ Service ALEXANDRA LITTLE ‘Now justice can be seen to be done at a time which suits you’, promises Lord Neuberger, President of the Supreme Court. As of 5 May 2015, UK Supreme Court proceedings can now be viewed via a ‘video on-demand’ service, which makes an archive of cases available online to the public. Until now, the court has only ever broadcast live cases. Footage of court proceedings, which includes those of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, will be uploaded and freely available for viewing on the Supreme Court website the next working day. Once judgment is delivered, footage of the Justices’ summary in court will also be published alongside the judgmental text and press summary. This complements the Court’s current live streaming service, which has already been used by an estimated 15,000 people each month since its launch in October 2014. Lord Neuberger explains that ‘the archive will help people see the background to decisions made in our highest appeal court. It will also be useful to the legal professional and serve as an informative tool for those considering a career in law’. One thing is clear: an ‘on-demand’ service is a welcome step to improving public access and keeping up with the modern age of technology. However, critics have already argued that the service is not without its imperfections. In particular, although the service is trumpeted as enabling ‘any time, any place’ viewing of proceedings, limited resources means that videos are restricted to a one-year time limit before they vanish from the public domain, only to re-emerge five years later in the National Archive. In addition, the footage is neither available for download nor re-editing. Community activist William Perrin, who sits on the government’s Crime and Justice Sector Transparency Panel, suggests an alternative: ‘video content should be declared to be public domain so that academics, legal publishers, video companies and parties to the cases can do new and fascinating things with it’. This proposal could cause some head-scratching amongst media and intellectual property lawyers. Most importantly, how can the video footage become available to

be downloaded and edited by members of the public, without exposing those individuals to legal liabilities? First, the Supreme Court should be understandably hesitant to launch a service where users, by inadvertently editing or republishing material, could attract liability for breach of others’ copyright. A range of people are involved in creating and featuring in the material who are not Crown servants, such as the counsel acting in the matter. Historically, no process has ever been undertaken to seek that participants in proceedings assign all their intellectual property rights to the Crown when taking part in proceedings, and never has there been any need to do so. Second, by enabling such access to courtroom footage, users could also attract liability for defamation. While there are particular exemptions that allow those taking part in court proceedings to avoid any such liability, this would not carry through to individuals who edit or publish material outside of the context of the courtroom. In response to initial criticisms of the one-year time limit within which footage of a hearing can be accessed online, the Supreme Court aims to conduct a review in March 2016 to determine whether demand or merit justifies extending the archive period. However, despite opinions of those who argue that the service does not go far enough by preventing public downloading, the message from the Supreme Court is clear: you can look, but you can’t touch! Alexandra Little was Called to the Bar in 2014, after studying for an LLB law degree at the University of Leeds. She currently works as a media law tutor and paralegal at Travers Smith LLP.

Grab the Popcorn: UK Supreme Court launches ‘Video on Demand’ Service

Magna Carta_114x177_Layout 1 08/07/2015 12:42 Page 1

Commemorating 800 years of

THE AUTHENTICATED FACSIMILE OF BRITISH LIBRARY COTTON MS AUGUSTUS ii.

Limited to 480 copies, individually numbered • Parchment 12½˝ × 20˝ cut by hand • Oak frame 22˝ × 27˝ • Certiﬁcate of authentication printed letterpress and signed by an oﬃcer of the British Library

+44 (0)20 7400 4200 • limitededitions@foliosociety.com • www.foliosociety.com/magnacarta

KIRKER HOLIDAYS F O R D I S C E R N I N G T R AV E L L E R S

Kirker Holidays provides carefully crafted tailor-made holidays to over 140 destinations in 40 countries - including 70 classic cities and 250 relaxing rural locations throughout Europe and beyond. We also organise a series of escorted Cultural Tours & Music Holidays, including our own exclusive Music Festivals on land and at sea.

Special Occasions

If you are celebrating a special birthday or anniversary, Kirker can tailor make an itinerary to help you to celebrate in style. For the ultimate experience why not travel on the Venice Simplon-Orient-Express?

Expert Advice

Our knowledgeable team has many years of experience and regularly visit the hotels and destinations that we feature so that we can give you first hand advice.

Added Value

We have a range of special offers to include complimentary nights and hotel upgrades and in many destinations we also offer complimentary entrance tickets to museums.

Unique Concierge Service

Kirker’s Concierge will arrange opera and ballet tickets, pre-book entrance for museums and galleries, book private guided tours, and recommend and book restaurants to ensure that you can sit back and relax whilst Kirker ensures the smooth running of your holiday.

Speak to an expert or request a brochure:

020 7593 2293 quote code XMT www.kirkerholidays.com

The Liberation of the Camps MASTER ROBIN GRIFFITH-JONES On 15 April 1945 the British Army liberated the concentration camp at Bergen-Belsen. The BBC reporter David Dimbleby was among those who entered the camp. He sent his report to the BBC on the following day. The BBC in London found it so hard to believe his report that for three days they refused to broadcast it: I have just returned from the Belsen concentration camp where for two hours I drove slowly about the place in a jeep with the chief doctor of Second Army. I find it hard to describe adequately the horrible things I have seen and heard, but here, unadorned, are the facts. There are forty thousand men, women and children in the camp, German and half a dozen other nationalities, thousands of them Jews. Of this total of 40,000, 4,250 are acutely ill or are dying of virulent disease. In the last few months alone, 30,000 prisoners have been killed off or allowed to die. I wish with all my heart that everyone fighting in this war, and above all those whose duty it is to direct the war from Britain and America, could have come with me through the barbedwire fence that leads to the inner compound of the camp. I passed through the barrier and found myself in a nightmare. Dead bodies, some of them in decay, lay strewn

about the road and along the rutted tracks. I saw a man, wandering dazedly along the road, stagger and fall. Someone else looked down at him, took him by the heels and dragged him to the side of the road to join the other bodies lying unburied there. No-one else took the slightest notice. They didn’t even trouble to turn their heads. Here over an acre of ground lay dead and dying people. You could not see which was which. This day at Belsen was the most horrible of my life.

On 21 April this year we gathered in the Temple Church to remember the liberation in 1945 of Belsen and the other Camps. We began with Dimbleby’s own report, while we watched on a screen the heart-stopping footage of the liberation’s first hours, which the Imperial War Museum kindly made available. Even with the most dreadful minutes excised, the footage was painful to watch. Our own Temple

Church Choir was joined by the West London Synagogue Choir for the evening. Rabbis Helen Freeman and Jackie Tabick were here to say the El Malei Rachamim and the Kaddish. And Eve Oppenheimer, survivor of Belsen, told the unadorned story of her childhood before, during and after her months in the camp. Few evenings in the Church have been as poignant at this. As we gathered, Master Feder of Inner Temple had read out the names of some of those who had died at Belsen. Over the coming 90 minutes, Masters Aikens, Bartle and Mayes - with Masters Lawrence and Hill from Inner Temple - read extracts from contemporary communiques, reports and stories that told how the Nazis’ ideology and genocidal aims evolved. By December 1941 Hans Frank, Nazi Governor of Occupied Poland’s Government-General, made clear that ‘I will on principle, approach Jewish affairs in the expectation that the Jews will disappear. We will take measures that will somehow lead to successful destruction'. In January 1942 Heydrich convened the Wannsee Conference in Berlin, to formulate ‘the final solution of the European Jewish question’, intended to involve 11 million Jews. In October 1943 Himmler spoke to SS officers in secret meetings in Poznan, Poland, of the Jews’ extermination: ‘This very difficult subject should be discussed amongst us, and yet we will never speak about it in public. I am talking about the 'Jewish evacuation': the extermination of the Jewish people’. Alongside these terrible words we heard some of the most poignant music from the Camps and the stories behind them. As our evening drew towards its end, the combined choirs sang the Sanctus from Verdi’s Requiem. In September 1943 the conductor Rafael Schächter was ordered by the SS at Theresienstadt to conduct Verdi’s Requiem, for which he assembled a choir of approximately 150 singers and four soloists. Shortly after the performance, almost the entire cast was deported to Auschwitz. Schächter reconstituted a choir to perform the work again. These singers too were then deported to the East, and in December Schächter recruited musicians for a third time. The final group, though reduced in size, gave fifteen performances. Schächter saw in his performances a code: the Requiem evokes the end of the world and the fate of those who do evil; even as they were facing their own destruction, the Jews in that choir were telling the Nazis how the Third Reich was destined for destruction. It was with this last choir that Rafael Schächter was finally transported to Auschwitz. All were killed on arrival. Hitler was appointed Chancellor by Hindenburg on 30 January 1933. Ludendorff, Hindenburg’s second-incommand in WW I and Hitler’s sometime ally, in the 1920s, wrote: You have delivered up our holy German Fatherland to one of the greatest demagogues of all time. I solemnly prophesy to you that this unholy man will cast our nation into the abyss. Future generations will curse you in your grave for what you have done. The statistics of the Holocaust are almost beyond belief. Over a million men, women and children were killed at Auschwitz-Birkenau, 800,000 at Treblinka, 150,000 at each of Kulmhof and Sobibor. During May and June 1944 the Hungarian Jews alone were gassed at Birkenau at a rate of almost 10,000 a day. When the Soviets moved in to

Birkenau, 29 of 35 storerooms had been burned down. In the remaining six, the liberators found part of the camp’s legacy: 368,820 men’s suits, 836,255 women’s coats and dresses, 5,525 pairs of women’s shoes and large quantities of children’s clothes. In the tannery the Soviet Investigation Commission found 7 tonnes of hair. More was involved than the systematic exterminations. Auschwitz-Birkenau, for example, was an enormous industrial complex, whose workforce of slaves could be worked to death building and manning its research farms, cement-factories and above all its rubber-factories. In 1942 IG Farben had 30,000 skilled workers on hand at Auschwitz. Such an evening in the Church could have been nothing but sadness chilled by anger. To hear Rabbis Helen and Jackie say the El Malei Rachamim and the Kaddish was to have those millions of victims brought back before our eyes. We owe an immense debt of gratitude to Eve Oppenheimer and to the Rabbis for ensuring that the evening was not just a commemoration of the dead but a celebration of life. The final anthem to be sung was the last, exultant movement of the Chichester Psalms:

Behold how good, And how pleasant it is, For brethren to dwell Together in unity. As we left the Church in silence, Ami Feder spoke again. This time he read out the names of survivors from BergenBelsen, while we saw on the screen the footage of men and women after the liberation: of incredulity, tentative smiles and the gradual return to human dignity; of the camp’s new clothes-store, ‘Harods’; and above all of the children, wideeyed and silent, with bowls of soup and bars of chocolate before them and, as if by a miracle, with a life before them. We have wondered ever since if one of those children we saw was the young Eve Oppenheimer herself, who seventy years later stood before us with such poise to speak with such clarity of the months she spent in the nightmare of Belsen. The Rev Dr (Master) Robin GriffithJones DLitt, is The Reverend and Valiant Master of the Temple at the Temple Church, London, and Senior Lecturer in Theology at King’s College, London University. He has worked extensively on law and religion. The Temple Church is the collegiate church of the two legal colleges or Inns of Court, Inner and Middle Temple; it is famous as ‘the mother-church of the Common Law’. The Temple played a central role in the gestation of Magna Carta, and in the spread of the Charter’s principles to America and throughout the world. In the Temple Church itself, in use by 1162, are the effigies of William Marshal, 1st Earl of Pembroke and hero of Runnymede, and of his son the 2nd Earl, one of the Charter’s Surety Barons. Griffith-Jones was heavily involved in the UK's celebrations of Magna Carta; his booklet, Magna Carta, 1215-2015: London’s Temple and the Road to the Rule of Law has been widely read. He ran the international conference on Magna Carta, Religion and the Rule of Law at the Temple in June 2014, and is co-editing the book. The Liberation of the Camps

Send for Benson! A Life of Sir Christopher Benson by Eric Stockdale BOOK REVIEW BY MASTER RICHARD HILL CHRISTOPHER BENSON WAS CALLED AS AN HONORARY BENCHER OF THE MIDDLE TEMPLE ON 28 NOVEMBER 1984, THE NOMINATION OF MASTER TREASURER, MASTER ACKNER. He was at that time the head of MEPC, a growing and flourishing property company, and already well-known in City and commercial circles. How much more he has done since, this biography, by a fellow Master of the Bench, well shows. It is a tribute to its succinctness that it occupies less than 200 pages: given the breadth of activity of its subject, it could easily have been several times longer. The son of a dentist in the Midlands, Christopher Benson had early considered the sea as a career, indeed serving two years in the Union Castle line and trying three times for a commission in the Royal Navy, which he eventually obtained. As a result of a serious accident he soon turned to a career in the field of property management. In this his progress, initially unspectactular, accelerated as his talent, hard work and judgment (that last word will recur) were recognised. He hauled MEPC, a dangerously shaky organisation, back into prosperity and it was the foundation for much that subsequently happened. Though a proportion of MEPC’s effort was overseas, and Benson’s itineraries well covered it, its activities were based in Britain and particularly in the City of London. Thus, in hindsight, it is no surprise that Benson took a leading role in the most spectacular of City developments, that of the London Docklands. He succeeded to the chairmanship of the LDDC (London Docklands Development Corporation) in mid-1984. For the subsequent five years, arguably the most critical in that massive enterprise, he was the driving force. The progress of Canary Wharf, of the Docklands Light Railway, and the City Airport, can all be traced to that time, and with it the rise of the City of London to a leading position in the world’s financial markets. It could not have happened without opposition, and the book deals dispassionately with those bodies and individuals who, for reasons ranging from doctrinaire to personal, found fault. Many eventually ended on the same side as the Corporation or at least in some degree of cooperation with it; some were irreconcilable. Benson, in this account, gave an ear to all. That quality was even more severely tested when he took on two other roles, chairmanship of Boots the Chemists and Costains, the construction company. These

were the targets of animal rights and environmental groups, campaigning respectively against animal experiments and the Newbury by-pass. In each case it was a question of balancing the greater good against the lesser evil, but animosity flared and towards Benson and his family it became personal and often nasty. Expertise was better demonstrated in the modernisation of the Royal Opera House and numerous other projects, in all of which Benson’s flair and judgment (that word again) came to the fore. And (since this review cannot run on and on) at this point his Mastership of the Bench must be mentioned. In fact, the book fills a whole chapter on the topic, and rightly so, for no Honorary Bencher has done more in recent years to support his Inn. Much of it was in the field to be expected, namely advice on property acquisitions – Benson advised on the very first cautious freehold buys in 1984, not mentioned in the book but to your reviewer’s knowledge – and management, but it overflowed into legal education and scholarships.

