Inner Temple Yearbook 2018

TREASURER

2018 2019

YEARBOOK

The Rt Hon Dame Elizabeth Gloster DBE

haynes interiors

Creating elegant and contemporary interiors for your home and chambers Modern designs that will sympathetically reflect the Temple’s heritage City & Barbican specialist, championing British design

• Interior Design & Decoration • Bespoke Curtains, Blinds & Rugs • Property Styling for Sale

“I really appreciated your cheerfulness, ideas, enthusiasm, persistence and expertise.”

Barbican resident, partner in Top 10 law firm

To discuss a project, please get in touch with Michele Haynes: T: 07984 884 408 E: m.haynes@haynesinteriors.co.uk W: www.haynesinteriors.co.uk

From the Editor’s Desk

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

FROM THE EDITOR’S DESK Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019 Treasurer: The Rt Hon Dame Elizabeth Gloster DBE Reader: The Rt Hon Lord Hughes of Ombersley Sub-Treasurer: Greg Dorey CVO Treasury Office: Inner Temple London EC4Y 7HL 020 7797 8250 yearbook@innertemple.org.uk innertemple.org.uk Master of the Yearbook: Simon O’Toole Editor: Alex Wright Assistant Editor: Henrietta Amodio Yearbook Manager: Nadia Ruiz Desk Editor: Emma Hynes Archivist: Celia Pilkington E&T Editorial Team: Fiona Fulton, Julia Armfield, Daisy Mortimer Photographs: Garlinda Birkbeck, Abhimanyu Bose, MPP Image Creation, Inner Temple photograph archive, Paul Clark Yearbook Design: Jon Ashby at Noun Ltd, 10 Kingshill Court, High Wycombe, Bucks HP13 5FN wearenoun.com

These are difficult times for many at the Bar, in particular the publicly funded Bar where we have again seen members of our profession in bitter dispute with the Ministry of Justice, and there have been significant divisions as to how to go forward.

Against that backdrop however, editing this Yearbook reminds me in strong terms of how proud we should be of this Inn, of which we are members. Not simply because of its history or beautiful grounds, but because of the work the Inn does now, in educating and training barristers; in providing scholarships to allow talented students to come to the Bar, when they would not otherwise be able to afford to do so; in reaching out to those who are from backgrounds where they would not traditionally have had the opportunity of a career at the Bar.

I

At the heart of that work are the countless hours given up by members, from the most senior to the very junior. Members who, amongst many other things, interview candidates for scholarships, teach advocacy at the weekends, speak at Outreach events and mentor those who wish to pursue a career in law. We are also privileged to have outstanding and dedicated staff.

My sincerest thanks go to everyone who has contributed to this Yearbook, and especially to the splendid work done as ever

by Henrietta Amodio, Nadia Ruiz and all the editorial team.

I hope you enjoy the read.

Alex Wright Goldsmith Chambers

Brandworld Design: SomeOne, 67 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4QS someoneinlondon.com Advertising: HTDL Ltd, 6 Ardent Court, William James Way Henley in Arden, Warwickshire, htdl.co.uk Printed by: John Good Limited, Progress House, Butlers Leap, Rugby CV21 3RQ, johngood.com

© The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple

facebook.com/TheInnerTemple @TheInnerTemple Julia Armfield, Henrietta Amodio, Daisy Mortimer, Nadia Ruiz © Bose photography

1

CONTENTS

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

I

Contents

From the Editor’s Desk 1

Alex Wright

History Society Review 2018 36

The Archivist

I

Contents 2

I

From the Treasurer

4

The Rt Hon Dame Elizabeth Gloster DBE I

A

From Royal Charter to Washroom 8

Sub-Treasurer

Celebrate the Life: 38 Master Evan Stone C

His Honour Peter Rook QC

Oral History Project: 40 Nemone Lethbridge Interview A

Master Spearing

The Wellness for 10 Law Forum 2018 T

Master Levitt and Master Spearing

Celebrate the Life: 12 Master Neill C

Master Lloyd READER’S LECTURE SERIES

‘Sales’ on Retention Title Terms: 14 A Tale of Caterpillars, Bunkers and the Supreme Court RL

Professor Louise Gullifer QC (Hon)

Celebrate the Life: 16 Master Dobry C

The Rt Hon Lord Carnwath of Notting Hill

T

Valedictory Speech 44

Master Maddams

Sir Edward Marshall Hall KC: His Gifts to the Inn T

46

Master Lawson and Richard Parsons

The Social Context of the Law 18

E

EDUCATION & TRAINING 49

WW1

EDUCATION & TRAINING T

Roll of Honour 77

L

Library Facilities and Services 83

Master Scruton

I

Celebrate the Life: 22 Master Aldous C

The Telegraph READER’S LECTURE SERIES

Proof in International 24 Criminal Trials RL

Dr Yvonne McDermott Rees I

In Memoriam 26

Celebrate the Life: 27 Master Richard C

The Times A

John Wilkes Memorial Lecture 29

Matthew Parris

Celebrate the Life: 33 Master Anthony Smith C

Mrs L A Smith G

Notes From the Great Garden… 34

Master Robertson and Sean Harkin

Books vs Online – 84 Let Battle Commence L

Deputy Librarian PS

Pegasus Scholars 86

Celebrate the Life: 98 Master Brooke C

Dr Christopher Brooke

The Running of a World-Class Choir TC

100

Director of Music

History Society Lecture: 102 Irish at the English Inns of Court A

Dr Colum Kenny BCL BL

Celebrate the Life: 104 Master Vaughan C

Lord Anderson KBE QC 2

Contents

READER’S LECTURE SERIES

Forensic Identification from the Hand RL

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

T

Temple Big Picnic 132

T

A Tropical Attorney General

106

Professor Dame Sue Black OBE FRSE FRAI FRSB T

First 100 Years 108

Dana Denis-Smith

134

John McKendrick QC

Celebrate the Life: Master Murphy-O’Connor COIC

C

The Council of the Inns of Court 110

C

Celebrate the Life: Master Knorpel 111

Hilton Lorie, The Jewish Chronicle

Anatomy of a Case: A Study in Clinical Negligence Claims T

The Times

Weddings and Baptisms 138 at the Temple Church TC

C

112

Master Pittaway

136

Celebrate the Life: Master Little

140

Master Pittaway A

A Barrister-at-Law – Eugène Marais 142

Heini Kotze

READER’S LECTURE SERIES

Domestic Violence: 116 A Human Rights Issue RL

Dr Shazia Choudhury

C

Celebrate the Life: Master Caron

145

Master Higgins

The Role of Mentoring 146 in the Legal Profession T

T

“ Ask not what your Inn can do for you…”

119

Zachary Bredemear C

Celebrate the Life: Master Gower

Dr Emma Jones 120

His Honour Judge Peter Gower QC

Temple Women’s Forum 122 The Lord Chief Justice and Master Taylor T

T

A

Timeline 148

The Archivist

The Summer Party 124

I

Bar Liaison Committee 150

I

New Benchers 152

I

List of Benchers in Seniority 154

I

People Finder 158

I

Committees 160

KEY I

Celebrate the Life: Master Flather C

126

T C A

The Times

L

Oral History Project: 128 Master Morland

PS

Master Morland

RL

The Greater Kashmir

131

G TC WW1

Celebrate the Life: Master Anand C

E

COIC

A

INNER TEMPLE INFORMATION TREASURY CELEBRATE THE LIFE ARCHIVES LIBRARY EDUCATION & TRAINING PEGASUS SCHOLARS READER'S LECTURE SERIES GARDEN TEMPLE CHURCH WORLD WAR I COIC

3

I

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

From the Treasurer

FROM THE TREASURER

By Master Treasurer Shortly before writing this article I presided over Trinity Term Call Night. To be able to welcome and congratulate newly-called barristers of the Inner Temple on their achievements, and to share in their enthusiasm and excitement was a real privilege. In my speech I also acknowledged the importance of our new barristers’ families and close friends in supporting them to this critical stage of their training and preparation for their new careers as advocates.

I

The Inner Temple, with its core purpose of education, has strong traditions of dedication, excellence and fellowship.

It is a bit like a family which grows with you and provides a changing network of support; a place where aspiring barristers are nurtured – first by being given advice on becoming a barrister, then on admission to the Inn, then financial support for the many students who obtain scholarships and then training through the vocational and pupillage stages. But the support doesn’t stop there; not only new practitioners but also barristers, throughout every stage of their careers, can take advantage of the continuing professional development programmes which the Inn provides, as well as its social, professional networking and cultural opportunities, not only to advance their careers but also to enhance their life outside work. Having benefited from this support during my own career at the Bar, and then on the Bench, I am honoured to have the opportunity as Treasurer to give something back to my Inn. In the same way as our newly called barristers owe a debt of gratitude to those who have supported them in their journey to the Bar until now, so the Inn, its students, barristers and Benchers alike, owe much to the dedication and commitment of all members involved in advocacy and ethics training, residential training weekends, scholarship interviewing, mentoring and outreach work. It has been gratifying that the Bar Standards Board, in its Policy Statement on Future Bar Training, has clearly recognised and affirmed the fundamental role played by the Inns in the education and training of barristers, stating that its review of Qualifying Sessions provided by the Inns “should focus on public interest matters such as the advocate’s role in the rule of law and integrating trainees into to a ‘community of practice’ through interactions with more experienced practitioners and the judiciary. We believe that the Inns are uniquely placed to provide this important function.”

The Rt Hon Dame Elizabeth Gloster DBE © Birkbeck

In one of her first appearances at one of the Inns in her new role as Chair of the Bar Standards Board, Baroness Blackstone observed an Inner Temple training session on Advocacy and the Vulnerable which she subsequently described as “incredibly interesting and impressive”, affirming again the importance of the role of the Inns in the provision of training.

In a watershed decision to be taken shortly, the four Inns will have to decide whether, through the Council of the Inns of Court, they will sign a memorandum of understanding with the Bar Standards Board for the implementation and delivery by the Inns of Court College of Advocacy of a new Bar Professional Training Course (“BPTC”), designed to: encourage greater flexibility in training systems improve accessibility improve affordability sustain high standards

The new – alternative – BPTC, in competition with commercial providers, will, if approved, ensure a more fit for purpose and considerably cheaper training course for would-be advocates. My discussions with students and professional educators leave me in no doubt that it is critical that the Inns of Court should be at the heart of future Bar training – indeed, it is our defining role.

The importance which the Inn attaches to its education function has also been recently underlined by its decision to recruit a Dean of Education – a new, parttime post which is intended to ensure that the Inn’s educational courses remain of the highest calibre.

In some ways, as Treasurer, there are few changes one can make in a year, especially on issues such as social mobility and improving access to the profession, but the seeds of change must continue to be nurtured. Complex issues require long term change and that is why I am

4

From the Treasurer

delighted to support the Inn’s Outreach Committee in its continuing work in making a significant difference to the future of our profession. I was especially pleased to see that the Inner Temple has been ranked 24th – up eleven places compared to 2017 – in the Social Mobility Index. The ranking reflects the top 50 UK employers who have taken the most action on social mobility in the workplace.

Sometimes action needs to be supported by visual symbols, which is why I made the decision that the Pride Flag should be raised on the Inner Temple flagpole during Pride in London.

The theme for this year’s Pride was Pride Matters. Pride does indeed matter for many of our members across the country and this visible act shows our support for our LGBT+ members.

The Bar should be a place of inclusion for all barristers and those who work alongside them. I was delighted to see this act so positively received and reaching over 71,500 people online.

The profession should be open to anyone with the required ability and training, no matter their background. Although there is much still to be done in improving access to the profession, through my own personal experience I have seen the landscape change dramatically. The working Bar is an increasingly diverse place. Those who practise – and those who succeed – at the Bar today, in whichever of its many different areas of speciality, come from a wide variety of diverse backgrounds.

We should take encouragement that the seeds planted by our renowned outreach programmes are bearing fruit. There is more to be done but it is pleasing to see the expansion of our outreach work including a pilot project in Liverpool to engage year 12 students in understanding the rule of law.

Reflecting our commitment to an equal and diverse profession and to comply with the Equality Act 2010, the Inn provides online equality and diversity training for every member engaged in policy-making committees, scholarship interviewing, pupil and new practitioner advocacy training, residential weekends, student mentoring or as pupil supervisors. I would encourage those of you yet to take up this training to do so.

I am delighted that, for the second year running, the Inn has hosted the Wellness for Law Forum (see page 10 for a full report). The Inn is committed to supporting well-being not only for members but also for staff. A proactive group of staff representing all departments has implemented a programme of talks and activities to support a thriving team. The Bar is a demanding profession for all who are involved in it and recognition of the need to promote mental and physical well-being as part of our daily working lives is crucial.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

the outcome, supporters and opponents of the scheme will uphold the decision by Bench Table and work in a collegiate way (as always) to make Inner Temple the gold standard of education and training for students and barristers.

Looking ahead to other events taking place during the latter part of my year as Treasurer, I, together with the Sub-Treasurer and representatives from Middle Temple, will be attending the American Inns of Court Celebration of Excellence in Washington DC in late October, when I shall be taking part in the ‘National Conversation on Civility’ in the Library of Congress. We will be accompanied by the Temple Church Choir, whose commitment to musical excellence serves a fine ambassadorial role in our international outreach.

I should also mention my trip to Singapore in April this year, as the guest of the Singapore Law Society, to which I was invited by the Chief Justice of Singapore, Master Menon, to give the opening address at the Law Society’s Litigation Conference Workshop. It was also a special privilege for the Inner Temple to be one of the Law Society’s Partners in this event, which was attended by barristers from the Inner Temple and other Inns who participated in the useful training programme for young Singaporean advocates. We were also pleased to strengthen the Inn’s links with members of the Singapore Inner Temple Association And then to the end of the year. Since its inauguration to commemorate the Quatercentenary of the Royal Charter in 2008, the Inner Temple Book Prize has expanded to include awards for both established and new authors and attracts entries from all over the globe. As Royal Bencher and Patron of the Book Prize, Master HRH The Princess Royal has graciously agreed to present the awards in December this year. We very much look forward to welcoming Her Royal Highness back to her Inn. I should like to take this opportunity to thank the Reader and Reader-Elect for all their invaluable assistance during what for me has been a very busy nine months as Treasurer; their involvement has been key to ensuring continuity over the next two years. I would also like to thank my fellow Benchers and all members of the Inn involved in the many educational, collegiate and outreach activities of the Inn for their dedication, commitment and skills in constantly striving for excellence in all they do. Finally, my thanks go to the Sub-Treasurer and all the staff for their hard work and unstinting enthusiasm for the work of the Inn. The Rt Hon Dame Elizabeth Gloster DBE

Perhaps the most important decision in a generation facing the governing Benchers of the Inn is Project Pegasus – the scheme to build a modern education and training centre on the top of the Treasury Building with alterations to the Library. Successive Treasurers over the past few years have deftly navigated the project from the governing Benchers’ vote in 2015 to approve development of the scheme, to the point of receiving planning permission for the work at the end of 2017. Soon the City of London’s planning committee will decide whether to grant permission for a temporary structure in the garden in which to accommodate the Inn’s regulatory and collegiate activities for the duration of the building work. I am grateful to the Bar Liaison Committee for providing a comprehensive survey issued to non-Bencher members of the Inn to collect views about the project, as well as views about future training for practitioner members. This information will help to inform the Executive Committee in its recommendations about Project Pegasus to Bench Table for the vote in December on the scheme and its confirmed costs received through the tender process. Although opinions on the project are divided, I am looking forward to an informed, courteous and constructive exchange of views leading up to the vote. I hope that, whatever 5

I

Website: the-bba.com Email: nicky@the-bba.com Tel: 020 7242 4764 VISION AND MISSION STATEMENT

Email: susan@the-bba.com

We exist to support, help and comfort those members of the Bar in England and Wales and their families and

Tel: 02072424761

their families in every circuit, often saving not only dignity but careers. We help when there is a real catastrophe. fects of severe illness or injury, VISIONaccidents AND and MISSION STATEMENT other unforeseen tragedies.

We exist to support, help and comfort those members of the Our staff are experienced, kind andand practical: our Association last safety net for dependents those struck down, their Bar in England Wales and theiris afamilies and partners and children, where there is no income, no capital, no family back up.the who are in need, in distress or in difficulties. During recent past we have helped barristers and their families in

T

Quo

te ‘T

EMP

LE’

to g e

GIVE THE GIFT OF Use at more than 240 venues nationwide including all of London’s West End

TheatreTokens.com *T&Cs: Offer valid on Gift Cards and eGifts from £5 only. Can only be claimed before 31/08/2019 via the official website or Tokenline when quoting ‘TEMPLE’. Maximum order is £500 per household. Full T&Cs at TheatreTokens.com/terms-of-sale

6

t 10

%o

ff *

W I T H A R I C H H E R I TA G E O F I N N O VAT I O N A N D E X C E L L E N C E , S E A R C Y S I S T H E L O N G E S T E S TA B L I S H E D C AT E R I N G B U S I N E S S I N B R I TA I N .

W E LO O K F O R WA R D TO W E LC O M I N G YO U TO O U R C O L L E C T I O N O F R E S TA U R A N T S , B A R S A N D P R I VAT E E V E N T V E N U E S .

S T PA N C R A S B R A S S E R I E

3 0 PAV I L I O N R O A D ,

S E A R C Y S AT

A N D C H A M PA G N E B A R

KNIGHTSBRIDGE

THE GHERKIN

Discover more at searcys.co.uk

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

From the Sub-Treasurer

FROM ROYAL CHARTER TO WASHROOMS By the Sub-Treasurer How novel are the concepts of well-being and wellness? And what have they to do with the law?

Our Royal Charter of 1608, conferring rights and obligations on Inner and Middle Temple, states that “…a great part of [the realm of England’s] happiness is worthily due to the ancient laws proper to this realm…”. It goes on to mention the Inns, “unto which, as to the best seminaries of instruction and upbringing, a great many young persons of honourable background, excellently endowed in mind and body, have daily flocked from all parts of this realm…”.

Finally, King James I refers to his “… being desirous of perpetuating, so far as in us lies, the happy estate of this realm of England”. So perhaps not so novel. We also, today, need to concern ourselves more with the minds and bodies and indeed happiness of our members and staff.

I

Before joining Inner Temple at Easter, I had spent 30 years in the diplomatic service. For hundreds of years, the unthinking expectation had been that diplomats and their families displayed a ‘stiff upper lip’ in all circumstances – the fact they were prepared to go and live in far-flung, dangerous, isolated and depressing places would have been seen as evidence that they were by definition resilient individuals.

Being separated from children for years on end, coming under fire and bombardment, risking virulent disease, being kidnapped, raped and bullied – well, all part of the package and obviously counterbalanced by exotic travel opportunities, lavish balls and free Ferrero Rocher after dinner parties.

Thankfully, the lesson was eventually learned – the hard way.

By the early 21st century, there had been a sea change in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), with resilience training available and compulsory psychological assessments for staff in extreme environments. More particularly, Trauma Risk Management or TRiM had been introduced – TriM being a peer support system designed to help people who have experienced a traumatic or potentially traumatic event.

I’ve been TRiM-trained by the FCO, as has Master Spearing.

Nowadays, TriM practitioners are a core element in Rapid Deployment Teams sent to deal with consular and other crises around the world, offering practical advice and assistance – they are recognised as essential to meet moral and duty of care responsibilities and to check that staff are capable of continuing to work in what are often awful conditions. TriM training is also a means of building a resilient workforce outside of crises – so they are prepared when the crisis hits.

British barristers and judges don’t usually work in high-risk or high-threat locations as such – though some do of course.

But they are frequently exposed to work-related pressures and highly stressful situations. I experienced a more typical scenario in my last few months in the FCO when I was working on a major litigation case against the British government, in the course of which I and a couple of colleagues had to plough through thousands of pages of detailed allegations of horrendous atrocities and alleged torture and sexual abuse, sometimes accompanied by lurid photographs. The training I had been given by the FCO helped me to stand back mentally from this; to be aware of the risks; and to deal with this workload in such a way as to minimise the negative impact on my personal life – I also checked in frequently with my more junior colleagues to ensure they were coping. But not everyone has been prepared for potential unhealthy stress in this way.

8

Greg Dorey CVO

Which brings me to the importance of investing in wellbeing and wellness at work. There seems to be something of an aversion to using the expression ‘business case’ in the self-employed legal sector, but I’m going to put it out there unashamedly because there is a high economic and productivity value attached to wellness and resilience, aside from the human dimension. Having well-organised and effective wellness programmes in place improves employee health behaviours; these lead to lower health risks; these lead to less chronic disease; this means fewer health care costs.

And wellness programmes improve productivity – the cost of underperformance by those at work is huge – and can decrease absenteeism. They can also avert human tragedies.

A ‘Health at Work’ study in the Financial Times in 2017 revealed that UK employees lose 11.7 per cent of their working hours both due to absence but much more so due to presenteeism (defined as being present at work but being limited in some aspects of job performance by a health problem and thus experiencing decreased productivity and below-normal work quality). Seventeen per cent of respondents showed low work engagement and only 11 per cent showed high work engagement. Young respondents were generally less engaged and felt more fatigue at work. Conversely, employees able to work flexible hours and/or work from home lost fewer hours, did more physical activity and felt significantly less fatigue than those that didn’t – I’d suggest those factors taken together make up a ‘virtuous circle’.

Mental health was a particular risk for the respondents in the ‘Health at Work’ survey, with 8.5 per cent of those aged 21–25 saying they suffered from depression. Depression was also linked very clearly to financial concerns and 72 per cent of those with such concerns suffered work-related stress, compared with a survey average of 54 per cent. But physical health was also a problem, with almost 50 per cent of those in the 51-60 age category suffering one or more chronic conditions. 29 per cent of those surveyed slept fewer than 7 hours a night and 40 per cent had problems with sleep quality – the latter did less physical activity, drank more alcohol, were more likely to be smokers, showed higher work-related stress, and were five times more likely to suffer from depression than those without any sleep difficulties. Workplace interventions helped where these were available and – crucially – known about.

That survey deals with employees in general, but the barrister and judicial profession is presented collectively with tremendous stress. Stress may be good in some contexts: it can be helpful when the adrenalin is flowing.

But a combination of constant challenges around fees, poor

From the Sub-Treasurer

working conditions, work content and business structures can be debilitating – as recent publicity around the problems faced by the Criminal Bar has brought out vividly. A Wellbeing at the Bar Report in 2015 revealed that one in three barristers found it difficult to control or stop worrying; two in three felt showing signs of stress is a weakness; and one in six felt low in spirits most of the time. The Bar Wellbeing Portal was launched in 2016 and has been much visited since.

In May this year, The Guardian headlined that barristers in England and Wales are “in the grip of a mental health crisis”, due to increases in digital evidence, the large number of historical sex assault claims and ridiculously long hours. Survey data from the Bar Council showed that workloads have increased by 40 per cent for criminal law practitioners in the past two years; one-third are considering new career options; and only half felt able to balance their home and work lives. I don’t believe the situation is necessarily as bad as in the US, where lawyers are in the top ten professions for suicide. But it is quite bad enough and needs mending. The evidence I have been mentioning clearly shows a widespread problem amongst employees in general and a serious and growing problem related to the Bar. Culture change is always challenging, but there is at least now much better awareness that wellness is a real and relevant issue with which employers, organisations and individuals need to engage. And that engagement needs to move from being responsive to being much more proactive over wellness. Of course we need to consider ourselves,

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

recourse to the Court of Criminal Appeal and pardons were rare and unpredictable. Defence Counsel had few evidential weapons to rely on and their most potent asset was the simple force of their personality. The responsibility was enormous and the strain on their nerves hard to imagine.

It is no surprise that some barristers broke down in tears in court or even killed themselves after defending a suspect who received the death penalty. Sir Edward Clarke (1841–1931), having secured the acquittal of a young woman charged with poisoning her husband, put his head in his hands in court and wept with strain and relief. Sir Rufus Isaacs (1860–1945), Attorney General and former Viceroy of India, was compelled to prosecute a defendant on a murder charge and was so horrified by the experience that he swore never to do so again.

The famous Marshall Hall appeared in Sanatogen Tonic Wine adverts, claiming that “if you are irritable and over sensitive… if your work worries you unduly and you are sleeping badly you are probably suffering from nerves and you need a tonic”.

He also wrote that “I believe I was one of the first to recognise Sanatogen’s value as a nerve food. Not only did I take it myself with great benefit but I recommended it to my friends.” It is implicit here that even the great barrister himself was among those experiencing high stress. Of course the reality is that people had to find their own coping mechanisms in those days and those who suffered really terrible consequences did not feature in our history, which always inclines towards the heroism of the Bar rather than the vulnerabilities.

“ Well-being and wellness certainly did not even get a look-in to our legal system until latterly – the attitudes to women remained unbelievable well into the 20th century” I as individuals, and acquire the tools to make ourselves as resilient as possible. But chambers can help with the selfemployed Bar, playing a role which has not traditionally been seen as their core function. The employed Bar may have a clearer duty of care, but has its own distinct pressures.

The Inns as institutions must be involved too, supporting the profession, but also looking after their own staff. I am pleased that staff in Inner Temple took part in a survey in 2016 as part of Mind’s inaugural Workplace Wellbeing survey and that the Inn was given a Bronze Award from Mind to recognise that we had begun a journey towards better mental health at work. We participated actively in Mental Health Awareness Week recently and when Mind CEO Paul Farmer gave a keynote speech at a training weekend for students at Highgate House, he commented with pleasure how many of those present were wearing green ribbons – the visible symbol of the week’s campaign. I am sure that if we fail to embrace wellness as an issue and incorporate it fully in our planning, it will be a major threat to our goals of promoting diversity, equality and retention of a wide range of staff. On which note, I was pleased to be able to note at the second Wellness for Law Forum on 6 July that we were flying the rainbow flag for the first time ever – and to hope that this was giving huge encouragement to our LGBT+ members and staff.

Progress is being made, against what was a pretty low baseline until a few years ago. As is clear from Master Sally Smith's highly readable biography of Sir Edward Marshall Hall KC, our legal system was fairly brutal until relatively recently, with the last public hanging in 1867; and the last hanging, drawing and quartering (in practice by then the relatively benign hanging and beheading) in 1820. Even children were hanged until as late as 1833. Barristers defending alone a person on a capital charge were in an extremely lonely place. There were minimal defence funds, almost no forensic evidence, and juries were fairly unsophisticated. Not until 1908 was there

Well-being and wellness certainly did not even get a look-in to our legal system until latterly – the attitudes to women remained unbelievable well into the 20th century.

Just one small example, but I was appalled to read in an interview which Master Spearing carried out with Nemone Lethbridge that when the latter got her first tenancy in Hare Court, they put a Yale lock on the lavatory; all the men in chambers were given a key, and she had to go up to Fleet Street and use the facilities in the Kardomah cafe.

Washrooms are at least no longer quite such an issue, so far as I know. (I realise their condition in Crown Courts can be a problem, but at least it’s not gender-specific.) And much is being done to improve well-being in the workplace, but there are still systemic shortfalls to address – not least across the legal profession – and we must do so as matter of urgency.

So, I was delighted to be able to host and open the second Wellness for Law Forum at Inner Temple on 6 July because it was another important step in achieving wellness in the profession. Certainly, the imperative to focus on wellness is no less than it was at the first Forum last year. I trust it will become an annual event, at least until such time – in the hopefully not too distant future – when it is no longer needed.

Greg Dorey CVO Sub-Treasurer Based on the Sub-Treasurer's opening speech at the Wellness for Law Forum 2018

9

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Wellness for Law Forum 2018

WELLNESS FOR LAW FORUM 2018 BUILDING A RESILIENT PROFESSION

By Master Spearing and Master Levitt Over the last couple of years, the Bar has been working together firstly to ‘take the temperature’ of well-being within the profession, initiating the conversation with our colleagues to respond to the challenges highlighted by the research, and we are now beginning to respond with actions to address the difficulties faced by many of us. One of the initiatives founded was Wellness for Law, a ‘not-for-profit’ seeking to provide a one-day forum for sharing knowledge to aid our development of good practice in the area of health and well-being education.

One very clear message is that the landscape we face as a profession is challenging and fast changing, with great resilience needed by current practitioners and those joining to adapt and respond. Therefore, the theme of this year’s Wellness Forum, kindly sponsored and hosted by the Honourable Society of Inner Temple, was ‘Building a Resilient Profession’.

T

Excellent keynotes were provided by Professor Felicia Huppert, Emeritus Professor of Psychology at Cambridge University, and Fellow of Darwin College, whose research has assisted governments and global institutions with policy and practical responses to address well-being issues; and Professor Cheryl Thomas QC (Hon), Director of the Judicial Institute at UCL and leading researcher for the MOJ and Judicial Office.

Both provided researched perspectives on the meaning of well-being, and the challenges faced by those in courts.

The Forum provides an opportunity for delegates to see practical presentations from clinicians, chambers practitioners and staff to demonstrate their initiatives within their workplaces at the Bar, many of whom had received wellbeing recognition certificates from the Bar Council.

We hope the Forum will be an annual event to support the continued progress of the Wellbeing at the Bar work.

To review a full copy of the programme and for further information of the presentations see innertemple. org.uk/wellness or wellnessforlawuk.org.

Rachel Spearing Master of Well-being

Since the 14th century, the Honourable Society of the Inner Temple has provided education, accommodation and collegiate services to lawyers and students. In the modern world the Inn’s role as an ‘Honourable Society’, with education and training as its core and central purposes, has never been more relevant. We are determined that the community of the Inn should not be inward looking.

The future strategy of the Inn should ensure that the barristers of tomorrow represent all parts of society, maintain high ethical standards, are trained to achieve excellence in advocacy, and thereby, in performance of their work and in their dealings with the public, promote those standards and the rule of law in all they do.

As Chair of the Education and Training Committee for the past year and a half it has been my responsibility to oversee all aspects of education and training for barristers, both those at the beginning of their careers and more established practitioners.

As part of my role, last year I chaired a small subgroup tasked by the then Treasurer to consider the

10

future of E&T at the Inn. Our starting point was the consideration of what the ideal barrister looks like.

A barrister is the sum of: 1. what they know (rather than who they know); 2. what they do (rather than what others do for them); and 3. what they are (rather than who they are).

The ideal barrister has a number of skills, prominent amongst which are advocacy and a high level of legal knowledge and expertise. That being said, it is uncontroversial that success as a barrister requires far more than simply the acquisition of formal legal knowledge. Rather, barristers will have, in addition to traditional knowledge-based skills, a range of attributes or personal characteristics which they deploy both consciously and unconsciously.

It is important to recognise that these skills and attributes are not only relatively easy to recognise and describe but can also be learned. We considered the OECD guidance on the specific combinations of knowledge, skills, attitudes and values required to equip people to lead a successful and responsible life. The OECD states that the key resources are:

Treasury

“Knowledge (conceptual, procedural and factual), and cognitive skills (analytical, decision-making and general problem-solving skills), complemented by social and emotional skills, attitudes and values.”

Thus, when considering the core function of advocacy, the traditional emphasis on cognitive skills and knowledge of the law should be complemented by greater recognition of the importance of: 1. non-cognitive skills (such as collaboration); 2. attitudes (particularly empathy for others, including witnesses and other court users); 3. independence; and 4. the values of integrity and respect for the court.

In this Inn we have thought a great deal about how the ideal barrister is formed and the part that the Inner Temple can play in that. We have purposely avoided the use of the expression ‘soft skills’ because of the value judgement implicit in it, namely that these attributes are of lesser importance than the acquisition of legal knowledge.

The point we seek to make is that it is in precisely the area of these kinds of skills, attributes and values that the barrister who demonstrates excellence is unlikely to be replaced either by robots or even by other professionals. Therefore, teaching attributes such as empathy and resilience should be given equal weight and status to the teaching of black letter law.

The reason I have spent a few moments on this will be obvious.

We want to build lawyers who are healthy in body and mind.

Some will go on to become judges, which illustrates the point that it is not just the welfare of barristers which concerns us at the Inner Temple but the much wider issue of the maintenance of the Rule of Law. At Inner Temple we call ourselves the ‘progressive Inn’. Thus, it was that this Inn was the first to commit to supporting the work of well-being. In 2013 the Charlie Waller Memorial Lecture was hosted here, with Professor Brian Marion speaking. This led to the introduction to Master Rachel Spearing, who is now the Inner Temple’s Master of Wellbeing and we are all greatly indebted to Master Spearing who initiated the main Wellbeing at the Bar work.

The Bar Council commissioned research (funded by all four Inns), led by Master Spearing and Sam Mercer. Inner Temple was

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

the first to contribute. The results were sobering. It emphasised what many of us knew instinctively: barristers are talented but often fragile souls.

Since the data was gathered in 2015, this Inn has instituted programmes for students, pupils, new practitioners and more.

For example, at the student welcome for all new BPTC students, Master Spearing tells the students how central well-being is to Inner Temple’s concept of the barrister and points them in the direction of the ‘Portal’. We are pleased to be collaborating with the Charlie Waller Memorial Trust which has adapted the ‘Portal’ with a specific student section.

At our residential pupil training sessions, our student lectures and in our core training we provide pupils with information of the impact of stress not only on their wellbeing but on their performance. We stress that attention to well-being is an integral part of responsible practice management. We have heard from Master Spearing, the CEO of MIND, Dr Jamie Barker (sports psychologist) and Dr Emma Jones (one of our Academic Benchers).

I also want to mention PASS (the Pegasus Access and Support Scheme) which is the cornerstone of our outreach and inclusion activities. Research suggests that those who come from what traditionally have been under-represented socio-economic groups may find the journey to becoming a successful barrister particularly challenging. Our programme includes practical training and clear advice on how to access support.

Well-being informs our advocacy training. Performance anxiety is a hugely familiar but until now under-acknowledged aspect of the life of the advocate. This year we have prepared a session on ‘Anxiety and the Advocate’ as one of the Qualifying Sessions which all student barristers must undertake. The fact that the BSB has accredited this session is a landmark moment.

Finally, for junior barristers at the start of their career, as part of our New Practitioners’ Programme, Master Spearing and a psychological Social Worker present a session on ‘Risk, Resilience and Practice Management’.

The message is a simple one. The primary purpose of the Bar is to provide a voice for others and to maintain the rule of law in a civilised society.

But you cannot look after others unless you look after yourself.

Alison Levitt QC Chair of the Education and Training Committee

11

T

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Master Neill

MASTER CELEBRATE NEILL THE LIFE: MASTER NAME A tribute given by Master Lloyd at a memorial service for Master Neill held in the Temple Church on 19 April 2018 I made most of my friends at school or at Cambridge, and they are mostly about my age. Brian was different. He was six years older than me, and he went to Oxford. We only became friends when we both became judges of the High Court in 1978, and members of the Court of Appeal in 1985.

Thereafter, we spent many happy holidays together. I remember one in particular in Italy, and another walking among the ruins in western Sicily. Brian was a great walker. I have vivid memories of him striding across the South Downs until he was well into his 80s. He only gave up when his leg began to give him trouble. Thereafter, he was determined to remain at least mobile until his son, Andrew, became master of the Turners Company, thus following in his father and grandfather’s footsteps. By this time, Brian had himself become ‘father’ of the company. I have no doubt that many members of the company are here this evening. They are most welcome.

But I must go back to the time before we became friends.

Andrew has already described Brian’s army service in the Rifle Brigade, how he landed in Normandy on D+5 and took part in the struggle for Hill 112. Brian and his platoon were driven back by heavy fire on their first attempt to reach the summit. But at dawn the following day he tried again. This time he somehow reached the top. But at that very moment he was wounded and lost consciousness. He was not yet 21.

C

He recovered from his injury quite quickly, as the shell fragment had lodged safely in his liver, where it must have remained to the end of his days; it had been judged too dangerous to operate. In November, he rejoined his battalion. By then, they were in the forefront of the push north through Germany.

The line of advance lay past the notorious camp, known as Belsen. It had been agreed between both sides that no fighting should take place anywhere near the camp. Brian and his platoon were the very first to set eyes on the entrance to Belsen. But he did not go in until a few days later. It is hard for us even to imagine what it must have been like.

But this incident in his army service was not forgotten. In the course of her recent visit to Germany, the Queen had expressed a wish to visit Belsen. Someone, somewhere must have remembered Brian’s experience. And so it was arranged that Brian should be taken in the greatest secrecy to meet her there on her arrival. I have a very special photograph of the Queen conversing with Brian on that occasion, taken, I fear, without her prior approval. But never mind.

At the beginning of 1947, Brian left the army to return to what he described as a more normal life at Oxford, as an elderly undergraduate of 23 at Corpus Christi College. In 1949, he was called to the Bar, and joined the chambers of Colin Duncan, specialising in defamation cases. He had a slow start, as is often the case at the Bar. But things picked up after he married Sally in 1956; so much so, that by 1968 he was in a position to apply for silk, that is to say to be appointed a QC by the Lord Chancellor. He soon became the leading counsel of choice in all the most celebrated cases involving the press. This is not the occasion to describe even a few of those cases; but I must at least mention A-G v Times Newspapers.

That was the famous case that arose out of the thalidomide affair. The Sunday Times called on the Distillers Company to increase their offer of compensation to the victims. The Attorney General sought an injunction to restrain the paper from publishing any further articles to that effect on the ground that it would be a contempt of court: by putting pressure on 12

Master Neill

the Distillers, it would prejudice the civil proceedings then pending between the parties. Brian’s argument was that in such cases there was not one, but two competing public interests: the protection of the administration of justice, yes; but also the right of the public to be informed on “grave and weighty issues of the day”. The outcome, he argued, should depend on balancing these competing interests on the facts of each case.

This argument was rejected by the Lord Chief Justice. But an appeal to the Court of Appeal was allowed, not surprisingly as the Court included Lord Denning and Lord Justice Scarman.

However, on further appeal by the Attorney General, the House of Lords unanimously reversed the Court of Appeal.

That would normally have been the end of the matter. But Brian had one further string to his bow: an appeal to the Court of Human Rights at Strasbourg. By the time the appeal came on for hearing, Brian had become a judge. But his argument prevailed by 11 votes to 9, thus reversing the decision of the House of Lords and making necessary the Contempt of Court Act 1981. It also paved the way for section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013. It was thus a case of the utmost importance in the history of free speech and human rights.

What made Brian such a persuasive advocate? I never heard him as an advocate myself; so I shall quote the views of another defamation expert, who was often on the other side, Lord Justice Hirst: “ Brian was an extremely skilful advocate, dispassionate, persuasive, unruffled and backed by the most meticulous preparation of his case. All round he was a very formidable opponent.”

Next, I must mention a book on defamation which he wrote with Colin Duncan, first published in 1978. It must have been researched by Brian in his busiest years at the Bar. Compared to other textbooks on defamation it is a little book. Even so, it is not confined to the existing law; it deals also with the many questions which Brian knew were likely to arise in practice. It was thus a godsend to judges and practitioners alike. It was this little book which led, in 1990, to his appointment by Lord Mackay, the Lord Chancellor, to chair a committee on the law and practice of defamation, of which he was by then the acknowledged master. To his great satisfaction, Neill on Defamation reached its fourth edition in 2014, with a typically modest and unassuming preface written by Brian himself at the age of 91.

I come now to the computer revolution which took place in the last years of the 20th century. It is difficult for us now to remember how antiquated the courts, and indeed the legal profession as a whole, had become. A county court judge in Shrewsbury made the headlines in the national press by actually using his laptop on the bench. Brian was among the very first to see that something must be done. In 1985, he

Celebrate the life

succeeded Lord Justice Scarman as president of the Society for Computers and the Law. Soon after, he persuaded Lord Hailsham to approve the creation of a joint committee to study the place of IT in our court system, with Brian as chairman. In 2000, the late Lord Justice Henry Brooke was appointed as the first judge in charge of modernisation of the courts. But he, and everyone else, would agree that Brian had been the voice crying in the wilderness.

I now return to Brian’s appointment as a High Court judge in 1978. Instead of trying defamation cases, as one might expect, “he was”, in the words of a subsequent Lord Chief Justice, “plunged almost at once into presiding in a very long criminal case, a task which he discharged with characteristic professionalism, and conspicuous success”.

Two years later, he transferred to the Commercial Court.

This was when I first got to know him well. He had had no previous experience, such as I had had, of cases dealing with ships and insurance and carriage of goods by sea and so on.

But he listened carefully, seldom interrupted and was extremely quick to take it all in. In no time, he had become the favourite judge before whom seasoned practitioners in the Commercial Court wanted to appear. For the next five years, he and I alternated as the judge in charge of the commercial list. It was a very happy time for me, and I believe also for him. We discussed everything under the sun, and became great friends.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

I mention now another little book, not written by Brian this time, but about him. In 2003, a group of seven judges, QCs and others, all of them experts in fields such as defamation, IT and others in which Brian had specialised, came together to write chapters in a book to celebrate Brian’s 80th birthday.

The introduction was written by two former law lords, Lord Bingham and Lord Woolf, both of whom had held office as Lord Chief Justice. They conclude their introduction by affirming “that the whole profession of the law owes an immense debt to Brian Neill”. The title of the book describes Brian as “the quintessential judge”. So far as I know, no such honour has ever before been paid to a living judge.

I come last to Brian the family man, so well covered already this evening by his son, Andrew. He was proud, with good reason, of his own generation: of his younger brothers, Desmond and Patrick, Lord Neill of Bladen, and his elder sister, Cathie. I only met her once. But Brian always said that she was the brightest of the bunch.

And he was immensely proud of his children and grandchildren.

He loved being with them in the family home at Seaview in the Isle of Wight, or “the Island” as he always called it. And there was nothing he enjoyed more than arranging family parties for his birthday. I remember hearing about the great family gathering at Ickworth, which must have been for his 90th birthday. I know that he had already planned a party for his 95th birthday, and it may be (for all I know) for his 100th.

“ In no time, he had become the favourite judge before whom seasoned practitioners in the Commercial Court wanted to appear” In 1994, we were both promoted to the Court of Appeal, where we often sat together. Sitting with him in a court of three, I was never more confident that, somehow or other, we would reach the right result. What was it that made him such a good appellate judge?

Here I want to refer to an address he gave at the funeral of another great appellate judge, Lord Goff of Chieveley.

Robert sat in the House of Lords from 1986 to 1998, for the last two years as Senior Law Lord. The very fact that Brian was chosen to give the address at Robert’s funeral is in itself the best evidence of Brian’s standing among his contemporaries. But it is also interesting to note the qualities in Robert which he most admired: not just his intellectual brilliance, but “his completely unaffected modesty” and the “unfailing courtesy which he extended to all, from the highest to the lowest”. I would say without hesitation that exactly the same applied to Brian himself.

In 1993, there was a vacancy in the House of Lords. Brian was then aged 70. Had he been five years younger, I do not doubt that he would have filled the vacancy. But at 70, he was considered too old. Three years later, after eleven years in the Court of Appeal, he retired. But his judicial career was not over. He was asked to join the Court of Appeal in Gibraltar, where he very soon became president. He retired for the second time in 2003, at the age of 80.

But even then he was not finished. He became chairman of the Slynn Foundation. This involved lengthy visits to Turkey and the Ukraine with Henry Brooke in an attempt to persuade those countries to introduce what we know as the rule of law. Brian found this hard work, and so it was. But nevertheless, he continued as chairman until 2013, when he retired for the third and final time at the age of 90.

C

And it was not just for his family. Brian was not gregarious. But he enjoyed the company of others. He and Sally had a gift for hospitality, which reflected their very happy marriage. After they moved from Notting Hill to Rivermead Court, there were many occasions when they would entertain their friends, either at their flat or, more often, at Hurlingham. After Sally died, he would often mention that the painting of a waterfall hanging in the flat was Sally’s favourite picture. He went on speaking of her, almost as if she were standing beside him in the room.

Brian and I continued to meet whenever we could either at the Inner Temple or in Chambers, since by this time he had become a member of my old Chambers. When we were alone together, he would often say how lucky we both were to have become judges when we did, 40 years ago. Many things have changed in the judicial firmament since then, not always he thought for the better; but this is not the occasion to say more about that.

Instead, I come to the very end of his life, the life of a man I shall ever hold in admiration. Just before Christmas, he was taken to the Chelsea and Westminster Hospital. On 22 December, a nurse rang my wife in Sussex to say that Brian was unlikely to survive the weekend. I was in London at the time, and by a miracle my wife was able to get hold of me. I went at once to his bedside. He was still alive, and thankfully he knew who I was.

I had the distinct impression that he was ready for death. I did not stay long, but said goodbye as best I could. I have wished ever since that I had repeated words from psalm 91, which starts: “Whoso dwelleth under the defence of the most High, shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty,” and ends: “With long life will I satisfy him, and show him my salvation.”

Brian died on Christmas Eve. He was 94. Like Sally, he is buried on the Isle of Wight, at Seaview.

The Rt Hon the Lord Lloyd of Berwick DL 13

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

‘Sales’ on Retention of Title Terms

‘SALES’ ON RETENTION OF TITLE TERMS: A Tale of Caterpillars, Bunkers and the Supreme Court

Based on journal article, Sale on Retention of Title, is the Law Broken?

L Q R 2017, 133(Apr), 244–268, by Professor Louise Gullifer QC (Hon) The use of retention of title clauses grew up from sales contracts. Originally, people bought goods using a normal sales contract then, by manipulating the passing of property, a transaction developed whereby the vendor retained a proprietary right in the goods, so that if the buyer did not pay the vendor could go and take the goods back. This was done using the sections of the Sale of Goods Act which say that the parties can agree the time that property passes.

RL

This has become fairly institutionalised; there is a standard term clause that people use. The law developed through a series of cases on the interpretation of each particular contract. The way that this has panned out under English law is that, while they have an interest in the goods themselves, trade creditors do not usually have an interest in the manufactured goods made out of raw materials sold, or the receivables from the sale of those goods. That is because those interests have been said to be security interests, they have to be registered with Companies House. While this is possible, it is just not economic to do that, so they never get registered, and so they are not valid.

The result is a balance; the manufactured goods will fall under the bank’s security (usually a floating charge) or some kind of specialist financing against inventory. The receivables from the sale of the goods could be charged to the bank as security for their loans or they could be the subject of receivables financing.

Thus, the trade creditors have the interest in the goods and other creditors have interest in the other assets of that business.

The problem is that if you develop the law by interpretation of individual contracts, no court is actually going to look at the overall picture. Sometimes, therefore, the overall picture gets a bit out of skew.

This retention of title structure has proved rather incompatible with our beloved Sale of Goods Act. The Act permits retention of title, but it was not really designed to regulate it, therefore we have a mismatch. A ROT clause is not a one-way ticket for the seller. If you want a ROT clause it will have drawbacks as well as benefits.

Caterpillar Ltd (formerly FG Wilson Ltd) v John Holt & Co Ltd is the “Caterpillar Case”. The seller sold generators to the buyer on ROT terms and the buyer sub-sold those generators to its subsidiary.

The buyer was sued for the price and said they did not have to pay. They relied on Section 49 of the Sale of Goods Act which says at 49(1), “Where under a contract of sale the property and the goods has passed to the buyer and he wrongfully neglects or refuses to pay for the goods according to the terms of the contract, the seller may maintain an action against him for the price of the goods.”

The buyer said that property never passed to them because they sold as agent; property passed through them directly to the sub-buyer. The majority in the Court of Appeal preferred this agency construction. That is a disaster. It has very uncommercial consequences and potentially upsets the balance of financing, since it means that the seller’s interest in 14

any receivables or manufactured goods is not an unregistered security interest, but an absolute interest and therefore valid.

Further, all three judges held that Section 49 is a complete code, governing when a seller can sue for the price. The upshot is that a seller on ROT terms is never going to be able to sue for the price, because ex hypothesi, the property will not pass until the price is paid. This is unsatisfactory, since in most cases sellers who sell on ROT terms do want to sue for the price.

The Court of Appeal looked in enormous detail at what other claims the seller could have. Lord Justice Longmore concluded that if the property never passed to the buyer, the seller has no claim to the price and no claim for damages. They cannot sue for non-acceptance because the buyer has accepted the goods. Lord Justice Longmore says that is an inherent result of a retention of title clause. After the Caterpillar Case, Section 49 became a provision that is incompatible with the use of ROT clauses for the protection of the seller.

PST Energy 7 Shipping LLC v OW Bunker Malta Ltd is the “Bunkers case”. Bunker oil (bunkers) tends to be supplied through long supply chains. The actual facts are more complicated, but let us assume that the bunker users, the people running the ship, are the ultimate purchaser.

OW Bunker (OWB) is a large multinational bunker broker. More or less the whole of the bunker conglomerate went bust. The bunker users had bought some bunkers on ROT terms. In some jurisdictions the person who delivers the bunkers to a ship has the right to arrest a ship if they are not paid. The bunker users were worried they might have to pay twice: their immediate contracting party (the insolvent bunker brokers) and the people who would arrest their ship and try and claim the price.

In many other jurisdictions, bunker users brought proceedings to which they joined both the people at the top of the chain and the bunker brokers. They asked the court to tell them whom to pay. In many cases the court said to pay the immediate contracting party. But in this case, the bunker users brought a case just against the brokers, seeking a declaration that they did not have to pay them.

Their ingenious argument was that they did not have property in the bunkers. It never passed to them because there was a retention of title clause all down the chain. Because property did not pass, the brokers could not sue under section 49. They had a second argument, that the brokers were in breach of the term implied by Section 12 of the Sale of Goods Act that the seller has the right to sell the goods.

The sellers (the bunker brokers) said that this was not a contract for the sale of goods at all, so Section 49 does not apply, and their claim was a claim in debt.

The Supreme Court accepted this argument; this was not a contract for the sale of goods, despite the fact that that is what it said. They reasoned that once the bunkers cease to exist, property in them cannot pass. Under this contract, most of the bunkers would be used up by the time the end

Reader’s Lecture Series

of the credit period came. Section 2 of the Sale of Goods Act defines a contract for the sale of goods as a contract by which the seller transfers or agrees to transfer the property and the goods. If you never transfer property it cannot be a sale of goods contract.

What is it then, if it is not a sale of goods contract? It is a sui generis contract. It is a contract to permit consumption prior to any payment, a licence to consume, and if any bunkers remain unconsumed, to transfer the property in those bunkers to the owners in return for the owners paying the price.

In the alternative, they said, if it is a contract for the sale of goods, then the broker can sue for the price because Section 49(1) is not exclusive.

This case is very unfortunate. There are serious problems with the idea that you can have what looks like a sale of goods on retention of title terms, but which turns out to be a sui generis contract of slightly uncertain limits. We do not know when a contract is a contract for sale of goods on ROT terms and when it is a sui generis contract. If it is a sui generis contract, how do we know what the terms are? Pretty much every ROT clause is likely to fall foul of this and therefore pretty much every contract made on ROT terms will turn into a sui generis contract.

There is a real problem here now. If you have a contact for the supply of goods, at least on ROT terms, it will not normally be a contract of sale. Or conceivably it will be an agency contract using the Caterpillar reasoning.

The English law of sales on retention of title terms is broken.

There will no longer be sales on retention of title terms; they have disappeared into other things.

I suggest three possible responses; the first is that we could have an alternative analysis as to when property passes.

Another is that we could legislate to deal with these types of contract. The third is that we could take a functional approach to retention of title.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

On insolvency then the seller or lender will have some kind of security interest in those goods and will be able to enforce.

Until that point the debtor can do everything an owner could do with the inventory. This is, functionally, a floating charge.

I suggest this is what an ROT clause in inventory is doing: enabling the supplier of the goods who is supplying on credit to create a revolving security interest, like a floating charge.

We can, thus, analyse ROT clauses as creating a kind of floating charge. We would have an ordinary contract of sale and a floating charge on the goods which would attach on delivery.

There would be permission to use the goods, to resell the goods, and all the things that you would expect to find in a normal floating charge. When the goods are sold, the buyer would get the tile of buyer, when they are made into something else, the floating charge disappears, and then the product can be the subject of somebody else’s security interest.

As an added attraction, this not only performs the function of this interest, but it also means that the Sale of Goods Act can apply to the contract with full force and needs no adaptation.

We would have to think about certain ramifications of this analysis. What about insolvency? Other creditors (such as preferential creditors) get priority over a normal floating charge because it is over all the assets of the business. Here, though, the floating charge is only going to apply to one thing; the goods which are financed, and moreover, that finance brings new money, new value into the business. There is therefore good reason not to adulterate that by having to pay out other people.

We also must think about registration. We do not register ROT clauses at the moment. It is unworkable under our current system, because it would mean that the seller would have to register every single contract they made at Companies House, and that would be entirely unwelcome, so it is suggested that the ‘ROT floating charge’ should not have to be registered, unless it secured ‘all monies’ owed by the buyer to the seller.

“ The English law of sales on retention of title terms is broken.

There will no longer be sales on retention of title terms; they have disappeared into other things” The passing of property analysis first: before the Bunkers Case, everyone thought that property passes at the moment of authorised use. At that point, the seller loses their security.

They are left with an unsecured claim for the price, but that is not surprising because there is no way you can get it back once the things gone.

When you apply this analysis to bunkers it gets a little more complicated because of the chain. We would have to say that each contract in the chain is a sale of goods contract with an implied term that property passes down the chain when the bunkers are used. I would not be surprised if retention of title sellers now expressly put that term into the contract.

Another argument is to say that new legislation could work out exactly which terms could be applied to the sui generis contract.

It does not need me to point out that this is probably not the time to embark upon that. The people who draft our legislation have a few other things to think about at the moment.

The radical solution: a functional approach for the retention of title. Although very few jurisdictions have what we call a floating charge, most jurisdictions have some kind of non-possessory security interest over inventory. In most jurisdictions, anyone providing credit can take an interest in assets which circulate in the business. It is non-possessory, so it means that the bank does not actually have to have them in their vault or any kind of possession of them.

Lastly, what about products and proceeds? We do not have at the moment that interest of a ROT seller in products and proceeds required to be registered. That is as it should be.

A functional approach recognises what retention of title clauses are there to do. As the director of the Secured Transactions Law Reform Project, of course I would suggest widespread reform. It is, however, interesting to look at what would happen if we just reformed this one area, which on any view is broken, or at least a little bit cracked.

Louise Gullifer QC (Hon) Professor of Commercial Law, University of Oxford Case citations: The Caterpillar Case Caterpillar Ltd (formerly FG Wilson Ltd) v John Holt & Co Lt [2013] EWCA Civ 1232, The Bunkers Case PST Energy 7 Shipping LLC v OW Bunker Malta Ltd [2016] UKSC 23 The full version of this lecture is available at

innertemple.org.uk/lectures/sales

15

RL

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Master Dobry

MASTER DOBRY A tribute by The Rt Hon Lord Carnwath of Notting Hill given at the memorial service for Master Dobry at Holy Trinity, Sloane Square on 10 April 2018.

It is impossible in the time available to do anything like justice to a personality as remarkable and complex as George. For his early history, I have his own notes for the speech he gave at his 90th birthday party, which I organised for him with Garry Hart at the House of Lords.

Garry became one of George’s most devoted admirers, and was much loved in return. It is very sad that he is no longer with us. I wish he were standing with me today.

Garry had asked George to give us a little of his history. He took us back in time to Warsaw where he was born at the very end of the First World War, and where he lived his early life. He came from a family of lawyers. I quote him: “Warsaw was a vibrant, elegant lively multiracial city, although somewhat provincial. It was known as the Paris of the East. I was there last before the war in 1939. My next visit was 50 years later in 1990. The town and the people were unrecognisable, the new buildings were ugly, but the new people were wonderful.”

C

That he came to this country we owe to a cruise taken by his father in 1935, in the course of which he discovered Edinburgh. He decided that this was where George should be sent to learn English. It is not quite clear what it was about Scotland that attracted him. George said it may have had something to do with the idea that the Scots were good with money. In any event he went there for three months, nominally to study economics, but stayed for three years.

The father of one of his friends, Neil Bruce, was a professor at Oxford. It was there that he went to stay after Edinburgh, and made many friends including Roy Jenkins and Ronald McIntosh, who is here today. He returned to Warsaw briefly in July 1939, but was in England when the war broke out.

He joined the Polish Army and later the Polish Parachute Brigade. There, in his words, his story might have ended: “Most of my Parachute Brigade comrades died at the Bridge too far at Arnhem during the Operation Market Garden. But I was lucky because I was transferred to the Polish Air Force to help with Intelligence work during the invasion…”

After the war, he read for the Bar and was called in July 1946. He soon developed a successful practice mainly in landlord and tenant work, but also a wide variety of work for the Polish immigrant community, ranging from divorce and nullity to libel. He also began to develop his interest in international human rights law. He was a founder member of the council of the organisation Justice.

In 1960, he joined the chambers at 2 Paper Buildings, now Landmark Chambers, where planning law was becoming a lively and lucrative area of practice. It was quite a political set in those days. One could even detect the seeds of the Brexit debate. The leading figures in Chambers included two Conservative ministers: Geoffrey Rippon, who later led the negotiations for entry to the Common Market, and Derek Walker Smith, who was a passionate opponent. I wonder what they would be thinking now. George was not too interested in politics in those days but was concentrating on his legal career. He quickly became one of the leaders in the field of planning and local government law. He took silk in 1969.

I first met him in 1970, when I joined chambers, without any previous knowledge of planning law. I was sent off, by our remarkable clerk Stanley Cobbett, to join George at a planning inquiry in Hastings. I had little idea what was going on. But, whatever it was, it was clear that George was in 16

Master Dobry Courtesy of Mrs Dobry

total command, and also that things were a great deal more interesting when he was on his feet. As I later learnt, that was one of the secrets of his success. He made things interesting and lively – not a typical feature of most planning inquiries.

After that, we seemed to get on very well. Most of my interesting work over the next ten years was with him. I learnt a lot – the importance of total commitment, and total command of everything about a case, including all the boring detail. He was a prodigiously hard worker. I also learnt something more difficult to identify – without disrespect, I can only describe it as the power of irrational thought. I had come from a more conventional tradition. One attempted to progress from proposition A, through logical steps B, C and D, to conclusion E. That was not George’s way. He had an unerring instinct for conclusion E. But the intervening steps were less easy to predict. One of the jobs of his juniors was to try to fill in the gaps. It was not easy, but very good training. Somehow he seemed to make it work.

We also had a lot of fun. One of the most memorable episodes for me was our attempts at two planning inquiries between 1971 and 1973 to get permission to build an oil refinery for the Italian oil giant ENI, on Canvey Island. The second inquiry started in January 1973. George decided that we should prepare for it by joining his friend Ronald McKintosh and his wife on a skiing holiday in Courchevel. Typically, George’s only concession to the location was to buy a very smart ski-ing suit from Harrods, and to have a photo taken on the slopes. The rest of time he worked, and I skied with Ronald.

The inquiry went well and we got our permission, but the refinery never got built. George used to boast that his proudest achievement from the inquiry was to have organised my meeting with my future wife, Bambina, who was working for ENI at the time. She has remained one of George’s most devoted friends and admirers.

Celebrate the life

Between 1973 and 1975, he combined a succession of important cases with work on his influential and far-sighted report for the government on the Planning System, for which he was awarded the CBE. He also found time to chair the inquiry into the M20.

It was in that period that I got to know George in his other role as an Essex Country Gentleman (always stylishly dressed), and as a family man. His first wife, Margy, was a wonderfully calming influence, but sadly died in 1978. His two daughters, Jophy and Anthea, and later his sons-in-law and his grandchildren, were a source of great pride throughout his life.

In 1980, at the age of 61, George became a circuit judge, a role which he loved and which suited him well. He had a strong instinctive sense of justice, but again sometimes a slightly eccentric way of getting there. In 1984, he married Rosemary Alexander, who has remained a great source of love and support for the rest of his life. He was also able to find more time for other things – his family, his country house in Essex and the Garrick Club, of which he was a loyal and muchrespected member and a regular visitor until very recently.

Given that he seemed to be enjoying himself so much, I was a little surprised in May 1987 to receive out of the blue a letter from him. It said that he had recently attended a memorial service and liked the hymns. Since he was intending to have one of his own in the not-too-distant future, he wanted to entrust me with his proposed list of hymns. They are in today’s service, but I am glad his letter turned out to be 30 years too soon.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

were being taught by an English teacher about English land law – equally amazingly, they seemed genuinely interested.

Twenty-five years on the British School has continued to play an important part in Polish legal education. Its alumni have included many leading figures in the Polish political and legal community. In 1999, this work was recognised by the award of the Polish Starred Cross of Merit. He was delighted that the Polish ambassador was able to attend his 99th birthday dinner last November (and is here today).

In 1999, he extended his support for the rule of law in Eastern Europe by establishing the Slynn Foundation, with the support of Lord Slynn, to help law students in developing legal systems. Sadly, three of the champions of the Foundation have died in the last few months: Sir Henry Brooke, Sir Brian Neill and David Vaughan QC, all of whom were great friends and supporters of George’s projects. Happily, the work goes on.

Perhaps the culmination of George’s public service came in 2000, when at the age of 81 he was asked by the Lord Chancellor Lord Irvine to write a report for the government on international legal relations. It was an inspired choice.

George understood better than anyone the importance of this country’s unrivalled legal tradition to our place in the world, politically and commercially. He also understood the vital link between the success of our legal services and our tradition of respect for human rights. It was a brilliant piece of work and remains of great relevance. He was saddened

“ He first helped to set up a British-Polish Legal Association.

Then with the support of the government know-how fund, and a number of leading British law firms, he established the British Centre for English and European Legal Studies at Warsaw University” At that point, it might have been thought that his professional career was winding down. In fact, a new phase was about to begin. In 1990, after the fall of communism, he returned to Poland for the first time for 50 years. He had developed a passionate belief in the rule of law as experienced in this country, and he was determined to see it restored in Poland. He found that the years of communist rule had not diminished the commitment among Polish lawyers to the concept of the rule of law. There was also a great respect for the British tradition, and a great thirst for knowledge about it.

He first helped to set up a British-Polish Legal Association.

Then with the support of the government know-how fund, and a number of leading British law firms, he established the British Centre for English and European Legal Studies at Warsaw University.

I vividly remember my introduction to the centre. It was typical of George’s sense of drama. He had been very secretive about it all. But in 1992, he invited a group of us to take part in a seminar in Warsaw on environmental law.

On the first evening, he led us to a taxi and said he wanted to show us something new. We had no idea what it was.

We were taken on a roundabout journey to what we later discovered was the university. He took us into the back of a classroom full of Polish students. To our amazement, they

that the retirement of Lord Irvine, and the demise of the Lord Chancellor’s Department in its traditional form, meant that some of the impetus for implementation was lost.

Even at this late age, George’s commitment to the work was total. We managed to persuade him to come away with Rosemary for holiday in Patagonia. Even the spectacular scenery of South America struggled to distract George from work on his report. Later, he told me that the highpoint of the holiday had been when we had been stuck on the runway at Gatwick for three hours, and he had me as a captive audience to read through the first draft of his report. I cannot pretend I felt quite the same way.

Over the 18 years since then, George continued to amaze, amuse and frustrate. His zest for life remained undiminished.

George in his early 90s was still as active and innovative as ever. I once asked him how he managed it at his age. He had a typically Georgian explanation: “The fact is, Robert, that these days I don’t have any memory left. So, I forget how old I am.”

I will end with his own words at his 90th birthday: “Now on a sunny autumn day in London it is wonderful to be 90.

And it is wonderful to be here. With a little bit of luck there will be another year or two. But later, don’t cry for me Argentina… I have been very, unbelievably lucky. And it has been such fun…”

The Rt Hon Lord Carnwath of Notting Hill

17

C

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

The Social Context of the Law

THE SOCIAL CONTEXT OF THE LAW

By Master Scruton

T The lectures devoted to the Social Context of Law, initiated in 2016, have continued during the last academic year, attracting a growing audience among senior and junior members of the Inn, as well as among members of the public.

The purpose has been to enhance an understanding of the law and its social importance, through the open discussion of questions concerning which there may be equally plausible but conflicting answers. We live in a volatile climate of opinion, and points of law, philosophy and jurisprudence are now at the heart of public debate. We therefore hope that this initiative will promote the image of the Inn as a place of serious legal scholarship, able both to educate its student body in the workings of the law and to provide informed discussion of the principles by which our law has been shaped, and will continue to be shaped in the future.

During 2018, we arranged four events, in each of which two or more expert speakers were invited to address some issues that have become prominent in public discussions. The four issues were these: sovereignty and what it means; free speech and how to protect it; war crimes, and how to punish them; and finally the relation between religion and law. In the discussion of sovereignty, chaired by Master Nice, we were fortunate to have on the panel, alongside Master Schiemann, the distinguished political scientist Vernon Bogdanor CBE FBA, an Honorary Bencher of Middle Temple and Emeritus Fellow of Brasenose College, Oxford, who has served on many public bodies devoted to constitutional reform, both here and elsewhere in Europe.

Master Schiemann and Professor Bogdanor agreed that the concept of sovereignty has two aspects: an internal aspect, concerning the question of the ultimate source

18

of a country’s law; and an external aspect, concerning the relations with other sovereign powers. Professor Bogdanor argued that the definition of internal sovereignty, in our own case, as the sovereignty of Parliament, does not make room for the many qualifications to parliamentary decisions that come from outside Parliament itself, either from international tribunals or from the effect of the original European Communities Membership Act, which, on one interpretation, subjects Parliament to laws imposed by the European Commission. Professor Bogdanor argued that we should speak instead of the qualified supremacy of Parliament, and cease to use the concept of sovereignty, which is a concept too muddled to be of help to us.

Master Schiemann, who speaks with the authority of a former judge of the ECJ, addressed the question of external sovereignty, or ‘national sovereignty’ as it is usually called.

In the relation between states, he argued, as in the relation between individuals, no agreement can be reached on the principle that each state puts its own interest above that of every other. Decisions must always be qualified by what others want, and it may well be in the national interest to allow others to prevail. In so far as the concept of sovereignty implies some kind of absolute right to pursue one’s own agenda, sovereignty is not only at odds with what is required by peaceful relations between states, but also in conflict with the assumptions behind the current international order. Master Schiemann raised the question of national identity, pointing out that boundaries are malleable and nations transient, so that any affirmation of an absolute right to sovereign decisions will be tantamount to locking the people of a territory within the borders that currently happen to surround them.

Treasury

This fascinating issue, clearly of the greatest importance to all thinking people in the wake of the Brexit vote, and the evolving tensions in the European Union, sparked off a lively discussion, leaving everyone with food for thought. In particular the old question, whether Parliament can bind its successors and if not, why not, came alive in a new and challenging way.

discreetly, since most people don’t want to know. There was a particularly good white wine served afterwards, as I recall.

In the discussion of free speech, we were again fortunate to host a distinguished visitor, Timothy Garton Ash CMG, the distinguished historian and political scientist, who is Professor of European History at the University of Oxford and a Fellow of St Antony’s College. Professor Garton Ash is the author of many important books, the latest – Free Speech: Ten Principles for a Connected World, published by Yale University Press in 2016 – offering a new and radical framework for discussing the issue that concerned us. I spoke in response, and Master Nice was again in the chair. Although the debate about free speech is an old one, Professor Garton Ash argued, it has been radically altered by information technology and the global communications network. There is now a global power struggle for the control of information, with states (such as China and Russia) and privately controlled media giants, such as Google and Facebook, each striving for monopoly control. The question of how we might guarantee our freedom of opinion, while also protecting our privacy, has become one of the most important legal and political questions of our day, and already state legislatures have moved to exert control over the gathering and the use of information, with the German network legislation creating a rule of self-policing that seems as likely to repress free opinion as to protect it.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Our third event, chaired by Master Korner, was devoted to the pressing issue of war crimes, how they are defined and how they are judged. Two benchers of the Inn, Master Bonomy and Master Nice, both involved, the one as judge, the other as prosecutor, in the recent trials conducted by the ICTY (the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia), introduced us to some of the enormous complexities surrounding criminal trials, when political interests are at stake, and when the court in question relies at every point on the acquiescence of states whose interests may be damaged by the verdict.

Master Bonomy reminded the audience that tribunals cannot suffice to bring war crimes to an end. The propensity to criminal behaviour in war-time is part of human nature, and the best we can achieve is to give people the sense that you cannot, simply because you are in a war, assume that you can get away with anything. A steadily evolving public recognition that war crimes exist, and that there is a shared interest in punishing them, will make a difference, and this is the best we can hope for. The concern of the tribunals, he argued, should be justice, and he quoted with approval the remark of Pope John VI that if you want peace, you should work for justice. In this way, the sense of impunity, of being above judgement, which so often adheres to military and political offices, can be dented. Although the ICTY found many problems in pursuing its cases to their conclusion, it also has served a vital purpose, in preparing the

“ There are two important questions that we face, Professor Garton Ash suggested: how free should speech be? And, how should free speech be?”

There are two important questions that we face, Professor Garton Ash suggested: how free should speech be? And, how should free speech be?

The first is in part a legal question, involving a definition of what can and cannot be said; the second is a wider and more social, not to say political, question concerning how free speech should be practised, so as not to undermine the basic assumptions on which the free exchange of opinion depends. What is needed, Professor Garton Ash suggested, is a culture of ‘robust civility’, in which good manners and mutual respect coexist with the explicit right to say what one thinks. To achieve this we would need a mixed regime of legal regulation and self-regulation.

In response, I suggested that we should always recognize that there are two quite different functions of communal discourse. One is the pursuit of truth, as in scientific enquiry, a pursuit that repudiates censorship. The other is the craving for membership, as in religious exhortations, and that craving is eager for censorship. When religions stray into scientific territory, as at the time of Galileo, then free speech becomes a threat to them, as it is a threat to many Islamists today.

When this happens it is not false beliefs that are censored; falsehood, and especially palpable falsehood, is never a threat to anyone. What is censored is the truth. That is the difficulty that we increasingly face, and I recommended the posture of Spinoza, who argued that we should pursue the truth, since knowledge depends upon it, but we should do so

T

way for the International Criminal Court, and clarifying the obstacles that the ICC must overcome. One of these obstacles, Master Bonomy argued, is that of collecting evidence, when witnesses are both difficult to trace and easy to intimidate.

He presented fascinating anecdotal illustrations of this point, before handing over to Master Nice as his respondent.

Master Nice agreed that the purpose of international tribunals is not to change the world but to put in place an effective machinery of justice that will serve to undermine the impression among military and political leaders that they are immune to punishment. The Yugoslav tribunals have, Master Nice urged, changed the way we think, and – for all their defects – should be regarded as a real political achievement. That said, he proceeded to expand on the defects in a most interesting way, pointing to the danger of making legal appointments by a political vote, and the difficulty of working with people like Mrs Del Ponte who have neither a grasp of adversarial procedure in criminal trials nor an ability to distinguish legal from political outcomes. As Master Nice pointed out, in all these matters the victim is of no importance to the victor, who is interested only in the final result, and he used the massacre at Srebrenica in illustration of the point. The work of the tribunal, he suggested, can be undermined when it is given a broad political remit, rather than the simple legal goal, of holding to account those responsible for crime. This old-fashioned idea of accountability, familiar from Master Nice’s practice at the English Bar, is apparently not widely understood in Balkan political circles.

19

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

The Social Context of the Law

“ Your ordinance cannot overrule the unchangeable unwritten code of heaven” Our final session, again under the chairmanship of Master Nice, was a tri-partite discussion of religion and the law, between Master Schiemann, Master Rix and the Master of the Temple, Master Robin Griffiths-Jones. Master Schiemann began by reflecting on the famous rebuke offered by Antigone to Creon, in Sophocles’s play. In response to Creon’s forbidding the burial of Polynices, she says: “Your ordinance cannot overrule the unchangeable unwritten code of heaven,” thereby implying the existence of a higher law by which our earthly laws are judged, and which can overrule the merely man-made law of the city. St Augustine, St Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther King all repeat Antigone’s provocative words. But so too, Master Schiemann argued, does the English law, which has long recognized equity as prevailing over law, which it does by invoking principles of natural justice that are rooted in religious ideas. Moreover, our courts of human rights, and the Universal Code of Human Rights that has evolved through them, make the same claim for the existence of a higher law. In that case, there really may be a conflict between religiously founded beliefs and human legislation. So how is the conflict to be resolved?

T

Master Rix, in a wide-ranging and touchingly personal response to that question, spoke as a Jew, who lives by a religion of law.

This law challenges the faithful at every turn to acknowledge the authority of the divine law-giver. But, Master Rix argued, we are bound to this law-giver by a covenant, and He too is bound, so that mutual consent lies at the heart of our religious duty. To understand the covenant is to understand what human beings can reasonably be asked to consent to. In other words, laws democratically adopted appeal to the very same human capacities as the law of God, and properly understood will always tend in the same direction.

This does not mean that there cannot be unjust laws.

Of course there can be. But we have developed ways of responding to them, of subjecting them to further tests and higher forms of judgment, as when appealing to universal human rights. At the same time we should not think we can solve all potential conflicts between religious duty and civil obedience with a simple principle, like the laïcité embodied in the French constitution. Matters are too complex for any single principle to settle things, and we must, as always in Britain, muddle along in a spirit of good-natured toleration.

The Master of the Temple brought the session, and our series of lectures, to an end with the electrifying story of a recent visit to Beijing, in which his host accurately described the distinction between the Western liberal system of law, in which the law exists to protect the rights of individuals, and the (much superior) Confucian authoritative system of law, in which the law exists to enforce the duty of civil obedience. To the question of what happens to the person who questions the law or wishes to uphold the right of free opinion, his host replied that we should distinguish the Western liberal system of law from the Confucian authoritative system, in which the law enforces civil obedience. But whence comes the authority of that Confucian system? To that question the reply was that we should distinguish the Western liberal system of law from the Confucian authoritative system, in which the law enforces civil obedience. Master Griffiths-Jones reflected further on the broad question of the relation between law and religion, arguing that ecclesiastical jurisdiction had not always been so very different from the alleged Confucian example, which his Chinese host had invoked without explaining it, and would no doubt invoke without explaining it forever.

Professor Sir Roger Scruton FBA FRSL

20

CHRISTMAS PARTY

Celebrate your Christmas party with colleagues and friends at The Inner Temple.

You will be captivated by our dedicated events team and our culinary delights. With a variety of beautiful rooms, The Inner Temple is the perfect venue for all your festive needs.

We have limited availability, so book now for your preferred dates.

Email catering@innertemple.org.uk

Call us 020 7797 8230

Gifts ONLINE

îŒŚ innertemple.org.uk/store IN PERSON

î•&#x; Treasury Building

21

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Master Aldous

MASTER ALDOUS Sir William Aldous, judge and equestrian

Master Aldous

Sir William Aldous, who died on his 82nd birthday, was a Lord Justice of Appeal and a passionate supporter of equestrian sports.

C

He enjoyed a long and distinguished career at the Bar as a specialist in intellectual property. As a judge of the Patents Court from 1988 to 1995, he made headlines in January 1993 when he supported the right of Central Television to broadcast extracts from an interview with the serial killer Dennis Nilsen, over which the Home Office was attempting to seek an injunction.

Nilsen, a civil servant, had been jailed for life in 1983 after being convicted of murdering six young men. In the interview, conducted at Albany prison on the Isle of Wight, he calmly described how he had cut up the bodies and how much he had enjoyed carrying his victims after he had killed them: “It was an expression of my power to lift and carry and have control. The dangling element of the limp limbs was an expression of [their] passivity.”

The interview, carried out in the presence of a clinical psychologist, a police superintendent and a detective chief inspector, was to form a seven-minute segment of a documentary, Murder in Mind, scheduled for screening on ITV’s late-night Viewpoint 93 slot.

The Home Office took out a writ, seeking an injunction banning screening on the grounds of the possible distress to victims’ families. Officials further claimed that permission had been granted for Nilsen to be interviewed for police training purposes only, so to broadcast it would infringe a section of the Copyright Act, which says that copyright resides with those who make the arrangements. The producers argued that the Home Office had been fully aware of their intention to broadcast, though they had agreed to make the film available for police use.

In an hour-long judgment, Aldous admitted that he had personally found the footage distressing, though he had not previously thought of himself as someone with a weak stomach, but he rejected the argument that the extracts should be banned because viewers might be distressed.