Finally, and correctly, the book devotes a chapter to what may become Christopher Benson’s greatest contribution of all to Britain: the Crossrail project. Communications are the key to prosperity in many senses, and this huge, imaginative and well-managed development has vast potential. Most biographies close with a summary. This one doesn’t. So may your reviewer, with apologies for temerity, attempt one? It seems to me that a biography should give a just account of the life and work of its subject: what they have done and what they were or are. This book succeeds on both counts. What Christopher Benson has done is vastly constructive – no

As for what Christopher is, the book speaks clearly. Over and over again he comes over as a ‘people person’: direct, humorous, active, his door ever open. If one single quality emerges more than another, the alert reader will already have twigged it: Judgment. It is indispensable in the higher reaches of life, corporate and public. Master Benson has it in abundance. A friend cannot conclude such a review without mentioning – as the book frequently does – Jo, Lady Benson, a public figure in her own right, full of goodwill, good works and energy, a great lady. Their two sons are both Middle

If one single quality emerges more than another, the alert reader will already have twigged it: Judgment. It is indispensable in the higher reaches of life, corporate and public. Master Benson has it in abundance. pun intended. It is not simply that developments attributable to him have been overwhelmingly successful; they have also been for the common good. If growth is a God (and there starts another disputation) then those thirty years’ work have much benefited humankind and, certainly, this nation. It has not been done without fuss – that is inevitable in a free society – but it has been done.

Templars, one already a QC. Of all the Hons this Hon has known, Master Benson has given most to his Inn. Do read it. The book is available from Oblong Creative Ltd., 416B Thorp Arch Estate, Wetherby LS23 7FG, tel. 01937 849949. Price £28 (inclusive of p & p in UK).

Master Hill was Called as an Honorary Bencher in 1994. He started his career at the Royal Navy in 1942 and went to sea in 1946. After 17 years at sea, specialising in navigation, he spent the remaining 20 years of his career mainly in Whitehall appointments. On retirement in 1983, he became the Under Treasurer of Middle Temple, remaining in office until 1994. He has written ten full-length books on maritime matters covering history, strategy and tactics and he has also contributed to numerous conferences and other published papers. He was the Editor of the Naval Review for 19 years.

Send for Benson! A Life of Sir Christopher Benson: Book Review

Gardeners Project KATE JENRICK

Over the years some keen gardeners in Falcon Chambers have urged me to improve the area behind the Church. A rather desolate area - little used, except by smokers - there was potential to make use of the relatively open but sheltered spot. The idea of a vegetable area was always in mind. But this area is a long way from the rest of my responsibilities in Elm Court and the main garden, and I was concerned I might overreach myself. Also, how many people would actually benefit? However, when my new assistant Tom Lane joined Middle Temple last July I thought it was the right time. I designed and commissioned four separate raised beds which fitted in with the existing hard landscaping. These were fabricated in steel and painted black. We shifted nine tonnes of top soil, added some home produced compost and in the first week of May it was ready for planting. Tom’s project was then to design and grow vegetables and cut flowers. Each bed was lined with a mix of herbs marjoram, thyme (lemon and variegated), rosemary and sage providing structure to the design, as well as kitchen worthy herbs. Raised from seed in our glasshouse, the first round of lettuces, spinach and mangetout were providing a crop before the end of May and the next crop was soon under way. Runner beans, tomatoes and celery followed. The brief I set was that it had to look colourful and attractive and so Tom’s design was colour-led. Again raising from seed, the beds contained flowering annuals and perennials of calendula, nasturtium and salvia (red and orange colours) against cooler blues of sweet peas, agastache and lemon bergamot which added colour and valuable nectar producing plants. Two gooseberry bushes were planted. There are plans to add to the soft fruit collection. The area was entered into the annual ‘City in Bloom’ campaign and was showcased to the City of London. Tom had followed the design brief and there was plenty to stop and look at (and pick). By mid-July I was able to determine the project a success. Judges from the City of London were also impressed, and the garden was honoured with the Award for Outstanding Crop Area. The first of many for Tom, I’m sure. Unbeknown to us at the time, people were taking an interest in our activities from early on. Thanks are due to Ivor Franks who took regular photographs from his room in Goldsmith Building. Harvests have been distributed within Falcon Chambers and I know other residents have made use of the produce. Another bench has been added to the

Gardeners Project

area, as more people are wandering into the courtyard and stopping a while. I need not have worried that it might be simply an indulgent experiment for gardeners’ enjoyment. It is my hope that it should evolve to form a long term feature and asset of Middle Temple gardens. I hope to repeat seed sowing workshops in the glasshouse next spring and invite readers to make a note in their diary, if they are interested, to pick up some tips on seed sowing and to help grow some food on your doorstep. After gaining a Diploma in Horticulture with Honours from the Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, Kate worked in 18th Century Landscape Garden at Painshill Park, Cobham and community social enterprise in east London. She came to Middle Temple in December 2008 where the mix of history and a busy, demanding use of the garden provided all the challenges a Head Gardener requires.

Become a Friend of the PSU PSU volunteers give free, independent a ssistance to people going through civil and family courts and tribunals without any support or advice.

As a Friend of the PSU y ou will be…

§

Helping people alone in court gain access to justice

§

Offered priority booking to our Friends events

§

Invited to our Annual Reception

§

Updated regularly about our work with our newsletter and our annual report

Find out more: www.thepsu.org friends@thepsu.org.uk Court Based Personal Support. Registered C harity No. 1090781

The Free Representation Unit has been around since 1972. Since then we have offered an unrivalled opportunity for junior lawyers, particularly Bar students, to gain advocacy experience at the start of their careers. Many distinguished silks had their first advocacy experience representing a FRU client. We work in the areas of employment, social security and criminal injuries compensation. We act both at first instance and in appeal tribunals. Many of our clients are vulnerable and on low incomes and without our assistance they would likely be litigants in person. In the year to the end of July 2015 our volunteers represented clients in more than 600 cases. To find out how you can volunteer for us or make a donation to support our work, please visit our website www.thefru.org.uk

Article Title

The Honourable Society of the Middle Temple

89 89

The Middle Temple Garden Party: 7 July 2015

The Middle Temple Garden Party

Big Voice London EMILY LANHAM

Last year I wrote a piece for The Middle Templar with the now Master Treasurer, Stephen Hockman QC, in my capacity as a member of the newly founded Equality, Diversity and Social Mobility Sub-committee. It was an article about the beginning of a change at the Bar; changing the public perception and opening up our doors to prove that we are diverse, we are accepting and we are the future. In a slightly different capacity, that of Director of Big Voice London, I write now about a project that has done just that; open our doors. Big Voice London is a youth charity that seeks to promote young people’s engagement with the law and encourage diverse access to the profession. We work with sixth formers from across Greater London, from some of the most economically challenged backgrounds and, through various projects, inspire them to engage with current issues of law reform and offer them insights into the legal working world. As members will know, every year the Inn runs a series of four Guest Lecture evenings; based on various topics concerning the profession and legal or political points of interest. This year, Big Voice London was invited to join the members and Benchers in a series of evenings that we hoped would paint a positive picture of Middle Temple and begin breaking down barriers to social mobility. We invited nine schools, whom Big Voice London work with, to an initial meeting during which students were able to ask questions about the Inn and careers at the Bar. After that, the schools were split into four groups, each of which would be attending one of the lecture evenings. As I write, we are in the summer break, having attended two of the lectures so far, with the final two taking place next term. Before each lecture, students and teachers were invited to a ‘pre-lecture meeting’, hosted at the Inn. The purpose of which was to allow students to experience the Inn for the first time; an intimidating and maze-like place, making sure they felt comfortable during the lecture evening to follow, but also to discuss the topics beforehand. The first lecture was from Master Judge, on the ‘Magna Carta: Luck or Judgment?’, and the second was a panel discussion: ‘Is it in the Bar’s DNA that everyone deserves a fair chance?’ The latter was particularly close to our students’ hearts as they consider their futures and career choices. My intention was to write how exactly this experience had enabled the students to seriously consider their futures and gain an insight in to the Inn which they would never have glimpsed before. Having spent a few evenings with these

young people it was obvious how much they enjoyed being in the environment and were impressed by all who they were able to talk to. On reflection though, there are people who are much better placed than I to tell you just what the opportunity meant to the students involved: On behalf of myself and those of my students lucky enough to attend yesterday evening, ‘thank you’ very much for inviting us to Middle Temple’s Guest Lecture evening. The experience of coming to such a splendid venue and having the opportunity to speak with so many members of the Bar was invaluable... I very much hope there will be further opportunities for our working together, in order to promote greater diversity at the Bar... Nigel Bartlett, Sutton Grammar School.

I have spoken to most of the students who attended the event last month and the response has been overwhelmingly positive. One of my students already carried out work experience that [was] arranged for her after the premeeting and she has come back a different student! She was really inspired by both the trips to Middle Temple and the work experience and has responded by dramatically improving her work effort in and out of class. Another student has told me that before the event she wasn’t sure if she wanted to go to university and what she would study if she did. However, having met and spoken to [BVL Mentors] she is really keen to do Law. I can’t think of anything that could be improved for subsequent events. The barristers were really welcoming to the students and a couple of them gave students their business cards, telling them to contact them for work experience. Jonathan Lake, All Saints School.

Big Voice London is a youth charity that seeks to promote young people’s engagement with the law and encourage diverse access to the profession.

I enjoyed the event and am glad you were able to arrange the opportunity. Instant feedback from the students, talking to them afterwards, was positive but non-specific - more of a reaction to the environment. For them, it was a completely new experience in a place they would never otherwise have seen unless (as several of them hope) they end up coming back in the future as members of an Inn. Certainly, these events have enthused them. I find that a number of students at my school start asking me about how to become a lawyer or state that as their ambition from 13 onwards, but none have any real idea at that stage what’s involved or what being a lawyer would be like. It’s one thing for me to explain requirements to them or tell them about my own and my friends’ experiences as solicitors and barristers, but quite another (and far better) for them to start seeing such things for themselves.

So often, the goals of social mobility and diversity are just statistics on a page or ticks in a box we are required to consider. I hope that this article will remind our members that to each of these young people, it’s their whole lives. In some small way, we have the opportunity to perhaps influence and change those lives for the better. We have two more lecture evenings coming up, postpublication. I will be there with students and their teachers in tow. I hope many of you will make the effort to come and speak to these incredible young people, because I think they’ll surprise you. At the very least, they might make you smile.

Ben Gallagher, Queensmead School.

Emily Lanham is a student member of Middle Temple and a member of the Equality, Diversity and Social Mobility subcommittee. She is Director of the youth charity, Big Voice London and works full-time as a paralegal at Landmark Chambers. She is due to finish the BPTC in 2016.

Big Voice London

Magna Carta: Runnymede to Philadelphia ROBERT J OLEJAR The concept of a fundamental law, binding on the government as well as the governed, is the cornerstone of both the British and the American Constitutions. The British Constitution achieves this by customs and conventions, court decisions and statutes, beginning with Magna Carta in 1215, when 25 rebel barons confronted King John at Runnymede and, to quote Mario Puzo’s The Godfather, ‘made him an offer he couldn’t refuse’. Middle Templar Sir Edwin Sandys, dubbed ‘The Father of American Constitutionalism’, drafted and obtained the Great Charter for Virginia in 1618, which guaranteed its colonists ‘self-government, freedom of speech, equality before the law and trial by jury’, along with all Common Law privileges ‘as if they had been abiding and born’ in England. Magna Carta had been exported! The pattern was repeated in successive American colonial charters. So, when the 55 delegates who met in Philadelphia in May 1787, to rework the Articles of Confederation - primarily drafted by Middle Templar John Dickinson and Benjamin Franklin - instead decided to form a new government, they relied on what they knew, English law and rights guaranteed in writing. Along with the Bill of Rights, the Constitution achieves three objectives. First, it creates a government with authority to do only what is exhaustively specified within the four corners of the document. For example, Congress may regulate interstate commerce, but not commerce conducted solely within a single state. Second, it protects the people from that government by clothing them with a non-exhaustive list of rights. The Supreme Court can recognise other rights as already included in listed rights or as a fundamental part of a person’s liberty. Third, it provides for its own amendment, ensuring its continued relevance. Magna Carta’s importance lies not so much in what it said as in what it achieved, freedom under the rule of law. The Constitution is the direct descendant of Magna

Carta. Surprisingly, many issues and concepts appear in both documents, half a millennium and 3,000 miles apart, although differing somewhat in purpose and treatment. The phrase, ‘Law of the Land’ appears in Magna Carta in a due process context, Cls. 39 and 55. Under the Supremacy Clause, the Constitution and federal laws are the ‘supreme Law of the Land’, Art. VI, §2. The first clause of Magna Carta protects the Church of England from the government, effectively establishing a national religion. The First Amendment to the Constitution prohibits the establishment of any religion. Magna Carta prohibits taxation without consent of the taxed, Cl. 12, and provides how consent is to be obtained. Cl. 14. This required the King to go to the peoples’ representatives for money. The Constitution gives 'the power to lay and collect taxes…’ to Congress, Art. 1, §8, Cl. 1, requiring the President to do the same. This was suggested by Charles Pinkney and submitted by fellow Middle Templar, John Rutledge. Several provisions of Magna Carta deal with the regulation of the courts, including the appointment of qualified judges and law enforcement officers, Cl. 45, jurisdictional prohibitions, Cl. 24, and a fixed place for the Court of Common Pleas, Cl. 17. Article III of the Constitution is devoted entirely to the establishment and jurisdiction of the federal judiciary, which Pinkney advocated. The only reference to vicinage requires federal criminal trials to be

The first clause of Magna Carta protects the Church of England from the government, effectively establishing a national religion. The First Amendment to the Constitution prohibits the establishment of any religion. held in the state where the crime was committed, Art. III, §2, Cl. 3. Magna Carta prohibits a bailiff from putting someone on trial without the testimony of credible witnesses, C. 38. The Constitution requires two witnesses to the same overt act to sustain a prosecution for treason, Art. III, §3, Cl. 1. Regulation and uniformity of ‘weights and measures’ is addressed in Magna Carta, Cl. 35, and the Constitution’s Commerce Clause, Art. I, §8. John Dickinson drafted a similar provision for the Articles of Confederation in 1776. Magna Carta provides for a committee of 25 barons to enforce observance of its terms, with rights of distraint and distress against the Crown, Cl. 61. The President, VicePresident and all civil officers ‘shall be removed from office upon impeachment for and conviction of treason, bribery and other high crimes and misdemeanors', Art. II, §4. The right to leave, enter, or travel within England is guaranteed by Magna Carta, Cls. 41-42, but the Constitution is silent on the subject. In Kent v Dulles, citing Clause 42, the Supreme Court held the right to travel is an important part of a citizen’s liberty, protected by the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. As Master Igor Judge, former Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, and Master Anthony Arlidge, both former Treasurers of the Middle Temple, note in their excellent recent work, Magna Carta Uncovered, in 1791 the American Bill of Rights was ‘adopted into the Constitution as the legitimate child of the Magna Carta'. The Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and post-Civil War Fourteenth Amendments are modern restatements of Magna Carta’s Clause 39; the Fifth Amendment prohibition against taking personal property for public use without just compensation can be traced to Clause 28, and the Sixth Amendment guarantee of a 'speedy' criminal trial is an application of Clause 40, ‘To no one will we…delay justice.’ Trial by jury can be traced to Magna Carta Clause 39, although, as Masters Judge and Arlidge point out, in 1215 trials were by ordeal or battle, with jurors functioning as investigators, or more like a grand jury, which is still used in the United States. ‘The rebels must have had in mind that a presenting or accusing jury should be made up of their equals and probably any inquest as to their rights would be determined by their equals’. Middle Templar Charles Pinkney successfully sought trial by jury in both civil and criminal cases. As a result, the word ‘jury’ appears four times in the Constitution: in criminal cases, Art. III, §2, Cl. 3 and the Sixth Amendment; for bringing criminal charges (grand jury), Fifth Amendment, and in civil cases, Seventh Amendment.

Beyond the words in both documents, is the issue of judicial review of future legislative and executive acts in light of these fundamental laws. Lord Coke said Magna Carta knows no sovereign and in Dr. Bonham’s Case held, ‘when an Act of Parliament is against common right and reason…the common law will…adjudge such Act to be void'. Middle Templar, Sir William Blackstone thought Parliament could be trusted to determine what English liberties are or should be. In the famous case of Marbury v Madison, Chief Justice, John Marshall sided with Coke and announced the American standard for judicial review, ‘An act repugnant to the Constitution is void'. Magna Carta and the Constitution of the United States of America would have long-since joined their authors in the grave, but for men and women willing to defend them on the battlefield and in the courtroom. I am honoured to have been recommended for Call to the Bar by a man who put himself in harm’s way to do both, first as part of the Normandy Invasion in World War II, later earning the Bronze Star, then as a lawyer in the 1960s, travelling to the American deep south to provide legal assistance to the civil rights movement. In 1979, President Jimmy Carter appointed him to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. He was the late United States Senior District Judge, The Honorable Dickinson R. Debevoise, to whom this article is gratefully dedicated.

Robert J Olejar is a trial lawyer and forensic accountant specialising in criminal defence and commercial litigation. A licensed Certified Public Accountant and Certified Fraud Examiner, he has been appointed as Receiver and Court’s Forensic Accountant by the Chancery Division of the New Jersey Superior Court. In September 2013, he successfully completed all the formal testing requirements to become a Barrister and was Called to the Bar of England and Wales in 2014. A former U.S. Marine, he holds a Fifth Degree Black Belt in the Japanese martial art of Ninjutsu.

Magna Carta: Runnymede to Philadelphia

Waterloo and the Middle Temple LESLEY WHITELAW IT IS DIFFICULT TO KNOW HOW MANY MIDDLE TEMPLARS FOUGHT IN WELLINGTON’S ARMY AT THE BATTLE OF WATERLOO 200 YEARS AGO. Records kept by the Inn were not concerned, then as now, with the personal or professional lives of members, other than those aspects which were most relevant to the Inn’s own interests: admission, keeping commons and fulfilling the requirements for Call, rent of chambers and election to the Bench. More detailed personal information has to be tracked down in external biographical sources such as reminiscences and Dictionary of National Biography (DNB) entries of eminent members or eminent kinsmen of members. One member we know fought at Waterloo was Alexander Robert Charles Dallas (1791-1869). He was the son of an Inner Temple barrister, Robert Charles Dallas who had been born in 1754 in Jamaica, where his father, Dr Robert Charles Dallas, had made a fortune as a doctor. Alexander Dallas served as a supplies officer in Wellington’s army in the Peninsular War and was present at the Battle of Waterloo. He was admitted to the Inn in 1819, but was not Called to the Bar. He attended Worcester College, Oxford, where he was awarded his MA and was subsequently ordained a deacon and later a priest in the Church of England in 1821 and became curate of Radley. In 1849 he established the controversial Irish Church Missions to Roman Catholics in Ireland where his anti-Catholic rhetoric caused acrimony and division. After his death his widow published a memoir of his life.

While a relieved nation celebrated the victory at Waterloo that ended over two decades of Napoleonic wars, many Middle Templars must have had a close personal interest with brothers or sons in action across the Channel in June 1815. One such was Henry Havelock (1795-1857). He was intended for the law and after school at Charterhouse he entered the Middle Temple in 1813. Because of his father’s financial difficulties and a quarrel between them, young Havelock was left without the resources to continue his education in the Inn. His elder brother, William Havelock, was in the army and had distinguished himself at Waterloo. With his assistance, and against their father’s wishes, Henry Havelock joined the 95th Regiment of Foot and was commissioned second lieutenant on 30 July 1815, just six weeks after the Battle of Waterloo. After over 40 years’ military service he died in India, a major-general, appointed KCB and a national hero whose equestrian statue is in Trafalgar Square. Standish O’Grady, 1st Viscount Guillamore (1766-1840), was a Middle Templar and Irish judge whose eldest son, also called Standish O’Grady, the 2nd Viscount (1792-1848) served with distinction as a lieutenant in the 7th Hussars at Waterloo, leading his regiment in a charge against the French which, although successful, sustained heavy losses. He was promoted captain for his skills on the battlefield.

Charles William Short (1799-1857) was the son of Charles Short, a Middle Temple barrister. He joined the Coldstream Guards as ensign in 1814 and was present with his regiment at Quatre Bras and at the defence of Hougoumont at Waterloo. In later life he published a successful treatise on the duties of the soldier and was renowned for his philanthropic work. Ernest Charles Jones (1819-1869), the Middle Templar radical, Chartist and writer who was sentenced by the Lord Chief Justice at the Old Bailey to two years’ imprisonment in 1848 for seditious behaviour and unlawful assembly, came from an establishment military and landowning background. His father, Major Charles Jones, was a veteran of the Peninsular War who had fought at Waterloo and was equerry to the Duke of Cumberland. One of the most famous casualties of the battle was the son of a Middle Templar. Lieutenant-General Sir Thomas Picton was struck in the head by a musket ball

The battle, the victory and the Duke of Wellington remained celebrated for many years after the event, as is demonstrated by an event almost twenty years later. Sir Joseph Arnould (1813-1886), Middle Templar, judge in India and writer, began a glittering academic career at Wadham College, Oxford in 1831. In 1834 he won the Newdigate prize for English verse with his Hospice of St Bernard. According to the DNB ‘On 10 June 1834 he recited it at the Sheldonian Theatre when the Duke of Wellington was installed as chancellor of the university and in doing so he refashioned two lines so as to read that he whom,“….. a world could not subdue / Bent to thy prowess, chief of Waterloo”’. This caused a sensation: John Wilson Croker reported that, on hearing the word Waterloo, the whole assembly started up and, ‘some people appeared to me to go out of their senses – literally to go mad’. It is surprising to find the famously unemotional Iron Duke the subject of something like celebrity hysteria in the Sheldonian in 1834.

While a relieved nation celebrated the victory at Waterloo that ended over two decades of Napoleonic wars, many Middle Templars must have had a close personal interest with brothers or sons in action across the Channel in June 1815. ordering a charge at the Battle of Waterloo. He had kept secret a serious wound sustained days before at Quatre Bras and died heroically at Waterloo – dressed, according to Welsh folklore, in top hat and tails, because his uniform had not yet arrived (he had been attending the Duchess of Richmond’s Ball in Brussels when news arrived of Napoleon’s advance). His courage had already been demonstrated at the Battle of Vittoria in the Peninsular War, but his brutality, particularly as Governor of Trinidad, had made him notorious (for this reason the continued hanging of his portrait by Sir Martin Arthur Shee in Carmarthen Guildhall, now used as a court, has been controversial). He was the most senior officer to be killed at Waterloo. Because of the high regard for his military reputation, colonial towns in Canada, Australia and New Zealand were named after him; his statue is among the 12 Heroes of Wales in Cardiff City Hall and he remains the only Welshman buried in St Paul’s Cathedral. His father, Thomas Picton of Poyston, Pembrokeshire, had been admitted to the Middle Temple on 21 March 1740.

The Middle Temple records are not merely more restrained, but utterly silent, on the subject. We would be delighted to hear from any reader who knows of further Middle Templar involvement at Waterloo. The Inn does not appear to have fallen prey to post-war Francophobia: only months later John Fonblanque, son of Jean Fonblanque, a naturalized Frenchman, was elected Treasurer of the Inn.

Waterloo and the Middle Temple

TEMPLE CHURCH CHOIR TRIPS:

Washington DC and Holland ROGER SAYER I write this whilst on tour with the Temple Church Choir in Holland. Our aspiration here in the choir is to provide the very best music making and experience for our choristers, as well as for the Inns and far beyond. Choral singing is a team activity which, rather like a sport, requires each individual to be reliable and consistent, skilled and focused. Singing is a physical activity where the whole body needs to be engaged and energised but relaxed and free. We often say, ‘Ice in the head, fire in the belly’. Building these skills takes time and patience, especially with a choir of ‘day’ boys. Extra activities help enormously to bind and blend the team. Recordings, concerts and tours are essentials beyond the weekly routine. Apart from the long term benefits to the choir, they promote the excellence associated with the Temple and the Inns - a sort of ‘Temple Brand’ that people know and come to expect. Since I was 18 I’ve been involved in choir tours, and time and again it provides a musical stimulus for the choir as well as giving a wider profile for the organisation it represents. Rather like a shop window, it gives the public a glimpse of where we come from and the organisation that we represent. Last October, the Temple Church Choir headed for

Washington DC. When my musical friends and colleagues knew of our plans, they assumed we would be singing in the National Cathedral or Smithsonian Concert Hall, but no - nothing of the sort! 18 choristers, 12 men and 4 valiant Chaperones (not to mention The Reverend and Valiant Master) headed for the Supreme Court and the Library of Congress (LoC) where the choir performed at major events in the presence of HRH The Princess Royal, The Honorable Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court of the United States and many of our own great. With repertoire from Handel and Haydn to Tippett and Take Five, it quickly became apparent that the music we could offer, comfortably weaved its way into the celebrations for the exhibition of the Lincoln Cathedral Magna Carta. There were musical highlights everywhere, from a concert at St Paul’s Church K Street to the singing of Zadok the Priest with orchestra at the opening ceremony in the LoC. One personal highlight, was seeing the Treasurers of Middle and Inner Temple enjoying time with the choristers in a local burger bar! With Washington completed and the 2015 Magna Carta events accomplished, we turned our minds to a tour to The Netherlands. The British choral tradition is respected

throughout the world, and nowhere more so than in Holland. The great churches are imposing, and have some of the finest historical organs, with acoustics to match. The Dutch adore our tradition, andÂ they came in their hundreds to hear the choir. Each concert was packed. On one occasion 150 were turned away as the huge church was at capacity with people sitting in the pulpit and standing in every corner! In one week we sang five concerts with repertoire ranging from Victoria to Whitacre. Â Greg Morris, miraculously adapted to the different and complex organs and provided three organ solos within the programme. At Delft we were honoured to have the British and Irish ambassadors attending our concert. It has been a wonderful opportunity to show our choir off to a wide and appreciative public. It is with my gratitude, I thank the Inns for supporting the choir and enabling us to carry out this work. The amazing Liz Clarke spends hours on the minutiae to ensure the smooth running and safety of the children at all times. Behind the scenes we had four chaperones (including John Shearer, our verger) who constantly looked after the daily needs of the choristers. I felt it fitting that I should end this article with a reflection from one of the choristers: Midnight, and the Temple Church Choir entered Holland, eating ice-creams and ready for action. We all slept like logs as we had just been on a twelve-hour journey. Deep inside, we all knew that it was going to be worth it. Breakfast was delicious, fresh slices of salami and different cheese alongside croissants and pain au chocolat. After fun and a competitive bowling game, it was time to get focused. As tired as we were, we were on fine form for the concert. We sang in front of a crowd of 1000 and raised 3000 euros. After a refreshing burger we arrived back at the house. Despite being tired we still managed to have a good conversation about how we thought the concert was amazing and a brilliant start to the tour.

Roger Sayer has been the Organist and Director of Music at Temple Church since October 2013. He was previously Organist and Director of Music at Rochester Cathedral. Between 1980 and 1984 he was an organ student at St. Paul's Cathedral and was appointed organist of Woodford Parish Church in 1981. Roger's most well-known recording to date is as organist on Hans Zimmer's soundtrack for Christopher Nolan's 2014 film Interstellar.

Temple Church Choir Trips: Washington DC and Holland

Temple Church Calendar 2015-16 In addition to the regular Sunday services at 08:30 and 11.15 the following events will take place in Temple Church. SEPTEMBER 2015 Saturday 19 - Sunday 20 Sept All Day

Thursday 24 December, 11:15pm

Midnight Choral Communion

Open House Weekend IT, MT and Church

Friday 25 December, 11:15am

OCTOBER 2015

JANUARY 2016

Sunday 4 October, 11:15am

Sunday 10 January, 11:15am

First Service of the Legal Year Thursday 15 October, 5:45pm

Choral Mattins, Christmas Day

Choral Mattins, First Choral Service of the Term

Choral Evensong, St Luke’s Day

Wednesday 13 January, 5:30pm

Sunday 25 October, 11:15am

Evensong, followed by Treasurers’ Receptions for Benchers

Choral Communion followed by quiet lunch in Middle Temple NOVEMBER 2015 Monday 2 November, 5:45pm

Choral Evensong All Saints, 75th Anniversary of Progressio

Guest preacher: Cormac Murphy O’Connor, former Roman Catholic Archbishop of Westminster. Sunday 8 November, 10:55am

Choral Mattins - Remembrance Sunday Wednesday 11 November, 10:55am

Armistice Day, Last Post and Reveille, Church Court Monday 23 November, 6:00pm

Choral Evensong

Ecclesiastical Law Society followed by drinks in the Round Monday 30 November, 6:00pm

Sunday 24 July, 11:15am

Choral Communion, Last service of the Legal Year, followed by family lunch.

MARCH 2016 Wednesday 2 March, 5:30pm

Evensong followed by Amity Dinner Sunday 20 March, 11:15am

Choral Mattins, Palm Sunday Thursday 24 March, 1:15pm

Holy Communion, Maundy Thursday

Friday 25 March, 11:15am

Choral Mattins, Good Friday Saturday 26 March, 8:00pm

Choral Communion, Easter Sunday APRIL 2016 Sunday 10 April, 11:15am

Easter Carol Service Wednesday 13 April, 5:30pm

Temple Church Carol Service (II).

Easter Carol Service

For bookings please contact catherine@templechurch.com

Evensong for Anniversary of Thomas More

Evensong, Ash Wednesday

Sunday 13 December, 11:15am

Please note, tickets are required for this service. Priority will be given to Benchers and Members of the Inns.