22

“ There is a potential educational benefit in allowing pictures of the interview to tell the story, rather than the spoken word,” he said. “I am aware of the possible distress, but the programme, having been made, is best seen and best seen with the extract in.”

Aldous’s judgment, upheld on appeal, was welcomed by broadcasters as reflecting a liberalising trend among judges.

But in other judgements, Aldous made clear that there were limits to the freedom to publish. In 2000, he was one of three appeal court judges who ruled against The Sun, after a company controlled by Mohamed Al-Fayed brought an action for breach of copyright following the publication of photographs of Diana, Princess of Wales, and Dodi Fayed showing their arrival and departure at a Paris villa owned

by Mohamed Al-Fayed on the day before their deaths – photographs that had been stolen and sold to the newspaper.

Aldous observed that although Fayed had given a fabricated account of the visit in the book Death of a Princess, there had been no need for The Sun to publish the photographs when the information they conveyed (that the visit had only lasted half an hour) could have been made available without infringing copyright. For the newspaper to describe its action as “fair dealing” was to “give honour to dishonour”. The judges held that there was no statutory defence of public interest to a breach of copyright.

William Aldous was born in Suffolk on 17 March 1936, the son of Guy Aldous QC and Elizabeth (née Paul), and educated at Harrow and at Trinity College, Cambridge. Called to the Bar by the Inner Temple in 1960, he served as a junior counsel on intellectual property matters to the Department of Trade and Industry from 1972 to 1976, when he took silk.

He was head of chambers at 6 Pump Court from 1980 to 1988, when he was knighted, elevated to the High Court and appointed a judge of the Patents Court. In 1995, he was appointed a Lord Justice of Appeal and sworn of the Privy Council. He retired from the bench in 2003, although he remained an arbitrator in intellectual property matters and was a member of the Gibraltar Court of Appeal until 2013.

Celebrate the life

Away from his legal career, Aldous was a keen rider to hounds.

At Cambridge, he had been a joint master of the University Drag Hounds for two seasons, riding out with them on Sundays, while hunting on Saturdays with the Suffolk Hunt.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Woolf, the Lord Chief Justice, that it would be inappropriate for judges to take part in “quasi-political” events such as the Countryside Alliance march planned for September in protest against “prejudiced attacks” on hunting.

“ We moved off with no hounds, but they were all on within two hundred yards” In a 2015 article in a hunt newsletter, he recalled Boxing Day meets at the Angel Square in Bury where, on one occasion, the hounds disappeared into the large crowd of hunt supporters to scavenge: “We moved off with no hounds, but they were all on within two hundred yards.”

Aldous’s father, also a keen huntsman, became a master of the Essex and Suffolk Hunt in 1967 and Willie (as he was known to his hunting friends) went in as a master to help him in 1970, serving until 1976. In later life, he regularly followed the Essex and Suffolk on foot.

Aldous also became involved in eventing, serving in various posts, including, from 2005, as chairman of British Eventing, leading the sport through difficult times as it dealt with losses incurred at the 2005 Windsor International Horse Trials.

In 2002, he caused a flurry of controversy when he said that he “resented” advice given the previous year by Lord

While agreeing to follow Lord Woolf’s advice, Aldous did not see any reason why judges should not take part in a lawful march, adding that he wanted his friends to know that his absence would not imply any lack of support. Besides, he pointed out, as his views were well known, there was no chance of his being asked to sit on a case involving hunting.

In his 2015 hunt newsletter article, he wrote: “I am so pleased to see hunting thrive in spite of the ban.”

In 1960, he married Gill Henson, whom he had met at Cambridge. She was the daughter of Gino Henson, master of the Blankney Hunt for many years, and would go on to serve as the main organiser of Stratford Hills Horse Trials. Her brother, Bill Henson, was for 16 years director of the Burghley Horse Trials.

C

She survives him with their son and two daughters.

Sir William Aldous, born 17 March 1936, died 17 March 2018 Courtesy of The Telegraph

William and Gill Aldous out with the Blankney Hunt in 1964

23

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Proof in International Criminal Trials

PROOF IN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIALS From a lecture delivered by Dr Yvonne Mc Dermott Rees on 3 April 2018

RL Evidence and proof are often mentioned together in the same breath, as though the two concepts are somehow interchangeable, but they mean quite different things.

The evidence side of international criminal trials has received a great deal of academic scrutiny, whereas the proof side has been somewhat neglected. This is particularly true for the mountains of scholarship that exists on the rules of admissibility of evidence in international criminal trials.

What happens to that evidence once it is admitted?

My first theme is the evaluation of evidence. The international criminal trial has many differences to the domestic criminal trial. One difference is the quality of evidence.

International criminal tribunals are not complemented by police forces equipped to investigate crimes and gather evidence. Investigative teams allied to either the prosecution or defence carry out their own investigations. This can give rise to issues of access to evidence and witnesses, witnesses’ unwillingness to come forward and provide evidence, and on occasion issues of witness intimidation.

Cultural and linguistic barriers are also common, not just between the judges and the lawyers and witnesses whom they meet in court, but also between the judges themselves, who hail from a wide range of jurisdictions.

In addition, while there is often ample evidence to show that the particular atrocities have occurred, often there is less evidence to link those atrocities to people high up in the chain of command. This often requires, in the words of former Chief Prosecutor of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, David Crane, “a certain amount of dancing with the devil”.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague © iStock/ Gaps Photography

24

The second major challenge is the volume of evidence presented. An example of this is the Prlić et al trial. Over the course of 465 trial days, the court heard 207 witnesses, and admitted almost 10,000 items of documentary evidence, totalling over a million pages of evidence.

One of the most frequent statements that we see in judgments is that the findings are based on the totality of the evidentiary record. The idea that judges can analyse, synthesise these thousands of pages of evidence and hold all that information in their heads assumes an exceptional – some might say superhuman – cognitive ability on the part of the international judge.

This relates to my next point on the holistic and atomistic approaches to the evidence. It is clear that divergence of opinion exists amongst judges on the approach to be taken to the evaluation of the evidence.

On one hand, we see criticisms by some judges that their colleagues have taken an excessively fragmentary view of the evidence. In the case of Stanišić and Simatović, the prosecutor argued that the trial chamber had “compartmentalised assessment of the evidence”, which “obscured the coherence of its case”.

On the other hand, some judges have criticised what they see as their colleagues’ broader view of the evidentiary record as a whole. In the very strong dissent issued in the Šešelj case, Judge Lattanzi described what she called her colleagues’ “flawed, or at best cursory” analysis of the evidence.

These two approaches to the evaluation of the evidence can be classified as atomistic or holistic, a classification borrowed from scholarship from the United States of America, and particularly authors like Michael Pardo and Ronald Allen.

Reader’s Lecture Series

The atomistic approach examines each individual piece of evidence, before forming an opinion on whether that evidence, taken with other evidence on the record, can form the basis of a conclusion. The holistic approach, on the other hand, takes a view based on the evidentiary record as a whole, before working backwards to determine which pieces of evidence lead to that overall conclusion.

Rather than seeing the two approaches as incompatible camps from which the international judge must choose, we can develop a framework where the best elements of both the atomistic and holistic approaches can be combined.

Individual pieces of evidence, and the factual findings that they lead to, can and should be subjected to the most searching scrutiny. But this must take place in the context of an analysis of the evidential record as a whole. In other words, judges need to keep an eye on both the woods and the trees.

Despite over two decades of practice in international criminal tribunals, no consistent approach as to how judges should weigh evidence has emerged. The same could be said for the lack of clarity surrounding the precise requirements of the standard of proof.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

However, as Judge Kovács has noted, the fact that we are at an earlier stage of proceedings does not justify a light assessment of facts, nor to disregard the proper presentation of evidence submitted. Instead, it requires that a serious examination of the evidence be carried out in light of the applicable lower standard of proof.

To subject the evidence to a less searching scrutiny would have the effect of rendering the confirmation of the charges stage little more than a rubber-stamping exercise, where all that is required is for the prosecution to show that there is some evidence that links the accused to these crimes that happened, and for allowing the prosecution to work out its theory of the case later. This would effectively render the confirmation hearing meaningless and may well lead to inefficiencies later.

I end with some observations on the structure and clarity of judgments. There is a relatively new trend of joint concurring opinions. This practice highlights some of the discord amongst judges and adds further conceptual confusion as to the precise basis for the majority judgment. It has the potential to dilute the normative force of the majority judgment.

“ Individual pieces of evidence, and the factual findings that they lead to, can and should be subjected to the most searching scrutiny. But this must take place in the context of an analysis of the evidential record as a whole. In other words, judges need to keep an eye on both the woods and the trees” There are different standards of proof applicable to each stage of proceedings at the International Criminal Court. The standard of proof for confirmation of the charges is ‘substantial grounds to believe’. Before the ICC can confirm the charges and send the accused to trial, they must have had substantial grounds to believe that he or she committed the crimes charged.

By 2012, 4 cases out of 14 had actually fallen at this procedural hurdle. There were some concerns, both by academics and practitioners, that the confirmation stage had become something of a mini-trial. It is in that context that, in 2015, judges of the International Criminal Court decided to draw what they called the Chamber’s Practice Manual, which establishes clear guidelines on the scope and quality of evidence required for the confirmation stage of proceedings.

A recent confirmation of the charges decision – Ongwen, a Ugandan former child soldier – illustrates this judicial divergence quite well. In this case, the defence argued that the confirmation decision was “riddled with findings whose basis and reasoning was not clear”. There was no reference in the judgment to any of that evidence. That is not to say that no relevant evidence existed. The prosecutor had provided a ‘pre-confirmation brief’, where it had set out in detail the evidence and linked it to the charges across 250 pages, but very little of that evidence was actually cited in the confirmation decision. Indeed, the list of charges confirmed is almost as long as the complete analysis of the chamber’s legal and factual findings, which is 33 pages.

Once again, we see this holism versus atomism debate creep into international criminal procedure. Some might argue that only a holistic approach to the evidence is required at this confirmation stage, given that the standard of proof is much lower than the trial standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt.

It is also important in light of the extreme length of international criminal judgments. The Mladić trial judgment issued in November 2017 is 2,600 pages long, plus a confidential annex, and we do not know how many pages are in that. The length of the tribunal’s judgments raises issues about the accessibility of their findings to those communities who the tribunals are there to serve.

Ironically, perhaps, the huge scope of judgments can be attributed, at least in part, to the expectation of setting a historical record. One of the more shocking and touching aspects of the Karadžić judgment is the consequences of Dutchbat, one of the UN protective forces, their loss of control in Srebrenica and their role in enabling the genocide in Srebrenica. This is discussed at length in the judgment; this is understandable given that it forms an important part of the narrative about how this genocide actually happened.

But on the other hand, one could argue that the failings of Dutchbat have precisely nothing to do with Karadžić’s own criminal responsibility. It might be more useful for all concerned if the chamber released a separate document called Context of the Crimes, with the judgment itself limited to specific elements of the crimes and modes of liability charge, and how the evidence presented supports those elements of the crimes.

It might also be useful in judgments to have some indication of how the chamber determined the probative value of witnesses’ testimony and other evidence. Jerome Frank noted that the practice of weighing evidence effectively is uncaptured by rules and generalised practices, and as such, it is, in his words, unruly. “Being unruly,” Frank said, “it is usually unpredictable.”

The same could be said about the unpredictability of which witnesses different chambers will find persuasive.

25

RL

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Proof in International Criminal Trials

It would be very useful for chambers to indicate precisely why and how they deemed certain witnesses reliable. Some indication of whether and how credibility was judged would be preferable to the current system, where it is not altogether uncommon to see statements like this: “Some of the witnesses were evasive, were not entirely truthful, although aware of this, the trial chamber nevertheless sometimes relied on some aspects of those witnesses’ testimonies. While the chamber might not have always explicitly stated whether it found the witness’s testimony, or portions of that testimony credible, it consistently took various factors into account in making findings and the evidence.” This approach makes it impossible for one or both of the parties to appeal on the basis that an alleged error of fact has been made.

But none of these things are clear, despite the fact that we are now well into the third decade of contemporary international criminal justice.

All of these aspects illustrate that proof in international criminal trials is an area that remains beset by uncertainty and, in a sense, this is surprising.

One might expect that, by now, we could identify more or less common approaches to questions such as the evaluation of evidence, and more or less shared understanding of the standard of proof and what it requires, and common structures for judgments and their scope.

In another way, this continued lack of clarity is not surprising at all, given the diversity of judicial backgrounds. Some judges may have been criminal court judges in their own legal system, while others may have been diplomats, or international law professors, and their appointment to an international criminal tribunal might be their first criminal trial. In addition, judges’ differing legal systems, each with their own framework for the gathering, presentation and evaluation of evidence, may lead to discord in attempting to reach agreement on these issues.

Nevertheless, these divergences and backgrounds cannot be an excuse for the continued lack of consistency to the evaluation of evidence, the understanding of the requirements of the standard of proof, the structure of judgments and use of evidence in those judgments. They provide all the more reason, now more than ever, to attempt to clarify and find common ground on these aspects of international criminal judging. The communities that these tribunals serve, local, international and legal, deserve nothing less.

Dr Yvonne McDermott Rees Associate Professor of Law, Swansea University The full version of this lecture is available at innertemple.org.uk/lectures/proof

I

IN MEMORIAM The Inn mourns members of the Inn who have died over the past year*:

Gary Flather Esq OBE QC

14 Sep 2017

Evan Stone Esq QC

4 Mar 2018

Anthony Smith Esq QC

15 Sep 2017

Richard Guy Esq

8 Mar 2018

Miss Jaquelin Barker

7 Nov 2017

His Honour George Dobry CBE QC

14 Mar 2018

The Rt Hon Sir William Aldous

17 Mar 2018

Antony Swift Esq

10 Nov 2017

Sir Donald Walters

1 Dec 2017

The Rt Hon the Lord Richard QC

18 Mar 2018

Henry Knorpel Esq CB QC

1 Dec 2017

Brian Huyton Esq

31 Mar 2018

The Hon Dr Justice Adarsh Anand

1 Dec 2017

Sir Desmond De Silva QC KStJ

The Rt Hon Sir Brian Neill

24 Dec 2017

Richard Anthony Curtis

David Vaughan Esq CBE QC

15 Jan 2018

Emmanuel Metu Esq

Thomas Whitehead Esq

19 Jan 2018

Charles Turnbull Esq

28 Jan 2018

Brigadier Peter Little CBE

30 Jan 2018

The Rt Hon Sir Henry Brooke

30 Jan 2018

Cyril Horsford Esq CVO Professor David D Caron

26

* Correct as of 9 August 2018

3 Feb 2018 20 Feb 2018

2 Jun 2018 24 July 2018 9 Aug 2018

Celebrate the life

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

MASTER RICHARD Rumbustious Welsh peer who was put in charge of New Labour’s reform of the House of Lords and exacted revenge after his sacking.

C Ivor Richard at the UN in 1976 © Keystone Pictures USA/Alamy Stock Photo

It was meant to be the pinnacle of his career when Lord Richard was charged by the incoming New Labour government to mastermind the reforms that would abolish hereditary peers. The Welsh barrister and leader of the Lords set about the task with relish, but just over a year later was sacked without warning when Tony Blair decided to abandon plans to have a portion of the upper chamber elected.

Richard did not take long to exact his revenge. In 1999, his wife, Janet Jones, published Labour of Love: the Political Diary of a Cabinet Minister’s Wife, which exposed the poisonous atmosphere at the top of the New Labour project.

Packed with her husband’s observations from cabinet meetings, the serialisation in The Sunday Times included details of John Prescott telling Blair he was “acting like f***ing Jesus Christ” after the Prime Minister told the cabinet that he was freezing MPs’ pay. Richard, a self-confessed bon viveur described in Private Eye as a “Gucci socialist”, was also not best pleased. He said: “Everyone is hopping, what about those of us with overdrafts?” By turns charming and volatile, but always frank, the rumbustious Richard took his anger out on Lord Irvine, the Lord Chancellor who is believed to have persuaded the Prime Minister to opt for a wholly nominated upper house. In the book, Irvine is called a “bloody fool” over his handling of criticism after spending £650,000 on refurbishing his official apartments.

The book details how Richard complained to Downing Street over Irvine’s claims that the spending was routine. “He can’t expect people to lie for him… not the clerks in the Lords, not me.”

Convivial to a fault, Richard had been tipped as a future Lord Chancellor when his friend John Smith led the party.

They were cut from the same cloth: hard-drinking Celtic barristers who would solve problems over liberal amounts of late-night Scotch.

The peer caused further outrage by supplying his wife with details for the book of Privy Council meetings where the Queen’s reservations about a visit by the Japanese Emperor Akihito were discussed. She had apparently said he was “very, very hard work”. Another indiscretion was revealing Cherie Blair’s admission that she had deliberately failed to curtsey to the Queen at the funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales, in 1997.

Finally, the book revealed cabinet incredulity when Blair announced his support for the Millennium Dome project.

“When the meeting ended Robin Butler’s number two caught Ivor Richard’s eye. ‘Oh dear’, he said. ‘Yes,’ said Ivor, ‘Oh dear.’”

Butler, who was Private Secretary to the Prime Minister, later admitted that the book caused panic at No 10.

For a man who listed ‘talking’ as one of his hobbies in Who’s Who, Richard exercised his predilection as an MP for ten years, as the British Ambassador to the UN for five, as a European Union commissioner for three and as a life peer for 27. An imposing figure, he had a clubbable nature.

Although some found him pompous, he was admired for his skill at striking deals in bars and tea rooms and for his intimidating stare and pithy questions at the dispatch box.

27

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Master Richard

Ivor Seward Richard was born in Cardiff in 1932 and brought up in the small mining village of Betws in Carmarthenshire, the son of Seward Richard and his wife, Isabella (née Davies).

His father was an inspector of mines and Ivor was sent to the fee-paying Cheltenham College, where he was bullied mercilessly because of his Welsh accent.

He said Thatcher’s negotiation of a rebate eroded British influence. “This continual harping on ‘my money’ did us no good whatsoever… I think that the way in which she did it roughing them up at every opportunity would be self-defeating. It was.”

When his role came up for renewal in 1984, he was replaced.

He won a scholarship to study jurisprudence at Pembroke College, Oxford, and was called to the Bar in 1955. He defended Brian Field, one of the Great Train Robbers, who had been sentenced to 30 years along with the others.

Richard persuaded the judge to reduce his sentence to five years on appeal in July 1964. He took silk in 1971.

Richard won Barons Court for Labour at the 1964 general election by just over 1,000 votes. Harold Wilson installed him as Secretary of State of Wales, and Richard later served as a junior minister to Denis Healey at the Ministry of Defence. He kept his marginal seat at the 1970 general election and campaigned for Britain to join the Common Market in defiance of the Labour whip. Before publishing Europe or the Open Sea in 1971, Richard asked Healey to write the foreword. “He looked at me and said, ‘It is terribly important that we assure our friends in Europe that the Labour Party is pro-European. On the other hand, it’s important that people like me get elected to the National Executive, so if you don’t mind I won’t do the foreword.’ ” Possessing slightly less guile, Richard paid for his staunch Europeanism. After losing his seat in February 1974, he was selected at the last minute to fight Blythe, against Eddie Milne, the deselected Labour MP who stood as independent Labour, and beat him.

He returned to the Bar and in 1986 defended Ella O’Dwyer, a member of the IRA accused of conspiring to cause explosions in Britain. Over the years, Richard had received intelligence that he was a target of the IRA and was once smuggled out of a hotel in New York in a laundry basket.

He got on well with his client, who once gave him a birthday card indicating that an order had come from the IRA to “lay off him”.

After being ennobled as Baron Richard of Ammanford in 1990, he became leader of the Labour peers in 1992 and Lord Privy Seal and leader of the Lords after Labour’s election victory in 1997.

He is survived by his wife, Janet, a writer and former teacher.

They met through mutual friends and married in 1989. She survives him along with their son, William, who is a press officer responsible for the natural history artefacts at King’s College London. Richard’s first marriage to Geraldine Moore in 1956 ended in divorce in 1962. He is survived by their son, David, a biologist who works at the University of Saskatchewan in Canada. His second marriage to Alison Imrie in 1962 also ended in divorce in 1989. He is survived by their son, Alun, who is a freelance IT specialist, and daughter, Isobel, who teaches at a school in Florida.

“ Over the years, Richard had received intelligence that he C was a target of the IRA and was once smuggled out of a hotel in New York in a laundry basket” The first of many comebacks was launched in the same year when he was appointed as the UK’s permanent representative to the United Nations. While the Foreign Office was appalled that Jim Callaghan, the Foreign Secretary, had chosen Richard rather than a diplomat, the Welshman certainly proved himself to be unconventional. He called Daniel Moynihan, the US Ambassador to the UN, the “Wyatt Earp of international politics” after the American criticised a proposed UN resolution stating that Zionism was a form of racism. He also dramatically walked out in 1976 during a speech by Idi Amin in which the Ugandan dictator goaded Britain over Northern Ireland.

In 1976, he chaired the Geneva Conference on how to implement black majority rule in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe). He found it impossible to establish any rapport with Ian Smith, the Rhodesian leader, and the meeting descended into a shouting match. Robert Mugabe was equally implacable, telling him that Britain wanted to install an “imperial, black puppet government”.

When Margaret Thatcher came to power in 1979, Richard was replaced at the UN. Two years later, she appointed him as the Labour representative on the European Commission, but soon regretted it when Richard campaigned hard for a ‘social chapter’ in which Britain would ultimately sign up to a reduced working week. After a meeting with Sir Terence Beckett, the Chairman of Ford and Director-General of the CBI, Richard said that their relationship was based on trust and understanding: “You don’t trust me and I don’t understand you.”

28

He was a doting father who once spent hours trying to buy a tank in which one of his sons could keep his pet spider. He loved cooking and friends could often smell home-made bread and Welsh cakes as they approached his home. He was a regular at Covent Garden and Wigmore Hall and wound down in the evenings by playing Bach, Beethoven and Chopin on the piano.

He was brought out of retirement one last time by Rhodri Morgan, the leader of the Welsh Assembly, to chair a commission on its future powers. The 2004 report proposed greater powers for making laws and raising taxes. It influenced legislation put through by Peter Hain, but the former Welsh secretary said Richard was “grumpy” that more had not been done.

Having exposed the dysfunctionality of New Labour, Richard formed an escape plan of moving to the Isle of Skye, but never quite carried it off. He gave up cigars but could not keep away from politics. He made his final appearance in the Lords in February, clearly very ill. His usual refrain when asked how much he had had to drink was “not enough”.

Lord Richard of Ammanford PC, QC, politician, was born on 30 May 1932. He died of multiple organ failure on 18 March 2018, aged 85.

Courtesy of The Times / News Licensing

Archives

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

JOHN WILKES A lecture given by Matthew Parris to mark the 250th anniversary of the imprisonment of radical politician, journalist and author, John Wilkes MP. A Lord Mayor of London and seen by many as the first populist politician, Wilkes was the Alderman for the ward of Farringdon Without in which Inner and Middle Temple are situated.

The radical’s radical, John Wilkes was a man of superlatives: he was one of the wittiest – and one of the ugliest – men in England. With a hideous squint, he used to boast he needed only “half an hour to talk away my face.” Once challenged by Lord Sandwich, who had told him he would either “die on the gallows, or of the pox,” Wilkes replied, “That must depend on whether I embrace your lordship’s principles, or your mistress.”

Fêted in America, admired in France, and often hated in Britain, Wilkes was a creature of his age and a creature of this city, London. A politician, publisher and journalist, he was without equal. I shall leave it to you to determine whether that was a good, or bad, thing. First, let us turn to 17 October 1726.

To Israel and Sarah Wilkes, a second son: Jack, Clerkenwell, City of London. Demeanour: sprightly, entertaining. Intelligence: sharp, expansive. Features: cross-eyed, Habsburg jaw.

Denied physical blessings, Jack was compensated with prodigious mental gifts. His wit I have mentioned, but nothing could prevent his teeth beginning to drop from his lower jaw before he reached the age of 30.

His parents were solidly middle class, and furnished him with money, education, and taste – his mother collected religious and decorative paintings, as well as Greek mythical figures sculpted in marble and bronze.

His father was a gin distiller who, ashamed of this fact, occasionally claimed to brew beer. He was a rough old type, fond of his son, but not above sharp teasing: “Jack, have you got a purse?” Israel asked of his son, then a small child. “No, sir.” “I am sorry for that, Jack. If you had, I should have given you some money to put in it.” A few days passed. “Jack, have you got a purse?” “Yes, sir.” “I am glad of it. If you had not had a purse, I would have given you one.”

But Israel also wanted to make his second son a gentleman. When Jack was about 15 his father enrolled him at Lincoln’s Inn, a marker of status rather than a commitment to law – how unlike today – though Wilkes did actually become interested in law.

First, Jack was sent to a boarding school in Hertfordshire run by a Presbyterian and classicist, John Worsley. Wilkes had his mother to thank for being spared a school like Eton – his American biographer Arthur Cash records her “determination not to have her sons educated in the decadent institutions of the rich.” Perhaps you see there a spirit he inherited as well as developed. But in many remarkable men are the buried hopes of a remarkable mother.

So Mr Worsley it was. He recognised in Wilkes “generous sentiments and that love of letters which I myself beheld the first dawnings of.”

Israel was impressed by his son’s progress – and proud.

Jack was shipped off to Thame, Oxfordshire, to continue his schooling under the tutelage of another Presbyterian classicist, Matthew Leeson. Leeson was a preacher, but banish any thoughts you have of solid, dependable parsons.

Within a year of Jack joining him, Leeson had told his congregation he no longer believed in the divinity of Christ.

Understandably, they removed him as their minister.

But Leeson was a good teacher and saw that Wilkes and another boy, the wonderfully named Hungerford Bland, went to university at Leiden. The Dutch university was then superior in point of learning to Oxford and Cambridge – both were in their rotten nadirs, when professorships were granted as political favours to men wholly ignorant of their supposed subject. Today we restrict that to the appointment of secretaries of state. Leiden also, unlike Oxford and Cambridge, accepted dissenters like Wilkes.

To adapt a phrase: show me the undergraduate and I’ll show you the man. But what might be an unfortunate dictum when applied to Boris Johnson, or depending on your predilection for porcine rumours, David Cameron, for Wilkes it is a happy read-across.

At Leiden he fell in with a set that included future heads of the Scottish Presbyterians, professors of philosophy and medicine, poets, and two, William Dowdeswell and Charles Townshend, who became chancellors of the exchequer. Alexander Carlyle, the future leader of the Broad Church Presbyterians of Scotland, recorded his student days and the meetings of this crew at Madam van der Tasse’s boarding house: “In the evenings about a dozen of us met at one another’s rooms in turn three times a week and drank coffee and smoked tobacco and chatted about politics, and drank claret, and supped [Dutch red herrings] and eggs and salad, and never sat later than 12 o’clock.” Presumably because by that point, they were long since lost to reality.

But Wilkes didn’t just carouse and joust with his peers. He met Andrew Baxter, a Scottish theologian. The two struck up a friendship by that most 18th century of activities: long rambles where they covered as many miles as they did philosophical discourses. Baxter wrote a dialogue – Histor – based on their walks through the elegant Capuchin Gardens.

Wilkes features as the central figure. In short, from the moment he fell into intelligent company, Wilkes shone.

Paul-Henri Thiry d’Holbach, later a key figure in intellectual Paris, grew attached to the young Englishman. This was a friendship made for life. In 1763, when Wilkes fled London for France, he was taken in by d’Holbach and his friends, the philosophes. As students, their bond had formed along the footpaths they trod beside the Rhine, speaking of religion, science, and philosophy.

29

A

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Matthew Parris Lecture

Now, I said the university man Wilkes was much the same as the adult and knowing, as you probably all do, the libertine side to the man, you may be wondering if I’m mistaken. It all sounds a little tame – leading, perhaps, to the life of a distinguished man of letters. Let us hear, then, from Wilkes himself, recalling his university years:

a dig. The revised entry read “It sometimes begins middle or final syllables in words compounded or derived from the Latin, as comprehended, blockhead.”

“I was always among women at Leiden. My father gave me as much money as I pleased, so I had three or four whores and got drunk every night. I woke up with a sore head in the morning, then I read.”

One more point about his time at university. In 1745, the year before Wilkes left Leiden, Bonnie Prince Charles fomented serious rebellion in Scotland, raised an army, and looked poised to cross the border. Wilkes rushed home and joined the Loyal Association – citizens ready to defend their country – but before he saw action the rebellion fell apart and he returned to Leiden. A wasted endeavour, yes, but now you see the evolving activist.

Returning to England for good, he soon found a marriage waiting for him, arranged by his father, Israel. Wilkes was to wed Mary Mead, a woman ten years older than him, whom he’d known since childhood. He told his friend, d’Holbach he was in love. A portrait made of Mary eight years after their wedding shows a distracted, slim young woman, with sloping shoulders, possessed of a slender face, with an elegant mouth and dark, beautiful eyes. But the match, made on 23 May 1747, was a non-starter: “In my non-age to please an indulgent father I married a woman half as old again as myself” he wrote. “It was a sacrifice to Plutus, not to Venus…Are such ties at such a time of life binding? – and are school-boys to be dragged to the altar?”

A

Wilkes was just 20. Three years later a daughter, Mary, known to all as Polly, was born to him and Mary. A biographer records that the father-daughter relationship was destined to be “the happiest and most enduring of Wilkes’ life.”

Polly became a companion, confidante and friend to Wilkes for the rest of his days. She never married. Just like his wife Mary – whose station in life afforded Wilkes money, respectability, and property – the latter being a qualification allowing him not just to vote, but to stand for office –Polly was someone on whom this effervescent character was quietly dependent.

What she and her mother got in return is less clear.

This was partly the mark of the man and partly the stamp of the times. Consider again Wilkes’ high jinks in Leiden – what sustained that mix of intellectual ferment and rollicking pleasure, but the money of others and the toils of those – servants mostly – lower down the ladder.

Wilkes, now based in Aylesbury with his wife, began to make his name in Buckinghamshire and in London. He had always cut a dashing, magnetic figure – and had always been keen to appear so: “Though Jack was but 18,” his university colleague, Carlyle, had written, “he was passionately desirous of being thought something extraordinary.”

But something extraordinary he was becoming. Admitted into the prestigious Royal Society in 1749, a few years later he was soon publicly teasing the august Doctor Johnson and A Dictionary of the English Language. The famed lexicographer had rashly written of the letter H, “It seldom, perhaps never, begins any but the first syllable.”

Wilkes’ Letter to the Printer of the Public Advertiser needled Johnson: “The author of this remark must be a man of quick apprehension, and comprehensive genius,” it began, before using a further 24 words in which H began an internal syllable.

In the fourth edition of the dictionary, Johnson conceded and removed the ‘never’, but couldn’t resist

30

Wilkes began to move in some eyebrow-raising circles, most notably the Hellfire Club – also known as the Mad Monks of Medmenham, a society set up by the MP Sir Francis Dashwood. Dashwood and a few others leased Medmenham Abbey and did it up for debauchery: the main house was made habitable but kept darkened by the addition of stained glass windows; raunchy frescoes covered the ceilings; a ‘ruined’ cloister and a ‘ruined’ tower were added for that extra Gothic pizzazz. And that was just the buildings.

Guests went wild: ladies – possibly including high class prostitutes – were admitted, and then allowed to choose a partner before retiring with him to his cell. Horace Walpole, who was shown around the Abbey, noted “Each member has his cell, in which indeed is little more than a bed. They meet to drink, though the rule is pleasure, and each is to do whatever he pleases in his own cell, into which they may carry women.”

Though Wilkes later fell out with Dashwood and the Earl of Sandwich, another prominent member, he took pride in his libido: “A man who has not money to gratify passions does right to govern them, but he who can indulge them, is better off.”

Whether Wilkes really could afford to indulge them was a matter as much for his creditors as anyone else. He was a compulsive spender and fast sank deep into debt – where he mostly stayed. Owing money to tradesmen was not in those days unusual for a gentleman, but we’re beginning to see in Wilkes a sort of fine, careless, reckless disregard for the consequences of his actions. I believe this was absolutely central to what, for good and ill, he became.

From 1754 he started trying to get into Parliament. That year he stood for election in Berwick. Wilkes had a devious strategy: he bribed the captain of a ship bringing opposition voters from London (and you thought Vote Leave were bad) so the ship docked in Norway not Berwick. When it finally made it back to England the voters had missed the election. Wilkes still lost.

He enjoyed greater electoral success in 1757 – also the year his wife left him. At last he was elected as MP for Aylesbury.

Crucially, as an MP he was free from arrest for debt. Now could begin the next phase of his life. He did still remain married to Mary for the rest of his life and when she died, Wilkes wore black for six months. But she was destined to be a footnote for his remaining years or, worse, a punchline for the ugly gentleman with the string of society mistresses.

But, now ensconced in Parliament, Wilkes could make use of the talents that had impressed those who taught him and studied alongside him. It was not instant and required him turning his hand, like many a politician before him – and many still to come (I could name another careless womaniser) to journalism.

He started up the satirical North Briton in June 1762, a response to Lord Bute’s The Briton, which launched the same year and had attacked Pitt, Wilkes’ favourite. In under a year Wilkes had managed to print an issue so scandalous and so offensive that a general warrant was launched for the arrest of everyone connected with the North Briton. Wilkes was thrown into the Tower of London.

North Briton 45 – a sensitive number, because 1745 was the year of Bonnie Prince Charlie’s rebellion – had alleged that the Speech from the Throne was the result of ministers putting lies into the King’s mouth.

But within a week of his arrest, Wilkes was released. Lord Chief Justice Pratt decreed that he was immune from arrest for libel on the grounds of parliamentary privilege. The irrepressible Wilkes not only carried on precisely as before but sought and

Archives

won damages against the government for arresting him in the first place. Asked by a French acquaintance how far liberty of the press extended in Britain, Wilkes replied: “That is what I am trying to find out.” His actions in fact secured a significant advance in civil liberties by establishing the illegality of general warrants: those which did not name a specific person.

confusion. Mobs patrolling the streets at noonday, some knocking all down that will not roar for Wilkes and Liberty; courts of justice are afraid to give judgement against him.”

To rid itself of the troublesome Wilkes, the government tried to remove his immunity from arrest by getting him thrown out of the Commons. He gave them every assistance. As well as reprinting the offending North Briton article (he had to do it on his own press as no other printer would touch it), he published a poem: Thomas Potter’s Essay on Women, co-written with Wilkes, which parodied Alexander Pope’s Essay on Man. It is perhaps best read on the page rather than aloud, but you will find it remarkably difficult to retrieve online. An inbuilt porn-blocking device on my broadband server prevented my accessing it via a site named Boychat.

Potter, who died in 1759, had been Wilkes’ political mentor – he was elected to one of the two Aylesbury seats in 1754 – and close friend: “The highest pleasure that can be afforded me next to the company of a woman,” said Potter, “is that of my dear Wilkes.”

Next to his affection for Wilkes, and the company of a woman, Potter is also remembered for a notorious act of bestiality.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

The massacre was front page news in America. Wilkes, according to a biographer, was held up by Americans “as an example of a manly, civil, rational person who stood for freedom, but abided by the law. The stories were told over and over of his calming the mob, his escaping from them to turn himself in at the King’s Bench Prison.”

While in prison Wilkes was elected Alderman for the ward of Farringdon Without, in the City of London. “He abhors the idea of an aristocracy,” Wilkes’ handbill read, “He will assert the conscience of every individual and the interest and freedom of the whole.” His opponent wisely withdrew when he realised Wilkes had twice the votes. The celebratory meal on the day of the election, 2 January 1769, was made with “gifts received in congratulation,” a biographer wrote. “After dinner, Wilkes was presented with the gift of an alderman’s gown trimmed in fur.”

That year – 1763 – Wilkes fought his second duel, this time with Samuel Martin, a supporter of George III. Unlike in his first duel when both Wilkes and his opponent, the Earl of Talbot, had missed, Wilkes was shot in the belly. Fortunately for him the ball deflected off two buttons on its way through and though it pierced his skin, it did not penetrate any vital organs.

But it was Wilkes’ problems with his election to the seat of Middlesex that set him on a new collision course with the powerful. He was re-elected from prison three times, but the House refused to seat him. Finally, the House passed a resolution finding him “incapable of being elected a member to serve in the present Parliament.” This motion – of incapacity rather than expulsion – went far indeed. Legally and constitutionally, it was rash. The ability to decide who could and couldn’t stand for election was critical. Conceivably Parliament might simply exclude all those who would contest any of its seats, allowing MPs to be re-elected unopposed.

He then fled to France. In absentia he was tried and found guilty of libel and seditious libel. But within five years, pursued by new debts in France, he returned. In doing so, he occasioned my being before you, because shortly after his re-entry John Wilkes was indeed imprisoned in the King’s Bench Prison on 10 May 1768 – 250 years ago – for sedition.

When Wilkes was out of prison he made it his mission to overturn this. At last, in 1782, he succeeded with a motion expunging from the Commons record the resolution whereby he had been declared incapable of running for election. But though his success here was great, his popularity had begun to decline.

Wilkes had stood for – and won – a seat in Middlesex. His victory speech is worth hearing for a flavour of the man: “Let the sons of venality bow the knee to the idol of sordid interest. Let them call their pusillanimity prudence, while they ignominiously kiss the rod of power, and tamely stoop to the yoke…You, gentlemen, have shown, that you are neither to be deceived nor enslaved…The eyes of the whole kingdom, of the whole world, are upon you, as the first and firmest defenders of public liberty.”

It had perhaps peaked with his becoming Lord Mayor of London in 1774 – did I mention that? This is getting more like a fantasy movie than a sobre biography – and when the Gordon Riots took place in 1780, so did Wilkes’ transformation from poacher to gamekeeper. He led a band of soldiers to quell the riots, ordering them to fire on the mob attacking the Bank of England. Several rioters were killed.

He had by now built for himself a reputation as a man of the people, ready to stand up against what we today call ‘The Establishment’. These were demotic times, and there was a ready market for rabble-rousers and for campaigners for the liberties of the ordinary people. Wilkes had a talent (for all his apparently careless swagger) for striking a deft balance between serious arguments of principle, and shameless crowd-pleasing. Imagine, if you will, a hybrid of the Jeremys (Corbyn and Bentham), with a bit of Fidel Castro, Nigel Farage and Ken Livingstone thrown in.