Wednesday 6 July, 5:30pm

Wednesday 10 February, 5:30pm

Sunday 27 March, 11:15am

Temple Church Carol Service (I)

JULY 2016

Evensong, Candlemas

DECEMBER 2015

Wednesday 9 December, 6:00pm

Evensong for St Peter’s Day

Wednesday 3 February, 5:30pm

Easter Vigil and First Communion of Easter, Holy Saturday

Temple Church Christmas Fair, Middle Temple

Wednesday 29 June, 5:30pm

FEBRUARY 2016

Advent Carol Service

Thursday 3 December, All Day

JUNE 2016

(repeat of Sunday 10 April) MAY 2016 Wednesday 4 May, 5:30pm

Evensong for Ascension Day

For any queries please contact Catherine de Satgé, Catherine@templechurch.com 100

Temple Church Calendar 2015-16

Congratulations! The Inn would like to congratulate the following couples who were married in Temple Church last year and wishes them all the best for the future!

Andrew Murray and Victoria Logue 5 July 2014

Claire Langevad and Lewis Hartmen 31 May 2014

Chloe Dennis and James Edwards 4 October 2014

Sophie Keen and William Wapshott 18 April 2015 Temple Church Weddings

101

ABA Magna Carta Celebrations MASTER GERARD MCDERMOTT

A highlight of this 800th Anniversary Year of Magna Carta for Middle Temple was the visit of more than 500 members of the American Bar Association, many of them together with their partners and families. Whilst still of great relevance in the United Kingdom and further afield, in the US it might be said that the Great Charter is revered. The ABA trip was only one part of a huge celebration by lawyers and others across the US throughout the year of the importance and relevance of Magna Carta. As William Hubbard (President of the ABA 2014-2015) has noted: Magna Carta, sometimes called the ‘Great Charter’ is the foundation for the rule of law and is a symbol of freedom and justice in the United States and around the World. Today, the principles of rule of law embodied in Magna Carta remain as necessary and important as ever. Those 3,500 words of Mediaeval Latin, scrawled 560 years before there even was a United States of America, have carried through the centuries and continue to shape our legal system in 2015. But to understand the importance of Magna Carta to US lawyers, politicians and citizens, one also has to bear in mind how important it was in shaping the development of the Constitution of the US and of its individual states. In the same speech, William Hubbard noted that the enduring legacy, certainly in the US, of the Great Charter, is its impact on the way people think about the relationship between government and individuals. It is viewed as the genesis of the idea that freedom is secured under the rule of law, not by the sword, and that no one is above the law. In the US, the Charter is seen as the basis of many of the most fundamental concepts of the law. When English settlers went to America in the 17th Century the concepts drawn from Magna Carta were an inspiration for state

102

constitutions, the Declaration of Independence in 1776 and later the US Constitution. Of the 56 signers of the Declaration of Independence, 25 were lawyers – and all four of those who signed from South Carolina (William Hubbard’s home state) were Middle Templars. The US Supreme Court has referenced Magna Carta in more than 175 decisions over the years. The protection from deprivation of liberty or property without due process, draws its inspiration from Chapter 39 of Magna Carta, which is the foundation of the 5th, 6th and 14th Amendments to the US Constitution. In April 2015, in deciding the case of Williams-Yulee v The Florida Bar, Chief Justice of the US said this: Judges, charged with exercising strict neutrality and independence, cannot supplicate campaign donors without diminishing public confidence in judicial integrity. This principle dates back at least eight centuries to Magna Carta, which proclaimed, ‘To no one will we sell, to no one will we refuse or delay, right or justice.’ So it was very natural that in celebrating Magna Carta the ABA should want to make The Temple a part of its celebrations. Having started their conference in Westminster with an opening ceremony, which included a special choir of lawyers put together by Legal Harmony, they then came to Temple Church, which of course was itself central to the events of 2015, where The Master of the Temple, Choir and Organist had arranged a special evensong, and thence to Middle Temple for a reception at which the ABA had even arranged for the sun to shine. Many ABA members to whom I have spoken regard the June visit as the most memorable ABA event they have ever attended - for that much praise must go to those in the Temple who helped arrange it, including the Master of the Temple, the Choir of Temple Church and the

Magna Carta, sometimes called the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Great Charterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; is the foundation for the rule of law and is a symbol of freedom and justice in the United States and around the World... Treasurers and Staff of both Middle Temple and Inner Temple. The weekend also included a dinner hosted principally by Inner Temple for the organising committee of the ABA London Meeting. Of course, many will know that William Hubbard was made an Honorary Bencher of Middle Temple towards the end of his visit. Nothing could have pleased him more. He had first visited as Chair of the ABA Young Lawyers Division in 1987 when I was Chair of the Bar Council Young Barristers Committee. He has always been aware of the great links, not only between the ABA, who together with the Canadian Bar Association helped fund the restoration of Middle Temple Hall after it sustained damage in the Blitz, but also between South Carolina and Middle Temple. In the year the ABA came to celebrate 800 years of Magna Carta, it was a most appropriate honour to bestow on William Hubbard as President of the ABA.

Master Gerard McDermott was Called to the Bar in 1978 and Called to the Bench in 2005. He took Silk in 1999. Master McDermott has been admitted as an Attorney-at-Law in New York for nearly 25 years. He is a former President of the American Counsel Association and former Leader of the European Circuit of the Bar.

ABA Magna Carta Celebrations

103

Extract from Guest Lecture on 13 October 2014:

The Courts and Parliament MASTER ROBERT LISVANE In my professional life, I was much concerned with that frontier between the Courts and Parliament, which on one side is determined by Article 9 of the Bill of Rights: ‘…freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament…’ and on the other, by the House’s sub judice Resolution, which prevents reference to active civil or criminal proceedings, with the exception that the rule does not apply when the House is considering legislation (although this does not open the door to gratuitous reference), or if the Speaker waives the rule in the public interest (which is rarely done). The rule - and this is not, I think, generally known - does not operate in proceedings in private, so a select committee meeting in closed session is not constrained by it, although of course the rule applies to any report made by a select committee. This relationship between the Courts and Parliament, and the principle underlying it, was elegantly summarised by Lord Browne-Wilkinson in Prebble v. Television New Zealand, to the effect that both the courts and Parliament ‘are astute to recognise their respective constitutional roles’. That is the foundation of what should be the relationship between the Courts and Parliament: no tanks on either’s lawn; and the two institutions seeking to act ‘in comity’. It is a source of some satisfaction to me (and even some surprise) that the sub judice rule works as well as it does, because a current high-profile case is likely to attract political as well as public attention. But of course a high-profile case will be in everyone’s minds - and the doosra that gets past the bat may be something less evident. Much enforcement activity is by its nature invisible. The key people are six Clerks in the Table Office (a job the old and bold - including me - all did in their early thirties). They deal in particular with written proceedings (every year 40,000 to 50,000 written questions and a couple of thousand Early Day Motions are tabled, and a couple of hundred subjects proposed for back-benchers’ adjournment debates). To spot potential sub judice issues, the Clerks in the Table Office rely on intelligent guesswork, supplemented by swift and

104

accurate advice from the Ministry of Justice and the Courts Service, which is normally forthcoming. Live proceedings in the Chamber are a different matter. Here you have, for Question Time, three Clerks at the Table listening more or less intently (but having quite a few other things to do); but most of the time it is two Clerks or only one. And we are talking here about 1,500 sitting hours a year, as well as proceedings in the parallel Chamber in Westminster Hall. An additional difficulty is the instantaneous nature of proceedings. The Clerks swiftly alert the Chair, who can and does interrupt, but cannot realistically suspend proceedings for a moment to consider, or ask for further inquiries to be made, as could be done in a Court. And of course, proceedings are irreversible: they are recorded and instantly transmitted. This is especially to the point in the case of socalled super-injunctions, to which I will return in a moment. The House formalised its rules on sub judice only in the 1960s, and at first only in respect of criminal proceedings. Civil proceedings were added in 1971, and the Resolution in its present form dates from 2001. Even so, it is in need of updating. It needs to reflect changes in Courts Martial and military justice procedure, where, following the enactment of the Armed Forces Act 2006, there is no longer a mandatory post-trial review. It needs to take account of the fact that, in civil proceedings, ‘setting down a case for trial’ - the trigger point for the rule to come into operation - is phraseology no longer used in the Civil Procedure Rules. The sub judice rule also needs some clarification in its application to tribunals. I am also concerned that its application to inquests - in effect treating them as quasi-criminal proceedings - is not sustainable. The opening and adjourning, perhaps for months, of a high-profile inquest, should not in my view prevent reference in Parliamentary proceedings; and struggling to defend an indefensible line would detract from the operation of the rule in cases where it is both important and necessary.

Masters Boothroyd, Lisvane and Judge at the House of Lords.

By the same token, I would argue against having the rule come into force at the point of arrest, rather than when charges are brought. At the time when the House originally agreed the rule, it was relatively common for charges to be brought shortly after an arrest. I would prefer enforceability over punctilio, even if it differs from the regime under the Contempt of Court Act 1981 for the application of the strict liability rule. I cannot think that we could have possibly held the line in the phone-hacking investigation if the point d’appui had been the first arrest. Necessary? How is debate in Parliament going to prejudice legal proceedings? Jurors may not be assiduous watchers of the BBC Parliament channel, and in any event, instructions from the trial judge may put BBC Parliament in the same bracket as googling the defendant’s previous convictions. And if it is a matter being decided by a judge or judges and not by a jury, surely the inhibition is even less relevant? Well, if there were no constraint at all, remarks by MPs with special knowledge, and even - save the mark - Ministers of the Crown, might at least change the context even if they did not prejudice proceedings. But the sub judice rule is not just - or even - about minimising risks of interference; it is about the House choosing not to interfere at all and preventing any perception that it is interfering. Let me turn for a moment to so-called super-injunctions: anonymised injunctions combined with a prohibition on reporting the fact of proceedings. Two recent superinjunctions, whose existence has been leaked and which have caught the Parliamentary eye, have been concerned with people engaged in the popular sports of football and banking. Parliamentary issues with ‘ordinary’ anonymised injunctions - if I can call them that - are nothing new, of course. I wonder how many here can remember the real

name of Colonel B, for example, more than a quarter of a century ago? With the principle that the interests of the child are paramount, anonymity in family proceedings is a particular area of concern. It is certainly not a place for crusading against alleged flaws in the family courts. But although we have been close to the knuckle on a few occasions, the last really bad breach we had was the naming, by Brian Sedgemore, of Cecil Parkinson’s child in 1996. When a super-injunction or an anonymised injunction can be flouted by the mention of a single name - perhaps of a sportsman who has been a little too sporting - in less than five seconds, there is little that the Chair can do. However, on the rare occasions when this has happened, it is significant that the House has reacted very badly, summing up the flouter’s motives in a moment, and not thinking much of them. This is an extract from a lecture given in Hall by Sir Robert Rogers (now Lord Lisvane) on 13 October 2014. The full text of the lecture is available from benchers@middletemple.org .uk

Master Lisvane was Clerk of the House of Commons from 2011 to 2014. He is joint author of How Parliament Works and of two Parliamentary Miscellanies: Order! Order! and Who Goes Home? He sits in the Lords as a Crossbencher. He was Called as an Honorary Bencher in 2013.

Guest Lecture Extract: The Courts and Parliament 13 October 2014

105

New Masters of the Bench These Masters of the Bench were all Called to the Bench between October 2014 and July 2015, following their election by Parliament. They are Called by Master Reader in a ceremony held in Hall attended by their guests, fellow Benchers, members of Hall and students. After dinner, each of the new Benchers is introduced by Master Treasurer and gives a brief address. 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. This list is in order of seniority, with the most recently called Bencher, ‘Master Junior’ at the end of the list. At each Inn event, ‘Master Junior’ replies to the Treasurer’s toasts to The Queen, Domus and Absent Members. A full list of Masters of the Bench can be viewed on the ‘Members’ section of the Inn’s website.

Professor Eilis Ferran (Honorary) Eilis Ferran is Professor of Company and Securities Law at the University of Cambridge, a University JM Keynes Fellow in Financial Economics and a Fellow of The British Academy. She has written extensively on UK, EU and international financial regulation, company law and corporate finance law. She has advised and given evidence to Parliamentary committees and other bodies, including serving as the Specialist Adviser to the UK Parliament House of Lords European Union Committee and in its inquiry into banking union. She is the founding editor of the Journal of Corporate Law Studies.

Sir Trevor McDonald OBE (Honorary) Sir Trevor McDonald OBE was born and educated in Trinidad in the West Indies where his career in the media began, first as a radio reporter, news presenter and sports journalist. He became the first sole Presenter of News at Ten in 1992. His awards include the Richard Dimbleby Award for Outstanding Contribution to Television from BAFTA, the Royal Television Society Gold Medal for his Outstanding Contribution to Television News (1998), the National Television Award for Outstanding Commitment to Television (2003) presented to him on live television by the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair, and the Royal Television Society’s Judges’ Award (2005). He was named Newscaster of the year in 1993, 1997 and 1999 and has regularly topped the polls as the most authoritative and trustworthy news presenter. He was awarded the OBE in 1992 and was awarded a Knighthood in 1999.

Mr Vijaya Kumar Rajah (Honorary) Mr V K Rajah, SC graduated with a Bachelor of Laws (Honours) from the National University of Singapore in 1982 and obtained his Masters of Law (First Class) from the University of Cambridge in 1986. He was admitted as an Advocate and Solicitor of the Supreme Court of Singapore in 1983 and commenced legal practice with Rajah & Tann that same year. He

106

was Managing Partner of Rajah & Tann from 1986 to 2003. In January 1997, he was appointed Senior Counsel. Mr Rajah was appointed Judicial Commissioner of the Supreme Court on 2 January 2004, and was subsequently appointed Supreme Court Judge on 1 November 2004. He was elevated to Judge of Appeal on 11 April 2007. Mr Rajah assumed office as the Attorney-General of the Republic of Singapore on 25 June 2014.

His Honour Judge Peter Testar Call: 1974 Peter Testar spent the first 3 years after Call, teaching law to undergraduates and accountants before he embarked upon pupillage. At the Bar he had a common law practice which eventually became exclusively criminal. In 2004, he was appointed to the Circuit Bench and since 2006 has sat at Southwark Crown Court, which has a case load of general crime, mainly arising in Central London, and of long cases including fraud. He has been involved in the Inn’s schemes for pupillage training, marshalling and access to the Bar.

Professor Michael Bridge Call: 1975 Michael Bridge is the Cassel Professor of Commercial Law at the London School of Economics and also holds a (fractional) chair at the National University of Singapore. Previously, he was Dean of Laws and Professor of Commercial law at UCL and, before that, Hind Professor of Commercial law at the University of Nottingham and Professor of Law at McGill University, Montreal. In addition, he has held visiting appointments at a number of universities in the United States, the Far East, Australia and New Zealand. He is a door tenant at 20 Essex Street Chambers and a Fellow of the British Academy. He is the general editor of Benjamin’s Sale of Goods and the author or co-author of a number of books on personal property law, credit and security, private international law and sale of goods (domestic and international). He is a member of numerous editorial boards of law reviews and has also been active in a number of bodies, past and present, concerned with international uniform law.