With, as ever, an eye for a sensational story, he had promised that if he were elected, he would turn himself in. He did so and wound up in prison. Wilkes, though, had formidable and frightening support. “The crowd always want to draw themselves from abstract principle to personal attachments,” wrote Edmund Burke, “and since the fall of Lord Chatham, there has been no hero of the mob but Wilkes.”

The day Wilkes was incarcerated an angry crowd gathered outside the gaol. The Riot Act was read once, then again before, amid the hail of rocks, the soldiers opened fire.

Five or six people died, but the effect was seismic. Wilkes’ popularity went through the roof. One Benjamin Franklin wrote “This capital…is now a daily scene of lawless riot and

A

“Jack Wilkes headed the party that drove them away,” wrote Doctor Johnson with irony, “Jack, who was always zealous for order and decency, declared that if he be trusted with power he ‘will not leave one rioter alive.’”

Though he was a hugely popular figure in America and backed their revolution – indeed, he himself secretly sent the colonies money and supported them in their war against the British state – he disapproved of the French Revolution of 1789. His radicalism had begun to curdle in his dotage. He was no longer such an important figure on the political scene. He died in 1797, fittingly in the city of Westminster. He was a Londoner through and through.

He inspired allies – Voltaire told him “You set me in flames with your courage, and you charm me with your wit” – and infuriated his many, many enemies. King George III put it differently: “that devil Wilkes.”

If that was his life, what might we learn from it? Today Wilkes would be called a populist. He had a power base: the mob. He might not have wholly approved everything it did, but then even Michael Gove said of Vote Leave’s claims over Turkey: “If it had been left entirely to me the leave campaign would have a slightly different feel.”

31

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Matthew Parris Lecture

Populist today is not synonymous with wit. Donald Trump may speak snappily, but his language is the brute language of power, not the silver one with which Wilkes lashed foolish opponents. “I’d rather vote for the devil,” one elector told him. “Naturally,” came the reply, “and if your friend is not standing, may I hope for your support?”

We see old tendencies reasserting themselves in our modern age, and it is not inconceivable that the tendency to control that John Wilkes fought against could reappear: in fact, the power of the state to deal with threats against it, threats it alone identifies, has in fact been a recent part of our political discourse. Think of 90-day detention.

But populist – of a sort – he was, and our immediate British parallels are, as I say, Nigel Farage and, even closer to home, Lutfur Rahman the deposed and disgraced Tower Hamlets mayor. Yet there’s a touch of that erudite old rascal, Tony Benn, thrown in too.

Wilkes fought the tendency to control when he battled for the freedom to publish calumnies against the king, or when he fought for the press’s right to print what was said in Parliament. And we need not look very far to find present day examples of certain groups in society wanting to control what can and can’t be said, what opinions can and can’t be voiced. The will of the people may soon morph into the same cudgel as was the word of the king.

Like Wilkes, Farage has found a surprising constituency in the United States. There, Wilkes was fêted for his enthusiastic support for liberty and the cause of freedom. Farage cloaks thoughts in words like ‘independence’ and ‘taking back control’, and a fanciful spectre of Western culture under siege from migrants. His US audience admire Farage for reasons different from those of his British followers.

Something is lost in translation, even across the pond.

Our politics here may be co-opted by different interests there.

Americans have always had money – they supplied Wilkes with money, even at great cost: The Commons House of Carolina would rather close itself down than rescind its gift of £1,500 to Wilkes. The Royal Governor made them choose and they chose.

Today there is a looming threat that the far-right activist Tommy Robinson, currently in jail for contempt of court, could be funded by US culture-war right wingers on his release. My point is that transatlantic political funding has an uncomfortable history and the power of populists and phrasemakers to encapsulate their ideas and give them wings can attract some questionable folks.

A

Or take Lutfur Rahman, who hardly seems to us to have demonstrated Wilkesian high-minded ideals, lusting rather after power itself, but who shared with him the ability to recruit foot soldiers to his cause. He was also an irritant to the powers that be and at variance with the law. The political hero who rocks the boat and smashes the system has his seedy counterparts.

Anaesthetised to Wilkes’ outrageous behaviour by the passage of time, and the fact that we deem his causes good, we can feel more comfortable dismissing his parallels with Farage and Rahman. Or Corbyn and Momentum.

But there exist better reasons to do so too. Let us consider what Wilkes railed against: the power of the state, the weakness of the press, the importance of liberty.

We may recall his opponents and see them – again with the eyes of a hindsight that marks ‘good’ and ‘bad’ so very clearly – as ludicrous, almost cartoonishly evil. Ask yourself about the concept of a general warrant, that a crime may be announced and then persons deemed suspicious brought in. How obviously tyrannical. But what if this were not just the result of a monarchical excess of power, but the imprint of the human tendency to control?

I don’t find it difficult to imagine a Tony Blair, after the London bombings, resurrecting some legal first-cousin of the “general warrant” for dealing with the terrorist threat.

32

What did Wilkes use to fight such tendencies? Principles, yes. But not just high-minded principles – he behaved scandalously and threw dirt in his opponents’ faces. His means were varied but he co-opted whatever he needed, and left no outrage undone in service of his commitment to his ends.

And if this somewhat muddies the waters of Wilkes’s posthumous nobility, something else does too. The extent to which his own personal liberty depended on the subjection of others to his causes. By all accounts his daughter Polly loved her father dearly and he doted on her. But even in her will she had to think of her father. “Polly”, says her biographer, left a will designed in part to carry out those bequests of her father’s will that could not be made, in part to pay off her father’s remaining debts,” Cash, that is. Polly died five years after her father, still cleaning up his mess.

Though Wilkes wore mourning clothes for his wife, he seems to have had no great affection for her. Yet that marriage, almost more than anything, made him, for it gave him status, and a sizeable income upon whose equity to incur larger debts. He soiled his own nest; but others, most of them now unremembered, helped him make that nest.

Enough carping. We can all do that, and Nietzsche was right when he said “They say no man is a hero to his valet.

But that is not because the hero is not a hero; but because the valet is a valet.” John Wilkes was a man who led a life in excelsis, to whose sin, mischief and wit we might turn to for a laugh, but to whose life there was, always and from the very start, a deep, deep seriousness. From rabblerouser to rabble-crusher, he meant it, and it mattered.

This evening, as we remember the 250th anniversary of his imprisonment for sedition, we can reflect on how he, in his life, his thoughts, and his deeds, embodied all the chaos and turbulence and ambiguity that we might group under that much-vexed word: progress.

And at the end of it all he inspired. How we miss such men and women in our politics today.

Matthew Parris Political writer, broadcaster and former Conservative MP

Celebrate the life

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

MASTER ANTHONY SMITH Nothing remains of the little house in Norwich where Anthony Thomas Smith was born on 21 June 1935. It was a casualty of the war, bombed, fortunately after the family had left, his father’s work for a shoe machinery company having taken them back to their home county of Northamptonshire.

They retained a love of Norfolk and Norwich and spent holidays on the Broads, where the boy learnt to sail, often alone among the reeds.

Master Anthony Smith

His primary schooldays at the Northampton Town and Country Grammar School were dominated by a redoubtable and inspiring spinster, Miss Holding, who instilled into her young pupils a thirst for learning with a love of literature and history, which lasted throughout his life.

He obtained leave from the RAF to fight the general election of 1959 on behalf of the Liberals in Northampton, having been appointed their candidate before he was old enough to vote himself. The seat was won by Reggie, Lord Paget, who became a friend.

Another move in his father’s work took them to Stafford, where he studied at the Grammar School and enjoyed Cannock Chase in leisure time.

His National Service completed, he began his career at the Bar in 1960, having been called to the Bar in 1958. But early 1964 saw him fight another unsuccessful general election for

“ He obtained leave from the RAF to fight the general election of 1959 on behalf of the Liberals in Northampton, having been appointed their candidate before he was old enough to vote himself” Then back to Hinckley in Leicestershire, where he became head boy at the Grammar School and spent a memorable free period before university producing and acting in a much-acclaimed production of Macbeth, without teaching assistance.

From Hinckley, he was awarded an exhibition to King’s College, Cambridge, going up in 1953. His love of music drew him to the Chapel and he was confirmed into the Anglican faith, having been brought up a Baptist.

He was very fortunate to be tutored by F L (Peter) Lucas and then, in law, by Henry Barnes. Later in life, he often wished he had stuck to English, but then he would have missed the joy of listening to the colourful Irishman. He was proud to join the Cambridge University Amateur Dramatic Club (ADC), under the spell of Dadie Rylands. He also became a member of the University Air Squadron, learning to fly on Chipmunks.

After Cambridge, having to do his National Service, he joined the RAF and was an education officer at the School of Catering, RAF Hereford, teaching the students maths and English, some of them to A-level standard, and enjoying the fruits of their labours in the kitchen at eight-course lunches!

He also ran the RAF Hereford Amateur Dramatic Society, where he met the Welsh girl Ann Wheldon Griffith, who would be his wife for the rest of his life and with whom he had three children, Sarah, Julia and Michael.

the Liberals, this time in Kettering. Sir Geoffrey de Freitas won the seat for Labour.

By this time, he and Ann had two small children, and with a family to support he was a very busy barrister, but nevertheless, as it was Leicestershire, he did occasionally find the time to don a red coat, mount a large horse and follow the foxhounds.

A few years later, at the request of the Leader of the Midland Circuit, he opened a set of chambers in Birmingham with an annex in Northampton. He took silk in 1977 and was appointed as a Recorder and elected a Master of the Bench of the Inner Temple in 1985. He sat on the bench of the Crown Court for 25 years, his judgment being rarely called into question. However, he had no ambition to be a High Court judge; his skill was as an advocate and that is how he will be remembered.

In 2002, he and Ann bought a farm and escaped to mid Wales, where he revelled in the rural life, the seclusion and the scenery, and was able to indulge his love of reading the works of his hero, Winston Churchill, and others. He also had a passion for vintage farm machinery and was fatally injured during an exploit with a tractor. The crew of the rescue helicopter was amused by his choice of light reading for the hospital, the War Memoirs of David Lloyd George.

Courtesy of Mrs L A Smith

33

C

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Notes From the Great Garden…

NOTES FROM THE GREAT GARDEN…

By Master Robertson and Sean Harkin

also tapping into some external expertise, with visits from the National Trust Garden Consultants and an arrangement with the retired RHS President and former Curator of RHS Wisley, Jim Gardiner, who has very kindly agreed to act as an external expert friend and mentor to the Garden Team.

The Garden covered in snow – 1 March 2018

2018 has seen big changes for the Garden Team – and some extreme weather conditions. At the beginning of the year, the ‘beast from the east’ brought low temperatures and covered the garden in a picturesque blanket of snow in late February and early March.

G

After a prolonged cold spring, we had a glorious May, including opening to the public once again for Open Garden Squares Weekend and for the Chelsea Fringe Festival, hosting the Great Garden Fête, where our new Sub-Treasurer distinguished himself in the sack race (not pictured, because we value discretion).

Master Robertson and Master Malecka channelled their inner Mary Berry to judge the cake contest. The RHS magazine featured the Inner Temple Garden on its cover in May, with a very complimentary article and lovely photographs. This publicity brought us many new visitors throughout the year – all keen gardeners who had read the article and wanted to ask questions and experience the joys of our garden for themselves.

After the snow had melted in March, we said farewell to Andrea Brunsendorf, our Head Gardener for the past ten years. She has taken over as the Director of Outdoor Landscapes at Longwood Gardens, USA, a prestigious appointment which reflects the international recognition her innovative work here attracted.

Most notably, during her tenure, the High Borders have become renowned for their colour, textures and long season of interest.

Following Andrea’s departure, Sean Harkin took over as Head Gardener in April. Sean was formerly Garden’s Team Manager at Kensington Palace, where he designed a memorial garden for Diana, Princess of Wales. Sean has been using his first season in post to get to know the garden, the team and the workings of the Inn, so as to formulate his ideas on how best to continue the work that has preceded him. Drafting our next five-year plan was a good opportunity for the Garden Committee and the Garden Team to pool thoughts on how to ensure the Inner Temple Garden conserves and develops its varied plant collection, continues to provide a much-needed oasis of beauty within the city and builds on our now established reputation for horticultural excellence and experimentation. We are

Sack race during the Great Garden Fête for the Chelsea Fringe Festival

34

The Great Garden © Marianne Majerus

Head Gardener, Andrea Brunsendorf, left the Inn after ten years for pastures new in America.

New Head Gardener, Sean Harkin with retired President of the RHS, Jim Gardiner on a walk of the Gardens.

Summer was dominated by a very extended spell of hot and dry weather. We would have struggled without our team of fantastic volunteers. With their help, we were able to keep on top of irrigating the garden to ensure it continued to look its best.

Garden

The RHS May edition of magazine where the Garden made the front cover

The Peony Garden’s , originally planted in 1848, had a particularly good year both during its main flowering in May, and a good second flush in the summer, due to the high temperatures

Summer also saw our Garden Trainee Emily Blackmore complete her two years in the garden and pass her RHS level three exams. We now have many alumni who have graduated from traineeships here to work in major gardens around the world. It is brilliant to pass on skills to future gardeners and set them off on a career in gardening. Emily went on to spend the summer on internships at Monet’s garden at Giverny (France), followed by Great Dixter (Sussex). In September, she started further horticultural training at The Royal Botanic Gardens Kew. We are thinking about how we might create a network for our alumni, so we can keep in touch with them and invite them back to talk to our current trainees about their experiences and expertise. We are also discussing with Chelsea Physic Garden ways we can collaborate on training. The richer the training environment we can provide, the higher the quality of the candidates we can attract and retain. Moreover, in keeping with the ethos of the Inn, our aim is that those who work here should feel that they have become part of our community for life.

Towards the end of the summer, we welcomed our new Garden Trainee, Paul Jabs, to the team. Alongside Sean, Sophie (Senior Gardener) and Imogen (Gardener), this completes the new Garden Team for the next chapter of the Inner Temple Garden’s history.

Garden Volunteer Annabel helping keep on top of watering the pot display during the heat of the summer

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Garden Trainee Emily Blackmore completed her two years at the Inner Temple before spending the summer as an intern at Monet’s garden at Giverny

Next year’s challenges may include (depending on the outcome of the planning application) managing the impact of Project Pegasus on the garden. If permission is given to place a temporary structure in the garden for the duration of work on the Hall, our job will be to manage the short-term challenges in ways that preserve the garden as an amenity during the build, whilst also ensuring that the garden does not suffer in the longer term. We have lots of ideas about potential upsides for the garden if it temporarily becomes the venue for the daily life of the Inn, and we will also look to use the opportunity of reinstatement works on the lawn at the end of the project to address some long-term issues from compaction of the soil and to put in place a proper system for irrigation. We will in any event be looking to do some additional planting on the west side of the garden, to balance up the interest around the garden, as at the moment the east side has a lot more going on. As ever, the challenge will be to adapt and evolve, whilst preserving the spirit of this historic garden and ensuring we pass it on to future generations in good shape.

Patricia Robertson QC and Sean Harkin

Garden Team from left: Paul Jabs, Garden Trainee; Sean Harkin, Head Gardener; Imogen Velouria, Gardener; and Sophie Tatzkow, Senior Gardener.

35

G

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

History Society Review

HISTORY SOCIETY REVIEW By the Archivist

The History Society has had a packed programme of lectures this year. The usual three lectures were extended to six. We enjoyed a one-man show about Tunji Sowande and a lecture by Matthew Parris to launch the Ward of Farringdon Without’s John Wilkes Society (see page 29).

In January, our first lecturer, Nathalie Cohen, archaeologist at the Museum of London, divulged details of the fascinating finds made by the Thames Discovery Programme since 2008. The River Thames foreshore is the largest open-air archaeological site in London and the Discovery Programme recruits volunteers to record this fast-changing environment.

They have uncovered fish traps, old barges and evidence of former bridges. Some of those at the lecture offered to join the Discovery Programmes and its amusingly titled offshoot, FROG, (Foreshore Recording and Observation Group), which works with archaeologists to record the structures and features exposed by the movement of river sediment. The creation of the Embankment in 1869 covered many of the river’s ancient features with the result that potential finds near to the Inn are hard to locate. Nathalie confirmed that the extension of the garden on three occasions since the 16th century means that much of the soil is alluvial and probably contains some fascinating artefacts. If Inner Temple were to allow a team of archaeologists to explore the site, she believes many treasures would be contained within its soil.

A

The History Society welcomed Emeritus Professor Colum Kenny to the Inn in April. Professor Kenny is a founding member of the Irish Legal History Society and a Bencher of the King’s Inns, Ireland (see page 102).

From 1542 until 1885, students wishing to practise at the Irish Bar were first required to reside for a stipulated period at one of London’s Inns of Court. The period of five years in the 17th century had been reduced to two years by the middle of the 19th century. Professor Kenny gave an insight into the attitudes and experiences of King’s Inns members who were compelled to live and dine at Inner Temple. One Maurice Eustace (1590–1665), future Lord Chancellor of Ireland, was advised by the Lord Deputy of Ireland Oliver St John that “the study of law was like the letter Y written in the Roman hand which was sharp and narrow in the first entrance but gives rest at the top like a chair wherein a man might rest with ease…”.

36

Daniel O’Connell (1775–1847), architect of the Catholic Emancipation in 1828, wrote home whilst keeping terms in London with the following description: “Every member of the Temple, every student of the law is supposed to be a Gentleman; as such there is a certain appearance absolutely necessary to be kept up. I could never go to the Temple unless in full dress with silk stockings etc. I could scarce appear in the streets after 12 o’clock otherwise. You must not hence conclude that I would wish to look up to, or ape after the follies of the persons of large fortune, who have the habit of studying the law, whilst they in fact spend their time in riot and idleness…”

In 1885, the requirement to eat “so many legs of mutton” in London, as critics described it, was finally abolished.

The ordeal was described by an Irish student in 1860 as follows: “Each mess has its dinner served to it separately – the meat on large pewter plates – and enjoys its own bottle of wine. Every mess has its ‘captain’, an officer whose privilege it is to help himself first to everything and whose duty it is to preserve order amongst the members of his own mess. The meat is not carved by any one individual for the others as it is at our more modern and more civilized King’s Inns in Dublin, but everyone helps himself.”

In April, the History Society was pleased to welcome Professor Alan Nelson from Berkeley University, California, to discuss his work on the early English plays performed at the Inn during the 16th century. Professor Nelson has collected the archival references and information about the plays staged at the Inn’s Christmas Revels during the Tudor period until 1642 as part of the international research group REED (Records of Early English Drama). REED is a performance history research project, based at the University of Toronto, Ontario, which seeks to uncover “the native tradition of English playmaking that apparently flourished in late medieval provincial towns”. In particular, he discussed a lost account of a ‘grand Christmas’ held here in 1526, which recorded the mock officers that were elected for the season: “Mr Shelley elect Lord Chancellor, Mr Recorder Lord Treasurer, Mr Halys Lord Privie Seale, Mr Skotte Chief Justice of the King’s Bench, Mr Baldwine Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, Mr Smythe Chief Baron of the Exchequer, Mr Walsh Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr Pakington, Chauncelor of the Duchie, Mr White Master of the Rolls…”

All the above were Benchers and Master Baldwin was to become Chief Justice of the Common Pleas in real life.

Archives

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

“ the extension of the garden on three occasions since the 16th century means that much of the soil is alluvial and probably contains some fascinating artefacts” In May, the History Society hosted a performance by the wonderful Tayo Aluko. Just an Ordinary Lawyer is a monologue that tells the inspirational story of Tunji Sowande (1912–1996), the first black lawyer to be appointed a judge in Britain. A native of Nigeria, he was Head of Chambers at 3 King’s Bench Walk. He was also resident here in King’s Bench Walk. Tayo Aluko, who wrote and performed this one-man show, described it as “a play with songs”, which celebrates the professional career of its subject and also illustrates his love of cricket and jazz. The story begins with Tunji Sowande’s first pupillage interview and tells how he gained tenancy at 3 King’s Bench Walk and was appointed as a Recorder. Tunji Sowande’s granddaughter watched the show and praised the play as an accurate and kind portrayal of her grandfather.

On 23 July, the History Society hosted the first John Wilkes lecture for the Ward of Farringdon Without with guest speaker Matthew Parris. In November, Master Woodcock, Garter King of Arms, will tell us about peerage claims at the College of Arms.

A

Next year, Master Ivan Lawrence will provide the first lecture of the year, focusing on his life as a criminal barrister and MP. This will be followed by a lecture from Master Baker on the history of the Inn. In June 2019, there will be a recreation of a 17th-century masque performed here at the Inn, which will take place in the garden. This will be accompanied by a commentary and lectures about the Inn’s theatrical culture during the 16th and 17th centuries and about the networks of writers and poets that congregated around the Inns of Court.

We hope that the History Society will continue to promote the history of our Inn and to host diverse and fascinating lectures that extend our understanding of our history.

Celia Pilkington The Archivist

37

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Master Evan Stone

MASTER EVAN STONE A tribute given by His Honour Peter Rook QC at the memorial service for Master Evan Stone, held in the Temple Church on Wednesday 25 April.

Evan Stone QC was born on 25 August 1928. He would have been 90 this August. He lived a long rich life. So many of you have helped me shed light on this rich life.

Both his parents died when he was quite young. Evan did national service in Tripoli. (I’ve not been able to find out the quality of the Italian he claimed to have learnt whilst there.)

He went on to Worcester College, Oxford, where he once appeared as the bad duke in As You Like It. He was called to the Bar in July 1954, just shy of his 26th birthday.

His mother attended the ceremony but died soon afterwards. His father had already died. For those of you who remember vinyl, his grandfather was involved in the invention of the double-sided record – the flipside.

A major part of the story of Evan’s life is the long and loving partnership of Evan and Gisela. Gisela came to England from Germany in the early 1930s with her parents. Her mother, Lucien Manien, was an opera singer and sang at Glyndebourne the year it opened. Gisela went to Francis Holland School.

Later, Gisela was at Bletchley Park as a translator.

C

Gisela had become a handbag buyer for Marks and Spencer when she met Evan, and she earnt more than him as Evan was starting off at the Bar. They married in July 1959.

Evan inherited a wood in Kent from his grandfather and he courted Gisela there. This is the bluebell wood they both loved. The bluebells will be flowering there this morning.

Gisela became Evan Stone’s rock.

Evan and Gisela bought 60 Canonbury Park South and were gazumped whilst on holiday so Evan beat the counter bidder, Sir Simon Dawbarn, who bought the equivalent house in Canonbury Park North. Typical of Evan’s style, the hatchet was buried and they became good friends.

Mike came along in September 1960. He went to Canonbury School and then Highgate. The cottage in Ridgewell near Clare on the Essex/Suffolk border was bought when Mike was a toddler and they spent long happy summers there.

Until quite recently, Evan, Gisela and Michael would go the Ridgewell Cottage for long summer weekends and the whole of August.

Mike’s illness struck when he was 11.

Evan and Gisela were a wonderful support for Mike. One example was the support they gave him with his pictureframing business in Highbury where he had a studio.

Evan and Mike had a strong bond. Evan was a caring and interested father. They shared a love of cricket and rugby.

Evan took him skiing and to watch cricket at Test matches in both Antigua and Barbados. Gisela would refer to them as ‘the boys’ as they whiled away the hours watching cricket and rugby together.

Mike told me that he enjoyed his father’s jokes. Evan was rightly very proud of Mike.

38

Master Evan Stone

Evan was made a Queen’s Counsel in 1979. He retired from the practice in March 2002 (just two years short of his halfcentury), but of course he continued as a Bencher of the Inner Temple. He was head of chambers at 29 Bedford Row in the years before it became a specialist family set.

Evan was head of chambers when it moved from 2 Dr Johnson’s Buildings to 5 Raymond Buildings in 1987 and then into 29 Bedford Row in 1991, by which time Peter Ralls had increasingly taken over Evan’s mantle. It was the first chambers to move to Bedford Row in 1991 – no doubt an adventurous move at the time.

In his role as head of chambers he saved a young barrister’s career, telling the distressed young tenant that lots of us fall off our horses, that it is important to get straight back on.

He defended the manager of the Grateful Dead who was up on drugs charges following a European tour, impressing the young with his knowledge of their existence and music.

One of the remarkable things about Evan was the state of his desk. Even at 2 Dr Johnson’s Buildings it was a mess, and things went from bad to worse. I have been told of Nicholas Francis’s description of his desk. “ His desk was like one of those Penny machines in amusement arcades when every now and again there would be a fresh fall of pennies where papers would cascade onto the floor. They could have been anything from junk mail to a bank statement to a large cheque…”

After the move to Bedford Row, Evan was to be sighted less in chambers. He was moving on to new pastures.

And now the flipside… Evan’s career was not confined to the Bar. Evan’s appointment to the Criminal Injuries Board opened up a new life to him.

Celebrate the life

I have heard from Daphne Robertson about the antics of Evan and her late husband, Donald Robertson QC, from the Scottish Bar. He would travel with the panel, including Donald Robertson, and sit for a week in various different places around the country. On one memorable occasion they were due to sit in the Lake District for a week and Donald decided that the place to stay was the Pheasant at Bassenthwaite, noted for its good value and even-better-value wine cellar. On the night they arrived, there was a huge snowfall and all the hearings were cancelled. The panel were snowed in, so they were forced to spend a few days in the Pheasant without doing any hearings.

The owner suggested that they help themselves to wine from the cellar and supervise the decanting to while away the day. A jolly time was had by all, and it became a challenge to see who could say ‘Bassenthwaite’ at the end of dinner.

You will note that the government abolished the Criminal Injuries Board not long after Evan and Donald retired. History does not relate how much public money they awarded to deserving victims, but I am told that it was a generous amount!

Medical sources have given me insight into the time when Evan was chairman of the City and Hackney Health Authority from 1984 to 1992, a time of great changes in the structure of NHS management, and closures and amalgamations of hospitals. Doctors do not necessarily, and certainly then did not, hold administrators and managers of health services in much regard, but Evan was unprecedented in being hugely admired, respected and befriended by doctors and nurses. During that time, the Maternity Department at Barts Hospital was closed, as was Hackney Hospital and the Mother’s Hospital (Salvation Army) in Clapton, and the new Homerton Hospital opened. Not only did Evan see this through skillfully, he retained the confidence of almost all the doctors who were involved with this.

Many doctors became real friends of Evan and Gisela. Marcus Setchell told him about the Gynecological Winter Study Group,

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

British cheers from a frenzied crowd, Evan was raised up in a cherry picker to perform the solemn ritual, which he of course carried out with great panache. Years later, he admitted that it was one of the most terrifying things he had ever undertaken.

Today is St Mark’s Day. In the past on this day, Evan would have been attending the annual St Mark’s tide service as chairman.

St Mark’s Hospital for Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, a postgraduate hospital with an international reputation for clinical care, teaching and research in the City Road, was in Evan’s patch. It moved in 1995 from its isolated site in the City Road and St Mark’s flourishes now in Harrow. Evan was disappointed that there was not to be a move to West Smithfield but of course Evan remained highly supportive.

He was a community-minded man, working for the local council, where he claims fame for having the central reservation in Wallace Road planted with daffodils. He was on the board of governors at Moorfields Eye Hospital, and was vice chair of the London Camberwell St Giles Research Committee and vice chair from 2011 to 2015 on medical ethics. He set up the Epilepsy Charity. He was a trustee of the London Playing Fields Association from 2000 and chaired the remuneration committee.

Evan’s later years were very full. He became a liveryman of the Worshipful Company of Barber Surgeons in 1999. In retirement, he took up making stained-glass pictures and bread-making.

He had an enduring interest in the history of medicine and was involved with the Harveian Society for 23 years.

Evan was the most genial of men. He loved a good story; sometimes he would find it difficult to get to the punchline as there was so much chuckling and chortling in the telling.

He led me in the early 1980s, prosecuting a VAT fraud at the newly opened Palais de Justice at Wood Green.

When the jury was being empanelled, a juror asked to be excused from service because he was a practising criminal.

I can say that it went into Evan’s folklore, as I was to hear the story more than once over the next few decades.

“ Evan was the most genial of men. He loved a good story” which had an annual ski trip and sometimes invited guests, who were asked to give an educational talk, and would that appeal to him? He leapt at the idea, and plunged with enthusiasm into the skiing. He was not short on bravado, but his, by then, mildly Pickwickian shape meant that his centre of gravity led to frequent tumbles, requiring two helpers to upright him. The experience strengthened his bond with the medical profession.

Around that time, Sir Marcus Setchell was involved in setting up the first test-tube baby unit in the NHS at Barts, and Evan gave great support to this in the face of opposition from those (‘old Jonahs’) who said it would prove too costly.

Later in his life, he took a great interest in the historic buildings of Barts, and became a loyal and enthusiastic supporter of the Friends of the Great Hall and Archive of Barts, which has just matured into an independent charity (Barts Heritage); the charity is about to take over the running of the heritage buildings and art treasures, with a major appeal to restore the buildings by the 900th anniversary of Barts Hospital in 2023.

During Evan’s time as chairman of the Health Authority, the main gate at Barts happened to be restored to its early 18thcentury glory. It bears over its arch the only statue of Henry Vlll in London. Henry’s crown was of course restored as part of the work and therefore re-coronation was required. In the absence of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Evan was persuaded that this was his responsibility and so, to the sound of loud

Peter Ralls, who took over from him as head of chambers, tells me that they were defending a man for murder whose mind might have been seriously affected by the disease yaws.

They saw a psychiatrist in chambers. Diverted from being concerned about his client’s state of mind, Evan observed that the psychiatrist was not only wearing no shoes in the head of chambers’ room he shared with Ian Davis in Dr Johnson’s Building, but was wearing bright blue socks. You can hear Evan’s voice: “I could not help observing that your footwear…” The psychiatrist simply replied: “I came on my motorbike and I left my sodden boots in the clerks’ room.” I suspect Peter Ralls was to hear that story more than once.

A host of adjectives have flowed from my sources in describing Evan: charming, warm, positive, communityminded, always with an infectious jollity about him. He accepted adversity without complaint and without any interruption to his geniality. He never lost his interest in people, firing questions at his visitors in hospital even when he must have been in great discomfort.

Few can boast such a varied career.

Few can boast such a rich life.

Few can boast such a giving life.

His Honour Peter Rook QC

39

C

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Oral History Project

ORAL HISTORY PROJECT An interview with Nemone Lethbridge conducted by Master Spearing

A

Born in 1932, Nemone Lethbridge read law at Somerville College, Oxford, and was called to the Bar at Gray’s Inn in 1956. After mixed pupillages, she focused on crime and became the only female tenant at 3 Harcourt Buildings. Her inspiring story is brought to life in extracts from an interview with Master Spearing held on 2 February 2018.

RS: So, what was it, Nemone, that interested you in becoming a barrister?

NL: Well, I was always argumentative. And my father, at the time, was chief of intelligence in Germany, and so he was very active in gathering evidence for the Nuremberg trials. And we went and stayed with him in Germany in the school holidays and became very interested in the whole matter of war crimes and the whole Nuremberg forum. As a child, we went to Berlin and I went to the bunker where Hitler killed himself, actually went to the room where he shot himself, and became very much involved in politics. And one could hardly avoid becoming interested in the processes of bringing these people to trial.

RS: Were your family encouraging, despite the lack of their own connections in the law?

NL: Well very much so, I mean they were very enlightened. And my father was friends with David Maxwell Fyfe, who later became Lord Kilmuir, who was the chief prosecutor at Nuremberg. And it was he who arranged for my first six months’ pupillage. So, it was nepotism rather than merit that got it for me, I’m afraid.

RS: Tell us about your pupillage experience. Obviously, your father’s connection to the law helped make an introduction; but I think at that time – remind us of what year you started your pupillage, then?

RS: I think people were being called to the Bar, but it was incredibly difficult to secure a pupillage, wasn’t it?

NL: It was very difficult, yes.

RS: So, having managed to find a place to go, tell us about your memories of the allocation of pupil master when you first started.

NL: Well, my first pupil-master was Mervyn Griffith-Jones, who at the time was First Junior Treasury Counsel. And he was very much of the old school – I mean, a very nice man, very kind, but extremely old-fashioned. And he was ACUTELY embarrassed at being lumbered with a woman pupil. I could see him cringing when he walked into the Old Bailey Bar Mess and I tagged along after him. But he did his best to help me. He was a very good advocate; it was a lesson in itself just to listen to him in court.

He didn’t talk to me much, but he did tell me…he gave me one piece of advice and that was: “If you want to advance at the Bar, you have to join the Inns of Court, ah, Conservative and Unionist Society. And learn to play golf.”

RS: What sort of work were you doing in your pupillage at that time?

NL: In the first six months, I think I did a few dock briefs, but that was it. That was the only way that I could have got work.

You’d go to the Old Bailey, and it was a sort of like a cattle auction: you went into court and the man in the dock would point and say, “I want that one!” or “I want him!” or “I want her!”

Those were the first cases I did. The first case I did was arson, before the Recorder of London, who was the most terrifying old gentleman called Sir Gerald Dodson. And my – I got my client seven years.

RS: And at that time, there were very few women…

RS: So, your first case, you’re sent off to the Old Bailey, you wait for a dock brief, and you end up in front of the Recorder of London in a very serious arson case.

NL: Yes.

NL: Yes, and got my client seven years!

NL: 1956.

40

Archives

RS: Goodness! And how did you prepare for that? Were you supported in the preparation, or the skills?

RS: No, tell us about them.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

NL: No, you were just thrown in at the deep end. And of course, one had no solicitor backing one on your dock brief. No help at all. You just did it.

NL: Well, the ‘sus’ laws were a way of sweeping up undesirables in a particular district. You had to prove that the defendant was a ‘suspected person’, behaving in a suspicious manner. And so they’d say, “I observed Mr Ronald or Mr Reginald Kray trying door handles in Whitechapel High Street.” And they would appear in Arbour Square Magistrates’ Court the following morning. And there I would be, and that’s how I got my first break.

RS: So, the dock brief system – I think we now see wonderful old-fashioned pictures drawn of a row of mostly male barristers, some snoozing, waiting for that moment…

RS: Tell us about your experiences as a woman. Were you treated differently? Were there – did you feel you didn’t have the same access to facilities or opportunities?

NL: No. RS: Did you do any advocacy training?

“My first morning of pupillage when I arrived, in the Temple – a junior clerk was sent out to Fleet Street to get some nail varnish remover and I was instructed to take off my nail varnish, because it made me look too tarty…”

RS: …where the judge springs into action and indicates that person is unrepresented and will be given the opportunity of selecting one from counsel’s row.

NL: Yes. RS: And so it literally was those sorts of early experiences that cut your teeth.

NL: That’s right. Then my second six months was at 3 Pump Court, which were Western Circuit chambers. Ewen Montagu was the head of chambers at that time. And Rose Heilbron was there too, and she was a great inspiration: a wonderful woman, very, very kind to junior people. But, I used to go on circuit, and that involved – this was before the Crown Courts Act, of course – so Assizes took place in the cathedral cities of the West Country, and one travelled down the night before the Assize was to open. One stayed in the Bar hotel, and one dined in the Bar Mess, which was a curtained-off part of the hotel dining room. And the wine waiter would come around during the course of dinner, lean over one’s chair and say “Miss Lethbridge, would you take the case of Smith?” And the small prosecution work was in the gift of the wine waiter.

NL: Yes, well, the first thing – my first morning of pupillage when I arrived, in the Temple – a junior clerk was sent out to Fleet Street to get some nail varnish remover and I was instructed to take off my nail varnish, because it made me look too tarty, I suppose. When I got my first tenancy in Hare Court, they put a Yale lock on the lavatory. And all the men in chambers were given a key, but I wasn’t; and I was told to go up Fleet Street and use the Kardomah.

RS: And the Kardomah was?

NL: A café.

A

RS: So having had a few hurdles, which from the sound of things you managed, and developed a resilience and focused on getting your work and doing a good job for reinstruction, you had a, clearly, a good line of work because the frequency of your clients being arrested, and presumably the connections also that they had in referring your abilities to their colleagues meant you managed to get on your feet… notoriety.

RS: You mentioned Rose Heilbron – many people have written quite extensively about Rose, about her career. So, what was it like, being in your shoes looking forward and seeing very little in terms of support from other women around you?

NL: Well, she was very helpful, a very kind, lovely lady.

Otherwise, one really was on one’s own. When I got a tenancy in 3 Hare Court, it was a set of chambers that did mainly prosecution. And of course, this was before the CPS was set up.

All the prosecution work was in the gift of the Yard solicitor, and he wouldn’t touch women. So, none of the chambers work was I allowed to touch. And I mean there were young men who were junior to me who were allowed to. Even things like traffic cases, I was not allowed to touch.

RS: So, you simply weren’t allowed, because of the preferences of others, to do certain work. What did you do?

NL: Well, I had a lucky break, in that the Kray brothers retained a firm of solicitors in the East End who were strictly Orthodox Jewish. And they… nobody in the firm could go to court on Saturday. So, they looked around for an amenable Gentile who would go to court on Saturday, and that was me; I started going to court on Saturday morning for the Kray twins. And they used to get arrested ALL the time by enthusiastic young policemen who wanted to make their name: for silly things, like – remember the old ‘sus’ laws?

Nemone Lethbridge, former Barrister who became a TV presenter © Mike Hollist / Associated Newspapers / Shutterstock

41

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Oral History Project

NL: Yes, I had some good work from the East End. Frank Mitchell, who in the end was (actually, the Krays were convicted of killing him, which I’ve always had grave doubts about), but he was charged with attempted murder in Wandsworth Gaol. I defended him on that. And he was acquitted. But, yes, I had some high-profile stuff.

Shortly afterwards, he was arrested. A man was found dead in Kilburn – an old man, I think a coal merchant, was found dead in the premises which had been broken into. Jimmy was charged with his murder, with another man. And he stood his trial at the Old Bailey. He met his counsel for the first time on the morning of his trial. He was told that there was no evidence against him; that he’d walk out of it. The evidence, however, that caused his conviction was given by the receiver of stolen goods, who told the jury that he had bought the watch and…the gold watch and chain from Jimmy, who’d told him it was the proceeds of a robbery and a murder. In Kilburn.

RS: And I had the privilege of looking at the scrapbook that Katie Gollop found in a West Country auction, which really brought you back into some prominence when we were looking for the history of women in law. That auction, and the collection of photographs, showed some of your history, and I referred you to one photograph, which referred to you “at the tender age of 24”, having your first big and rather glamorous victory in the Court of Appeal. What was that like?

NL: The Court of Appeal is very frightening. It is a terrifying forum. The Lord Chief Justice’s Court, which is Court No 4, is enormous. And it’s very difficult to make your voice heard. And the judges, in those days, were not sympathetic towards women. Some of them were very, um, very rude! Others were patronising – and I don’t know which is worse. But, no, it was always an alarming court. And one would sit outside – there’d be a long list – one would sit outside the court in a draughty corridor really shaking until one’s case was called on.

RS: There came a point in time when you met, I think a love of your life, Jimmy O’Connor. Tell us about him.

A

NL: Well, Jimmy O’Connor was a man whose family had come to England from Cork, in Ireland, at the time of the potato famine.

And they had lived in dire poverty in the Irish ghetto of Kilburn.

And he had an appalling childhood. His father came back from the Great War deeply traumatised – swore that he’d never work again, and he didn’t. And the family really lived on the breadline. Two of his siblings died as young children and he became a thief. And he was a thief. Then, at the outbreak of war, he volunteered to join the British Expeditionary Force, which he did, and he went to France. He spent about a year in France, and then at the time of Dunkirk, he escaped on the Lancastria, which was torpedoed in the Atlantic.

He was in the water for 12 hours, while the German fighter planes were strafing the sinking ship and shooting at the survivors in the sea. And the sea was full of burning oil, so a lot of the survivors burned to death, and others were machinegunned. He survived. He was, ah, picked up by a minesweeper and landed at Plymouth. He was then in hospital for some time.

He was then told to wait for his recall papers for the army, which didn’t arrive, didn’t arrive, didn’t arrive; and…he became a thief.

And he went around the West Country, stealing. It’s not a very proud story, but it’s true. During the course of his criminal life, he broke and entered a jeweller’s shop in Bath, with an accomplice. And they stole, among other pieces of jewellery, a gold watch and chain, which he subsequently sold to a receiver of stolen goods in London.

Well, in fact, that watch and chain had been the proceeds of a robbery in Bath some months before. Anyway, he spent two months in the condemned cell. While he was in the condemned cell, he was confirmed by Bishop Matthew. He was a Catholic, he was confirmed, and kept in touch with Bishop Matthew for the next 30 years or so. But then he was reprieved 48 hours before he was due to be hanged, because the officer in the case went to the Home Secretary and said there is a doubt in this case. He must have had a twinge of conscience. And so he was reprieved.

Well now, later, under the ‘30 years rule’, we got all these papers, reprieve papers from the Home Office. And the watch and chain had actually been identified by the jeweller in Bath, who’d said, “Yes, these are the proceeds of a robbery that took place some months before the murder.”

RS: You met Jimmy O’Connor, and I think – just to put things into context – when you met Jimmy O’Connor he in fact had been convicted; he’d served his sentence, I think he’d served 11 years, before it was commuted.

NL: Yes. RS: So, when you met Jimmy O’Connor in the 60s, he had moved quite forward from whatever life he’d occupied in the past and was involved in writing plays. Tell us a little bit about the work that he was doing at the time.

NL: Well, first of all I just want to add that we were introduced by a member of my chambers, who was a man called Lionel Thompson, who was known as the ‘bad baronet’. But, it was in the Star Tavern in Belgrave Mews. And Lionel (I went in there with him), he turned to me and he said, “I want you to meet the most fascinating man in London.” And it was Jimmy. And Jimmy and I were both very strongly opposed to the death penalty.

And that’s what drew us together to start with, campaigning against the death penalty. Which was still in operation at that time.

RS: So you fell in love, and I think it’s right that you married in secret, didn’t you?

And you had a bridesmaid who was your friend.

Nemone with Jimmy O’Connor. Right: Newspaper cutting from Katie Gollop QC’s Scrapbook Courtsey of Katie Gollop QC

42

Archives

NL: Ann Curnow, who became Treasury Counsel. And she was godmother to my oldest child too.

NL: Well, it was nice, and the present generation of judges seem to be so different. The whole atmosphere is so much more liberal, and tolerant. I find the fact that there’s a – a woman Bencher of an Inn of Court astonishing. I still have an impression of the Benchers of the Inns of Court as described by Charles Lamb, Essays of Elia, the old Benchers who are about 100 years each.

RS: As I understand it, you escaped to Ireland to have a secret wedding, and when you returned and told your chambers and colleagues about this they said that it was fine, as long as things were kept discreetly quiet. But there came a point in time when it became public.

NL: Yes. RS: And so that wasn’t discreet. Tell us what happened to you then, Nemone.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

RS: You have encouraged others to follow. So, I want to ask you about your experiences of your feeling incensed about change. And I want to take you to 1 April 1995 when there were changes to legal aid. What happened there?

“ You know I think you’ve done a great thing, this is a courageous act, and you have my sympathy, and you did nothing wrong” NL: Well, when the press found out – well, there was a short item about my sister’s wedding saying that Jimmy and I had been guests at the wedding. And then of course all hell broke out. And I was very upset, and I was embarrassed for my mother. So, I took my mother off to Greece, and we were there for six weeks. And when I came back there was a letter from the head of chambers, saying, “For reasons which you’ll understand, which we don’t have to go into, I can no longer accept your rent.

And I’ve instructed the clerks to remove your name from the door of chambers.”

RS: And so what did you do?

NL: I was heartbroken. But I did try to find other chambers, without success. In fact, I actually went to see Gerald Gardiner, who was Lord Chancellor in the Labour government. And he said, “You know I think you’ve done a great thing, this is a courageous act, and you have my sympathy, and you did nothing wrong. I would love to help you, but unfortunately we don’t accept women in these chambers!”

RS: I think it took you 18 years to…

NL: …Yes. RS: But you never gave up your love of the Bar, did you?

NL: No, I, I still love it.

RS: And so, tell us what changed? What did you do in those years?

NL: Well, Jimmy and I went to live in Greece; and at that time you could travel very cheaply round Europe, and we virtually commuted from Greece, and we were both working for the BBC. Jimmy did six plays with Ken Loach, and then a number of other plays. And I did a legal trilogy. I adapted Pride and Prejudice for television, and I worked for a time for Granada, doing Crown Court and that sort of thing.

RS: So, you were writing about the law and creating interesting dramas? And then I think your luck changed when you came to be acquainted with Louis de Pinna.

NL: Yes, Louis de Pinna was a member of the Chancery Bar. He was a very strong member of the Liberal Party. And he had no prejudice. And he invited me to join his chambers.

RS: So, this was, I think, at 36B Chancery Lane.

NL: That’s right, yes!

RS: And how long did you stay there?

NL: I was there for, oh, gosh, five or six years, I think. And then I went to 4 New Square, in Lincoln’s Inn. RS: Tell us about your experiences of working with people who, now, you can see on the Bench.

NL: Yes. What happened was legal aid was abolished for personal injury. And this seemed to me absolutely monstrous – and – I mean what happens to the roofer who falls off the roof and breaks his back? He’s got no remedy. He can’t afford to pay privately, which very few roofers can. It seemed to me scandalous, and a man in my chambers called Mark Twomey, who’s now in silk – the Family Bar – he and I thought we’d set up a law centre. Which we did. And it’s still going strong.

RS: And that’s the Law Centre at Stoke Newington.

And I think, is it right, that you can still be found volunteering there…?

NL: Yes… RS: …On Sunday afternoons? And the work that you do, I think at the Law Centre, from what I see, and the comments that are made, has been truly life-changing for many people in the Stoke Newington area.

NL: We do more than just the local area. I mean, we set up in order to help local people, but then we’ve become the… sort of the destination of last resort for people who’ve had a bad experience elsewhere. We had one client, who, thankfully, no longer comes, who came for ten years from Huddersfield.

Every Saturday. Because we listened to him. And didn’t treat him with contempt. And we…we’ve had strange cases. I mean, last week a trafficked woman walked in, who’d been trafficked from West Africa and held as a slave in London for seven years.

And she found her way to us. And we had another girl who was threatened with an honour killing. I mean, it’s extraordinary how, by word of mouth, people come.

RS: It’s providing a beacon of hope and a place to go to be supported regardless of what issues they may be facing.

NL: We don’t turn anybody away.

RS: So, Nemone, it’s been delightful speaking to you. I’d like to ask you for a few wise words of wisdom. What is your top tip for advocacy?

NL: Preparation. It’s like the top tip for…a great crossexamination really is not thunder and lightning, it’s preparation.

Meticulous preparation.

RS: I certainly have found you a great source of inspiration to me. Your grace and your dignity and your resilience, Nemone, is extraordinary.

NL: Thank you!

RS: I’d like to ask you something personal about how… how does one face the challenge of rejection, discrimination and injustice?

NL: Don’t accept it! Refuse to accept it. Say, “This is rubbish.

I will not put up with this!”

Rachel Spearing with Nemone Lethbridge 43

A

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Valedictory Speech

VALEDICTORY SPEECH By former Sub-Treasurer, Master Maddams on his retirement as Sub-Treasurer of The Inner Temple, 22 March 2018.

Master Maddams

Master Reader, distinguished past Treasurers, honourable Masters of the Bench, members of Hall, a special welcome to our students and pupils, friends, colleagues and guests.

T

First of all Master Reader, on behalf of my daughter Cecilia, my brother Bob and myself, may I thank you and the Inn for organising this wonderful event, starting as it did with the sacred in the Temple Church, then a secular champagne reception, and now the sumptuousness of dinner in this glorious hall with its tradition of good food, fine wine, beautiful service and sparkling conversation. Indeed, tonight has all the ingredients of what the Maddams family would recognise as a stonking good party! I think it was Boris Yeltsin who once said that (in rough translation): “ There are several reasons for drinking And one has just entered my head If a man cannot drink when he’s living How the hell can he drink when he’s dead.”

Amen to that.

The Inn has been described by many people in various ways and the one that has stuck with me is that the Inn is a community of communities, a description first coined by Master Rix when Treasurer in 2005. It became the title of the handsome book which we published to mark the 400th anniversary of the grant of our Royal Charter in 2008 and where we were honoured to welcome Her Majesty The Queen and Master His Royal Highness, The Duke of Edinburgh.

I have come to understand the wisdom of that short headline reflecting, as it does, the many constituencies within the Inn, and the part which the Inn plays, as a whole, across the wider legal landscape. I believe this is a role which will become ever more important in the years ahead.

Being Sub-Treasurer allows the post holder a unique insight into that wider legal landscape, when so many of our members have busy daily lives in the courts, chambers, with clients and, when time allows, families and friends.

My first observation is just how well the four Inns of Court work together. There is always a friendly banter as to who has the best car park, catering and film locations, but we really are stronger and more effective when we work together. And so, it is a pleasure to see Master Ian Mayes of Middle Temple here this evening, representing our closest neighbour, and with whom we share the joint privilege of caring for the Temple Church.

44

And watch this space as the reinvigorated Council of the Inns of Court aims high with its ambitious, and sorely needed, plans to run, once again, its own Bar course on an exciting new model.

It will cost less and deliver more to the next generation of aspiring young barristers.

We also seem to be gaining an appetite for making ourselves available to the wider public and here are a few examples: The Pegasus Access and Support Scheme, supervised

by Master Fiona Jackson and Struan Campbell; The social context of the law series of talks, the brainchild of Master Nice and Master Scruton; The Inner Temple Book Prize for outstanding legal authorship, now in its fourth iteration, which enjoys the patronage of Master Her Royal Highness The Princess Royal and conceived by Master Rix; The Chelsea Garden Fringe, replete with dog shows, phing things and the occasional horticultural terrorist, brought to you by our renowned former gardener Andrea Brunsendorf; The Library’s blog and timelines under the careful watch of Master Sally Smith and Margaret Clay; The growing recognition that the Temple Church Choir is at a world-class standard, trained and directed by the wonderful Roger Sayer and whom we heard in top form earlier this evening; A History Society that brings our archives to life in many fascinating ways, inspired by Master Paget and our detective-like archivist, Celia Pilkington; And two memorable open weekends, each attracting over 25,000 visitors, all of whom flocked to hear the Reverend and Valiant Master of the Temple, Robin Griffith-Jones’, talk on Magna Carta, the Knights Templar, The Da Vinci Code, what William Marshall ate for breakfast, and when he might get an increase in his charter salary of 16 guineas a year (not likely in the near future…!).

People want to learn more about who we are and what we do. Our revamped website is responding to this and early indications are that the number of ‘hits’ it receives has increased substantially. It you haven’t yet visited it, may I encourage you to do so. Otherwise, Master Agnello and Henrietta Amodio will want to know why not!

Treasury

But within the Inn itself, there is a daily rhythm to our lives, and I have sometimes reflected that our four legal terms correspond to the qualities of the four seasons:

And staying on an international theme with so many people here tonight from different countries, cultures, religions, backgrounds and traditions, may I conclude, as I have done so many times at Cumberland Lodge weekends, with the words of the American author and humourist Ogden Nash, words which should ring out from the United Nations, to the farthest islands of the Commonwealth and, in my opinion, should be learned by heart for anyone seeking admission to the Inner Temple:

Starting with autumn (Michaelmas term), the beginning of the legal year and when new students are planted into the soil of the Inn. Winter (Hilary term), when teaching intensifies, and plans made in the greenhouse of the Treasury Building germinate for the coming year.

Spring (Easter term), when everything explodes including the appointment of new QCs, the awarding of scholarships, when pupils in their second six find their feet and Bar final exams take place – and – Summer (Trinity term), when exam results are announced, new Benchers elected, cases are concluded for the recess and we all look our best for a summer party in the Garden.

The treasurer of the year chooses its theme and I still remember: Master Keene dancing the night away to a big band; Master Williamson taking us to Scarborough Fair with the Brighouse and Rastrick Brass Band; Master Vivian Robinson on the back seat of a pink Cadillac as Elvis Presley; Master Laws as the Mad Hatter, with a hat to match, in an Alice in Wonderland world; Master Hallett in her Venetian mask; Master Thorley’s sweet stall; Master Tomlinson with a Singapore sling in hand; Master Moore-Bick in an enchanted garden; Master Cryan flinging in the Highlands; Master Pittaway looking pukka at the regatta in boater and blazer;

And finally, the late Master Hirst as a maharajah, with his own banknotes, in an Indian Bazaar. It’s a pleasure to see his maharanee with us tonight. Maintaining the tradition, our Treasurer for this year, Master Gloster, looks forward to your company at a 1960s summer party, so please delve into the back of your wardrobes for something suitable to wear.

What interesting private lives our treasurers lead.

May I now extend a particular welcome to my successor, Greg Dorey, and his wife, Alison. He inherits an organisation in good shape, conscious of its custodianship of the past but with an eye firmly on the challenges ahead. He will be supported by a great team of managers and staff, well over half of whom were here when I arrived 12 years ago.

I would like all those staff members present to please stand so can we give you a hearty round of applause.

We are fortunate that our fully engaged membership extends well beyond the self-employed Bar as our members pursue their careers in ever more interesting ways, from Manchester to Malaysia, Birmingham to Brunei and Cardiff to Chennai. I have visited them all. May I repeat the Reader’s welcome to all of you here tonight who have travelled from far and wide and for the hospitality you have extended to me and the Treasurer whenever we have visited you.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

F oreigners are people somewhere else, Natives are people at home; If the place you’re at Is your habitat, You’re a foreigner, say in Rome.

But the scales of justice balance true, And tit leads into tat, So, the man who’s at home When he stays in Rome Is abroad when he’s where you’re at.

When we leave the limits of the land in which Our birth certificates sat us, It does not mean Just a change of scene, But also a change of status.

The Frenchman with his fetching beard, The Scot with his kilt and sporran, One moment he May a native be, And the next may find him foreign.

There’s many a difference quickly found Between the different races, But the only essential Differential Is living different places.

Yet such is the pride of prideful man,

From Austrians to Australians, That wherever he is, He regards as his, And the natives there, as aliens.

Oh, I’ll be friends if you’ll be friends, The foreigner tells the native, And we’ll work together for our common ends Like a preposition and a dative.

If our common ends seem mostly mine, Why not, you ignorant foreigner?

And the native replies Contrariwise; And hence, my dears, the coroner.

So, mind your manners when a native, please, And doubly when you visit And between us all A rapport may fall Ecstatically exquisite.

One simple thought, if you have it pat, Will eliminate the coroner: You may be a native in your habitat, But to foreigners you’re just a foreigner.

Goody for Our Side and Your Side Too by Ogden Nash.

Thank you for listening, thank you for your friendship, and thank you for allowing me to understand the real value of what barristers do.

If you shine a little more brightly because of your membership of the Inn, then this has indeed been a job well worth doing.

Thank you and good luck.

Patrick Maddams Hon FRIBA

As for the Sir Humphrey sobriquet, I am indebted to Greg with his extensive experience in the higher echelons of foreign diplomacy and public policy for his own mandarin-like description of what a Sub-Treasurer does: “ And so, while the Benchers depart to their dinner, The Sub-Treasurer stays, growing thinner and thinner, Racking his brain to record and report What he thinks That they think That they ought to have thought.”

45

T

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Sir Edward Marshall Hall KC

SIR EDWARD MARSHALL HALL KC: HIS GIFTS OF SILVER TO THE INN

By Master Lawson and Richard Parsons

Last summer, as we were carrying out our biannual check of the Inn’s silver, we again wondered what lay behind the engravings on what is known as the ‘Greenwood Cup’.

We knew that Greenwood was a solicitor, whom Marshall Hall had successfully defended on a charge of murder, but couldn’t understand the significance of the inscription underneath.

Fortunately, our Bar Liaison Committee representative, Zach Bredemear, had the good sense to contact Master Sally Smith, the author of the recent, splendidly readable and fascinating biography of Sir Edward Marshall Hall KC, A Law unto Himself.

The book tells us that Harold Greenwood was an outwardly respectable country solicitor living in Kidwelly, Carmarthenshire, with his wife, Mabel, and four children in a substantial house surrounded by a beautifully kept garden.

T

In June 1919, the family sat down to Sunday lunch a little late, as the maid had been unable to access the china pantry.

Harold Greenwood had spent a significant period of the morning alone in there, the maid was to tell the police. Mabel had her customary glass of red burgundy with her lunch, Harold a whisky and the children water. Within hours, Mabel started to suffer from profuse diarrhoea, then vomiting, and later severe chest pains. Despite the attentions of the local doctor, she died in the early hours of Monday.

Suspicions that Harold had enjoyed the company of other ladies seemed to be confirmed when four months later he announced his engagement to a Miss Jones, and it became known too that he had been carrying on a “violent flirtation” with the same doctor’s sister! Suspicions turned into a police investigation and the exhumation of dear Mabel. Arsenic was found in all her organs. Harold was in the habit of using Coopers Weedicide in the upkeep of the immaculate gravel paths around the garden.

Unsurprisingly, that weed killer contained arsenic and an inquest returned the verdict that Harold had killed his wife.

The description of Marshall Hall’s conduct of the trial reveals much about the nature of the man and the advocate, and the book should be essential reading for any aspiring advocate.

What is not in the book, but came in the reply to Zach’s enquiry, explains the inscription, “I dared you to do it – and you did it. Here’s the mug.”

By the time of the trial in 1920, public opinion was firmly of the view that Harold Greenwood was indeed guilty. Shortly before he set off for Carmarthen Assizes to defend him, Marshall Hall dropped into one of his favourite silversmiths and the old friend who ran it.

“I am surprised at you, Sir Edward, for defending that blackguard, you must see that he is guilty,” said the jeweller.

“Guilty indeed?” said Marshall. “The man is innocent, and I will get him off.”

“Very well,” said the silversmith, “whether you get him off or not, if you convince me the man is innocent, I will make you a present of this,” pointing to the silver tankard.

Following the acquittal and amidst the huge public adulation that seemed to follow every trial that he conducted, the silversmith sent Sir Edward the ‘mug’. Richard Parsons has his views (see below) about the terminology. He may well be correct, because the phrase “I dared you to do it…” is likely to be a reference to another capital case in which Marshall Hall defended in 1913, some years before. He represented 24-yearold Jeannie Baxter, a “murderess of startling beauty” who clearly captivated Marshall Hall too. She was kept in comfortable style by her ‘protector’, who said he would marry her when his mother died. Whilst waiting, she fell for a rakish young man, who was an aviator, heavy drinker and gambler with a penchant for shooting games. He always carried guns and would demonstrate his shooting prowess by shooting over his shoulder through open doors or at photographs in drawing rooms. On the fateful evening, a neighbour heard a volley of six shots ring out from his flat, followed by Miss Baxter coming out screaming, “I have shot him – he dared me to do it.”

46

Treasury

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Her account was that this was one of her lover’s games. He had pointed the gun at his own chest and dared her to pull the trigger; she had tried to wrest the gun from him and, in the struggle, it had gone off and killed him. On his body were found two fatal wounds, although four other shots had been fired. One witness recounted that he recalled her saying that the aviator would have either to marry her or give her her protector back or she would kill him. Remarkably, the jury acquitted of murder and convicted of manslaughter. A disappointed Marshall Hall appealed on the basis that she would have been acquitted had the judge not suggested manslaughter as an alternative to murder. The Court’s response was that “Marshall Hall might very well have hoped for a verdict, that he ought not to have got”!

The biography has accounts of many of his trials, but has much more – the psychology that lay behind his advocacy; his troubled domestic life and latterly his ill health; his battles with judges and newspaper proprietors; his will, which left much to ‘Louisa’ at the expense of his wife and daughter; his catholic eye for silver, paintings and objets d’art of all sorts; and his generosity to friends and young members of the Bar. It really is a ‘good read’ and an affectionate but balanced account of one of the Inn’s greatest advocates and most generous benefactors.

Earlier this year, the Inn, through the encouragement of the Treasurer, Master Gloster, and the good offices of Richard Parsons, who has guided the Inn for over 30 years in relation to our silver, acquired a set of four beautiful George II candlesticks. They were made in London in 1742 by James Gould. They bear the Pegasus crest and are engraved “Robert Paunceford Esq, Treasurer of ye Inner Temple 1743”. It is good to welcome them back!

His Honour Michael Lawson QC Master of the Silver

T

I have to admit having some personal background in the following article. My father, Laurie Parsons, was born in 1892; he fought in the Great War, both in the trenches and then as a pilot in the Royal Flying Corps. He, as I, was a partner in our family firm of jewellers and silversmiths, Tessiers Ltd, in New Bond Street. Through his client contacts, in the early 20th century, he naturally knew Sir Edward Marshall Hall KC and I remember him talking about the famous basket that is mentioned at the end of this article.

Both men knew Lady Carnarvon (see Master Sally Smith, A Law unto Himself, for Sir Edward’s connection), who saved my father’s shot-up leg when he was convalescing at Highclere Castle, converted to a hospital during the war. To my knowledge, no one worked at Tessiers with the initials WAK, engraved on the Greenwood Cup. Interestingly, when he died in 1927, the barrister left bequests in his will to members of the Parsons family, and I have the green jade and ruby cufflinks Lady Carnarvon gave to my father on his wedding day, after he escaped from France in 1940.

On his death, Sir Edward also left a considerable sum of money as a trust to the Inner Temple, which is still administered today to benefit those “impecunious of the Inn” as he was, from time to time. He also left three precious objects to the Inn’s Treasury; they consist of a silver tankard, a gold snuffbox, and a silver-gilt cup and cover.

47

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Sir Edward Marshall Hall KC

Master Lawson has already mentioned the George II silver tankard made by London goldsmith Fuller White and hallmarked for 1747, engraved on the front with the text: “The Greenwood Cup” and the year “1920”, underneath on the base: “To E M-H I dared you to do it and you did it – so here’s the mug. WAK.” If we consider the last four words of this text “so here’s the mug” and the initials WAK, combined with the suggestion the tankard was given to settle a wager by a silver dealer, it is more likely the dealer would have used the word ‘tankard’ rather than ‘mug’. A tankard has a hinged cover to prevent foreign matter entering the contents and tends to contain a larger volume of fluid than a mug. Could it be that the word ‘mug’ has an alternative meaning; was the ‘mug’ WAK? To have made a bet with such a winner as Sir Edward was not the best idea, even given that Harold Greenwood was accused of murdering his wife and the evidence was strongly against him. Searches in silver dealers’ records of the time do not reveal who WAK might have been.

T

The next item is a 4.3/4 ounce 18-carat gold engine-turned table snuffbox, made in 1824 by the celebrated London goldsmith and box maker, Alexander Strahan. The wear to the base suggests it was in regular use and is engraved inside the lid: “To My Fellow Benchers of the Inner Temple from E M-H 1922.

Good at a Pinch.” It was made nearly a century earlier than the engraved date of 1922, and, apart from the formal engine turning, the only decorative feature is the scroll thumb piece to the front of the hinged lid. Again, taking the last four words of the inscription, “Good at a Pinch”, could this also have a double meaning? This text quite literally describes the pleasure of taking a pinch of snuff. It could also be interpreted that ‘a pinch’ can have the less formal meaning of strained circumstances, to steal, even make an arrest. So also, to take a pinch of snuff at difficult times could be a palliative; possibly the snuff-taking ritual could allow a pause, particularly effective in setting the drama before a jury in an early 20th century court-of-law.

The silver-gilt cup celebrates Sir Edward the Parliamentarian.

He was elected to Parliament on two occasions, in 1900 until 1906 for Southport and in 1910 until 1916 for Liverpool, East Toxteth. His first debate in the House of Commons related to the daughter of one of his constituents. The problem revolved around children being sent by their fathers to collect ale from the local pub to bring home. This activity presented moral problems and Sir Edward debated that ale should be delivered to doorsteps in a cart like milk. This suggestion made in the late afternoon was met with jeers in the chamber and from then on he only spoke in the House when it was absolutely necessary. The silver-gilt cup and cover, engraved with his coat of arms on the front and the script initials M H on the back, is also engraved around the foot: “To E Marshall Hall K C (MP Southport Division SW Lancashire) 1900–1906. From some friends and well wishers in the Southport Division, June 11th, 1906.”

Similar to the snuffbox, this Adamesque-form cup and cover was made earlier than the inscription date, by the London goldsmith William and bears the London hallmarks for 1811.

48

The purchase of the magnificent silver Dutch layette basket by Hans Coenraet Brechtel, royal goldsmith of The Hague, dated in 1645, must rank as one of Sir Edward’s greatest out-of-court successes and an acquisition of a piece of national treasure.

He was an avid collector and led a team of five Benchers to buy this silver basket from Tessiers Ltd, of New Bond Street, in June 1925 (see Inner Temple Yearbook 2005/06 pages 64–67 for the full article). Mary, the Princess Royal and daughter of Charles I had been pledged in marriage to the young Prince William of Orange when she was nine years of age, in a symbolic ritual in London. In 1642, the events of the Civil War had led Charles to send Mary to safety at the Dutch Court, in The Hague. It is believed that the iconography in the chased and pierced work in the base of the basket was a message from the Dutch Court to the exiled English Court to smooth relationships after William tried to seduce the young princess, before the relationship had been formally concluded, in June 1644. A Layette basket is used to store the birth clothes while a mother is in labour and indeed, some years later, Mary gave birth to a son, also William, who became William III of England, after the Glorious Revolution in 1688, which changed the historical course of the British Isles.

Richard Parsons Jeweller and Silversmith

EDUCATION & TRAINING # E

49

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Education for the Bar

EDUCATION FOR THE BAR It has been another extremely productive year for the Education and Training Department, the Education and Training Committee (chaired by Master Levitt) and all the committees and members dedicated to the Inn’s core function of education and training. The following pages outline just some of this year’s education and training activities as well as forthcoming projects.

The Inn was particularly excited this year to be ranked 24th amongst the top 50 employers on the UK’s annual index of employers acting to improve social mobility – an impressive 11-place increase on last year! Congratulations are due to the Outreach team and Outreach Committee and to the very many member volunteers who participate in our outreach programmes for school and university students. Whilst this recognition is gratefully received, there is still, as always, much more to be done in widening access to the profession, and the Inn will continue to work with relevant partners to develop its programmes, including the flagship Pegasus Access and Support Scheme.

E

“Education and training opportunities” and “scholarships” were again identified in the annual survey of new student members as the two most important factors affecting a student’s decision to join this Inn. Financial assistance is an important factor in widening access, and Inner Temple continues to offer generous scholarships to the most able students. The vast majority of our scholarships are means-tested to decide the financial level of the award. This year, the Inn received the highest number of applications ever for the BPTC scholarships – 441 applications, with a total of 383 interviewed – and we continue to attract the highest number of applicants of all four Inns. Thanks are due to the Scholarships team, Scholarships Committee and particularly to those members who dedicate time to interviewing candidates – a significant task given that the Inn interviews every eligible candidate.

Turning to legal education and training, the BSB continues its Future Bar Training review, most recently focusing upon the Inns’ requirements in the Bar training rules (admission, qualifying sessions, pupillage training and student conduct), assessing the extent to which these requirements remain necessary and proportionate in the light of the BSB’s Professional Statement and, where they remain necessary, considering the governance arrangements that will ensure appropriate regulatory oversight by the BSB. Crucially, the BSB has agreed that the Inns will continue to have an essential role in the training of barristers. In a policy statement, it was noted that, going forwards, the BSB will: continue to oversee students intending to become barristers in England and Wales, but with strengthened oversight arrangements between the Inns and the BSB; continue to require student membership of an Inn; require authorised education and training organisations to check prior educational attainment; continue to require the Inns of Court to administer the ‘Fit and Proper Person’ test and other checks made before somebody is allowed to be called to the Bar; require a ‘standard’ Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check;

50

review the wording of the declaration made when students are called to the Bar and its associated guidance; continue to delegate matters of student conduct to the Inns (subject to reviewing roles and responsibilities and agreeing appropriate BSB oversight of the process); continue to require a minimum number of professional development events provided by the Inns, which are known as ‘qualifying sessions’.

The BSB envisages signing a memorandum of understanding with the Inns to clarify the respective roles and responsibilities.

The four Inns continue to explore their potential involvement in delivery of the proposed Part 1/Part 2 BPTC course. A detailed proposal for the course will be considered by the Inns in due course with a view to seeking authorisation from the BSB to deliver the course, via the Inns of Court College of Advocacy (ICCA), using fit-for-purpose training facilities within the Inns.

Elsewhere, Inner Temple continues to develop its qualifying sessions programme and pupils’ advocacy programme, enabling students and pupils to learn from practitioner members and other experts the skills, knowledge and attributes required by a barrister at the point of authorisation. Further, the four Inns are currently finalising a common qualifying sessions framework and quality assurance system to provide a level of consistency across the Inns, whilst retaining a great degree of flexibility. Inner Temple has led the way in developing qualifying sessions and pupils’ advocacy training, which provide relevant skills and knowledge, and we will continue to develop new sessions to meet the needs of our student and pupil members. Thanks are due to our dedicated Qualifying Sessions Committee and Advocacy Training Committee, as well as the members who give up countless evenings and weekends to train our students and pupils.

The Advocacy Training Committee continues to monitor and, where necessary, adapt the Inn’s advocacy training provision for members. A Working Group of the Education and Training Committee redesigned the New Practitioners’ Ethics course in light of the Moorhead report on The Ethical Capacities of New Advocates (December 2015) and the Inns of Court College of Advocacy response to that report (September 2016). The new course incorporates electronic polling software for the first time, allowing the New Practitioners to vote anonymously on a range of answers to the ethical questions posed by the trainers, with the responses then displayed on a screen, prompting discussion as to the most appropriate solution.

With the other Inns and circuits, the Inn is also committed to delivering compulsory vulnerable witness training for barristers wishing to undertake publicly funded serious sexual offences cases. Member volunteers have been trained as specialist facilitators of this intensive training and several training sessions have been delivered. The Inner Temple has so far trained over 200 delegates, with additional sessions planned.

As always, the Inn is immensely grateful to all its members who volunteer for our education, scholarships and outreach programmes. With their ongoing support, and the support of new volunteers, the Inn will continue to do everything it can to meet the evolving needs of those training for the Bar through to established practitioners. If you would like to volunteer to assist with any of our programmes, please do get in touch.

Education & Training

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

E The Education and Training Team

EDUCATION AND TRAINING TEAM FIONA FULTON Director of Education 020 7797 8189 ffulton@innertemple.org.uk

JULIA ARMFIELD Education Manager 020 7797 8207 jarmfield@innertemple.org.uk

DAVID MILLER Professional Training Manager 020 7797 8209 dmiller@innertemple.org.uk

KERRY UPHAM Education Co-ordinator and Assistant to DoE 020 7797 8189 kupham@innertemple.org.uk

DAISY MORTIMER Outreach Co-ordinator 020 7797 8262 dmortimer@innertemple.org.uk

RICHARD LOVERIDGE Education Co-ordinator 020 7797 8212 rloveridge@innertemple.org.uk

SELLISHA LOCKYER Scholarships and Students Manager 020 7797 8210 slockyer@innertemple.org.uk

EDWINA KOROMA Events Co-ordinator 020 7797 8213 ekoroma@innertemple.org.uk

STRUAN CAMPBELL Outreach Manager 020 7797 8214 scampbell@innertemple.org.uk

GEORGINA EVERATT Scholarships and Students Co-ordinator 020 7797 8211 geveratt@innertemple.org.uk Education and Training Department Treasury Building, Inner Temple, London EC4Y 7HL (office situated at 2 King’s Bench Walk) Tel: 020 7797 8208

www.innertemple.org.uk www.twitter.com/TheInnerTemple www.facebook.com/TheInnerTemple

51

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Inner Temple Outreach

INNER TEMPLE OUTREACH In this Yearbook, you’ll read a lot about anniversaries, especially our schools project or the upcoming anniversary of the Academic Fellows Scheme. In the ten years since the Inn’s first outreach projects started, the Inn has made great progress. It has increased its reach and the depth of the support it provides to ensure people, from all backgrounds, have access to informed advice and guidance about the profession.

GOING FURTHER The Inn has recognised that, while it is based in London, it is not a London-centric organisation, and its members practise across England and Wales and internationally.

That is why this year, the Outreach Committee approved a change in focus for its insight evenings on becoming a barrister. By the end of 2019, the Inn will be delivering insight events on every circuit. This will be a great chance to reach students and graduates who might not have the traditional access to advice and guidance about the profession. It is a wonderful opportunity for more junior members of the profession to start volunteering with the Inn. Priorities for these events will be given to universities that have a high number of students from widening participation backgrounds.

E

To support universities across England and Wales, the Inn is now offering workshops on becoming a barrister and an application and CV session that can be part of a law module or employability event.

BREAKING RECORDS Building on the success of past years, this year the Inn was delighted to receive almost 200 applications for the Pegasus Access and Support Scheme (PASS) and awarded places to 59 applicants.

2018 has not only marked major milestones; it also seen the Outreach Committee and Outreach Team make real advances towards achieving our overall mission of creating enriching opportunities, to inspire, connect and enable understanding about the Bar and the Inner Temple as an Inn of Court in the modern world.

It was the highest number of applications for PASS we’ve ever received and the highest number of places we’ve ever offered to students. So far, 45 of the students have completed a mini-pupillage with one of our PASS partner chambers, and 53 attended the residential PASS skills course in June. The feedback we have received on the mini-pupillages undertaken so far has been excellent and demonstrates how critical this part of the scheme is in changing student perceptions for the better and affirming their aspirations. Lots of the participants have indicated that undertaking their mini-pupillage has removed any doubts they had about pursuing the career.

2018 is the second year the Inn has delivered the PASS skills course and the scheme is now progressing into a year-long coaching opportunity for the students.

RISING UP All of this effort is making a real impact.

In 2017, the Inn entered the first UK’s Social Mobility Employer Index in the country. The Inn was ranked 35 of the top 50 employers for its social mobility outreach programmes. In this year’s index, the Inn was ranked 24.

The Index is the creation of the Social Mobility Foundation and is published in partnership with sponsors the City of London Corporation. It ranks the UK’s

employers on the actions they are taking to ensure they are open to accessing and progressing talent from all backgrounds.

This year, the Index found that having a workforce that is diverse in terms of social background is fast becoming as important to employers as being diverse in terms of gender and race.

Entrants included banks, law firms, government departments, engineering firms, retail firms and technology companies.

The official report on the Inner Temple submission commented: “The PASS scheme is well-targeted and evaluated, and we were particularly impressed with the new eligibility criteria and application process for the scheme.”

HELPING US As ever, the Inn could not achieve these great outcomes without the support of volunteers. To all of you that have given up your time to help us – thank you. You’re making a real difference.

Due to recent General Data Protection Regulation, the Inn has seen a real decrease in the number of members we can contact about volunteering.

The Inn can’t make a difference to the profession without our volunteers. So if you want to volunteer (and it really does not matter what level of the profession you’re at), please get in contact.

FORTHCOMING EVENTS LAW FAIRS

INSIGHT

DINNER FOR LEGAL ACADEMICS

Sussex/Brighton – 7 November 2018

Insight Newcastle – 23 October 2018

19 March 2019

Exeter – 13 November 2018

Insight London – 25 October 2018

1 May 2019

Manchester – 13 November 2018

Insight Bristol – 30 October 2018

21 May 2019

Essex – 15 November 2018

Insight Durham – 29 January 2019

Southampton – 21 November 2018

Insight Leicester – 7 February 2019

Nottingham Trent – 22 January 2019

Insight Cardiff – 19 February 2019

PROSPECTIVE STUDENTS’ QUESTION AND ANSWER DAY

Insight Southampton – 14 March 2019

23 June 2019

2 November 2018

DINNER TO THE UNIVERSITIES

PASS RESIDENTIAL COURSE

21 November 2018

5 March 2019

23 June 2019–25 June 2019

SCHOOLS PROJECT

5 February 2019 12 February 2019

COMBAR SCHOLARS RECEPTION

26 March 2019

25 June 2019

10 April 2019

52

Education & Training

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

WHAT IT MEANS TO BE AN ACADEMIC FELLOW In 2019, the Inner Temple will be celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Academic Fellows Scheme. As the Inn approaches this important milestone, it is an opportunity to consider the impact of this scheme.