Caroline Hutton Call: 1979 Caroline was born in Beverley, East Yorkshire in 1956 but brought up near Hampton Court rowing and sailing looming large in her life. Educated at Surbiton High School followed by Clare College, Cambridge (1975-1978) where she sang, coxed and read Law and by the Inns of Court School of Law. She was called in November 1979 and did pupillage in specialist building contract and then landlord and tenant chambers before moving to Lincoln’s Inn, where she has been a tenant of Enterprise Chambers in Old Square since 1981. A real property specialist, she founded the Property Bar Association and has served on the Bar Council and the Council for Licensed Conveyancers. Married to the Right Honourable Dominic Grieve QC MP with two sons.

David Westcott QC Call: 1982 Silk: 2003 David is one of the joint Heads of Chambers at Outer Temple Chambers (formerly known as 35 Essex Street and, before that, Lamb Building). He is a long-established specialist in clinical negligence, and has been a highly recommended Silk in the various directories since 2003. David was supported in his pupillage by a Jules Thorn Scholarship, a Winston Churchill Award and a Harmsworth Entrance Exhibition. He was a supporter of the Inn’s Sponsorship Scheme for many years as a Junior and closely concerned in Chambers’ selection and supervision of pupils.

Mr Justice Peter Kelly Call: 1981 Silk: 1986 Born 1950 in Dublin. Educated at O Connell’s School. University College Dublin and King’s Inns. Called to Irish Bar 1973, Middle Temple 1981 and Bar of Northern Ireland 1983. Appointed to High Court 1996. Judge in charge of Commercial List since its inception in 2004. Appointed to Court of Appeal in 2014. Former Hon Sec and Treasurer of the Bar Council. Former Chairman of Education Committee of Inns. Current President of the Association of Judges. Bencher of Kings Inns. Adjunct Professor of Law National University of Ireland Maynooth. Member of Council of Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. Chairman of St Francis Hospice Dublin. Chairman of Edmund Rice Schools Trust. Director Dublin Choral Foundation.

William Flenley QC Call: 1988 Silk: 2010 William Flenley practises from Hailsham Chambers, where he is involved in litigation, arbitration and mediation in the fields of professional liability and insurance law. He is an accredited mediator. In December 2012 he was elected for two years as Chairman of the Professional Negligence Bar Association. He has co-authored three editions of Flenley & Leech, Solicitors’ Negligence and Liability (3rd ed., 2012). He was Assistant General Editor of the Lloyd’s Reports: Professional Negligence, a contributor to Cordery on Legal Services and co-author of a book on freezing orders, The Mareva Injunction and Anton Piller Order. In Chambers he takes an interest in diversity and management issues. During pupillage he was a parttime lecturer in law at the London School of Economics. William is married with two children. Since 1990 he has been on the board of first Bondway and then Thames Reach, charities for the homeless in London.

Daniel Alexander QC Call: 1988 Silk: 2003 With over 20 years’ experience of litigation and advice in intellectual property cases, Daniel’s practice covers all areas of intellectual property including IT and media/entertainment cases. Work includes international and EUcases, including multi-jurisdictional IP issues, private international law, and arbitration/mediation of IP and media

disputes. Patent work includes most areas of technology. Cases have involved medical and plant biotechnology (including SPCs), pharmaceuticals, chemical process design, telecommunications and mobile phones, medical and analytic equipment, electronics, petroleum engineering apparatus, data transmission and systems design, hydraulic equipment, consumer and household products. Practice includes EPO, UK Patent Office and CJEU cases. Media/ copyright work includes rights licensing, copyright infringement and internet related cases in all areas, including music, visual arts, print and electronic media. Work includes cases for most major broadcasters. Prominent trade mark work includes the leading ECJ cases Canon, BMW/Deenik Nichols, Gerolsteiner, Doublemint, Philips/Remington, Davidoff/Levis and Celltech. IT work covers wide range, including rights-related and contract disputes and arbitration of IT disputes.

Khawar Qureshi QC Call: 1990 Silk: 2006 Khawar Qureshi is a barrister at Serle Court Chambers and McNair Chambers Qatar. In 1993 he was the youngest advocate to have appeared in the International Court of Justice. He has taught Commercial law at Cambridge University, Public International law at Kings London and was appointed a Visiting professor in Commercial Law at the University of London in 2006. He was appointed a Deputy High Court Judge in 2013. Khawar has consistently been recognised by the legal directories as one of the leading advocates in commercial litigation, international arbitration, public international law, administrative and constitutional law. Khawar has made extensive appearances in the English Court at all levels, and in many international arbitration/commercial matters for and against more than 60 governments. He was an 'A' Panel UK Government Treasury Counsel from 1999-2006. Khawar has been Chairman of TheCityUK Legal Services group, which is designated by the UK Ministry of Justice as the lead organisation to promote UK legal services internationally.

Thomas De La Mare QC Call: 1995 Silk: 2012 Tom practices from Blackstone Chambers, where he has been since getting tenancy in 1995. Tom practices in EU, public, regulatory and commercial law, thanks in no small part to the assistance provided by a Queen Mother scholarship and then, when in practice, the Peter Bristow scholarship which enabled him to work in the EU institutions for nearly a year. Before the Bar Tom studied law at Trinity, Oxford and obtained an LLM from the European University Institute in Florence. Tom was the Chair of the Bar European Group from 2011-2013, of which (along with ALBA) he remains a committee member. Outside the law, Tom’s interests include walking, fishing and wine (ideally all in one day).

Catherine Addy Call: 1998 Catherine read Law as both an undergraduate and a postgraduate at Cambridge University. She received a Queen Mother’s Scholarship from the Inn, before completing her pupillage and becoming a tenant at 13 Old Square (now Maitland Chambers) where she continues to practice in most areas of chancery and commercial litigation. She is a member of the statutory Insolvency Rules Committee (appointed in 2013) and of the Bankruptcy and Companies Court Users’ Committee, as well as continuing to serve on a number of Bar Council committees (having previously been both an elected and a Chancery Bar Association nominated member of the Bar Council). A former Chairman of the Young Barristers Committee, and of the Bar Conference, she remains passionately committed to the future of the profession and to the maintenance of its high standards.

New Masters of the Bench

107

Sebastian Faulks (Honorary) Sebastian Faulks’s novels include Human Traces, Engleby, Birdsong and A Possible Life. He worked for 13 years as a journalist for The Telegraph and The Independent newspapers before taking up writing full time in 1991. He was appointed CBE in 2003, is a fellow of the Royal Society of Literature and an honorary fellow of Emmanuel College, Cambridge. He is also on the Government Advisory Group for the Commemoration of the First World War.

Chief Justice Ivor Archie (Honorary) With Honours Degrees in Engineering and Law, Mr. Justice Ivor Archie was Called to the Bar of Trinidad and Tobago in 1986. In 1998, while serving as Solicitor General of the Cayman Islands, he was appointed to the Trinidad and Tobago High Court Bench and was elevated to the Court of Appeal in 2004. In 2008 he became the 8th Chief Justice since the country’s independence and the youngest ever appointed to that office at the age of 47. In 2013 he was awarded the order of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, the highest national award. Chief Justice Archie is a Fellow and Board Member of the Commonwealth Judicial Education Institute, a Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators and a certified mediator. He is married to Denise Rodriguez-Archie, a chartered accountant and they have two children, Chinyere, a medical doctor and Sean, who is an engineer.

David Elvin QC Call: 1983 Silk: 2000 David Elvin QC attended Hertford College, Oxford. He has also been Called to the Bar of Northern Ireland. He is member of the Inn of Court of Northern Ireland. David specialises in planning, environmental and public law. In 2001 he was appointed a Recorder, in 2008 a Deputy High Court Judge and in 2015 a judge of the Upper Tribunal (IAC). David is one of the general editors of the Encyclopaedia of Planning Law and Practice and co-author of Unlawful Interference with Land. Since 2009 he has been one of the Boundary Commissioners for England. Outside of the law, David is the Chairman of the Millennium Trust of St Pauls’ Church Covent Garden (the Actor’s Church), a member of the Choir of St Paul’s Church Covent Garden, a member of the Advisory Council of the RSCM and is restoring a listed farmhouse and barn on the North Downs in Kent.

Derek Sweeting QC Call: 1983 Silk: 2001 Derek’s practice is focused on contentious civil litigation, and advisory work in the High Court and the Court of Appeal as well as arbitration. It includes cases relating to maximum severity personal injury and clinical negligence work, commercial contracts, product liability, insurance, construction, information technology, professional negligence and civil fraud. He is regularly instructed by the Attorney General; in recent years, in particular, in relation claims arising from the Iraq war. Derek is listed as a leading Silk in Clinical Negligence, Personal Injury and Information Technology in The Legal 500. Derek is a regular and popular lecturer on his areas of practice. He is a co-author of the chapter in Fraud: Law, Practice and Procedure, dealing with the overlap between civil and criminal claims. Derek has a keen interest in sports law. He has advised in relation to contractual and negligence issues in disputes relating to individuals, agents, sports organisations and venues.

Paul Stanley QC Call: 1993 Silk: 2010 Paul was born and grew up in London. He became a member of Essex Court Chambers in 1994 after completing his pupillage there. His practice is in commercial law, with a particular concentration on financial services law, insurance law, arbitration, and commercial

108

fraud. He obtained his BA in law from Cambridge and an LLM from Harvard Law School. He has published books on product liability insurance law and the law of confidentiality. Paul has a particular interest in legal education. He taught public and EU law part-time while a pupil and junior tenant, and is a frequent advocacy trainer both for the Inn and more widely, both in England and abroad.

Jonathan Ruffer (Honorary) Call: 1979 Jonathan is the Chairman of Ruffer LLP and Auckland Castle Trust. Born 1951, trained as a stockbroker and barrister before moving into private client investment management in 1980. He established Ruffer Investment Management Limited in 1994, which transferred its investment business to Ruffer LLP in 2004. He has written a social history, ‘The Big Shots’ on Edwardian shooting parties, and on the banking crisis of 2008, ‘Babel’. He is Chair of the Auckland Castle Trust, overseeing a project for the revitalisation of the palace home of the Bishops of Durham for 800 years, and the set of thirteen Zurbaran paintings of Jacob and his children.

Patric Dickinson Call: 1979 Patric was born in London and spent his childhood in Sussex and Gloucestershire. He read history at Oxford, where he was President of the Union, and has worked at the College of Arms since 1968. He currently holds the office of Clarenceux King of Arms, the second senior position in the College. He is also Secretary of the Order of the Garter and plays a large part in organising the Garter Ceremony held annually at Windsor Castle. Active in the genealogical world for many years, he has been President of the Society of Genealogists since 2005. He joined Middle Temple in 1973 and was called to the Bar in 1979. He did pupillage at 1 New Square, Lincoln’s Inn, and is currently a door tenant at 13 Old Square. He has been Honorary Treasurer of the Bar Theatrical Society since 1978 and was a founder member of Middle Temple Historical Society in 1981. Amongst other posts he has held, he served as Honorary Secretary of the British Record Society from 1979 to 2010 and as Chairman of the Anthony Powell Society from 2003 to 2007.

The Hon. Mr Justice Sean Ryan (Honorary) Call: 1972 Silk: 1983 The Hon. Mr. Justice Ryan is the President of the Court of Appeal and is the second most senior Judge in Ireland. He was educated at UCD and King’s Inn. Prior to his appointment as a Judge, he practised as a barrister on the South Eastern Circuit. He was appointed a High Court judge in 2003. In 2003, he was nominated as the Chairperson of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse which published its report in May 2009. From then until October 2014, he worked as a High Court Judge, hearing cases in a wide range of lists including Personal Injuries, Motions and Chancery actions. He was appointed as Ireland’s first President of the Court of Appeal upon its establishment in 2014.

Professor Ansgar Ohly (Honorary) Ansgar Ohly holds the Chair for Civil Law, Intellectual Property and Competition Law at the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich. He is also a permanent Visiting Professor at the University of Oxford and a Visiting Senior Member of St Peter’s College, Oxford. He studied Law at the universities of Bonn and Cambridge. From 2002 to 2012 Ansgar held the Chair for Private law and Intellectual Property Law at the University of Bayreuth. There he was also the vice-speaker, later the speaker of the German Research Foundation (DFG) graduate school 'Intellectual Property and the Public Domain'. He is specifically interested in European developments and in the comparison of civil law and common law systems. He is also the co-editor of GRUR, the leading German intellectual property journal.

Crispin Odey (Honorary) Crispin was educated at Harrow and graduated from Christ Church, Oxford in 1980 where he read History and Economics. He joined Framlington Fund Managers as Manager of the Continental European Pension Fund for two years, working with Anthony Milford. He subsequently joined Baring Asset Management in 1985 to run their Continental European Pension Fund and European Growth Trust before founding Odey Asset Management in 1991. In 2008 Crispin successfully anticipated the credit crunch. That year his return was 54.8%. With two offices in Mayfair, and sites in Guernsey, Switzerland and New York the company now has more than 100 staff and runs assets of $13.5 billion. Crispin is married to Nichola Pease and they have two sons and a daughter. Crispin is a keen and enthusiastic shot, but also enjoys quieter pursuits such as golf, fishing and tennis. He has had a pork sausage named after him by a neighbour!

William C. Hubbard (Honorary) William C. Hubbard is President of the American Bar Association. He previously served a two-year term as Chair of the ABA’s House of Delegates. Mr. Hubbard is past president of the American Bar Foundation and the American Bar Endowment. He is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers and the American Board of Trial Advocates. He is a permanent member of the United States Fourth Circuit Judicial Conference. Mr. Hubbard has served on the Board of Trustees of the University of South Carolina since 1986 and served as Chairman of the Board from 1996-2000. In 2002, Mr. Hubbard was presented the Order of the Palmetto, the highest civilian award presented by a South Carolina Governor. In 2007, Mr. Hubbard received the American Inns of Court Professionalism Award for the United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Mr. Hubbard earned his BA and JD from the University of South Carolina. He was law clerk to U.S. District Judge Robert F. Chapman. He is a partner in the Columbia, South Carolina office of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP.

Her Honour Judge Angela Finnerty Call: 1976 The first in her family to go to university, she gained a First Class Honours degree from Leeds University in 1975. Angela was awarded the Harmsworth Scholarship. Following a pupillage in London, she returned to Leeds and became the first woman to be accepted as a tenant at 37, Park Square. Angela practiced from those chambers as a Family specialist until 2000, when she was appointed to the Circuit Bench; the first female Circuit judge appointed to sit in Leeds/Bradford. In 2011, she was appointed Designated Family Judge for North Yorkshire. For eight years until 2013, Angela was a tutor with the Judicial College on both the Family and the Craft of Judging tutor teams. For ten years until 2014 she was the Circuit Judge Representative on the Family Procedure Rule Committee and is a signatory to the Family Procedure Rules 2010. She is married to His Honour Judge Heaton QC. They have four children and two grandchildren.