Since 2010, the scheme has seen 24 academics, from 16 institutions in every part of England and Wales, complete their three-year tenure. After their fellowship has ended, many have stayed engaged with the Inn, helping to support and inform our educational and outreach activities. Two have even been appointed Academic Benchers. Those that have stayed on after the end of their fellowships gain the title Associate Academic Fellow.

We currently have 12 Academic Fellows, each actively playing a role in the Inn’s work. The events and activities fellows have been involved in range from arranging outreach activities at their universities, helping the Inn in reaching more students and engaging with local members, to hosting research conferences at the Inn and around the country.

The Inn recognises that since the scheme was set up, the educational landscape has changed and the pressures on academics have increased, not only the expectations of students but also the demands on research. As such, last year the Executive Committee agreed to increase the funding support available to fellows during their tenure, which has allowed the Education and Training Department to be more strategic in its approach to supporting fellows’ research and teaching activities. This change has had a great impact and we’re now seeing an even higher level of research outcomes, linked to the Inn, with even more members engaged with our fellows’ work. One of the most exciting outcomes of the scheme is seeing Academic Fellows come together and support each other, creating a long-lasting network that will continue to benefit universities and the Inn’s educational delivery.

To understand the impact of the Inn’s support for academics, it is best to hear from our Academic Fellows and Associate Academic Fellows who have been supported in 2018. They explain below the impact of this support:

E The ‘Race, Mental Health and State Violence’ symposium, hosted at Birkbeck by Dr Eddie Bruce-Jones © 2018 Birkbeck Media Services / Dominic Mifsud

“On 9–10 April 2018, the Inner Temple supported a two-day symposium that I hosted at Birkbeck School of Law called ‘Race, Mental Health and State Violence’. The event brought together legal practitioners, mental health service providers, legal scholars, police, law students and members of the general public in an effort to critically discuss and evaluate asylum policy, policing practice, and the intersectional forms of vulnerability at the juncture of race, mental health, gender, migration status and various forms of law enforcement. The papers were interdisciplinary and provided a balance of theoretical and practical insights. The keynote addresses included the Dean of American University School of Law and the Director of Inquest. Without the support of the Inn, it would have been impossible to host such a high-calibre event and bring together over 100 attendees from such varied sectors of society. As an Associate Academic Fellow of the Inn, I am grateful for the support, and I am positive that attendees left with a sense of appreciation for the Inn’s commitment to bridging the gap between legal practice and legal academia.”

Dr Eddie Bruce-Jones, Deputy Dean of School of Law, Birkbeck, University of London, and Associate Academic Fellow.

“The second annual Critical Law and Corporate Social Responsibility [CSR] Network conference took place on 7 June 2017 and the theme centred on Critical Law and Corporate Crime. This conference included Master Desiree Artesi, who gave a keynote address on tackling the issue of corporate criminal responsibility and ethical business regulation. The support of the Inner Temple has been invaluable for enabling knowledge exchange and the dissemination of ideas in my research area of critical law and corporate social responsibility.

Furthermore, it has been crucial in enriching this aspect of inclusive legal education through funding events, which present the platform for vital exchanges between students, academics, legal practitioners and civil society. Overall, my position as an Academic Fellow has given me an immense opportunity: to access support, facilities and a wider network, to enhance the discourse between learning and practice, and to interrogate new and emerging ideas.”

Dr Adaeze Okoye, Senior Lecturer, University of Brighton, Academic Fellow

“As an Academic Fellow of the Inner Temple, I benefitted a great deal from the Inn’s support in three ways. First, the Inner Temple has sponsored the LJMU/Inner Temple Debating Competition for five years. I started the debating competition to enable students to improve their public speaking skills and confidence. The Inner Temple provided judges for the competition, who have been very generous with their advice and time.

Since the debating competition, eight LJMU students to date have won Inner Temple scholarships. This is a very positive step towards improving students’ employability and increasing diversity in the Bar. Secondly, I was very fortunate to have a bencher of the Inner Temple to provide a foreword to my monograph, ‘Financial stability and prudential regulation: a comparison between the regulators and central banks of the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia and Germany’. Finally, the Inner Temple provided the opportunity for me to give a lecture titled ‘Of Trust and Confidence in Artificial Intelligence’. I thoroughly enjoyed the experience and look forward to further collaborations with the Inner Temple.”

Dr Alison Lui, Senior Lecturer, Liverpool John Moores University, Academic Fellow

53

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

New Academic Fellows

NEW ACADEMIC FELLOWS Established in 2010, the Inner Temple Academic Fellowship Scheme aims to recognise the outstanding contribution of legal teaching and research of early- to mid-career academics to the Bar of England and Wales. Working closely with universities across England and Wales, the scheme also seeks to demystify the profession for prospective student members by building strong ties between the Bar and legal academia.

During their three-year tenure, Academic Fellows are variously invited to give lectures, to participate in residential weekends and other qualifying sessions, and to attend social events. In turn, we support, as much as we can, their research endeavours.

Dr Claire Fenton-Glynn, University of Cambridge

Dr Tatiana Cutts, LSE

Claire’s research lies in the field of human rights and the protection of children. She has published on a wide range of issues, including inter-country adoption, international surrogacy and cross-border child protection, as well as children’s rights under the European Court of Human Rights.

Tatiana joined LSE’s department of law as an assistant professor from the University of Birmingham in 2016. Prior to that, she was a senior lecturer at Keble College, and received her DPhil from the University of Oxford in 2015.

Her research interest spans several areas of private law, primarily within the context of modern monetary practices.

Tatiana is also involved in various policy-facing projects concerning the integration and regulation of Bitcoin, amongst other applications of distributed ledger technology.

At the core of this research is the interaction between international and regional human rights instruments and domestic law, and the way in which these frameworks can be used to implement children’s rights.

Claire works as a consultant on children and youth rights with the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and is a fellow of the Centre for International Sustainable Development Law.

E

She has also worked with organisations such as the European Union, Save the Children and Avocats Sans Frontières on issues concerning child protection, human rights and rule of law.

Claire is an Inner Temple Book Prize winner (New Author, 2015).

Dr Solène Rowan, LSE Solène Rowan is an associate professor at the LSE, specialising in contract, tort and commercial law. She studied law as an undergraduate student at King’s College London and Paris I (Panthéon-Sorbonne) and completed her LLM and doctoral studies at the University of Cambridge.

Prior to joining the LSE, Solène was a fellow and college lecturer in law at Queens’ College, Cambridge. She has held visiting lectureships at the University of Oxford, the University of Paris II (Panthéon-Assas) and Osaka Gakuin University, Japan. She is also a non-practising solicitor of the Senior Courts of England and Wales, having trained at Herbert Smith LLP, London and Shanghai.

54

We were delighted to welcome four new Academic Fellows this year, each of whom we are sure will play a key role in the Inn’s educational and outreach programmes:

Martin George, University of Leicester Martin George joined Leicester in September 2014 and is an associate professor. His research and teaching interests lie in land law, the conflict of laws and, more broadly, legal education.

After studying at the universities of Leicester and Nottingham, Martin was a college lecturer at Hertford College, Oxford, before taking up the lectureship in land law at the University of Birmingham from 2009 to 2014. He was awarded the Excellence in Teaching Prize 2013 at Birmingham, and was voted Lecturer of the Year in 2015 and 2016 by the law students at Leicester. Martin is the co-author, with Emeritus Professor Mark Thompson, of the new sixth edition of Thompson’s Modern Land Law (Oxford University Press), which was published in July 2017.

Martin is the Senior Tutor at Leicester Law School, as well as the Senior Admissions Tutor for the College of Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities at the University of Leicester.

Education & Training

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

ACADEMIC FELLOWS

ASSOCIATE ACADEMIC FELLOWS

This year’s four new Academic Fellows join our current cohort of Fellows:

On completion of their three-year tenure, Academic Fellows are then appointed Associate Academic Fellows of the Inn. We are delighted that this growing cohort of Associate Fellows continues to contribute to the Inn’s education and outreach activities.

2016–2019 Dr Vanja Hamzić SOAS, University of London Dr Insa Koch LSE Dr Yue Shuang Ang Oxford Brookes University Dr Emma Jones Open University

2015–2018 Dr Alison Lui Liverpool John Moores University Dr Adaeze Okoye Canterbury Christ Church University Dr Tarun Khaitan University of Oxford Dr Ruvi Ziegler University of Reading

2014–2017 Dr Yvonne McDermott Rees Swansea University Dr Colin King University of Sussex Dr Shazia Choudhry Queen Mary University of London Dr Dimitrios Giannopoulous Brunel University London

2013–2016 Dr James Goudkamp University of Oxford Dr Barbara Lauriat King’s College London Dr Maksymilian Del Mar Queen Mary University of London Dr David Lowe Liverpool John Moores University

2012–2015 Per Laleng University of Kent Dr Eddie Bruce Jones Birkbeck University of London Dr Paul Wragg University of Leeds Dr Jo Braithwaite London School of Economics

E

2011–2014 Dr Ronan McCrea University College London Joanna Miles University of Cambridge Dr Andrew Scott London School of Economics Professor Christian Twigg-Flesner University of Warwick

2010–2013 Professor Andrew Francis University of Leeds James Lee King’s College London Dr Catherine MacKenzie University of Cambridge Professor Iyiola Solanke University of Leeds

55

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Ten Years of the Inner Temple Schools Project

TEN YEARS OF THE INNER TEMPLE SCHOOLS PROJECT

E Jonathan Taylor discussing a case with students

In 2008, the Inn launched a pioneering Schools Project to ensure that all students, regardless of their background, are aware of the opportunities available to them at the modern Bar and to raise aspirations towards the profession. The programme challenges stereotypes about who can become a barrister, provides information about the legal system in England and Wales, and promotes social mobility at the Bar. This year, we are celebrating ten years since our project was established. In that time, thousands of students from nontraditional and disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds across England and Wales have visited the Inn to develop their understanding of the profession and to take part in interactive case law workshops with practising barristers and judges, as well as a plea in mitigation. They also have the chance to ask practitioners about their own journeys to the Bar, to receive tips and advice from them, and to hear about the role of the Inns of Court in supporting those aspiring to a career at the Bar. The students come to us through our partnerships with charities focusing on social mobility, including the Sutton Trust, Social Mobility Foundation and Pure Potential. They should meet at least one of the eligibility criteria for the Pegasus Access and

Support Scheme (PASS), so they can apply to the scheme when they reach university. This year, 6 of the 59 participating PASS students have previously attended a Schools Day at the Inn. We wouldn’t be able to make our Schools Days successful without the help and support of volunteers, to whom we are extremely grateful. Over 3,000 hours of volunteering have taken place for the Schools Project over the last ten years and the effort the volunteers go to is reflected in the excellent feedback from participating students. Almost every student who has taken part in a Schools Day has rated it either ‘excellent’ or ‘very good’ and we are always thrilled to read the positive comments they consistently provide. One student told us:

“ Prior to today I had ideas about the type of people that worked and belonged at the Bar. Today proved me completely wrong. I was told that I could do it, no matter what my background. The advice given was invaluable.”

“ We believe that the project is challenging the perception some students have of elitism at the Bar” 56

Education & Training

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

The students often comment on how supportive the volunteers are, saying

“…the barristers were extremely friendly, humorous and answered questions superbly”.

The students often describe feeling daunted or intimated before spending a day here so we are especially pleased when these concerns are allayed:

“ I was a little nervous at first – but by the end I felt completely comfortable and relaxed to be in the environment.

The barristers were fun, approachable and down to earth!”

Master Eleanor Laws advises students

We believe that the project is challenging the perception some students have of elitism at the Bar, with one student telling us:

“ I always thought you had to know important people to become a barrister… but from this seminar I have really understood that it is about passion, dedication and hard work, and that diversity is something the Inns of E Court are taking seriously.”

Another student stated:

“I thought everyone at the Bar came from very specific backgrounds; however, I now realise that anyone can come to the Bar, regardless of background.”

Our hope for the next ten years is for the project to continue to grow in size, so we can continue to dispel myths about who can become a barrister, and ensure that as many students as possible have the opportunity to learn more about a career at the Bar.

Students listening to Master Toby Hooper

Students listening to panelists

57

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Social Mobility and the Legal Profession

SOCIAL MOBILITY AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION

By Dr Elaine Freer

March 2018 saw the publication of a book that would never have existed without Inner Temple: Social Mobility and the Legal Profession, published by Routledge. It is based on a PhD thesis that was written with funding from the Inn and which stemmed from an idea from the Inn. Inner Temple teamed with Keele University to fund and create a PhD research project examining the role of professional associations in influencing their profession, and in doing so, evaluated a programme that Inner Temple had created – the Pegasus Access and Support Scheme (PASS), along with a less detailed evaluation of their involvement with Pathways to Law – a scheme run by the Sutton Trust in which Inner Temple provided the Bar-centric element.

PASS began as a programme that provided mini-pupillages to university-stage students who were broadly termed ‘nontraditional aspirant entrants’. In other words, they fulfilled various criteria that were taken to be indicative of that – state schooling, eligibility for free school meals, first in the family to go into higher education. Pathways was a broader programme that introduced secondary school-aged young people to the legal profession more broadly, with input from solicitors’ firms and court visits, as well as a visit to the Inn.

E

For my part, this work on improving diversity at the Bar provided an incredibly rich area to analyse academically, and this book is the culmination of the PhD that I undertook at Keele, two evaluative reports that I produced for Inner Temple running alongside that work, and snippets of my own experience of the Bar. Without those programmes, I would never have known about the amount of work that is going on in this area, a lot of it behind the scenes, powered tirelessly by the organisation of Inn employees and participation from a team of willing volunteer barristers, and about the efforts that the Bar is making to dispel its historical image of being an old boys’ club.

From an academic perspective, it was particularly interesting and useful to have both sides of the story of the Pegasus Access and Support Scheme – through interviews, I spoke to Benchers who had been there at the very beginning and had sown the seed of the idea in a committee meeting. I spoke to barristers who had helped the Education and Training team bring it to fruition. I spoke to barristers and chambers’ employees who administered the scheme in chambers, and I spoke to people from other organisations of the Bar, and a chambers which did not participate in PASS.

Copies of Dr Elaine Freer’s Social Mobility and the Legal Profession, and opposite: Master Fiona Jackson and Dr Elaine Freer

58

I would like to thank all those who gave their time to be interviewed or participate in focus groups for this research.

For some of them, it was quite an endeavour – tracking down High Court Judges when they weren’t out on circuit; getting involvement from chambers outside of London (I had a nice day out in Leeds), fitting things around busy court diaries (one interview was conducted over the phone with the interviewee in a busy robing room in the north of England).

For my student participants, the prize for commitment went to the person who dialled in to a conference call from a bench in a shopping centre during his lunch break working as a shop assistant. Their efforts made this research possible, but more importantly they made it credible. Interviews and focus groups were carried out mainly in 2013, and a few very early in 2014. It is therefore at least four years since I have seen those people who participated in my research.

And for that reason it was a particular thrill to see so many of them again at the book launch on 28 March, especially those who were in my student focus groups, whose achievements since I met them demonstrate so clearly the talent and potential that secured them a place on PASS.

Dr Elaine Freer, 5 Paper Buildings

It was, and continues to be, wonderful to work with people who care about this issue.

Seeing PASS develop in line with some of my recommendations, and then being involved in those sessions myself, has been incredibly rewarding, and the feedback from students just seems to get better and better.

All this is due to the work of the Outreach Committee and the Education and Training Department. I have sat on the Outreach Committee since I got tenancy and I am always deeply impressed by the dedication of the members and staff on that committee. The members give their time voluntarily and for free, and the staff work tirelessly. It goes without saying that if something is not overseen by people with vision and energy, it will not go anywhere.

The Bar is, and always has been, a collegiate profession.

This was perhaps the biggest discovery for many of the student participants in access programmes. The profession may have faults, but on the whole, lack of support is not one of them. Student after student commented on the warm reception they received from their PASS chambers and from the barristers they shadowed, noting how surprised and delighted they were to see the camaraderie and support that so often goes on every day in robing rooms up and down the country.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

What repeatedly emerged from questionnaires and feedback was that non-traditional entrants expected a stuffy, elitist, distant profession. Due to the PASS partner chambers’ efforts, that was not their experience.

But what of the future for these applicants? If they want to do publicly funded criminal, family or immigration work, they have very hard decisions to make. Those decisions have nothing to do with their talent, with their commitment, drive or motivation. They have nothing to do with their ability, or even the relatively small number of pupillage places available.

Even having cleared that hurdle, many in those areas of practice will not be able to support themselves financially.

I can see the logic of those who say that it is unfair to encourage access when many young barristers without family support cannot afford to stay at the Bar. However, in my view, it is not right to say that, because we are in the middle of a government-led decimation of the profession, access initiatives are unfair. Access initiatives, at their core, are about providing accurate information about this profession. If there are then entrants who choose not to come to the Bar, or leave it, due to underfunding, that is something that we must fight against, but which ultimately the government must tackle by properly funding a precious part of the mechanisms of society. As a profession, we cannot control funding.

However, we can ensure that capable candidates from any background know that they are welcome.

Dr Elaine Freer 5 Paper Buildings

E

59

Reflections on PASS

Connor Evans

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

REFLECTIONS ON PASS

By Connor Evans I graduated from Cardiff University with an LLB in Law and French and am currently an Inner Temple major scholar studying the BPTC at Cardiff University.

I first became involved with Inner Temple through the Pegasus Access and Support Scheme (PASS). I instantly felt welcomed and supported by what would go on to become my professional home in London. A continuing concern for the profession as a whole is diversity and outreach.

However, Inner Temple takes this in its stride, offering one of the most established outreach programmes of all the Inns. One of the major reasons I chose to apply for PASS and subsequently become a member of Inner Temple was because of the enthusiasm and effort the Inn puts into its outreach programme. If the Bar still has deficiencies in diversity, Inner Temple certainly goes out of its way to address these.

E

During PASS, I was part of the first cohort to be involved in the residential course. The Outreach team organised a programme of events over two to three days. It was the perfect welcome to the Inn as well as the journey to the profession. The first day covered sessions on how to apply for scholarships, interview tips and an introduction to networking. These were all incredibly insightful. The second day concentrated on wellbeing in the profession and a mock interview, in which we were interviewed by a practising barrister and then given feedback. Finally, we were given an advocacy task where we were provided with an opportunity to practise examinationin-chief and cross-examination. The feedback given during these sessions was incredibility supportive and helpful.

The final part of PASS placed me in a mini-pupillage with Landmark Chambers, a specialist public, planning and environmental set. The Inn covered the expenses for the mini-pupillage. Without the Inn’s support, I would not have been able to undertake this mini-pupillage.

The outreach support by the Inn reassured me that I would be proud to be a member of Inner Temple.

PASS was incredibly helpful in gaining insight on life at the Bar and a perfect opportunity to make many new connections – from students to barristers and members of staff within Inner Temple.

PASS participants listening to volunteers describing good advocacy

60

Through PASS, I managed to gain a contact who offered me guidance. As someone who came to the profession with no links or contacts, I was so grateful to Inner for having provided the opportunity to make my first professional contact on PASS. I applied for a scholarship in my final year of undergraduate study. I knew that unless I obtained a scholarship, I would struggle to fund the BPTC. Fortunately, I managed to obtain a major scholarship for my 2017/2018 BPTC year. Although the financial aspect of the scholarship allowed me to pursue a career at the Bar, the vote of confidence that comes with being granted a major scholarship is immense. I had the support of the Inn which, through its scholarship, had confirmed that I had the necessary qualities and deserved the opportunity to pursue a career as a barrister.

The application process is very straightforward. What I would advise applicants is to allow more than enough time to review your application – the number of silly mistakes you correct in editing is unbelievable. Moreover, learn the scholarship criteria by rote and always link examples and experiences back to these.

Inner Temple interviews every eligible applicant. I want to stress that as an applicant, you can use this to your advantage if your paper application is not as strong as you would like.

The interview comprises a case study and general questions about your application as well as your ambition to pursue a career as a barrister. In preparation for the interview, familiarise yourself with your application and prepare by reading multiple cases and summarising the essential elements. In the interview, you will choose a case study and will have half an hour to read it before presenting it before the panel.

I am coming to the end of my BPTC year. Students about to embark on this journey should be aware that the workload is intense and demands a professional approach.

Furthermore, it requires you to develop a broad skill set and juggle several deadlines in a short amount of time. However, the course can be enjoyable if you invest yourself in it.

I also wish to stress that it is a tough course and can be daunting at times. It is essential to develop a supportive group of friends and keep morale up, especially during the ‘Gateway gauntlet’. I look forward to being called later this year!

Connor Evans

PASS participant practising her advocacy skills

Education & Training

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

INNER TEMPLE SCHOLARSHIPS 2018 BPTC AWARDS PETER TAYLOR SCHOLARSHIP Emmeline Plews

STEPHEN CHAPMAN AWARD William Bordell

PRINCESS ROYAL (5 Awarded) Michael Rhimes, Ian Cooper, Richard Nicholl, Sophie Land, Nathalie Koh

MAJOR SCHOLARSHIPS (20 Awarded) Peter Carlyon, Isabel Bertschinger, Nadia Campbell-Brunton, Alexandru Circumaru, Hannah Cox, Michael Haywood, Liam Kelly, Victoria Lewis, Kiera Oluwunmi, Jamie Skepper, Eleanor De, Anishaa Sundramoorthy, Akash Sonecha, James Baird, Lindsey Kirby, Vedantha Kumar, Andrew Mackersie, Niamh McEvoy, Sarah Pemberton, Alice Whyte

EXHIBITION AWARDS (73 Awarded) Andreas Malekos, Shannon O’Connor, Julia Freytag, Taylor Blair, Katharine Bailey, Emmanuel Coniah, Zanib Raja, Lorna Mashongamhende, Harry Bithell, Laurene Veale, Allen Worwood, Connor Jones, Danielle Buckett, Adeola Fadipe, Natalie Larbi, Daniel Whiteley, Natasha OteroNevitt, Louise Thomson, Ryan Hodgins, Ian Bond, Holly Newing, Ayesha Ahmad, Adam Rogerson, Daniel Beckley, Chidubem Okechukwu, Sarah Jones, Aleister Adamson, Ruby Jamieson, Chloe Branton, Charlotte Wycherley, Shekyena Marcelle-Brown, Bethany Baggaley, Oishee Dey, Hollie Davies, Helena Spector, Jack Barber, May Martin, George Aubrey, Olayemi Danialu, Laura Jeffrey, Cristian Baciu, Lucia Brieskova, Lewis Aldous, Taehyun Baek, Camille Richards, Lucy Kinder, Matt Ward, Iona Gallagher, Alexander Bryant, Charlotte Crocombe, Toby Manhire, Lucy Katko, Iuliia Glukhikh, Gemma Gould, Sarah Clarke, Harry Garside, Rhia Abukhalil, Holly Menary, Madeleine Miller, Robert Murphy, Tanya McKinlay, Ella Ripper, Olivia Gaunt, Celine Honey, Hazel Bradley, Tom Brook, Henry Peto, Suzannah Pinkerton, Manizja Latifi, Madeleine van Oss, Blessing Park, Alice Aubrey-Fletcher, Joshua Lynbeck

2018 GDL AWARDS PRINCESS ROYAL (2 Awarded)

E

Lauren Hitchman, Robert Harris

MAJOR SCHOLARSHIP (4 Awarded) Holly Armstrong, Stacey Jackson, James Kane, Hugh Whelan

EXHIBITION AWARDS (30 Awarded) Mequissa Baptiste, Lewis Barber, Camellia Basu, Hannah Bernstein, Feargus Campbell, Daniel Dawson, Anya Draycott-Kapp, Rory Forsyth, Hannah Forsyth, Maud Foxley, Edmund Garnett, Mahdi Godazgar, Oliver Hirsch, Ross Hutchinson, Felix Keating, Lilian Lewis, Edlyn Livesey, Clementine Makower, Eleanor Martin, Rhiannon McCaffray, Niamh McGinty, Rachel McNally, Margo Munro Kerr, Joseph Pitaluga, Joe Robinson, Serena Sekhon, Jake Thorold, Conor Turley, Rochelle Wild, Rhys Williams

This year, the Inn received 441 applications for the BPTC awards and, after allowing for withdrawals, interviewed 383 candidates over two Saturdays in March. We have awarded 100 scholarships and exhibitions, to a total of £1,600,656.

61

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Notes on Winning a Scholarship…

© Art Lasovsky / Unsplash

NOTES ON WINNING A SCHOLARSHIP…

William Bordell Stephen Chapman Scholar 2018

E

“I feel extremely privileged to have received this year’s Stephen Chapman Award. Having gone through a challenging interview process, it means an enormous amount that the Committee has shown faith in my potential to become a barrister. My scholarship will allow me to start next year’s BPTC course free from financial worries; enabling me to pursue pro bono activities in a way that wouldn’t have been possible otherwise. Above all, the award gives me the confidence to believe that I can achieve even more as I move into a career at the Bar. For that, I am hugely thankful.

“Ever since I first came to Inner Temple, I have appreciated its efforts to make the Bar a welcoming, friendly and fun place to build a career. As a member of the Inn, it’s difficult not to be struck by the support, encouragement and kindness which are simply second nature to all the staff and members I have encountered.

I hope to spend many happy years at Inner Temple and I couldn’t be more grateful to the Committee for the future that they have made possible for me.”

62

Kiera Oluwunmi BPTC Major Scholar 2018 “Receiving a scholarship from Inner Temple has not only made the BPTC financially possible, but has also given me confidence from knowing that the panel saw potential in me to succeed in this competitive profession.

“Being awarded a scholarship by Inner Temple has been a huge financial help to me. It means that I can focus fully on the BPTC without worries about funding, and has made my route to qualifying as a barrister much more straightforward than it could have been. This assistance from the Inn is not something I take lightly, and it is deeply appreciated.

“Furthermore, the scholarship process helped me focus on why I wanted to become a barrister, and articulate this motivation to a panel of practitioners.

This is the first real test of aptitude for the Bar after a qualifying law degree, and I am extremely grateful for this endorsement from barristers of many years’ Call. Being awarded this scholarship by Inner Temple will undoubtedly encourage me for the length of my career at the Bar.”

Taehyun Baek BPTC Exhibition Award 2018 “I would like to express my deepest gratitude for the honour of being awarded a scholarship by the Honourable Society of the Inner Temple.

“The Award is testament to the will, passion and hope I invest into my aspirations of becoming a barrister.

“I endeavour to exhort students, especially those from minority communities, to dream big! With vigour, we can rise above our circumstances and fulfil our potential. If, like me, you desire to become an advocate who stands for a more just legal society, do not be afraid to step out; seek and you shall find support. Do not shy away from achieving your greatest ambitions!

“Finally, I am looking forward to an exciting future, and this scholarship marks a greatly privileged headstart in my journey to the Bar.”

Education & Training

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

STUDENT SCHEMES Each year, the Inner Temple offers its student members the chance to take advantage of schemes designed to enhance their skills and develop legal work experience.

MENTORING SCHEME

MOCK INTERVIEW SCHEME

The Mentoring Scheme pairs the Inn’s student members, including those studying the GDL, with barristers practising in a discipline that matches each student’s interest. The Inn’s pool of generous volunteers covers nearly every area and method of practice, from crime to commercial and from self-employed to in-house counsel.

This scheme offers an opportunity for students to practise their interview technique in front of an experienced barrister ahead of pupillage interviews. Participants have found this to be a very beneficial and rewarding experience. A snapshot of this experience is provided by a participant below:

POLICE LIAISON SCHEME The Inner Temple partners with police stations to allow BPTC students to shadow police officers over an eighthour shift. The scheme is reciprocal and, in return for their generosity in welcoming our students to their stations, the Inn facilitates a mock trial for our contacts in the police, demonstrating the workings of a criminal trial, and hosts a thank-you drinks reception each year.

THE MARSHALLING SCHEME The Marshalling Scheme offers BPTC students an opportunity to sit with a judge for a few days and discuss their cases in detail. This scheme is open to applications from all current BPTC students and is a valuable chance to observe court proceedings from the perspective of the judiciary. Student participants have regularly commented that this unique view of court life provides a detailed insight into how the judiciary operates, how judgments are reached and the influence of barristers in this process. There are a variety of placements available each year all around the country.

Focus on Mock Interviews Yaa Dankwa Ampadu-Sackey I was called to the Bar in 2007 and shortly after worked as a litigator at a firm of solicitors specialising in credit hire.

In 2009, I travelled abroad for further studies and was called to the Ghana Bar. I completed a full 12-month pupillage and practised with a law firm specialising in corporate and commercial law for three years. I returned to England in 2013 and have subsequently employed all my efforts to secure pupillage.

These efforts led me to the Mock Interview Scheme. The scheme offers applicants who have secured a pupillage interview the opportunity to practise their interview techniques before a practising barrister.

I was privileged to have been matched with a QC who had been interviewed earlier on in his career at the same set of chambers that had invited me for the interview. From the outset, my ability to communicate effectively with a senior barrister was tested as I had to send a couple of emails to schedule a date and time for the interview.

The interview was conducted in a formal manner, after which I was provided with detailed feedback on my style and responses. We discussed the profile of the set of chambers where I would be interviewed comprehensively and the interviewer highlighted some members’ profiles for further research. We discussed the best way to present the strengths on my CV and deal with any apparent weaknesses.

63

E

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Advocacy and the Vulnerable Training

ADVOCACY AND THE VULNERABLE

By Master Sarah Clarke For the last two years, the Inn has been playing an important part in the legal profession’s ‘Advocacy and the Vulnerable’ training programme. This training has been created by the Bar, Judiciary, Solicitors Profession, and Academics, working together with the Inns of Court College of Advocacy, towards the common goal of raising standards and helping advocates to employ developmentally appropriate language as part of their cross-examination techniques, in order to obtain ‘best evidence’ from a vulnerable witness.

It is widely acknowledged that children and vulnerable witnesses are unable to cope with the demands of the adversarial process, which can and often do increase any existing damage to their psychological and emotional well-being.

E

This is far from a level playing field and therefore justice cannot be seen to be done. There is no evidence to suggest that defendants are being denied a fair trial as a result of developmentally appropriate questioning of witnesses.

The training builds on the excellent work already undertaken in this field by the Inns of Court College of Advocacy’s ‘Advocate’s Gateway’, which is a free online resource of ‘toolkits’, to help advocates prepare to question witnesses with different types of vulnerability together with training resources and other materials. The Criminal Procedure Rules now require advocates to consider and apply the Advocate’s Gateway materials in any case involving a vulnerable witness. Despite early indications, the Ministry of Justice has not made this training compulsory; however, the legal profession and judiciary have made it clear that the expectation is that all those who encounter vulnerable witnesses in their professional practices must undertake this training. The Inn’s experience is that it is not just criminal practitioners who are attending the Inn’s courses but also those practising in fields such as family law, immigration, employment and disciplinary proceedings.

The training has been rolled out across the legal profession by the training of ‘Lead Facilitators’ from the Inns of Court, the Specialist Bar Associations, the Circuits and the Solicitors Profession. In turn, these Lead Facilitators recruit and train Facilitators.

Lead Facilitators and Facilitators are practitioners and Judges who have expertise in this field and have demonstrated a proper appreciation of the purposes of this course and an ability to apply those principals and train others. At the Inn, we are incredibly fortunate to have a committed and talented pool of such trainers who have given up many hours of their limited free time for this task. Particular thanks go to Peter Clark (who leads this training for the Inn with me), HHJ Samantha Leigh, HHJ Mark Lucraft QC, HHJ Dafna Spiro, Sara Lawson QC, Adam Wiseman QC, Jo Cecil and Lieutenant Colonel Jo Edwards, to name but a few.

64

The training involves three distinct learning areas. The knowledge element requires pre-course reading and viewing of online training materials. The skills element requires attendance at a face-to-face training course at which participants undertake practical exercises facilitated by the Inn’s trainers. The exercises focus on question construction, good and bad practice, and practical advocacy. The consolidation element involves the viewing of four exemplar films of crossexamination and a recorded film by a Registered Intermediary.

The training uses a specially constructed case study – R v George Graham, which is a sexual assault case involving a number of complainant witnesses, each with different vulnerabilities. The case study has been carefully designed to throw up particular challenges regarding questioning of the witnesses and also case analysis decisions.

As is characteristic of the Inn, we were amongst the earliest to recruit our trainers and start rolling out these courses.

We have now undertaken a large number of courses, with more planned over the next 18 months. Feedback from participants has been consistently excellent and our experience is that even those who initially arrive somewhat sceptical often leave as the most enthusiastic converts.

As always, none of this could be done without our fantastic Education and Training team, in particular Fiona Fulton, David Miller and Julia Armfield.

Sarah Clarke QC

Education & Training

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

THE LAW WITHIN SPORT

By Michele Verroken HIGHGATE HOUSE RESIDENTIAL WEEKEND, FEBRUARY 2018 In February 2018, the Inn ran the second of its three annual residential weekends, focusing on niche topics of the law.

This weekend focused on the topic of “The Law Within Sport”, exploring the various challenges faced by both athletes and practitioners in the modern sporting environment. Amongst the various speakers invited to participate was Michele Verroken, Founding Director of Sporting Integrity Ltd, whose talk centred on the legal and regulatory pitfalls faced by sportsmen and women in their professional arenas.

Sport encompasses both leisure activities and significant commercial business activities. Despite a long history of autonomy, self-regulation and governance, sports and the organisations that administer sporting activities increasingly feel the intervention of the state through more direct application of national and international laws. Present-day sport is surrounded and immersed in aspects of administrative law, contracts, torts, public, criminal, commercial and EU law, whilst continuing to exist in its own regulatory framework. However, challenges with sport’s regulatory framework increasingly create pitfalls for sportsmen and women. Whether an issue arises from a dispute or breach, the complexity of sport’s regulatory and legal intersection means previous reluctance by the courts to intervene in sports disputes is now being revisited.

Traditionally, sports organisations have managed disputes at national and international levels, through internal disciplinary tribunals and using arbitral-based dispute resolution. Lord Denning MR¹ observed that sports governing bodies were often in a better position to manage their own disputes. However, he further noted that where a sports organisation acted contrary to natural justice, the courts can and should intervene. To minimise the possibility of challenge and expense of court proceedings, increasingly sports bodies’ disputes panels have adopted quasi-legal procedures, more formal judicial rules and decisions, legally qualified panel members and of course legal representation for those appearing before them.

Through membership of a sports organisation, sportsmen and sportswomen are required to adhere to agreed rules and procedures. It is interesting to see how some of these rules stand apart from the law. One such set of rules relating to anti-doping exists in the form of the World Anti-Doping Code2. “(Definition of Doping = use or intent to use, administer, possess, encourage, traffic in prohibited substances or methods; refuse, evade, tamper with doping control, or associate with ineligible Athlete Support Personnel).”

Interestingly, anti-doping rules present athletes with a real conundrum. Breaches of the anti-doping rules are possible without an athlete intending to cheat. Anti-doping rules are based on strict liability; this makes the athlete solely responsible for any violation, without regard to fault. Usually a finding from analysis of their body fluid (urine or blood), or non-analytical evidence, establishes the violation to the comfortable satisfaction of the hearing panel. “(This standard of proof is greater than a mere balance of probability, but less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Where the Code places the burden of proof on the Athlete alleged to have committed an anti-doping rule violation to rebut a presumption or establish specified facts or circumstances, the standard of proof shall be by balance of probability).”

Numerous cases over recent years have shown when an athlete commits an anti-doping rule violation without any intention to cheat, rebutting the strict liability principle of the World Anti-Doping Code is a tough legal challenge.

Yet the severity of the anti-doping rules is necessary to deter or detect athletes from cheating by enhancing their performance, gaining an unfair advantage and financial benefits. Over the years, it has been necessary to increase surveillance to test athletes out of competition as well as in-competition, via blood as well as urine sampling, then profiling biomarkers, through investigations of personal data, encouraging whistle-blowing and admissions.

The challenge for an athlete is to know how to stay within the rules. This is not easy. It is possible to consume a poorly labelled or contaminated supplement, or to confuse a medication containing a prohibited substance available in one country with a permitted version available in another country. These are known circumstances which have led to a doping violation. Did the athlete cheat? Who can an athlete rely upon for advice?

Unsurprisingly, athletes believe anti-doping rules are not founded on a presumption of innocence. They rely upon testing to verify their reputation as a ‘clean’ athlete and are frustrated by evidence of corruption within the anti-doping system (manipulation of results during testing procedures, in laboratory analysis and in reporting). The level playing field we expect in sport does not appear to be the reality.

Vigilant legal representation and expert guidance in decision-making are essential parts of sports regulation.

Regulation of anti-doping cannot continue to ignore the fundamental human rights of athletes, the need for proportionality in sanctions, evidence-based, reliable and transparent science to help focus on real cheating in sport.

As Ed Smith3 so eloquently put it:

“ Sport is riddled with inconsistencies.

You can break some rules with impunity… but if you break others you’re a barefaced cheat.”

Michele Verroken Founding Director, Sporting Integrity Ltd

1 Enderby Town FC v Football Association [1971] Ch 591, 605 2 World Anti-Doping Code 2015 available at www.wada-ama.org 3 Ed Smith (2008), What Sport Tells Us About Life. Penguin Books 65

E

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Corporate Crime and Punishment

CORPORATE CRIME AND PUNISHMENT

By Master Vivian Robinson

CUMBERLAND LODGE RESIDENTIAL WEEKEND, DECEMBER 2017 The Residential Student Weekend held at Cumberland Lodge in December 2017 focused on the subject of ‘Corporate Crime and Punishment’. A keynote speech was delivered on Friday evening by Serious Fraud Office Director, Master David Green, and on Saturday morning Master Vivian Robinson chaired an expert panel, consisting of Master Deborah Taylor (Resident Judge at Southwark Crown Court), Master Alison Levitt (Partner, Mishcon de Reya), Master John Griffith-Jones (Former Chair, Financial Conduct Authority) and Robert Barrington (Executive Director, Transparency International UK). In the article which follows, Master Griffith-Jones pinpoints a number of the issues which provoked a lively and informative discussion amongst the panel and audience.

An advocacy masterclass, written by Saul Herman, took place in the afternoon and the rest of the weekend was devoted to the provision of advocacy and sentencing exercises for students. The Inn was fortunate in having guidance and assistance over the weekend from a significant number of Members of the Inn and its staff, and as always, Master Salter arranged for the provision of a stimulating entertainment by attendees on Saturday evening.

Master Vivian Robinson QC Weekend Organiser

E

The Saturday morning speaking panel. L–R: Master Levitt, Master Taylor, Master Vivian Robinson (Chair), Robert Barrington, Master John Griffith-Jones

66

Education & Training

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

NOTES ON CORPORATE CRIME

By Master John Griffith-Jones

I start with the central question of what constitutes a ‘crime’ in financial services. Stepping away from statutory definitions, possibly dangerous amongst lawyers, I would suggest that the layman would be comfortable with two broad categories.

The second was the regulators’ tendency to concentrate on the firm rather than the individual.

On the one hand, there is the clearly unacceptable, the cheating, stealing and lying category, where we have laws and prosecutors to bring criminal sanctions to bear on the offenders.

There were, and are, various reasons for so doing, not least amongst them the relative ease of getting corporates to ‘admit’ to some form of wrongdoing and move on relative to establishing and proving ‘guilt’ of individuals. There is undoubtedly some benefit from speed of settlement and from establishing a deterring precedent.

On the other hand, there is a much greyer zone where things are somewhat less clear-cut. This ranges widely, from incompetence that causes damage to others, through taking ‘unfair’ advantage of customers, to using inappropriately new technologies, and much else besides.

But there is also a downside, which is that settlement by paying a fine became seen as ‘an absorbable cost’ of doing business. Bigger fines have not solved this problem, with the cost tending to fall back onto shareholders, frequently ‘the public’ via their pension plans.

This is the world of regulation, where the law has given authority to the FCA to develop a rule book that underpins its statutory responsibilities. Importantly, the law also gives it enforcement powers and the majority of issues dealt with are under those processes, delivering regulatory sanctions, which are civil rather than criminal in nature.

Parliament took a keen interest in this state of affairs.

Starting from the reality that management make all decisions about what to do or what not to do, it reached the view that there needed to be a much more clear-cut human chain of responsibility, which gave rise to the senior manager regime. This requires firms to nominate individuals to fulfil certain key roles and to write down their responsibilities.

So far, so reasonably good, and the system has worked in the large majority of circumstances over time. But some big events have put the spotlight back on the question of what constitutes a crime and how should it be punished.

Above all, there was, and still is, widespread public anger that no individuals were held to be ‘guilty’ of any offence directly connected with the financial crash. How, they ask, can this possibly be, given the scale of the problem and the cost to the country?

There are essentially two technical answers, neither of which have satisfied the critics, and both of which have given rise to considerable pressure for change.

The first is that neither the law nor the then FSA’s rule book defined what actually happened as a ‘crime’. Absent retrospective change, which carries many other side effects, this will remain a case of shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted. Not that it should not be shut, for history can and does periodically repeat itself. But it is a first-class example of the need for effective preventative regulation, which the FCA is seeking to achieve.

You might think this a reasonable ask. Indeed it is.

And it brings a significant change to the balance between individual and corporate responsibility.

E

For a start, the FCA can go straight to the documents to establish who is in the relevant chain of command without argument when, ex post, everybody is seeking to absent themselves from the crime scene.

Secondly, the relevant people know from the start they will likely find themselves the subject of any enquiry alongside their firm. As the regime was being debated in Parliament, there was a vigorous discussion about the reverse burden of proof that the regime could potentially include. While this was rejected as a concept, the need to show that a senior manager function was being appropriately discharged is an intended consequence of these arrangements.

Thirdly, the question of punishment becomes very much more personal. It is one thing to argue about the size of a corporate fine, a million pounds here or several million pounds there, but for individuals, their careers are at stake. Egregious cases will no doubt remain reasonably simple to punish, but there will be a need for a sense of proportionality in determinations where responsibilities were reasonably discharged in the round.

The laudable aim, of course, is to get the punishment to fit the crime.

John Griffith-Jones Former Chair, Financial Conduct Authority

67

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Student Societies

STUDENT SOCIETIES

Burns Night 2018 in inner Temple Hall

E

The ITSA Committee celebrate Burns Night

INNER TEMPLE DRAMA SOCIETY

INNER TEMPLE STUDENT ASSOCIATION

Sebastian Cox

Laura Hollingbery

It has been an exciting year for the Drama Society, with a brand-new committee and the new perspective granted by a new set of creative minds. We are aiming to bring together more experienced dramatic members of the profession at the more senior end, along with the new influx of BPTC and GDL students, to show that we are a Society with something to offer for thespians of all levels of professional and performative experience.

We were delighted to see such a positive response to the Society at both of the Inn’s BPTC introductory evenings.

It was a pleasure to welcome so many of you to our first student-barrister networking evening at Mitre Court the following month.

Our year started with an improv workshop, which is always a great place to build on key confidence and public speaking skills essential both on stage and at the Bar. Christmas 2017 saw our raucous and rambunctious rendition of I, Robin Hood, a Christmas panto extraordinaire, which featured audience participation beyond our wildest expectations! We also had an encouragingly large cast, which brought in those with musical or behindthe-scenes talent as well as the actors themselves.

Breaking with Shakespearean tradition, 2018’s summer play The Hypochondriac, was a spin on Molière’s classic romantic comedy. Audiences at the Inn enjoyed a play which poked fun at pompous professionals wearing silly wigs and speaking Latin – doctors, of course!

We are very excited for the year ahead, and the Society hopes to publicise and advertise its events and activities more widely in order to bring in as many newcomers as possible – including cameos from Benchers and senior members of the Inn.

We couldn’t allow Christmas to pass without festivities at the Inn. Many of you joined us in the Drawing Room this year, dressed in highly attractive Christmas jumpers, for mulled wine, mince pies and poor renditions of Band Aid’s classic.

As is now a firm tradition, ITSA hosted our annual Burns Night at Inner Temple Hall. We were pleased to welcome so many guests to enjoy an evening of traditional Scottish festivities, including a three-course meal complete with haggis and a wee dram, a wonderfully rousing toast to the haggis delivered by Master Maddams, the Sub-Treasurer, and a ceilidh band to lead everyone in a highland jig.

Each year, ITSA seeks to help the Inn’s student members with the gruelling and stressful pupillage application process. This year, the Committee decided to seek the views of the students prior to organising the event to find out how best we could support you.

Students asked for practical assistance with their pupillage applications so the Committee arranged a Pupillage Application Clinic, where students met with practising barristers to receive feedback on their applications and enjoyed networking afterwards at a drinks reception.

The Committee were grateful to all of those who gave up their time to make the Clinic a success.

We finish the year with our annual summer party, Great Gatsby on the Thames. This year, the Committee hosted a 1920s-themed boat party on Wednesday 20 June 2018 to celebrate the end of another BPTC year. It was the perfect chance to remind students that, however stressful things can seem, we are all in the same boat… sometimes, literally!

68

Education & Training

The Lawson Moot Final

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

The Inner Temple Debaters

INNER TEMPLE MOOTING SOCIETY

INNER TEMPLE DEBATING SOCIETY

Eleanor Sharrock

Helen Ball

2017–2018 was another successful year for the Mooting Society. The year started out strongly with the Magna Carta Moot, with the winners of the 2017 Inter-Varsity Moot and the ESU Moot competing in a Show Moot.

We are very grateful to Jonathan Schaffer-Goddard for writing such an interesting problem for the moot.

This year has been a successful one for the Debating Society. On the international level, we sent teams to both the European Debating Championships in Estonia and the World Debating Championships in Mexico. Both teams acquitted themselves well in the challenging environment and were consistently the best of the Inns of Court teams. On the national level, we have sent teams to competitions across the country, competing in opens, inter-varsities and pro-ams; we made a particularly strong showing at the Oxford Inter-Varsity this year.

The Lawson Moot offered the chance for students of all levels of Mooting to compete against each other, with judges’ feedback being provided to Mooters after each round. Judges for the five rounds were made up of a blend of students, pupils, junior and leading counsel.

We have had impressive Mooters representing the Inn in national and international competitions, with Joseph Meethan and Anne Hogarth winning this year’s UKELA Lord Slynn (Senior) Moot. Our Telders team also won the national rounds and represented the UK in the international rounds and our ESU team won their quarter-final round. The Society also competed in the LSE LGBT-Featherstone Moot for the first time.

The annual Inter-Varsity Mooting Competition was held in January, with a full day of Mooting for more than 20 teams from universities across the country, from Brighton to Edinburgh. The problem was written by our sponsors Tanfield Chambers and the teams enjoyed having to Moot both sides of the problem throughout the day.

The Society’s grateful thanks go to all the members and Benchers who have helped us throughout the year. We could not have run the events without this vital support. We hope to increase the opportunities available for participating in Mooting competitions and training next year, and we hope you will continue to support the Mooting Society in the coming year.

The majority of the Society’s efforts this year were within the Inn itself. In January, we hosted the Inner Temple Inter-Varsity, in which dozens of teams from across the country competed over two days around the Inn. The Grand Final was held in the Parliament Chamber, followed by a black tie dinner for all judges and competitors.

This year’s Rawlinson Competition – the internal debating competition for student members of the Inn – fielded a number of strong competitors. The final, which was preceded by a Mixed Dining Night qualifying session on 16 May, was very close indeed, and we congratulate Samantha Ball on her well-deserved victory.

This year also saw the first Inner Temple Public Speaking Competition. Held over four rounds, the Public Speaking Competition tested speech, writing, research and advocacy skills, with a particular focus on the ability to answer questions in a high-pressured environment. The final was held on 12 June, and was judged by Master Kabir Sheikh and former president Oliver May. Both Anne Hogarth and Joseph Meethan made excellent speeches and responded calmly and confidently to the questioning. Anne’s winning speech on the role of science and philosophy in the modern world was commended for its clarity and concision.

As this goes to print, we are about to start the try-out rounds for this year’s European Debating Championship, so please wish all of our members the very best of luck!

69

E

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Call to the Bar

CALL TO THE BAR E

The Legal Services Act 2007 defines a barrister as “an individual who (a) has been called to the Bar by an Inn of Court, and (b) is not disbarred by order of an Inn of Court”.

Call is the conferral of the ‘Degree of the Utter Bar’ and the title ‘Barrister’. The degree is conferred on those who have completed the required academic, vocational and Inn’s qualifying session stages, and who have satisfied the Inn that they are fit and proper to be called to the Bar. In order for a barrister to be able to practise, he or she must also complete the profession training stage of qualification (pupillage).

70

Education & Training

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

E

71

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Judicial Independence in Times of Crisis

JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE IN TIMES OF CRISIS

By Yvonne McDermott Rees* and Dimitrios Giannoulopoulos**

The British Academy, through a competitive funding scheme, offers UK scholars the opportunity to run a landmark event featuring leading-edge research as part of their annual conferences programme surrounding novel, dynamic and exciting subject areas in the humanities and social sciences. We had the immense pleasure of organising the first conference in the Academy’s 2018 programme, on ‘Judicial Independence in Times of Crisis’. High on the Academy’s agenda for the conference series was a focus on interdisciplinary research, and linking academia with policy makers and professional practice. We were very privileged to have the ability to draw on our Inner Temple Associate Academic Fellowships when attempting to do so.

The conference was inspired by the observation that judicial independence appears to be under renewed threat, both in Britain (as illustrated by the reaction to the High Court’s decision in Miller), and around the world, including Poland, the United States, Turkey and France. A number of key themes emerged from two days of stimulating debate.

E

The Rt Hon the Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore provocatively noted the phrase famously misattributed to former prime minister Jim Callaghan – “Crisis? What crisis?” – as his starting point.

Events that might be depicted as crises could more accurately be seen as challenges that present an opportunity for debate, he said. Where, for example, public criticism threatens a decline of trust in the judiciary, it also provides an opportunity to calmly explain the role of judges. Lord Kerr’s analysis presents a convincing alternative to giving sensational news more attention than they are due, but the question remains: what are the preconditions for ensuring the public can securely engage in the evidence-based analysis that he aspires to?

Similarly, Fiona de Londras challenged the common misconception that judges of the European Court of Human Rights have seized power from domestic legislatures. Instead, she argued, the Court has shown a remarkable measure of self-

L–R Yvonne McDermott-Rees, Professor Kate Malleson and The Rt Hon the Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore. Photo: Sally Trussler

72

restraint. Lord Kerr had similarly analysed how declarations of incompatibility under the Human Rights Act simply provide an opportunity for Parliament to reflect on a piece of legislation, underlining that the passing of the Act had constituted “an historic constitutional landmark”. Stephen Skinner, in providing a comparative historical perspective by drawing on the role of the judiciary in Fascist Italy, illustrated three ‘red flags’ that can suggest the decline towards totalitarianism: the vilification of rights was one of them. Whilst the current political environment might not come anywhere close to the levels experienced

by Italy from the 1920s to the 1940s, that experience still highlights the need, as reflected in the remarks of the Rt Hon the Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, “for constant vigilance”. In attempting to synthesise the above, we are led to reflect on the intrinsic tension between the need for constant – judicial – vigilance, including via the channels of international law, on the one hand, and local resistance, on the other, to what is often perceived as external interference with domestic law.

Taking a less optimistic approach, other speakers in the conference appeared to agree with the implication that judicial independence is under extreme threat globally, and we live in times of crisis. A prominent critic of Donald Trump’s policies, Stanford’s David Sklansky, described current attacks on the judiciary in the United States as “unprecedented and concerning”. The administration’s apparent triumphalism in its non-partisan approach to judicial appointments gives cause for concern, he added. Reflecting on his experience as international legal advisor for the International Commission of Jurists in Myanmar, Dr Daniel Aguirre similarly noted the extreme challenges in promoting judicial independence there, where the majority of Supreme Court judges are appointed from the military, and where bribery remains an all too common practice at lower levels of the judiciary. Raphaële Parizot, John Jackson and Ilias Anagnostopoulos reviewed the extent to which anti-terrorism measures and challenging political climates have diminished the traditional hallmarks of a strong

Education & Training

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

L–R Yvonne McDermott-Rees, The Rt Hon the Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd and Professor Dimitrios Giannoulopoulos Photo: Sally Trussler

and independent judiciary in France, the United Kingdom and Greece respectively. Anagnostopoulos inquired about the stress levels of judicial independence where external threats manifest themselves in the context of troubled foreign affairs, taking Turkish aggression towards Greece under Erdoğan as his case in point. The above arguably reinforce the point about the need for external scrutiny, in cases where checks and balances in domestic law may have failed to provide protection. Poland offers a key illustration, and several references were made during the conference to its strained relationship with the EU and international human rights.

A number of speakers further analysed supervisory mechanisms and external scrutiny, and how they interplay with judicial independence. His Honour Jeremy Roberts provided an insightful overview of how European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence has shaped the role and procedures of the Parole Board. In light of recent reforms following the Worboys case, it could be argued that public accountability has come to the fore in bringing about reforms such as the right to request summaries of the Board’s decisions. Vian Bakir discussed how public accountability of the judiciary can be secured in an era of ‘fake news’, while Martina Feilzer analysed how legitimacy and judicial independence can be balanced in criminal justice, drawing on criminological research on trust in the judiciary from around the world. Lt Col Harry Mynors, reflecting on the experience of service in Northern Ireland, Iraq and Afghanistan, advising on criminal law, international humanitarian law and the law of armed conflict, spoke of how the continuing force of human rights obligations can play a role in difficult armed conflict situations.

A further theme was the changing landscape in which judges operate. Kate Malleson explored how, in recent years, judges have become less insulated from political life, as can be seen from frequent appearances before parliamentary committees.

The media landscape, in particular an increasingly entrenched populism and the rise of fake news, particularly in the context of Brexit, was analysed by Julian Petley and Vian Bakir, while Lord Thomas discussed the likely increased role of technology in legal practice in the future. In his wide-reaching keynote speech, he stressed that we need dialogue and openness from the part of the judiciary to enhance the public’s understanding of judicial independence. He went on to elaborate on the nine

areas we need to concentrate on to achieve this: efficiency, governance, modernisation, court administration, judicial appointments, public accountability, communications, community engagement, and international engagement.

A final theme was what we might call the ‘hidden aspects’ of judicial independence. Several speakers noted the impact of personal attacks on members of the judiciary. The former president of the French Cour de Cassation, Guy Canivet, analysed the impact of budgetary control on the effective exercise of judicial functions, whilst Sir Konrad Schiemann discussed, amongst other fascinating themes emanating from his experience as a judge of the European Court of Justice, how judicial self-control can play an important role in the exercise of an independent judiciary. Moa Bladini analysed how judging and emotions are not as removed as one might think, in imagining the dispassionate, objective judge. Empathy plays an important hidden role in judicial decision-making; the judge should not be seen as a Hobbesian leviathan, divested of all common feelings. Radical change in relation to diversity in the profession was also, rightly, highlighted by several speakers as an urgent need.

We are exceptionally grateful to the Inner Temple for its support, not just with this conference, but throughout our tenures as Academic Fellows of the Inn from 2014 to 2017. As well as the wonderful conference dinner hosted at the Inn, we benefitted from the support of several Benchers throughout the conference. Special thanks are owed to Masters Carr, Cryan and Nice, who chaired sessions of our conference, and to Masters Schiemann and Roberts, who shared insights from their vast professional experiences. Master Roberts also contributed timely blog posts on the theme of independence and the Parole Board, which were published on the British Academy’s webpages and have kept the dialogue alive after our conference.

We would like to say a very special thanks, finally, to the Inn’s Outreach Manager, Struan Campbell, for his wonderful support with the conference. We hope that the conference proceedings will be published in 2019, and we will be sure to donate a copy to the Inner Temple library once the volume is published.

Yvonne McDermott Rees* and Dimitrios Giannoulopoulos** Videos of the speeches of Lord Kerr, Prof Kate Malleson and Lord Thomas can be viewed on www.BRinEUROPE.com

* Associate Academic Fellow; Associate Professor of Law, Swansea University ** Associate Academic Fellow; Professor of Law, Goldsmiths, University of London

73

E

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

The Inns of Court College of Advocacy – Two Years On

THE INNS OF COURT COLLEGE OF ADVOCACY – TWO YEARS ON

By Derek Wood CBE QC

Since its establishment two years ago, the Inns of Court College of Advocacy (ICCA) has been developing a broad range of projects partly inherited from its predecessor (the Advocacy Training Council) and partly generated in the form of new projects.

The College’s mission continues to be to raise and maintain high standards in the practice and ethics of advocacy in courts and tribunals, and to disseminate best practice in those areas. We have been achieving this through a body of work, both within our home jurisdiction of England and Wales and internationally. This has included the development of new materials, the introduction of new training programmes and the expansion of our international programme of work.

ADVOCACY AND THE VULNERABLE

E

The Advocacy and the Vulnerable programme continues to roll out nationally. It will ultimately deliver training to 14,000+ advocates who practise in the criminal courts.

The course aims to help advocates understand the special procedures applicable to cases involving vulnerable witnesses and to employ appropriate language as part of their cross-examination techniques in order to obtain ‘best evidence’ from such a witness. The ICCA has trained lead facilitators for 15 providers, including Inner Temple, who are delivering the training. A complete list can be found at: icca.ac.uk/advocacy-the-vulnerable. The ICCA plans to develop a similar programme for family law practitioners.

In parallel with this work, the ICCA continues to host its important website The Advocate’s Gateway (TAG), which now contains 18 toolkits containing detailed guidance on the challenges posed by witnesses who have different types of difficulty in giving evidence.

PROMOTING RELIABILITY IN EXPERT EVIDENCE In November 2017, the ICCA launched a 74-page guide entitled Statistics and Probability for Advocates: Understanding the Use of Statistical Evidence in Courts and Tribunals, published as a collaborative project with the Royal Statistical Society. At the same time, it published generic advice on the handling of expert evidence. It also delivered two rounds of expert evidence training in collaboration with the Specialist Bar Associations in 2017. Similar training on the circuits is due to take place in late 2018. Further information will be published on the ICCA website as it becomes available; please contact events@icca. ac.uk should you wish to be kept informed of developments.

The ICCA has also established a working group to further its progress in this field. It will be working with the Judicial College and the Royal Society. Developments will be published on the ICCA website.

YOUTH JUSTICE ADVOCACY In April 2017, the ICCA proudly launched five authoritative and very practical guides for practitioners representing children in the Youth Justice System. These guides covered first hearings, bail and remand, anonymity and reporting restrictions, the sentencing of young offenders, and the application for Certificate of Assigned Advocate. In the year following this launch, the ICCA has continued its work in this specialist practice area and has added a further two guides to complement the suite of existing materials. The new guides deal with child trafficking and sexting and include a helpful sexting glossary. The ICCA continues to work closely with the Youth Justice Legal Centre and Every Child Protected Against Trafficking (ECPAT) to produce this guidance, a partnership which has led to the ICCA’s growing reputation for providing guidance in the field of Youth Justice.

These guides will assist Youth Justice Practitioners to comply with their CPD requirements following the introduction of compulsory registration of Youth Court practices by the BSB. Whilst undertaking extensive research to produce the ICCA guide on child trafficking and county lines, the ICCA also took the opportunity to interview ECPAT’s Head of Training, Laura Duran. Laura has provided valuable expertise that has been distilled into four short films. The College hopes that practitioners prosecuting or representing children charged with criminal offences that are linked to them being exploited or trafficked will find these films useful as an indication of the scale and extent of the problem.

74

Education & Training

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

INTERNATIONAL WORK Since its launch, the Inns College has further expanded the ATC’s legacy of International training, undertaking 20 individual training trips in 14 jurisdictions over the past 24 months. The programme continues to build with plenty of new training opportunities coming up in the next six months. The ICCA is committed to assisting overseas Bars with improving standards of advocacy training to help maintain the rule of law and usually do so through a ‘seed corn’ approach. This ensures a lasting benefit to the overseas Bar by assisting the jurisdiction to develop and implement their own advocacy training provision and methods.

The College continues to develop its existing links with jurisdictions, including in Sierra Leone, The Hague, Poland and America, as well as developing new contacts.

New areas of development include linking with the English Law Studies (ELS) course at the University of Malaga, where the ICCA delivered advocacy training to Spanish students as part of their Specialist Legal Training workshops. The ICCA hopes to continue to develop this partnership and will continue to provide advocacy training to this programme.

ETHICS The pupillage year is a critical time for barristers’ ethical development yet, as has been identified by our recently published research, ethics is an area currently showing weakness in junior practitioners. The College’s Professional Ethics Training committee hopes to support pupil supervisors to improve training in this area through a pilot programme designed to allow supervisors of all levels to share their concerns, experiences and techniques with each other and with some very experienced pupil supervisors and advocacy trainers. However well pupils may have learned ‘the rules’, discovering how to apply them in practice brings new challenges: these skills need to be taught during pupillage.

The College is keen to recruit new trainers to assist with their international programmes and have recently opened this opportunity up to New Practitioner Trainers as well as Teacher Trainers; if you are interested in assisting on these programmes, please contact David Miller (dmiller@innertemple.org.uk) or Phoebe Makin (pmakin@icca.ac.uk) for further information.

Derek Wood CBE QC Chair of the ICCA Governors If you are interested in any of the College’s projects, please contact info@icca.ac.uk with your details for more information

OUP AND ICCA NATIONAL MOOTING COMPETITION The pursuit of excellence in advocacy is central to the ICCA’s functions, so we are delighted to be partnering with the Oxford University Press for the prestigious OUP and ICCA National Mooting Competition. Master Hallett kindly agreed to judge the 2018 Mooting final, which was held on Thursday 28 June at Inner Temple. Details on the winner can be found on the OUP website: global.oup.com/ukhe/mooting.

75

E

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

We Need Your Help

WE NEED YOUR HELP BARRISTERS TO GIVE MOCK INTERVIEWS The Mock Interview Scheme gives students a chance to refine their interview technique with the support of an established barrister before they undertake a ‘real’ pupillage interview. The scheme is highly valued by our student members and consistently receives positive feedback. The time commitment is flexible but typically amounts to around one to three hours per year. Please contact Edwina Koroma.

GROUP LEADERS/JUDGES FOR STUDENT CONFERENCE WEEKENDS The Education and Training Department organises three student conference weekends a year at external venues in Windsor and Northamptonshire.

The weekends focus on a particular legal topic and include panel presentations from experts, as well as sentencing exercises and advocacy exercises.

Previous weekends have covered a broad range of topics, including hearsay, assisted dying, prisons, terrorism and vulnerable witnesses. Barrister members over seven years’ Call act as group leaders and judicial members judge the student advocacy exercises. If you would like to volunteer to be a group leader or judge at a future weekend, please contact Julia Armfield.

E

OUTREACH The Outreach team organises a range of outreach activities for school and university students at the Inn and across England and Wales. If you are interested in helping with these events, please contact Struan Campbell or Daisy Mortimer. We are particularly keen to hear from members on Circuit.

76

The Inn reli es to a gre at extent o of its mem n the willin bers to ded gness icate time to support a nd effort education and trainin If you are a g activities. member w ho would li to help, ple ke to volun ase see ou teer r Guide to V Opportunit olunteerin ies in the M g embership of the web Services se site or con ction ta c t the Educa Training D tion and epartment (contact de tails on pa ge 51).

SCHOLARSHIP INTERVIEWS The Inn offers funds in excess of £1.7 million annually to be distributed as scholarships and exhibitions for Bar training. Interviews are typically held on two consecutive weekends in March for BPTC awards and over a single weekend in June for law conversion awards. If you would like to volunteer to assist with the interviewing process, please contact Georgina Everatt.

MARSHALLING The Marshalling Scheme enables pupils and BPTC students to spend a day or days (up to a week) in court with a judge. As a result of the Scheme’s popularity, the Inn is seeking more judges to participate. Please contact Richard Loveridge for details.

MENTORING The Mentoring Scheme aims to provide students with advice, guidance and a point of contact during their initial stages of becoming a barrister.

Mentors are usually allocated at the beginning of the academic year and the demand is always very high. Please contact Georgina Everatt if you would like to help.

REGIONAL QUALIFYING SESSIONS

ADVOCACY TRAINING FACULTY

BPTC students at providers outside of London are able to organise up to three qualifying sessions locally. These may be lectures, advocacy training, mooting or debating sessions, followed by a reception with members of the local Bar. These sessions are subsidised by the Inn. Our student members would greatly appreciate the support of local members for these sessions. If you would be willing to help with future sessions, please contact Georgina Everatt.

The Inn’s dedicated Advocacy Trainers provide compulsory advocacy training courses for pupils and new practitioners, and they are increasingly being called upon to provide specialist advocacy training for established practitioners. If you are over seven years’ Call and would be interested in undertaking the advocacy teacher-training course to support this core function of the Inn, please contact David Miller.

World War I

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

ROLL OF HONOUR This Roll of Honour contains (in order of the date of enlistment) the names of all those members of the Inner Temple who voluntarily enlisted to serve in the First World War before conscription was introduced with the Military Service Act of 2 March 1916. The list includes all those members who were killed in action, died of wounds or died of illness contracted while serving.

ANN : DOM : MCMXIV E T ANTE

R WOODWARD, JUN 3 Bn South Wales Borderers Captain Killed in action at Richebourg in the Battle of Festubert, 9 May 1915

G R VENABLES 3 Bn Shropshire Light Inf 2 Lieutenant Killed in action in Flanders, 7 March 1915

F W GRANTHAM 2 Bn Royal Munster Fusiliers Captain Killed in action at the Battle of Festubert, 9 May 1915

R C GREEN 1 Bn Bedfordshire Reg Lieutenant Died 18 May 1916, of wounds received near Arras

A W ARMITAGE 8 Bn King’s Own Yorkshire Light Inf Captain and Adjt Killed in action at Le Sars, 1 October 1916

E W HORNER 18 Hussars Lieutenant Died 21 November 1917, of wounds received at Noyelles, near Cambrai

RONALD W F CAMPBELL 10 Bn Royal Fusiliers Captain Died 11 August 1916, of wounds received at the Battle of the Somme

W T WETENHALL 6 Bn Leicestershire Reg Captain Killed in action in the Battle of the Somme, 3 September 1916

J Y SCOTT 10 Bn Rifle Brigade Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of the Somme, 3 September 1916

LORD ELCHO Gloucestershire Yeomanry Captain Killed in action at Katia, Sinai, 23 April 1916

A E G HULTON Army Service Corps Lieutenant Died 6 June 1915 of wounds received at St Jean, near Ypres, 25 April 1915

G H COHEN 5 Bn Liverpool Regiment Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of Festubert, 17 May 1915

THE HON E B HERBERT Gloucestershire Yeomanry Captain Killed in action in Palestine, 12 November 1917

W G G LEVESON-GOWER I Bn Coldstream Guards Lieutenant Killed in action at Awoingt, near Cambrai, 9 October 1918

H T CAWLEY, MP 6 Bn Manchester Reg Captain Killed in action in Gallipoli, 23 September 1915

LORD B BLACKWOOD Grenadier Guards Lieutenant Killed in action in France, 3 July 1917

T H BETHELL 10 Bn King’s Own Yorkshire Light Inf Captain Killed in action in France, 20 February 1916

A L LEMON 6 Dragoon Guards (R) Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of Cambrai, 27 November 1917

L P CLAY Yorkshire Dragoons Major Killed in action at Templeux la Fosse, 18 February 1918

F J RIGBY, MC 1 Bn Seaforth Highlanders Captain Killed in action at Orah, Mesopatamia, 21 January 1915

C B M HODGSON, CROIX DE GUERRE 3 Bn Royal West Surrey Reg Captain Died at Cairo, 1 April 1918, of wounds received in Palestine

J W LEWIS 1 Bn Welsh Guards Lieutenant Killed in action near Ypres, 6 June 1916

J H B FLETCHER 7 Bn London Regiment Lieutenant Died 13 May 1915 of wounds received in France CHRISTOPHER BUSHELL, VC, DSO 7 Bn Royal West Surrey Reg Lt Col Killed in action near Morlancourt 8 August 1918

E S TURTON Yorkshire Hussars Lieutenant Killed in action near Ypres, 31 August 1915

WWI

WILLIAM LORING, DCM Scottish Horse Captain Died at sea 24 Oct 1915, of wounds received at Gallipoli

W J BONSER 12 Bn Rifle Brigade Captain Killed in action near Ypres, 25 September 1915 R D GARNONS-WILLIAMS 12 Bn Royal Fusiliers Lt-Col Killed in action at the Battle of Loos, C J WARNER 3 Bn Oxford & Bucks Light Inf Captain Killed in action at the Battle of Festubert, 16 May 1915 C W WINTERBOTHAM 5 Bn Gloucestershire Reg Lieutenant Killed in action near Ovillers la Boiselle, 27 August 1916

THE HON R S A PALMER 6 Bn Hampshire Reg Captain Died in Turkish hands, 21 January 1916, of wounds received at the Battle of Um, El Hannah, Mesopatamia

77

WWI

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Roll of Honour

H W BRODIE 6 Bn East Kent Reg Captain Killed in action at Hulluch, near Loos, 13 October 1915

N C MACLEHOSE 8 Bn London Reg Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of Festubert, 26 May 1915

CECIL BERTIE GEDGE 3 Bn London Reg 2 Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of Loos, 25 September 1915

J H WHITWORTH, DSO, MC 6 Bn Manchester Reg Captain Died 31 March 1918, of wounds received near Dompierre

ROBERT GIBSON 6 Bn King’s Own Scottish Borderers Lieutenant Killed in action at Hill 60, near Ypres, 5 May 1915

M A ROBERTSON 10 Bn Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers Captain Killed in action at the Battle of the Somme, 1 July 1916

C H S SHEPHERD-CROSS Machine Gun Corps Major Died 15 October 1917, of wounds received in action at Ypres

R H I ROSE 6 Bn Bedfordshire Reg Lieutenant Killed in action at Arras, 28 April 1917

RAYMOND ASQUITH 3 Bn Grenadier Guards Lieutenant Died 15 September 1916, of wounds received in the Battle of the Somme

E BAYLIE AMPHLETT 12 Bn Worcestershire Reg Captain and Adjt Killed in action in Gallipoli, 4 June 1915

SIR H G T BUTLIN, BART 1 Bn Cambridgeshire Reg Captain Killed in action at Beaumont Hamel, 16 September 1916

J E J BRUDENELL-BRUCE Northamptonshire Yeomanry Lieutenant Died 11 April 1917, of wounds received in France

H L G EDWARDS 1 Bn Royal Welsh Fusiliers Lieutenant Died 16 May 1915, of wounds received at the Battle of Festubert

A E K MASON 7 Bn Royal Fusiliers Captain Killed in action near Vermelles, 2 March 1916

H G BURDETT 2 County of London Yeomanry Captain Died of illness contracted on service, 3 March 1916

E B BILTON Highland Cyclist Bn Captain Killed in action near Albert, 15 March 1917

C L HART 3 Bn West Riding Reg Captain Killed in action at the Battle of the Somme, 1 July 1916

C H JONES 11 Bn Welsh Fusiliers Captain Killed in action in the Balkans, 18 September 1918

A T C CREE 7 Bn Durham Light Inf Lieutenant Killed in action at Ypres, 12 May 1915

C A W CRICHTON 3 Bn London Reg 2 Lieutenant Killed in action at Neuve Chapelle, 10 March 1915

A F SCHUSTER 4 Hussars Lieutenant Killed in action Hooge, 20 November 1914

HUGH CLOUDESLEY 7 Bn Royal West Surrey Reg Lieutenant Killled in action at the Battle of the Somme, 1 July 1916

E M BROWN Machine Gun Corps Lieutenant Killed in action in France, 29 September 1917

H R STABLES 5 Bn Royal Fusiliers Lieutenant Killed in action near Ypres, 15 November 1914

F C DIETRICHSEN 7 Bn Sherwood Foresters Captain Killed in the Dublin Rebellion 26 April 1916

H H C WILLIAMSON 1 Bn Coldstream Guards Lieutenant Killed in action near Ginchy in the Battle of the Somme, 25 September 1915

K WALLACE ELMSLIE 4 Dragoon Guards Lieutenant Killed in action near Messines in the First Battle of Ypres, 4 November 1914

S H MARSLAND 11 Bn Manchester Reg Lieutenant Killed in action at Suvla Bay, Gallipoli, 7 August 1915

JAMES REID 10 Bn Highland Light Inf Captain Killed in action at the Battle of Loos, 25 September 1915

E M SALVESEN 4 Bn Royal Dublin Fusiliers 2 Lieutenant Killed in action near St Julien, 25 April 1915

G S WOODHOUSE Royal Field Artillery 2 Lieutenant Killed in action in France, 13 October 1915

J H T LIDDELL 6 Bn King’s Royal Rifle Corps Lieutenant Died 17 November 1916, of wounds received at Beaumont Hamel on 13 November

G W TALBOT 7 Bn Rifle Brigade Lieutenant Killed in action at Hooge, 30 July 1915

W M HUGHES-HUGHES 9 Bn Welsh Reg Captain Killed in action at Givenchy, 25 September 1915 HUGH MAKINS 16 Bn London Reg Captain Died 4 November 1915, of wounds received at Vlamertinghe W D WARD 9 Bn Hampshire Reg Captain Accidentally killed at Bangalore, Burma, 4 September 1918 C F SARTORIS 7 Bn Leicestershire Reg Lieutenant Killed in action in Gallipoli, 24 June 1915

A E MILLSON 6 Bn Royal Fusiliers Captain Killed in action in France, 9 April 1917 H J DE TRAFFORD 1 Bn South Staffordshire Reg Captain Killed in action at the Battle of Loo, 25 September 1915 M B BEAUMONT-CHECKLAND 2 West Somerset Yeomanry Lieutenant Killed in action at Langemarck, 16 August 1917

78

GERALD PLUNKETT Collingwood Bn Royal Naval Division Sub-Lieutenant Killed in action in Gallipoli, 7 June 1915

World War I

N W R KING 16 Lancers Lieutenant Killed in action near Ypres, 21 February 1915 FRANCIS DOUGLAS ADAMSON 2 Bn Border Reg Lieutenant Killed in action near Givenchy, 16 November 1915 R N PHILLIPS Royal Welsh Fusiliers Captain Died 27 December 1914, of wounds received near Fleurbaix on 3 November GEORGE BRUCE JOY 3 Bn Welsh Reg Lieutenant Died 21 May 1915, of wounds received in France

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

CHARLES T A POLLOCK Inns of Court Officers Training Corps Captain Killed in action in France, 31 March 1918

DOUGLAS L HARVEY 9 Lancers 2 Lieutenant Killed in action near Messines in the First Battle of Ypres, 3 November 1914

GEORGE G EDGAR 14 Bn King’s Royal Rifle Corps 2 Lieutenant Died 28 August 1916, of wounds received in action at Delville Wood

SEYMOUR J H VAN DE BERGH 1 County of London Yeomanry Lieutenant Killed in action at Beersheba, Palestine, 27 October 1917

SIDNEY T MARTIN 6 Bn Inniskilling Fusiliers 2 Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of the Somme, 1 July 1916

CHARLES E H LOXTON 5 Bn North Staffordshire Reg 2 Lieutanant Died 25 May 1915, of wounds received near Ypres

ALMERIC W WOOD 3 Bn Oxford & Bucks Light Inf 2 Lieutenant Died 29 September 1915, of wounds received near Ypres on 25 September

RICHARD G TASKER 10 Bn Worcestershire Reg Captain Killed in action at Ovillersla-Boisselle, 3 July 1916

A DOUGLAS GILLESPIE 2 Bn Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders 2 Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of Loos, 26 September 1915

EDWIN H MACKINTOSH 8 Bn Royal Highlanders 2 Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of Loos, 25 September 1915

H ST H JEUNE 9 Bn Gloucestershire Reg Captain Died 12 May 1917, of wounds received in France

GUY C B WILLOCK 18 Bn London Reg Captain Killed in action at the Battle of Loos, 25 September 1915

GERALD F W POWELL 8 Bn Royal West Kent Reg Major Killed in action at Hill 60, near Ypres, 29 July 1917