Simon Browne QC Call: 1982 Silk: 2011 Simon practises from Temple Garden Chambers and specialises in insurance law, catastrophic personal injury cases and costs litigation. He regularly acts in claims concerning both UK and foreign jurisdictions. For 10 years he was on the editorial board of the Sweet and Maxwell Practitioner text and continues to write various articles. He is appointed to sit as a Chairman of Bar Tribunals and Adjudication Service and has been appointed to the Costs Committee of the Civil Justice Council. He has also been appointed to sit as barrister representative on the Joint Tribunal of the Bar Council and the Law Society. In addition to sitting on scholarship interviews, he is an experienced advocacy trainer having taught for the Inn at Cumberland Lodge, on the SEC Keble College Course and in the USA, Australia and South Africa to teach their domestic Bars. Outside of the profession, in 2014 Simon chaired the Testimonial Committee of an England International Rugby Player and is a keen tennis player and spectator. He tweets (@sicksilk).

Susan Grocott QC Call: 1986 Silk: 2008 Susan is Head of the Family Team at Deans Chambers, Manchester, a multi-disciplinary set. Susan undertook pupillage at Fountain Court and 5 Pump Court before returning to the north to practice in January 1988 from 43 King Street, where she established a mixed common law practice. In the late 1990’s Susan’s practice became more specialised, encompassing all aspects of family work; money, public and private law children, TOLATA, professional negligence, decalaratory work prior to COP and judicial review. In 2002 Susan joined the family Team at Deans Court Chambers taking silk in 2008. In Silk, Susan continues to undertake both money and care/private law children work and advisory work for various public bodies on practice/policy issues. Susan is a regular speaker at seminars and conferences domestic and international.

Nicholas Vineall QC Call: 1988 Silk: 2006 Nicholas Vineall was educated at RGS Guildford, Christ’s College, Cambridge, and the University of Pittsburgh, where he was a Harkness Fellow. He began professional life as a general common lawyer at 12 King's Bench Walk, but since 1998 has practised from 4 Pump Court, where he has a broadly based commercial and construction practice. He is also a member of Arbitration Chambers Hong Kong and sits as an arbitrator. He is interested in education and served on the ICSL and has been a school governor at Waverley School in Peckham and at the RGS in Guildford. He is a Trustee of the Harold G Fox scholarships. He has served on the Bar Council (and was chair of the young Bar), and was Vice Chair of the BSB Standards Committee. He stood as a parliamentary candidate in 2001 and 2005, and was a Southwark councillor for 4 years. He enjoys singing and is an enthusiastic but poor player of tennis and squash.

Christiane Valansot Call: 1989 Christiane Valansot has a French Baccalaureat in Mathematics and Physics (Lycee Francais de Londres and Lycee Janson de Sailly Paris XVI), read English at Manchester College, Oxford and was called to the Bar at Middle Temple in 1989. She is also admitted as a solicitor. She is a financial services lawyer. She has worked at a City law firm, as inhouse counsel in investment banking and as the general counsel at the UK trade association for asset managers. She now self-employed. She serves on the Inn’s Education and Training Committee and is also an advocacy and ethics trainer. She also serves on the Research and Development Committee of the Advocacy Training Council and chairs its Ethics Working Group. She jointly devised Middle Temple’s Employed Bar module of the New Practitioner Programme and established the Middle Temple Employed Bar garden party jointly with the Bar Association for Commerce, Finance and Industry, of which she is a former Chair and current Vice President. She is a former member of the Bar Council. She is a keen skier and ski mountaineer and a qualified ski tour leader with Swiss Alpine Club federal accreditation. She is also a lawn and real tennis player.

Her Honour Judge Khatun Sapnara Call: 1990 Her Honour Judge Sapnara was appointed as a Circuit Judge in March 2014. She sits primarily in family cases in the East London Family Court, but also in crime in Kingston Crown Court. She was appointed as a Recorder in 2006. She read Law at the London School of Economics. She was recognised as a leading barrister and practised for 24 years in London, specialising in family public law cases. She is an acknowledged expert in forced marriage, 'honour' based violence and domestic violence. She has served on the Family Law Bar Association Committee and also the Equality and Diversity Committee of the Bar Council. She has taught at the Judicial College and currently serves as both Diversity Community Relations Judge and a Judicial Role Model. She was appointed to the Family Justice Council from its inception and has served as a Trustee/ Board Member of a number of charities such as Ashiana (a refuge for victims of forced marriage and domestic violence) and was a Governor of the state comprehensive school she used to attend. She is married to Simon and has two sons, Umar and Gibriel.

New Masters of the Bench

109

Obituary: Master Barbara Calvert MASTER ANDREW HOCHHAUSER

Barbara Calvert, Lady Lowry, was a trailblazer. She championed the cause of women at the Bar.

She was the first woman to become a head of chambers, the first female QC to become a full time Chairman of Industrial Tribunals, and in 2001, the first female Reader of Middle Temple. She was an enormously popular Bencher and yet it was only in her early thirties that she discovered what an Inn of Court was, when she went to a New Year’s Eve party. Barbara Adamson Calvert was born in Leeds on 30 April 1926, the day before the General Strike began. She was the daughter of Albert Parker CBE, a distinguished chemist, and his wife, Lilian. She described herself as ‘an obstinate and difficult child’. She was educated at St Helen’s School, Northwood, and then read economics at the LSE. In 1948, she married her first husband, John Thornton Calvert, a civil engineer. When, having raised two children, Paul and Sandra, she hankered after a career, one of John’s friends suggested that she should consider a career at the Bar. She joined Middle Temple and over three years she ate her 36 dinners. In her own words ‘the food was dreadful, but the company was great’. In 1959, at the age of 33, she was

110

called to the Bar. In 1961 she commenced pupillage. Her first pupil master was Sir Frank Layfield and her second was Peter Ripman, a personal injury practitioner in David CroomJohnson’s set. After pupillage, she joined Cloisters, then the chambers of John Platts-Mills QC, but was told there was a snag – ‘You will have to share a room with another woman’. That person was Audrey Sander, a future Circuit Judge. The two became firm friends and Audrey followed Barbara when she set up her own chambers at 4 Brick Court. Barbara said ‘It was the most exciting thing I ever did’. Her practice as a junior was predominantly in family law and she forged a considerable reputation in this area, although later she (inaccurately) insisted that she had ‘no academic or legal distinction of which one can speak’. She fought for the rights of women in the family and in the workplace. In 1975 she took Silk, whereupon she practised more in crime and defended many defendants charged with rape. Having been appointed a part-time chairman of Industrial Tribunals in 1974, sitting at London South, then at

Ebury Bridge Road, in 1986 she took a full time post there until 1996. She was a formidable tribunal before whom to appear. Woe betide the advocate who came before her, inadequately prepared! Her dry sense of humour, however, was ever-present in her court. This was not the only judicial appointment Barbara held. She sat as a Deputy High Court Judge in the Family Division from 1978 until 1998 and she was a Recorder on the South-Eastern and Western circuits from 1980 until 1998. John Calvert died in 1987 and in 1994 she married Lord Lowry, the former Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland and Law Lord. He died in 1999. In 1982 she was elected to the Bench of Middle Temple, which she described at her Readerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Feast as â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;her greatest privilegeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. As a Bencher she was a role model for female members, as she had been for many distinguished female barristers and judges over several decades. She

inspired numerous students and supported countless young practitioners. Until the very end, Barbara was an inveterate chain smoker. The image of her, sitting on a bench outside Hall, with her black cane by her side, eyes twinkling, a scotch in one hand and a cigarette in the other, dispensing sage advice to a spell-bound group of students, is unforgettable.

On 22 July 2015, she died at home, peacefully in her sleep. She was one of a kind, and she will be sorely missed by so many. Her memorial service will take place in the Temple Church on 13 November 2015.

As a Bencher she was a role model for female members, as she had been for many distinguished female barristers and judges over several decades. She inspired numerous students and supported countless young practitioners.

Obituary - Master Calvert

111

Obituary: Master Mark Littman REPRODUCED BY KIND PERMISSION OF THE TELEGRAPH.

Mark Littman, who has died aged 94, was one of the most successful silks practising at the commercial bar, his skills enhanced by his decision to take a 12-year break from the courts to become directly involved in the business world. Called to the Bar by the Middle Temple in 1947, Littman quickly developed a successful practice and was appointed QC in 1961. A tall, slightly stooping, figure, he was popular with colleagues and also respected by the Bench. He had great charm, which he was careful not to overuse, and was an attractive advocate, putting his case with exemplary clarity, outlining arguments at a pace, and with only as much detail as was required, a combination which encouraged judges to pay close attention. Littmanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s practice involved him in many of the major commercial cases of the time, particularly international disputes. An example was the contest between the two Zeiss companies (manufacturers of optical systems). One was based in West Germany, the other in East Germany, each of which claimed the right to the Zeiss trademark. The business had been based in Jena, and when it became clear that Germany was to be partitioned, and that Jena would be in the Eastern, Russian, sector, US forces moved in April 1945 to transfer equipment, key personnel and other assets in order to re-establish Zeiss in the Western sector. The remainder of the firm in the East claimed to be the true successor. This division, with two enterprises carrying the valuable name, resulted in litigation in several jurisdictions lasting 18 years. Littman was retained for the West German company in London. The case eventually ended in 1971 with an agreement under which the two companies agreed to cooperate, with one selling under the Zeiss brand name in Western markets and the other mainly within Comecon. Littman was reputed to be better on the first day of a case in court than on subsequent days, perhaps a symptom of a low boredom threshold. This in turn may have deterred him from seeking advancement to the Bench and to stand down from practising between 1967 and 1979 to seek new challenges in the commercial world. He became a director of several major companies, joining the board of Rio Tinto Zinc in 1968. He also became a director of Commercial Union Assurance and Amerada Hess, a US oil company, and was for several years a director

112

Picture courtesy of the The Telegraph

Charming QC who criticised the war in Iraq and took a break from the courts to go into business

Mark Littman with his wife at a dinner in London in 2000Â

of Granada, the broadcasting company, and Burton Group, the high street tailors. Littman lectured widely on commercial and public law and made occasional forays into the public policy arena. In 1999, in Kosovo: War and Diplomacy, a pamphlet published by the Centre for Policy Studies, he argued that Nato’s intervention in Kosovo was illegal, unnecessary, unproductive and immoral . Later he became a staunch critic of the war in Iraq, writing an article in The Guardian as conflict loomed in which he maintained that it would represent a breach of the UN Charter and hence international law, unless it was authorised by a new and unambiguous resolution of the Security Council. Mark Littman was born in London on September 4 1920 and educated at Owen’s School and at the London School of Economics, from which he graduated with a First, aged 19, in 1939. Two years later he took an MA with first class honours from Queen’s College, Oxford. After wartime service in the Royal Navy Littman began pupillage with John Gallaway Foster QC, and joined the chambers of Hubert Parker, the future Lord Chief Justice. There was no surprise when Littman was appointed a Bencher of the Middle Temple in 1970. He became Treasurer of the Middle Temple in 1988 and served as a member of the General Council of the Bar from 1968 to 1972. He also served on the Senate of the Inns of Court. Between 1979 and 2010 he was head of chambers at 12 Gray’s Inn Square, described by one former member as “a family rather than a set of barristers”. Littman’s penchant for witty remarks, such as “Nothing pleases a barrister more than an undeserved victory”, never obscured the seriousness with which he took his calling, and he was endlessly kind to junior members of his chambers. One protégé recalled consulting him on a case on which he felt he had grounds to appeal but feared to do so in case he was wrong-footed by some obscure point of law. Littman, he recalled, “in a calm and humorous manner … explained that, unless I appealed the judgment and lost the appeal, I could not truly regard myself as an advocate” . Littman’s desire for stimulating company led him to become a member of no fewer than four London clubs – the Garrick, the Reform, the Oxford and Cambridge and the RAC – and the Century Association in New York. In 1954 he married Marguerite Lamkin, an American socialite said to have been the model for Truman Capote’s Southern heroine Holly Golightly, who later founded the Aids Crisis Trust (on which her husband served as a trustee), winning the friendship and enthusiastic support of the Princess of Wales. She survives him.

Littman’s penchant for witty remarks, such as “Nothing pleases a barrister more than an undeserved victory”, never obscured the seriousness with which he took his calling, and he was endlessly kind to junior members of his chambers.

Mark Littman QC, Treasurer 1988. Born September 4 1920, died June 19 2015.

Obituary - Master Mark Littman

113

Obituary: Master Lee Kuan Yew REPRODUCED BY KIND PERMISSION OF THE TIMES.

Visionary Prime Minister of Singapore who established a prosperous city state that became the envy of its Asian neighbours

114

changed everything. His studies were interrupted, and he took a job transcribing Allied wire reports for the Japanese. It was then also that his nationalist pride was kindled. As he wrote later in his memoirs: “I did not enter politics. The Japanese brought politics to me. The Japanese occupying forces were blind and brutal and made me, and a whole generation like me, in Singapore and Malaya, work for freedom — freedom from servitude and domination.” From then on, he decided, Singaporeans would not be “the pawn and playthings of foreign powers”. After the war he was able to continue his education in England, having sailed on the troop ship Britannic — but on board he was shocked by the sight of many returning servicemen and women “unashamedly making love on the lifeboat deck”. He enrolled first at the London School of Economics but he hated his cold bedsit in Swiss Cottage and went to study law at Fitzwilliam House, Cambridge, where he won a

THE LIFE PICTURE COLLECTION/GETTY IMAGES

Few countries owe their identity, cohesion and prosperity to one man as much as Singapore does to Lee Kuan Yew. If Stamford Raffles was the celebrated founder of the British colony, Lee was, without doubt, the man who shaped the small island as an independent state, dominated its politics for more than 40 years and built it up fromunstable and vulnerable beginnings to become one of the world’s most dynamic and innovative nations. A controversial and sometimes headstrong leader, whose intolerance of opposition was frequently denounced by his liberal friends in the West, his achievement in moulding a society that is imbued with selfconfidence means that Singapore is well able to cope with his loss. His legacy is a country that is prosperous, ordered and efficient — the envy of many of its neighbours. Lee Kuan Yew (whose name means “light that shines far and wide”) was a brilliant Cambridge scholar and successful lawyer. He was at the centre of Singapore’s political life almost from the moment that the wartime Japanese occupation ended. The first prime minister after independence fromBritain in 1959, he took his country into the newly formed independent state of Malaysia, but suffered the anguish two years later of its bitter divorce, and recognised Singapore’s lonely vulnerability. From 1965, he set about an extraordinary and single-minded programme to modernise, educate and fashion a new nation with a single identity and a sense of patriotism in a territory made up of different races, languages and religions. On the long journey to modernity he was swayed neither by outside ideologies nor Western views and interests. He was, by turns, denounced as an autocrat, reviled as a patriarchal chauvinist, hailed as a moralist and disciplinarian and praised as a political visionary. Little wonder that the Western politician he most admired was Margaret Thatcher; little wonder that she, in turn, saw him as a role model. Lee Kuan Yew once joked that, during his lifetime, he had sung four different national anthems: God Save the King during his boyhoodand education under British colonial rule; Kimigayo, the imperial Japanese anthem during the bitter years of occupation; Negaraku during the twoyear union with Malaysia; and Majulah Singapura, the national anthem of independent Singapore. The great-grandson of a Chinese immigrant, he was born to a middleclass family in 1923 and grew up speaking English — a fact that would be central to his later insistence on turning Singapore from a polyglot nation, where 70 per cent of its people could speak only Chinese, to a country educated only in English that used linguistic unity as a tool of national cohesion and international competitiveness. He did not learn Mandarin until he was in his 30s, and admitted he always found it difficult. His academic ability though was evident as a boy: hewon a coveted place at Raffles Institution, Singapore’s most exclusive school, where he was always top of the class, and in 1939 sat for the Senior Cambridge Examination, emerging as the top student in the whole of Malaya. The outbreak of war, however, forced him to cancel plans for further study in England, and instead he won a scholarship to study economics, English literature and mathematics at Raffles College. It was there that he met his future wife, Kwa Geok Choo, who was the only student to out-score him in exams. Shewas his devoted partner until her death in 2010. The Japanese invasion in February 1942 — when Lee was 19 —

Lee Kuan Yew pictured in 1959 when he secured an impressive election victory and started talks on independence

double first honours degree and studied with equal distinction at the Middle Temple. He played golf, and began smoking a pipe and riding motorcycles. It was also in Cambridge that he was exposed to the ideas of Fabian socialism, and helped to campaign for David Widdicombe, a friend in the Labour party. After Cambridge, he decided to drop his English name Harry — the name by which he was always knownto old friends—and call himself simply Lee Kuan Yew. To his final days he retained a warmth and respect for Cambridge as well as a passionate commitment to a rigorous educational system. Returning to Singapore in 1949, he had already married Kwa Geok Choo, who had become the first woman from southeast Asia to take a first-class honours degree at Cambridge; he joined a law firm and then set up his own partnership with his wife and elder brother, who was also a Britisheducated lawyer. He became an honorary legal adviser for several trade unions, and in 1952 helped the Postal Workers Union to win concessions from the colonial government. During that year, the first of his three children, Lee Ksien Loong — now Singapore’s third prime minister— was born. Itwas at this time that his serious participation in politics began. He and a group of fellow English-educated professionals formed the socialist People’s Action Party (PAP), whose main aim was the political union of Singapore and Malaya. The party formed a marriage of convenience with pro-communist supporters, but the communist party itself, the main force behind the insurgency in Malaya, was banned. Lee later said that he was one of the few people who had managed to ride the tail of the communist tiger without getting caught. Elected secretarygeneral of the PAP in November 1954, he held the post for most of the next 38 years. The following year he was one of threePAP candidates to win election to the newly-constituted legislative assembly; he promptly denounced Singapore’s constitutional structure as colonialism in disguise. He joined an all-party delegation to London and helped to negotiate the colony’s selfgoverning status, which was accorded in 1959. That year, as independence loomed, Lee led the PAP to an impressive general election victory and took office as prime minister. But while riding the leftist and anti-colonial wave, he nimbly set about eliminating communist influence and creating a political and economic climate that would make the largely Chinesepopulated island an attractive partner to the Malaydominated peninsula. He convinced Tunku Abdul Rahman, the Malayan prime minister, of the need to merge the two states and broaden it to include North Borneo. But the union ran into trouble from the start. A split developed within the PAP, and Lee had to rely on right-wing opponents to remain in power. He played up the threat to Malaysia from the “confrontation” policy of Indonesia and won a second victory at the polls. Relations with the Tunku began to sour; the Tunku was fearful of the left-wing Chinese majority in Singapore, especially of PAP’s plans to contest constituencies in Malaya. The Malay majority feared Chinese economic dominance would be translated into politics, and the Tunku insisted on Singapore’s separation in August 1965. The split left Lee devastated. He wept on television. However, it laid the ground for Singapore’s prosperity. Ever resilient, he told Harold Wilson: “Do not worry about Singapore. My colleagues and I are sane, rational people, even in our moments of anguish.” He identified the three main challenges facing the small island: corruption, unemployment and housing shortages, and set about solving all three. Over the next 15 years he systematically clamped down on corruption, tore down the slums to build new public housing and created jobs. Singapore’s GDP rose by 15 times per head from$443 in 1960 to $6,634 in the mid-Eighties. He imposed fines for spitting, begging, driving dirty cars and, famously, chewing gum—so much so that Singapore now still mocks itself as a “fine city”! Old-timers and tourists may regret the disappearance of the once louche atmosphere and replacement of quaint alleys with skyscrapers, modern department stores and almost bland modernity, but few could argue against such progress. His insistence on building a “garden city” created extensive parks and botanical gardens. Race riots in 1964 had been a factor dissolving the union withMalaysia, and Lee, always aware of the dangers of racial and religious tensions, was quick to use the lawto counter any threat that might incite violence. He warned against “insensitive evangelisation” — referring to Christian proselytising directed at Malays — and in 1974 advised the Bible Society of Singapore to stop publishing religious material in Malay. Education, health and the quality of life improved and the country enjoyed some of the best living standards in Asia. But all this came at a cost. Lee tolerated no opposition, and used the full force of the lawto hound his critics. The use of the Internal Security Act was condemned by human rights activists and Western liberals complained — but Lee took little notice. He insisted that Singapore would go its own way. Those foreign correspondents who reported negatively were sued for libel or forced to leave the country. Armed burglars and drug traffickers faced the death penalty, while male hooligans, drug addicts and petty

criminals were caned with the rattan — a judicial punishment handed out equally liberally to foreign trouble-makers. (In his autobiography, Lee recalled that he had often been caned for being late at school in the Thirties, and “it didmyfellow students and me no harm”). Long hair was not tolerated in an attempt to deter western hippies. At the same time he addressed Singapore’s strategic weakness, building up the army and anchoring his country in the region by founding, with four other nations, the Association of South-East Asian countries in 1967, of which Singapore has remained a key member. He remained suspicious of Soviet and Chinese communism, but strengthened relations with Malaysia; Lee eventually enjoyed awary relationship with its long-serving prime minister, Mahathir Mohamed, but did not share the prickly Malaysian’s antipathy to Britain and the West. Lee used to enjoy relating that in the 1960s a British foreign secretary said to him: “Harry, you’re the best bloody Englishman east of Suez.” But as he got older, he did become more disillusioned with Britain — indeed, withWestern society in general — believing it had lost its moral compass. Asked why his admiration for America had diminished, he replied: “It has a lot to do with the erosion of the moral underpinnings of a society and the diminution of personal responsibility. The liberal, intellectual tradition that developed after World War Two claimed that human beings had arrived at this perfect state where everybody would be better off if they were allowed to do their own thing and flourish. It has not worked out, and I doubt if it will. Certain basics about human nature do not change. Man needs a certain moral sense of right and wrong.” He was not convinced that one-man, one-vote was the best system. Singapore practised it “because that is what the British bequeathed us”, but he would prefer a system that gave every man over the age of 40 who had a family two votes “because he’s likely to be more careful, voting also for his children. He is more likely to vote in a serious way than a capricious youngmanunder 30.” His own strong moral sense meant that he actually married his wife twice. After the Second World War, when they were both studying in Britain, and the idea of cohabiting or “living in sin” was unacceptable, he proposed a secret marriage without telling their families, and in 1947 went through with a ceremony in Stratford-upon-Avon. It was a rush job; he bought a platinumwedding ring in London, notified the registrar in Stratford and, two weeks later, they became man and wife. It was a further three years before they married a second time in Singapore to placate their parents, none of whom ever knew the secret. Lee’s devotion to his wife, towhomhe was married for 63 years, was absolute. She famously once said: “I walk two steps behind my husband like a good Asian wife.” In fact, theirs was a partnership of equality. After her second stroke in 2008, he devoted himself to nursing her and reading poetry at her bedside. He said her illness was harder to bear even than the political stress he had felt when Singapore was expelled from Malaysia. He did not leave the cabinet until 2011 though “retirement” had been a long time in coming. After elections that saw a steep fall in PAP’s popularity in 1984,heannouncedthathewould retire frompublic office four years later at the age of 65, eventually handing over in 1990 to Goh Chok Tong. He had served 31 years as prime minister, which was a record in the Commonwealth. But he was reluctant to step aside, believing that his guidance was still needed. He remained in the government as senior minister — almost a back-seat prime minister — while retaining the post of secretary-general of the ruling PAP. Lee’s determination to set clear rules andestablisha first-class civil service did much to help him achieve his aim of turning the city state into an international hub, a financial centre and selfproclaimed global city. As he told the Singapore Press Club in 1996, the country could survive without him “provided it keeps strengthening its ties by continual selfrenewalandadjustingpolicies to meet changing circumstances”. A convinced elitist — he was said to have sent the highest-achieving Singaporean students on cruises to find partners with a similar IQ — he was resolved to ensure that the brightest and best retained control. However, his suspicion of rivals allowed few other potential leaders to grow in his shadow. His influence lives on in his family. His eldest son, a brigadiergeneral and distinguished Cambridge and Harvard graduate, followed his father into politics and became prime minister in August 2004. His youngest son, Lee Hsien Yang, was also a brigadiergeneral educated at Cambridge — again graduating with first-class honours—and is chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore. His daughter, Lee Wei Ling, runs the National Neuroscience Institute. His long and many dealings with foreign statesmen built up a network of personal and diplomatic contacts that served successive governments well. Henry Kissinger once described him as “one of the asymmetries of history”, and Tony Blair calledhim“the smartest leader I ever met”. Indeed, by the end of his life, the founding father of modern Singapore had — although he declared himself a religious agnostic — acquired a powerful aura as the almost mystical embodiment of Asian traditions and Confucian values.

Obituary - Master Lee Kuan Yew

115

Obituary: Master Jeremy McMullen MASTER MICHAEL RUBENSTEIN

Master Jeremy McMullen, who died in February 2015 at the untimely age of 66, had a unique career, unlikely to be replicated. After studying at Oxford and the London School of Economics, he worked for what is now the GMB union for 11 years in the unglamorous role of a London regional organiser. He then went to the Bar, joining Old Square Chambers, where he took Silk and acted for clients as diverse as Arthur Scargill and Dame Shirley Porter. He wrote a highly regarded handbook on employment law and workers’ rights and he is still number 10 in all-time appearances in Industrial Relations Law Reports, having appeared in 78 reported cases, most of which were representing claimants. He became Chair, and then Vice President, of the professional group, the Industrial Law Society and was a founder-member of the Employment Law Bar Association. He was appointed a Circuit Judge in 2001, having been a part-time chairman of employment tribunals. His Honour Judge McMullen QC was assigned to the Employment Appeal Tribunal and sat there regularly until his retirement as a Senior Circuit Judge in October 2013. His charm and courtesy as a judge, his skills as a raconteur, his intellectual curiosity, and his verve all combined to make him probably the most popular person in the wide world of employment law. Jeremy was also an accomplished rower, a seasoned world traveler, with a keen love of cricket, opera, music and theatre. He was a patron of the British Humanist Association. He relished his position as a Master of the Bench at Middle Temple and was actively involved in the Inn’s training programme until shortly before his death. It was also partly due to his advocacy that I had the privilege of being elected as an honorary bencher. Jeremy was diagnosed with terminal cancer on the day of his retirement in 2013. He continued to live life to the full until he was no longer able to, but he and his friends talked about setting up something that would perpetuate his memory. Jeremy felt passionately about discrimination and about social mobility. While at the Bar, he acted as legal adviser to the Disability Rights Commission and also, for a time, as an equal value independent expert. He decided he wanted to encourage access to the Bar by funding awards enabling recipients to gain on-the-job experience, and with characteristic flair, he said the fund should have the specific

116

Obituary - Master Jeremy McMullen

aim of encouraging female law students from disadvantaged or under-represented backgrounds to become barristers. The Jeremy McMullen Memorial Fund will consist of awards of one week’s work experience in barristers’ chambers and one week’s marshalling alongside a sitting judge. For each week undertaken, the student will receive £250 and up to 10 placements will be available every year. The fund is being administered by Middle Temple (https://www.justgiving.com/ JeremyMcMullen). The initial target was £50,000. With typical generosity, Jeremy and his widow Debbie made a substantial contribution to kick start the fund. At the time of writing, there have been 157 contributions from colleagues, friends and admirers, and moving tributes to Jeremy were paid earlier this year at a memorial in Middle Temple Hall from Paul Kenny, John Hendy QC, Her Honour Judge Jennifer Eady QC and Master Treasurer. The fund has now exceeded its original target and is certain to be a fitting memorial to a memorable and much-missed member of the Inn.

Obituary: Anna Martin PETER MARTIN

Anna Martin, who died on 7 March 2015, lived at 4 Pump Court for 63 of her 103 years. Born in Hungary in 1912, she married Andrew Martin, later Master Martin, in 1932. During World War II Anna, who was fluent in English, Hungarian, and German, worked in the news information department of the European Service of the BBC. Here she collated and archived the transcripts of broadcasts from Occupied Europe, monitored by the BBC listening service at Caversham. She was stationed at various places including Wood Norton, Caversham and finally at Bush House on Aldwych. This experience gave her a lifelong interest in breaking news in particular. She was also very passionate about maintaining order, which is demonstrated by the meticulously kept private papers found in her flat. Throughout the war and after Anna kept scrupulously precise records of her income and expenditure so that, for some future historian, her books of account will show exactly how modest wartime incomes were spent on rationed food, clothes, rent, and not much else. Leaving the BBC in the 50’s, Anna helped her busy husband, who combined active practice at the Bar with an academic life first in Oxford and later at Southampton. Anna eventually migrated to work at the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) at Toynbee Hall in the East End. There, in the as yet undeveloped Docklands she, and two other barrister’s wives, worked among the dockers and their families as advisers on a range of topics, mostly money related. The story is told of her that at a supervised interview with a docker’s widow Anna asked her if her recently dead husband had died intestate. ‘No dear’, came the answer, ‘Not at Tesco’s, I told you before, he died at the bus stop’. In this work, which she hugely enjoyed and it is said excelled, Anna continued until eventually aged out in her 70's, after which she volunteered at the Royal Courts of Justice CAB. She then persuaded her son Peter to volunteer at time when the first attempts by RCJ CAB to give practical assistance to litigants in person, then growing exponentially in numbers, were inaugurated under the chairmanship of The Honourable Mr Justice Cazalet. Following Andrew’s death in 1985, Anna, now a Bencher’s widow, moved into a flat on the 3rd floor North of 4 Pump Court. There Anna lived until just a very few weeks before she died, assisted in her daily life by carers who came in and out day by day. During the years after her long widowhood

began, Anna kept herself very busy. In January 2015 she fell, breaking her femur; she was quickly rescued by the emergency services and was hospitalised. Sadly, she never quite recovered from this fall and died, quietly and without fuss as she had lived for so long, on 7 March 2015. Anna’s late cousin Antonia Gerrard was Called to the Bar at Middle Temple. Before beginning a career in the law Antonia, a gifted ceramic artist, designed and executed a mural of a procession to the Law Courts which Anna left to the Inn. The Inn has agreed to restore and install this mural at 4 Pump Court in memory of Anna’s long and happy life in the Inn.

Obituary - Anna Martin

117

Obituary: Lady Barbara Calcutt CHRISTOPHER WILSON-SMITH QC

Barbara Calcutt died on 5 July. She was the much loved widow of Master David Calcutt, who was Treasurer of the Inn (1998), Head of Chambers and Master of Magdalene College, Cambridge. Barbara coped with David’s passing with immense courage, which typified her strong character. Barbara Calcutt had a full and interesting life. Its pinnacle was the time she spent with David. This Lady achieved a great deal. Barbara had a good schooling at Priors Field, Godalming. At a young age she joined the Foreign Office. She was seconded to Paris for a number of years. In this placement, she had many fond memories, some of them colourful. She worked as a Psychiatric Social Worker for a number of years; she helped many people. This, she said, gave her an insight into mankind. She undertook further studies at the LSE and Birmingham University and was a Governor of St Catherine’s School, Bramley, where she served for many years. Barbara’s church was very important to her. She remained active in the affairs of the Diocese of Winchester until the time of her death. She always enjoyed participating in the services of The Temple Church; these were a feature of her week. An important time in her life was that which she spent at Magdalene College whilst Sir David was Master. She immersed herself into the ambiance of life at the University and was highly regarded by all. She took a particular interest in the undergraduates; she knew all of them by name. She was honoured to become the President of the Boat Club. At Bumps, Barbara was seen striding down to the riverbank in College colours - one stocking in lilac and the other indigo. She was a magnificent hostess to the legendary grand dinners of Magdalene; she always arranged for undergraduates to dine with the high and important guests. Lady Calcutt had wide interests. She was well read and had travelled widely. She was fluent in French, German and Italian. She was a good historian. Barbara had a love of the countryside. For her, it was always a joy to spend time on Exmoor. She passed many happy summers on the moor with David. She also had a wide circle of friends. Everyone around the Temple knew and loved her, regardless of their background. She was a true character and always gave her

118

Obituary - Lady Barbara Calcutt

time. Barbara maintained a close relationship to members of David’s Chambers. In reality, she was an honorary Member of Chambers. Lady Calcutt will be missed by many. People will remember her for her outgoing and strong character; her sparkling eyes. They will also remember her for her strong views on a wide range of subjects; she was not slow to express these forcefully when she though it was needed. She will be missed. She was a Mensch.

In Memoriam The Inn is sad to announce the passing of the following members in the past year. Masters of the Bench Master Alan Rawley Master (Alun) Kynric Lewis Master Mark Littman Master Barbara Calvert Master Lee Kuan Yew Master Jeremy McMullen Master Colin Ross-Munro Members His Honour James Coulson His Honour John Hopkin John Powles Guy Argles

John Taylor QC Terence Platt His Honour Judge John Dixon His Honour John Johnson Elizabeth Elliman Paula Abrahams John Coffell Philip Sandercock Niall Ferguson Angela Willis Wayde Christie James Wilson Robert Gavron John Armstrong Christopher Attwooll

Ian Wordsworth Francis Bennion The Honourable (George) Edward Adeane Robert Baker Carron Russell Simon Draycott Bench Widows Lady Rosemary Kilner Brown Anna Martin Lady Barbara Calcutt

In Memoriam

119

Staff News New Starters The Inn warmly welcomes the following members of staff who have started their career with the Middle Temple in the last year. Amy Stewart, Assistant Events Manager Amy joined the Events team in January 2015 to assist with managing the events. With a diverse background in restaurants and hospitaility, she was drawn to the new challenge of the history versus contemporary of Middle Temple. When not working she furthers her love of food and drink at fine dining restaurants, wine bars, and holds quite an extensive gin collection.

Tony Braddick, Handyman Tony joined the Estates department in January 2015 as a Handyman. He has previously worked as a Facilities Manager at the London School of Economics for three years. He has 25 years experience of working in maintenance. In his spare time he enjoys watching his children play football.

William Kervick, Surveyor

Megan Dunmall, Assistant Archivist Megan joined the Archive department in April 2015. She has previously worked as an archivist at Lambeth Palace Library, the Royal Armouries at the Tower of London and Canterbury Cathedral Archives.

Alexander Williams, Security & Front of House Manager Alexander joined the Inn as its first Security and Front of House Manager in April 2015. After reading Law at Cambridge University he served in City of London Police for 17 years, most recently in Counter Terrorism. You will see him working at the new Security Office, 4A Essex Court.

Daniel Miles, Front of House Officer

Daniel joined the Front of House team in William joined Middle Temple in February April 2015. Prior to his role at the Inn he 2015. He is originally from Waterford in has 10 years of experience working in Ireland and has been living in London for Front of House roles at institutions such the past 10 years. He graduated with a as the Science Museum and Imperial War Surveying degree from Reading University Museum. In his spare time he likes to review films online. You (distance learning) in 2009. In his free time can view his blog on WordPress under Daniel’s Dunkings. he enjoys travelling, sports including triathlon. He also plays Roseanna Johnson, Front of the guitar and enjoys live music.

Sophie Frankis, HR Advisor Sophie Frankis joined the HR team in April 2015 as HR Advisor. After graduating from the University of Greenwich with an English Literature degree, Sophie began working as an HR generalist in various organisations in the City, most recently City law firm Bates Wells Braithwaite. She has also completed her CIPD qualification.

120

Staff News

House Officer

Roseanna jointed the Front of House team in April 2015.

Graham Chatham, Estates Security Officer Graham joined the Estates Security team in April 2015. He has 30 years of experience in the security industry. Prior to joining the Inn he was a close protection officer and security team leader for a Middle Eastern Royal family. In his spare time he likes to listen to music and travel.

Hassan Malik, Estates Security Officer Hassan joined the Estates Security team in April 2015.

currently halfway through her undergraduate degree in History with The Open University.

Bruno Da Silva, Kitchen Porter Bruno joined the Events team as a permanent Kitchen Porter in June 2015. Prior to working at the Inn he worked in IT in Portugal for 11 years. Bruno and his wife migrated to the UK in 2013. Bruno has recently embarked on a course to pursue his dream to become a chef. In his free time, Bruno enjoys playing football

Ismail Hashi, Estates Security Officer Ismail joined the Estates Security team in June 2015.

Daniel Kelleher, Estates Security Officer Daniel joined the Estates Security team in April 2015. He has 18 years of experience in the security industry. Prior to joining the Inn, he worked for a high profile member of a Middle Eastern Royal family for eight years. In his free time, he enjoys spending time with his family and coaching children’s football.

Lucinda Morgan, Accounts Assistant (Events)

Lucinda joined the Finance team in June 2015 after spending almost four years working in Canada for one of the largest pension plans in the country and shortly after, a Top 15 accounting practice in Murray Baker, Education Services Toronto. She is planning to finish her ACCA qualification now Manager she has returned to England and hopes to sit her first exams Murray joined the Education team in May 2015 next year. and manages the day to day operation of the Education Office and Team. Originally from Christian de Iulio, Electrician Australia, Murray has worked in University Christian joined the Estates team in July Administration for almost 10 years, including 2015. long stints in the Faculty of Law at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, and more recently at UCL Laws here in London.

Edward Melegrito, Chef de Partie Edward joined the Events team in May 2015. Edward was a Nursing student before he came to the UK. His change of career took place in 2006 when he started working as a Chef in the private health care sector. His hobbies include playing his guitar (badly), table tennis and spending time with his family and friends.

Lilian Maddix, Chef de Partie Lilian joined the Events team in May 2015. She has worked in hotels and private health care since 2006 as a waitress and chef. Her hobbies are swimming, going to the gym, cooking and travelling. She recently came back from a four week trip to Canada.

Lauren McHardy, Administrative Officer Lauren joined the Treasury office in August 2015. Prior to that, she worked in the Higher Education sector for eight years. Lauren read History at the University of Edinburgh and graduated in 2007.

Sharon Jager, Head of HR

Sharon joined the Human Resources team in August 2015. Sharon’s career to date has been within the public and not-for-profit sectors, including organisations as diverse as The Royal Horticultural Society, London Underground, Brunel University and Defra. Sophie Linin, Events Supervisor Outside of work Sharon’s interests are the arts and she is a regular Sophie joined the Events team in June visitor to London’s galleries, museums, theatres and the opera. 2015 as Events Supervisor. She has previous experience of running events at high profile attractions, such as the London Eye and Madam Tussauds London. She is

Staff News

121

Tamara Obeng, Online Services Administrator Tamara joined the ICT team in August 2015, having previously worked in marketing for Monckton chambers. Prior to that she worked for a national charity as a Team Leader in Sales & Marketing. She graduated with a degree in Journalism from City University London in 2011. Due to a strong passion for the online world, she is now studying the CAM Diploma in Digital Marketing from The Chartered Institute of Marketing.

Anne Atkinson, Head of Catering and Events Anne joined in September 2015 from The Petersham Hotel in Richmond, where she held the position of Deputy General Manager. Anne began her hospitality career in her home country, Germany. She came to the United Kingdom in 1996 and worked in London at The Langham, The Landmark and The Savoy, where she held the position of Banqueting Manager, the first female to hold this position in its history. Anne continued her career at The Grove in Hertfordshire as the Director of Events before joining The Petersham Hotel.

Leavers and Retirements The Inn thanks the following members of staff who have retired or left Middle Temple, for all their hard work and wishes them well for the future. Tomasz Slowikowski, Events Supervisor Ian Smith, Assistant Surveyor Terry Wosahlo, Handyman Lee Hartfield, Sous Chef David Turner, Deputy Head Porter Hannah Baker, Assistant Archivist Richard Chapman, Education Services Manager James Webster, HR Business Partner Ian Overall, Head Chef John Darley, Data/Website Administrator Peter O’Neill, Senior Electrician Vanessa Hayward, Keeper of the Library David Doherty, Estate Security Supervisor Peter Donovan, Front of House Officer Suzanne Traue, Training & Development Librarian Andrew Clarkson, Chef Tournant Amy Mason, Administrative Officer Peter Irving, Events Manager Francesca Trevisan, Sales Co-ordinator Lisa O’Daly, Head of HR

122

Staff News

Website: the-bba.com Email: susan@the-bba.com

Tel: 02072424761 VISION AND MISSION STATEMENT We exist to support, help and comfort those members of the Bar in England and Wales and their families and dependents who are in need, in distress or in difficulties. During the recent past we have helped barristers and their families in every circuit, often saving not only dignity but careers. We help when there is a real catastrophe. Confidentiality limits our disclosure of case histories but they include the effects of severe illness or injury, accidents and other unforeseen tragedies. Our staff are experienced, kind and practical: our Association is a last safety net for those struck down, their partners and children, where there is no income, no capital, no family back up.

123

Middle Temple Events Calendar 2015/16 1 October 2015

Michaelmas Term Begins

23 January 2016

Burns’ Night

2 October 2015

Music Night

9 February 2016

Honorary Bench Call

3 October 2015

Ordinary Dining Night

12 February 2016

Music Night

4 October 2015

Sunday Lunch

13 February 2016

Ordinary Dining Night

5 October 2015

Guest Lecture

14 February 2016

Sunday Lunch

8 October 2015

Call Day

15 February 2016

Guest Lecture

13 October 2015

Moot Final

16 February 2016

Reader’s Feast

15 October 2015

Private Guest Night

25 February 2016

Private Guest Night

19 October 2015

Survive & Thrive I

29 February 2016

Survive & Thrive II

20 October 2015

Honorary Bench Call

8 March 2016

Music Night

22 October 2015

Grand Day

10 March 2016

Call Day

25 October 2015

Agincourt: A Kingdom for a Stage

14 March 2016

Guest Lecture

27 October 2015

Bench Call

23 March 2016

Hilary Term Ends

4 November 2015

Music Night

24 March 2016

Hall Closes after Lunch

7 November 2015

CPD Day

7 November 2015

Circuit Dinner

4 April 2016

Hall Re-opens for Lunch

8 November 2015

Sunday Lunch

5 April 2016

Easter Term Begins

9 November 2015

Guest Lecture

12 April 2016

Bench Call

10 November 2015

Employed Bar Forum

14 April 2016

Private Guest Night

12 November 2015

Private Guest Night

20 April 2016

Music Night

17 November 2015

Reader’s Feast

6-8 May 2016

Four Jurisdictions Law Conference

22 November 2015

Children’s Concert

10 May 2016

Bench Call

24 November 2015

Bench Call

12 May 2016

Survive & Thrive III

26 November 2015

Call Day

19 May 2016

Annual Dinner

3 December 2015

Christmas Fair

9 December 2015

Christmas Lunch I

6 June 2016

Moot Semi-Final

10 December 2015

Christmas Lunch II

7 June 2016

Trinity Term Begins

10 December 2015

Revels

9 June 2016

Private Guest Night

11 December 2015

Revels

13 June 2016

Moot Semi-Final

13 December 2015

Carol Service Lunch

28 June 2016

Music Night

16 December 2015

Christmas Lunch III

5 July 2016

Garden Party

17 December 2015

Christmas Lunch IV

11 July 2016

All Inn Dining

21 December 2015

Michaelmas Term Ends -

17 July 2016

Temple Family Picnic

Hall Closes after Lunch

19 July 2016

Bench Call

27 July 2016

Private Guest Night

22-30 December 2015 A Christmas Carol

28 July 2016

Call Day

4 January 2016

Hall Re-opens for Lunch

29 July 2016

Trinity Term Ends -

11 January 2016

Hilary Term Begins

Hall Closes after Lunch

18 January 2016

All Inn Dining

Events in bold are Qualifying Sessions. Hall will remain open during the Whitsun vacation 2016. Barrister and student members can book tickets through the Treasury Office on 020 7427 4800. Masters of the Bench can book with Oliver Muncey on Benchers@middletemple.org.uk or 020 7427 4804. Events and dates may change. All event information, including timings, cost and specific booking information is on our website www.middletemple.org.uk.

124

Middle Temple Events Calendar 2015/16

THE ICLR PUPIL AWARD 2 0 1 6

The ICLR is a not for profit charity established in 1865 and we publish the most authoritative reports of cases decided in England and Wales. Many of us at ICLR are barristers and we know that the hunt for a pupillage is not easy. We can’t help you find a pupillage, but we would like to lend a hand when you have one secured. If you are taking up pupillage in Autumn 2016, at a set of chambers whose work is predominantly publicly funded, paid a pupillage award of no more than £14,000, you could receive our top-up award of a further £12,000. We will be making the award to one pupil every year. Applications will open in early Spring 2016 and the award will be made in September 2016. To find out more visit iclr.co.uk/pupilaward or email us at sponsorships@iclr.co.uk to register your interest.

Magna Carta, 1215: Salisbury Cathedral