ARTHUR F WILLMER 9 Bn Rifle Brigade Major Died 20 September 1916, of wounds received in action near Flers

KENNETH J CAMPBELL 9 Bn Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders 2 Lieutenant Killed in action near Ypres, 10 May 1915

A F BLACKWELL, MC Royal Field Artillery Lieutenant Killed in action in France, 2 June 1917

JOHN C LAUDER 8 Bn Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders Captain Killed in action in France, 28 December 1916

JOHN R TRINDER, MC 18 Bn London Reg Major Killed in action at High Wood in the Battle of the Somme 15 September 1916

HUGH G P WYATT 1 Sussex Yeomanry 2 Lieutenant Died of sickness at Alexandria, 12 November 1915

WALTER J FORSTER 3 Bn East Lancashire Reg Captain Killed in action at Monchyle-Preux, 31 May 1917

DAVID LYELL 7 Bn Royal Scots 2 Lieutenant Killed in action in Gallipoli, 12 July 1915

RONALD D WHEATCROFT 6 Bn Sherwood Foresters Lieutenant Died 2 July 1916, of wounds received at Gommecourt

GEOFFREY G BELLAMY Machine Gun Corps Captain Died 1 September 1918, of wounds received at Bus-lès-Artois, France

PAUL HOLMAN Hon Artillery Company Private Killed in action near Ypres, 17 February 1915

JOHN A RITSON 7 Bn South Lancashire Reg Captain Killed in action at Bozentinle-Petit in the Battle of the Somme, 23 July 1916

HAROLD THOMPSON 3 Bn Northampton Reg 2 Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of Festubert, 9 May 1915

R C G DU P LE BLOND 12 Bn Rifle Brigade Captain Died of sickness 17 May 1915 MICHAEL C LAWRENCE 1 Bn Coldstream Guards Captain Killed in action near Ginchy in the Battle of the Somme, 16 September 1916 FREDERICK NEIL LE MESURIER 2 Bn Roy Dublin Fusiliers Captain Killed in action at St Julien, 25 April 1915 W M DUNNINGTONJEFFERSON 7 Bn Royal Fusiliers 2 Lieutenant Killed in action near Gravenstafel in the Second Battle of Ypres, 25 April 1915

LAUNCELOT S R CARY 9 Bn Devonshire Reg 2 Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of the Somme, 20 July 1916

GERALD B LOCKHART 6 Bn Loyal North Lancashire Reg Lieutenant Killed in action at Sari Baar, Gallipoli 10 August 1915

WWI

A EVAN ALLIES 8 Bn Royal Welsh Fusiliers Lieutenant Killed in action at Anzac, Gallipoli, 13 June 1915

IAN C FINDLAY 3 Bn York & Lancaster Reg 2 Lieutenant Died 10 August 1915, of wounds received in France

JESSE F M HIND 9 Bn Sherwood Foresters Lieutenant Killed in action at Thiepval, 27 September 1916

BERNARD RISSIK 9 Bn Rifle Brigade 2 Lieutenant Killed in action in Flanders, 22 June 1915

79 79

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

THE HON GERALD W GRENFELL 8 Bn Rifle Brigade 2 Lieutenant Killed in action near Hooge, 30 July 1915 W H STUART GARNETT Royal Flying Corps Lieutenant, Staff Accidentally killed at Upavon, Wilts, 21 September 1916 NOEL W FREEMAN, MC Royal Field Artillery Major Killed in action at Ettreillers, 21 March 1918 HUGH A G MALET 2 Bn K O Scottish Borderers Lieutenant Killed in action at Hill 60, near Ypres, 18 April 1915 T A STEWART-JONES 5 Bn Royal Sussex Reg Captain Killed in action at the Battle of Festubert, 9 May 1915 PERCY N G FITZPATRICK S African Heavy Artillery Major Killed in action near Beaumetz, 14 December 1917 REGINALD L WARD 3 Bn York & Lancaster Reg Lieutenant Killed in action near Boesinghe, Belgium, 21 April 1916

WWI

CHRISTOPHER G GOSCHEN 4 Bn Grenadier Guards Captain Killed in action at Lesboeufs, 25 September 1916 A MCW LAWSON- JOHNSTON 2 Bn Grenadier Guards Lieutenant Died 22 February 1917, of wounds received at St Pierre-Vaast

Roll of Honour

FRANCIS C B WEST Royal Field Artillery Lt-Col Killed in action near Pozieres, 28 September 1916

ROBERT K MCDERMOTT 3 Bn Seaforth Highlanders Captain Killed in action in Palestine, 20 September 1918

HAROLD E PENNINGTON 9 Bn Royal Sussex Reg 2 Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of Loos, 27 September 1915

JOHN DALRYMPLE MAITLAND 9 Bn West Riding Reg 2 Lieutenant Killed in action in France, 22 February 1916

EDWARD H S BLIGH Drake Bn Royal Naval Div Lieutenant Killed in action at Gallipoli, 10 September 1915

R G H YEATHERD 2 Dragoon Guards Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of the Somme, 15 September 1916

HORACE J BRIERLEY 9 Bn Lancashire Fusiliers Lieutenant Killed in action in Gallipoli, 7 August 1915

THOMAS G BROCKLEBANK Royal Field Artillery Captain Killed in action at Maricourt in the Battle of the Somme, 5 August 1916

J W ASHLEY MAUDE 10 Bn King’s Royal Rifle Corps 2 Lieutenant Killed in action at Laventie, 24 August 1915

EDWARD B CARPENTER Plymouth Bn Royal Marine Brigade, Royal Naval Section Captain Died 18 August 1915, of wounds received near Krithia, Gallipoli

MAURICE A M DAVIES 9 Bn Devonshire Reg 2 Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of Loos, 25 September 1915 WILLIAM A KEEN 7 Bn Middlesex Reg Captain Died 6 September 1918 of wounds received at Moislains BERTRAM W DEVAS 10 Bn Suffolk Reg Lieutenant Killed in action at Serre, 13 November 1916 ALISTER GRAHAM KIRBY 5 Bn London Reg Captain Died of sickness at Marseilles, 29 March 1917

J D GILKISON 1 Bn Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders Captain Killed in action at the Battle of Le Cateau, 26 August 1914 JOHN HARLEY 13 Bn Worcestershire Reg Lieutenant Killed in action in Gallipoli, 4 June 1915 WILLIAM W MORGAN Hawke Bn Royal Naval Division Lieutenant Killed in action in Gallipoli, 10 June 1915

GEORGE FRANCIS WALKER 5 Bn York and Lancaster Reg 2 Lieutenant Killed in action on the Somme, 7 December 1916

A MAXWELL LABOUCHERE, DSO 9 Bn Oxford & Bucks Light Inf Major Died 30 April 1918, of wounds received in France

HERBERT J SUTTON 1 Bn Welsh Guards Lieutenant Killed in action at Hill 70, in the Battle of Loos, 27 September 1915

HERBERT LUMB Royal Field Artillery 2 Lieutenant Died of sickness on service in Gallipoli, 8 October 1915

GERALD W A SIMPSON Army Ordinance Dept Lieutenant Died of sickness, 25 January 1919

ANTHONY F WILDING Royal Marines Captain Killed in action at the Battle of Festubert, 9 May 1915

FRANK RICARD 1 Bn Royal Warwickshire Reg 2 Lieutenant Killed in action near Ypres, 25 April 1915

ROBERT HUNTER HILL 14 Bn London Reg Sergeant Killed in action at Hulluch, near Loos, 13 October 1915

EUSTACE W R HADDEN 4 Bn Oxford & Bucks L I Major Died of sickness in France, 10 June 1916

DONALD HOLMAN 11 Bn Middlesex Reg Lieutenant Killed in action near Morlancourt, 8 August 1918

F S J SILVERTOP Oxfordshire Hussars Lieutenant Killed in action at Guillemont Farm, 20 May 1917

GEORGE W H HOPLEY 2 Bn Grenadier Guards 2 Lieutenant Died at Boulogne, 12 May 1915, of wounds received near Bethune on 3 February 1915

GEORGE A C SANDEMAN 3 Bn Hampshire Reg Captain Killed in action near Ypres, 26 April 1915

CARLOS B LUMSDEN 18 Bn Highland Light Inf Major Died of sickness on service in France, 7 March 1916

80

A C GATHORNE-HARDY 9 Bn Scottish Rifles Captain Killed in action at the Battle of Loos, 25 September 1915

WILLIAM G COURTHORPE Royal Air Force Captain, Staff Died of illness in France, 21 October 1918

World War I

JOHN WILLOUGHBY SCOTT, DSO 8 Bn Somerset Light Inf Lt-Col Killed in action near Monchyle-Preux, 23 April 1917 CHARLES J H SHEEPSHANKS 8 Bn Devonshire Reg Captain Killed in action near Fricourt, 17 March 1916 HERBERT CECIL SHUTT 3 Bn Royal Scots Fusiliers Lieutenant Killed in action at Serre, 13 November 1916 OLIFFE R NICHOLAS 3 Bn Royal West Kent Reg Lieutenant Killed in action in Mesopotamia, 18 April 1916 R M SEBAG-MONTEFIORE Royal East Kent Yeomanry Captain Died at Alexandria, 19 November 1915, of wounds received in Gallipoli on 23 October RUPERT AUCRUM EVANS 3 Bn West Yorkshire Reg 2 Lieutenant Accidentally killed in Northumberland, 25 January 1916 CUTHBERT E BRISLEY Royal Air Force Major Accidentally killed while flying in England, 30 July 1918

HERBERT B FAQUHAR 15 Bn London Reg (Civil Service Rifles) Captain Killed in action at Vimy Ridge, 21 May 1916 JULIAN G K FARRAR 12 Bn Lancashire Fusiliers Captain Killed in action in the Balkans, 14 September 1916 KENNETH M H SOLOMON 11 Bn Gloucestershire Reg 2 Lieutenant Died 18 September 1915, of wounds received at Suvla Bay, Gallipoli on 22 August GEORGE A M DOCKER Royal Fusiliers Captain Killed in action at Le Touquet, near Armentieres, 17 November 1914

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

ALFRED VICTOR RATCLIFFE 10 Bn West Yorkshire Reg Lieutenant Killed in action at Fricourt in the Battle of the Somme, 1 July 1916

BRIAN G H COTTON 17 Bn London Reg 2 Lieutenant Died 8 November 1917, of wounds received in Palestine

RICHARD B FARRER 5 Bn Leicestershire Reg Lieutenant Killed in action in France, 8 June 1917

WILLIAM G GABAIN, MC General List Captain Killed in action at Pargny, 24 March 1918

VALENTINE FLEMING, MP, DSO Oxfordshire Hussars Major Killed in action at Guillemont Farm, 20 May 1917

MAURICE POWELL Royal Field Artillery Lieutenant Killed in action near Lens, 5 July 1917

GEORGE REGINALD TOLLER Garrison Bn Lincolnshire Reg Lieutenant Died of sickness in Mesopotamia, 27 July 1917

FRANCIS C DAVIDSON Indian Army Reserve of Officers Captain Killed in action on the N W Frontier, India, 10 May 1917

NOEL G ADDISON, MC 1 King Edward’s Horse Lieutenant Killed in action near Locon, 9 April 1918

GEORGE L CALDERON 9 Bn Oxford & Bucks Light Infantry Lieutenant Killed in action in Gallipoli, 4 June 1915

JOHN HUGH ALLEN 13 Bn Worcestershire Reg Lieutenant Killed in action in Gallipoli, 13 June 1915

HUMPHREY N DICKINSON 3 Bn Royal West Kent Reg 2 Lieutenant Died 13 October 1916 of wounds on the Somme

RAYMOND P D NOLAN 1 Bn Black Watch Lieutenant Killed in action near Ypres, 3 November 1914

C A PIGOT-MOODIE 6 Bn Rifle Brigade 2 Lieutenant Killed in action 13 January 1915

CHRISTOPHER BETHELL 10 Bn King’s Own Yorkshire Light Inf Captain Killed in action in France, 20 February 1916 RAYMOND BEVIR 10 Bn Royal Fusiliers 2 Lieutenant Killed in action near Pozieres in the Battle of the Somme, 15 July 1916 HERBERT E E COLEMAN 2 Bn Royal Sussex Reg 2 Lieutenant Killed in action at High Wood in the Battle of the Somme, 9 September 1916 CHRISTOPHER ERLE 1st Garrison Bn Northamptonshire Reg Captain Died of sickness on service abroad, 10 February 1917 C F J WEGG-PROSSER 15 Bn Rifle Brigade 2 Lieutenant Killed in action at the Battle of the Somme, 3 September 1916

ERIC J BRADLEY 5 Bn London Reg Private Unknown

WWI

HERBERT CLYDE EVANS Nelson Bn Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve Lt-Comdr Killed in action in Gallipoli, 5 June 1915

W H BRUCE BAXTER 6 Bn Royal Warwickshire Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown PATRICK H SHAW-STEWART Hood Bn, RNVR Sub-Lieutenant Unknown REGINALD L WARD 3 Bn York & Lancaster Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown CHARLES C YATES 9 Bn Loyal North Lancashire Reg Lieutenant Unknown JOHN L HEATH 1 Bn Yorkshire Light Inf 2 Lieutenant Unknown

WILFRID M LANGDON 10 Bn Cheshire Reg Captain Killed in action at Vimy Ridge, 21 May 1916 HUGH C MELVILLE 10 Bn Sherwood Foresters 2 Lieutenant Killed in action near Ypres, 14 February 1916

81

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

A

JOHN R B ROBERTS 6 Bn Northumberland Fusiliers Private Unknown

EDGAR E WALKER 3 Bn East Yorkshire Reg Captain Unknown

ERIC FRANCIS WENTZEL 3 Bn East Surrey Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

G S KAYE-BUTTERWORTH 13 Bn Durham Light Inf Lieutenant Unknown

CHARLES J. FOWLER 22 Bn Royal Fusiliers 2 Lieutenant Unknown

ARTHUR CAPEL MORRIS 12 Lancers Trooper Unknown

BASIL E ATKINS 9 Bn East Yorkshire Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

CECIL R LANGHAM 5 Bn Royal Sussex Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

ARTHUR T BONHAM CARTER 3 Bn Hampshire Reg Captain Unknown

HUGH L F BOYD 2 Bn Royal Highlanders 2 Lieutenant Unknown

CHARLES F PURCELL Irish Guards 2 Lieutenant Unknown

GEORGE REGINALD TOLLER Lincolnshire Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

CHARLES A VINTCENT 5 Bn Rifle Brigade 2 Lieutenant Unknown

WILLIAM A BOWERS 5 Bn North Staffordshire Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

DAVID MALCOLM FELL Royal Field Artillery 2 Lieutenant Unknown

ATHELSTAN B BAINES 6 Bn Oxford & Bucks Light Inf Lieutenant Unknown

CHRISTOPHER H COUNSELL 3 Bn Hampshire Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

FREDERICK W GOLDBERG 3 Bn Royal West Surrey Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

PERCY P POPE 3 Bn Welsh Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

HENRY THOREAU CULLIS Rifle Brigade 2 Lieutenant Unknown

RONALD F C TOMPSON Grenadier Guards 2 Lieutenant Unknown

HERBERT W GOLDBERG 3 Bn Royal West Surrey Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

CHARLES G E FARMER 15 Bn King’s Royal Rifle Corps 2 Lieutenant Unknown

ROBERT G M MITCHELL Australian Imp Force Private Unknown

THE HON E J KAYSHUTTLEWORTH 7 Bn Rifle Brigade 2 Lieutenant Unknown

IORWERTH GLYNDWR JOHN 3 Bn South Wales Borderers 2 Lieutenant Unknown

CHARLES BADHAM MARTIN 47 Bn Australian Inf Private Unknown

WILFRED A KOHN 11 Bn East Lancashire Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

VICTOR W J HOBBS 4 Bn East Kent Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

JOHN LOCKHART MILLER 8 Bn London Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

THOMAS G R DEHN 3 Bn Wiltshire Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

JAMES O’ H PEARMAN 13 Bn Royal Warwickshire Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

WILLIAM F E DENISON 15 Bn Sherwood Foresters 2 Lieutenant Unknown

HERBERT VICTOR SEWELL Royal Field Artillery 2 Lieutenant Unknown

FRANCIS EDMUND STORRS Royal Naval Volunteer Res Lieutenant Unknown

JOHN C STOLLERY 5 Bn Royal Fusiliers 2 Lieutentant Unknown LAUREL C F OLDFIELD 5 Bn Yorkshire Reg Lieutenant Unknown FRANK D LIVINGSTONE Army Service Corps 2 Lieutenant Unknown JOHN WILLIAM CHURCH Hertfordshire Reg 2 Lieutenant Unknown

82

Roll of Honour

Library

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

LIBRARY FACILITIES AND SERVICES

The Library offers the following facilities and services:

The Library is open to all members of the Inner Temple and to members of the other Inns of Court. It is a legal reference Library, staffed by experienced information professionals, which offers users access to a wide range of print and electronic resources in a comfortable working environment.

a quiet environment for study, with over 90 reader places a comprehensive collection of English legal materials, including the most up-to-date editions of major practitioner texts an extensive archive of old editions of practitioners’ works specialist Commonwealth & Scottish collections collections which are all on-site and easily accessible a range of commercial legal research databases PCs for online research, access to email and word processing free Wi-Fi photocopying, scanning and printing facilities a document supply service an enquiry service (in person, by telephone and by email) assistance with online searching and legal research an overnight loans scheme for barristers legal research training for pupils and students legal research FAQs on our website tours for students and pupils, plus a virtual tour on our website web access to the library catalogues of the four Inns AccessToLaw, a gateway site providing annotated links to selected UK, Commonwealth and worldwide free legal websites (www.accesstolaw.com) Current Awareness blog for legal news, changes in legislation and new case law (www.innertemplelibrary.com) quarterly electronic newsletter a Facebook page with information on Library services, news and events (www.facebook.com/innertemplelibrary) range of guides available in the Library or for downloading from our website equipment and software for users with hearing or visual impairment

More information on the Library’s collections, services and contact details can be viewed at www.innertemplelibrary.org.uk.

83

L

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Books vs Online – Let Battle Commence

BOOKS Vs ONLINE – LET BATTLE COMMENCE By the Deputy Librarian

My career in law librarianship spans nearly 30 years and several different kinds of law library. I have seen many changes in information provision and dissemination over the years. One of the most important developments has been the rise of the subscription databases and the availability of materials online generally. This has inevitably led to the frequently heard rhetorical question, “It’s all online, isn’t it? ” This is far from true and based on my experience I would argue that without access to both hard copy and electronic resources, we would not be able to operate such a successful service for our users. As Wallace Breem (Inner Temple’s former Librarian and Keeper of Manuscripts) once said, “The needs of the barrister are diverse and sudden.” * Books and online resources enable us to meet these needs.

L

There are many reasons why a good hard-copy collection is essential for barristers. One of the main ones is that none of the databases contain old editions of textbooks. They only provide access to the current edition, so even last year’s White Book is not available online. The Library’s old editions collection is very large and we retain all superseded editions. We often have to refer to an old edition to answer a query. A typical example was a pupil trying to establish whether CPR 25.1(1) (g) had an equivalent in the RSC. Our old editions of the White Book answered this question.

The time spans covered by the databases can sometimes be very restrictive for research purposes. If someone is trying to view a piece of legislation at a particular point in time, the databases are of limited value. Westlaw allows historic searching of Acts back to 1991, and Lexis does the same back to 1998.

A recent request to find the Public Record Act 1877 as it was in 1957 and 1958 therefore entailed using old editions of Halsbury’s Statutes and the Current Law Legislation Citator. Likewise, it would be difficult to trace all amendments to a statute if it was enacted before the date at which the databases start to detail amendments. The only recourse would be to use the hardcopy legislation citators. Similarly, none of the databases can match the back runs of journals that we hold in the Library.

The main subscription databases contain a good deal of material but no one database will include everything.

84

*A sketch of the Inner Temple Library by W W S Breem (1971)

The database providers will only hold the material which they themselves publish, or that they have negotiated the rights to include on their platforms. In the Library, we do not have these concerns when we purchase materials. We buy according to the value it will add to our collections.

Database providers will remove material if it is deemed to have lost commercial value. As stated earlier, we keep all superseded editions. This means our collections are complete and not dependent on commercial considerations.

The assumption that everything is online is certainly not true if you are looking for official publications or material produced by government departments. Command Papers are not online before the mid 1990s, so a recent request for the Cleveland Report on Child Abuse in 1987 could only be fulfilled by using the hard copy in the Library.

The availability of large physical collections means that users can browse and experience the value of serendipity. It is not easy to browse when you are using a database. The need to view various kinds of materials requires several windows to be open on a PC or tablet, which can become confusing. A comment from a Library user illustrates another problem of using online books: “I’ve got an electronic version [of Blackstone’s Criminal Practice] but I can’t read that and type at the same time.”

It is often assumed that because most people use electronic devices in their day-to- day life, using the legal databases will be easy. This is not necessarily the case. The databases organise materials differently from one another and require different search techniques. Even using the word AND needs to be given some thought because some of the databases treat its use in different ways. Wildcards and truncation symbols vary according to the database you are using, so just because you use one database does not mean you can automatically use another one as easily. That is why we offer training in the Library to overcome these issues. It is not quite so difficult to use a book – most have contents pages and indexes, so finding something in a book should be fairly easy. Even with something like Halsbury’s Laws, there are excellent help pages and diagrams to assist the user.

It is often not so easy to find help pages on a database.

Library

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

“ I have had the pleasure of using Inner Temple library recently on several occasions.

It is a wonderful resource and the staff are so helpful. The Internet simply cannot duplicate the quantity and quality of the material you have, or provide the knowledge of how to make the most of research materials” The availability of materials on the internet enables information to be accessible. However, with this freedom comes the danger that not everything is authentic or authoritative. With a legal textbook, it is usually straightforward to establish who the author is and to find out about their background.

Also, a book will state clearly how up to date it is, usually in the preface. This is not apparent with some websites, so the unwary user is in danger of relying on information which could be out of date and unauthoritative.

My observations from working on the Enquiry Desk lead me to conclude that for court purposes, material to be submitted should look like the original hard copy whether that is a law report or textbook. Most of the databases do not provide PDF chapters and some law reports are not in PDF format either. Photocopying the hard copy is the only solution.

From the above, it might appear that I favour hard copy over databases and online resources. In fact, I readily acknowledge that all of these resources have a place and, combined, enable us to provide an excellent enquiry service in the Library. The main subscription databases are useful for providing access to very recent materials. Sometimes, the online versions of books and encyclopaedias are updated more quickly than the hard-copy equivalents and as the changes are included in the text online, it could be said that referring to the online version is easier than using hard-copy supplements and updaters.

The databases often provide access to materials that would be hard to obtain in hard copy. Included in the Library’s Justis subscription are many Caribbean judgments and English Court of Appeal transcripts.

All of these would be difficult to find elsewhere.

The ability to search across different types of material at the same time can be done very quickly on the databases.

So if you want to search across a range of journals or law reports, it would be quicker to do this using Westlaw and Lexis rather than looking at each journal or law report separately in the Library. That said, many users prefer to read their research results – the article or law report – in hard copy.

The flexibility of searching that the databases allow can make tracking down cases much easier. We were recently asked to find the case of Re B. Very little was known about the subject matter but because the judge was known, we were able to track this down quite quickly.

In the battle between hard copy and online, I would say it is a draw. A law library of the 21st century needs to have both hard copy and electronic resources. The Inner Temple Library is fortunate to have both. An observation by a Library user sums this up perfectly: “I have had the pleasure of using Inner Temple library recently on several occasions. It is a wonderful resource and the staff are so helpful. The Internet simply cannot duplicate the quantity and quality of the material you have, or provide the knowledge of how to make the most of research materials.”

Finally, I think it is also worth remembering that the hardcopy collections are part of the Inn’s cultural heritage. The collections have been built up over many years and include items that would be hard to find anywhere else. The Library and its holdings are as valuable to the Inn, and are as much part of its fabric, as the paintings and silver collections and represent many of the values that the Inn holds dear.

Tracey Dennis Deputy Librarian 85

L

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Pegasus Scholars

NEW ZEALAND

By Julia Bartholomew, 2–3 Hind Court

I spent two-and-a-half months between September and December 2017 at Bankside Chambers in Auckland, where I was fortunate to have the opportunity to work with Lady Deborah Chambers QC, an eminent silk in the field of relationship property and trusts.

PS

Lady Chambers has appeared in numerous notable cases, including the landmark case of Clayton v Clayton in the New Zealand Supreme Court, a matrimonial property dispute involving complex trusts issues. During my time at Bankside, I assisted Lady Chambers by drafting opening submissions on behalf of her clients, the wife’s parents and trustees of a family trust, in a relationship property case in which the husband was claiming a beneficial interest in the trusts. I had the opportunity to attend court with Lady Chambers, including a case in the Family Court in which she achieved a very substantial award of interim spousal maintenance for her client (apparently, the first instance of the New Zealand court awarding spousal maintenance to a husband). I was interested to note that mediation formed a significant part of Lady Chambers’ practice, and that mediation was frequently successful. This is in contrast to my experience of family law disputes in the UK, where resort is often had to the courts without any meaningful attempt to resolve matters via mediation. Perhaps one reason for the popularity of mediation in New Zealand is not only its effectiveness but that the sometimes lengthy and cumbersome court process is unappealing. The process of discovery and disclosure in the New Zealand Family Court can be drawn out and the ability to mount appeals against both substantive and case management decisions, without the requirement to obtain leave, means that a difficult litigant has ample opportunity to obstruct the progress of a case.

The structure of Bankside Chambers was very different from chambers in England and Wales, in that each barrister practised entirely independently, managed their own practice and did their own ‘clerking’. Different members of chambers practised a range of areas, as diverse as employment law, crime, international arbitration and planning. However, in common with our system, the atmosphere in chambers was collegiate and I enjoyed several social occasions with members of chambers, including a ‘pub quiz’ that we hosted against neighbouring Shortland chambers.

The career path for a young barrister in New Zealand is very different to ours. The juniors in chambers were all employed by one or more of the ‘barristers sole’ and would only aspire to set up as a self-employed practitioner much later in their career, often after many years of experience at top solicitors’ firms, either in New Zealand or other common-law jurisdictions. New Zealand barristers are dual-qualified as solicitors, and this means that in some cases they have a considerable role in running the litigation in addition to undertaking the work we usually consider the traditional domain of counsel. There seemed to me to be considerable advantages to a system that affords longer training and the opportunity to work under the supervision of experienced barristers and solicitors for several years before embarking on self-employed practice.

86

One of the advantages of being in chambers with members practising a broad range of areas of law was that I had the opportunity to work on different types of cases (an opportunity, which, being in specialist chambers in England, I have not previously had). Some examples of the different sorts of work I was involved with are as follows: I undertook legal research for an employment law silk in relation to his client’s allegation that the other party was in contempt of court for breach of a search order. Controversially, at an earlier hearing, the Employment Court had found that it had jurisdiction to deal with contempt of court proceedings and this case was due to be the first contempt hearing before the Employment Court.

I assisted in writing submissions on a matter of statutory interpretation in an appeal against a decision of the immigration and protection tribunal.

I participated in a webinar about family law arbitration with Sir Robert Fisher QC, former high court judge and now arbitrator.

I undertook research on the law relating to conflicts of interest for barristers and solicitors for a QC who was accused by the opposing party of being conflicted because that party had once sought to instruct him in a different but related matter.

I spent a day at the District Court (equivalent to our Crown Court) with lawyers from Kayes, Fletcher, Walker, a firm which undertakes prosecution work in South Auckland.

I assisted a member of chambers in writing a paper about writing decisions and attended a conference on public decisionmaking and reason-writing.

My experience at Bankside has given me a new perspective into our own legal system, in terms of both the substantive law and procedure. Some areas of New Zealand law are the same or very similar to ours, notably trusts law. In other areas, particularly those where the law tends to adapt more readily to changes in society, New Zealand has taken a different direction.

One striking example is the Property (Relationships) Act 1976, which codifies the rights not only of married couples but also of cohabiting couples who are in de facto relationships lasting more than three years. In this country, we are yet to legislate for the consequences of relationship breakdown for non-married couples, despite recommendations by the Law Commission that such legislation is necessary.

Finally, I found an important aspect of the New Zealand legal system to be the willingness of judges to consider and be influenced by case law from different common-law jurisdictions.

I consider this to be an enriching feature of the law and one which demonstrates that despite being a relatively small jurisdiction, New Zealand’s legal system is international and outward-looking.

Julia Bartholomew

Pegasus Scholars

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

FRANCE

By Miranda Butler, Garden Court Chambers

The architecture of the European Court of Human Rights is intended to represent the Scales of Justice and the principle of transparency. Richard Rogers' design of two large cylindrical chambers containing courts separated by a central glass lobby, didn’t immediately strike my untrained eye as embodying these concepts.

Rather, what struck me as I first walked down Avenue Robertsau to start my three-month stage at the Court, funded by the Pegasus Scholarship, was its positioning.

My stage, funded by the generous support of the Pegasus Scholarship, gave me a unique opportunity to experience this international institution. I learnt more about the Convention in three months at the Court than I had in three years at the Bar. I participated in the Court’s case processing and filtering, undertaking research, and worked with Judge Eicke and the excellent lawyers in the UK’s team. The Court provides highquality training to its staff, stimulating work for its stagiaires and a welcoming environment to everyone working there.

The Court is just a few hundred yards away from the headquarters of the Council of Europe. It faces the European Parliament. It is surrounded by consulates and cars bearing diplomatic number plates. Tourists, politicians, bureaucrats and lawyers speaking different languages reinforce the multicultural atmosphere. During my time in the city, I learned that Strasbourg had been deliberately chosen to be the seat of so many European institutions because it had so often been the site of conflict in the continent. Strasbourg has changed hands multiple times, usually between France and Germany, and the impact of these changes is still seen today in its Alsatian street signs and Germanic restaurants.

The Court’s atmosphere could not be further from the tabloids' vision of a remote, elitist body concerned solely with the protection of foreign criminals who own cats. Everyone I met believed deeply in the principles of the Convention but was also acutely aware of avoiding institutional overreach. In the last two decades, the Court has sought to foster a system of rights protection at the national level. Overwhelmed by an enormous caseload, it had become clear that Strasbourg could not be the primary human rights court in Europe. Rather, domestic courts of all levels needed to learn to interpret and apply the Convention directly. My time at the Court showed me how carefully judges and lawyers alike try to ensure effective rights protection in Europe while respecting national governments and traditions.

Working at the Court, I sat with two team members from Portugal and Bulgaria and was as likely to hear Greek spoken in the corridors as English. I learnt that the UK division, in which I was working, also handles applications to the Republic of Ireland, a fact which was treated by my colleagues as surprisingly uncontroversial. This truly European institution embodies the strengths and tensions inherent in the European Convention on Human Rights: co-operation and difference, distinct national identities brought together in the cause of universal rights. It was a fascinating time to be at the Court: against the backdrop of Brexit and resurgent authoritarianism in countries like Hungary and Poland. There was a clear sense of anxiety as both Turkey and Russia ceased their contributions to the Court’s budget. But there was also a sense of determination in my colleagues, a drive to recommit to the Convention’s ideals.

The Pegasus scholarship gave me the opportunity to meet and learn from lawyers from vastly different backgrounds, to put my human rights practice in the context of the social and political changes in Europe, and to develop a nuanced understanding of how the Convention is understood and applied at the highest level. I come back to practice with a renewed energy to be part of the protection of human rights domestically (hopefully with the occasional trip to Strasbourg).

I am deeply grateful to the Pegasus Trust and Inner Temple for this opportunity and the support which they have shown me.

Miranda Butler

87

PS

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Pegasus Scholars

BERMUDA

By Emma Horner, 4 Stone Buildings

On my Pegasus Scholarship, I spent seven weeks on the beautiful and vibrant island of Bermuda. It was a privilege to be selected for the scholarship, and an opportunity to experience and understand the similarities and differences in legal practice in a common-law jurisdiction with a legal history closely tied to English law.

Bermuda is a British Overseas Territory in the Atlantic Ocean, with its capital established in 1612. English law from the 17th century stands as Bermudian law; however, it now has its own constitution and legislature. The development of English law remains an important part of the Bermudian legal system, with English common law remaining persuasive precedent in the Bermudian courts.

Bermuda is much more than a 21-mile long island in the middle of the Atlantic: it is a tropical paradise, but it is also an international hub of insurers, funds and lawyers.

PS

I spent my time with a well-known commercial law firm, sitting in the Disputes team of Appleby’s Bermuda office in Hamilton.

This placement gave me an insight into the busy and varied practice of an offshore commercial firm. During my time there, I had the opportunity to experience and assist with the team’s commercial trust litigation, large corporate insolvencies, advisory work to large international financial institutions and a local judicial review brought by a major telecommunications company. The extremely high quality of work I was able to experience was a testament to the legal profession in Bermuda, and the reputation of the firms based there.

During my time with Appleby, I was able to use and develop the skills acquired at the English Bar to assist in the preparation of court documents, skeleton arguments and written advice and to gain an insight into the practical procedures in Bermuda, with many of the procedural rules closely following the old Rules of the Supreme Court.

88

During my time, I also had an invaluable opportunity to sit with two of the judges of the Commercial Court. Justice Stephen Hellman (a former Pegasus scholar) and Chief Justice Ian Kawaley kindly invited me to marshal them in the Supreme Court of Bermuda for a number of days. Their generosity in giving up their time to discuss advocacy techniques, legal principles and the details of the cases being heard before them was an unparalleled experience to gain an insight into the views of the judiciary in a jurisdiction that often has leading English Silks appearing before them, while sitting beside the Justices on the bench gave me a chance to assess the effectiveness of differing styles of advocacy.

Everyone I met was incredibly welcoming and ensured I settled into the Bermudian way of life. I was able to get involved in all things local. A colleague invited me on a ‘raftup’, whereby a number of boats anchor up side by side in one of the many beautiful bays across the island, giving me the chance to explore the island from the crystal-clear waters. I explored the sights in St George and the Royal Dockyard, cruised on the infamous ÜberVida boat on a Friday evening and, of course, visited the well-known Horseshoe Bay and Elbow Beach, which certainly did not disappoint!

When my placement came to an end, I spent my remaining few days whizzing around the island in a Renault Twizy (a very small electric car, without any windows), taking in the sights of the colourful limestone houses, the pink sand beaches and the clear turquoise ocean before heading back to a cold, grey London winter.

I am thankful to the four Inns of Court, the Pegasus Trust, the Justices of the Supreme Court of Bermuda and my hosts Appleby for the experience, and I would highly recommend that junior barristers apply for the scholarship.

Emma Horner

Photo: © EQRoy / Shutterstock.com

Pegasus Scholars

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

USA

By Theo Barclay, Hailsham Chambers

When I set out for Washington DC on a cold October morning, I was not sure what to expect from my Pegasus Scholarship. After two years of civil practice, I hoped that this early-career sabbatical would provide engaging work and an opportunity to immerse myself in American law.

What followed was a six-week tour through America, marked by the depth and breadth of the experiences that had been arranged for me. Instead of working at one law firm, the American Inns of Court dispatched my co-scholar and me across seven different states and to hundreds of different events. We beat a frenetic path from the sober, reserved Wilmington, Delaware, to the ostentatious, scorching streets of Los Angeles, California, and back.

The American Inns of Court’s (AIC) main aim in this endeavour was to teach us about the differences between the US and the UK’s respective legal structures.

The starkest difference was immediately –obvious: the American division between individual state law and the federal system. We soon learned that America is a country with 51 legal superstructures operating in parallel.

To familiarise us with the national system, we visited federal courts in Delaware, Florida, Los Angeles and the Californian countryside. We were able to observe the country’s top judges in action before having lunch with them. Each was generous with their time and in many instances was bemused to hear of legal London’s various idiosyncrasies.

Back in Washington DC, I shadowed the Chief Judge of the Court of Federal Claims, which decides large civil cases brought against the federal government. We were able to compare notes and discuss similar British cases that I am involved in.

The AIC Committee also exposed us to a variety of federal law enforcement agencies, with security briefings from the FBI and a tour around the Pentagon being particular highlights.

The difference in formality from the federal courts was unmistakable. The judges were familiar and easy-going, and the advocates were able to dress and act more casually than their British counterparts.

We were also taken to see criminal law in action in the state courts. The vast proportion of the cases we saw involved opiates and guns – a far higher level than could be expected in the UK. I enjoyed the chance to rekindle my interest in this side of the law, which I have not encountered since my studies.

Our experiences were put into context by fascinating trips to see how the law is enforced on the streets. These included a ride-along with the Virginia State Police, trips to the police headquarters in Orlando and to a jail in Virginia.

We also visited the appellate courts. Appellate advocacy is very different in the USA and the UK. In the USA, advocates only receive about 15 minutes to argue their cases, with the key to winning a case lying in the production of definitive written submissions in advance. The judges are far keener to intervene on advocates, who are permitted about 20 seconds before the relentless stream of interruptions commences.

The culmination of the placement was a day at the Supreme Court in Washington DC observing a commercial case, having had the chance to see a preparatory moot the day before.

PS

“The difference in formality from the federal courts was unmistakable. The judges were familiar and easy-going, and the advocates were able to dress and act more casually than their British counterparts”

In the state courts of Florida, Virginia and Los Angeles, it was a somewhat unsettling experience to see jury trials in most civil cases, something entirely alien to me as a British civil practitioner. The process of jury selection was another shock. We saw the advocates ask the jury a wide array of personal questions with the aim of eliminating those likely to be unsympathetic to their respective cases.

89

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Pegasus Scholars

The death penalty remains the most internationally visible distinction between the British and American systems.

We learned from the District Attorney in Los Angeles how each decision to seek the death penalty is taken, and heard about both the human and monetary cost of prosecuting those cases. Experienced capital defenders in Orlando and Washington talked us through the variety of delaying tactics and methods that are used to defeat a capital case. We also had the chance to be walked through the defence of one of the 9/11 conspirators by his government-appointed counsel.

Over the course of the four weeks I spent in Washington DC, I met with various political figures, including Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, Solicitor General Noel Francisco, Labour Secretary Alberto Costa, Senator Chuck Schumer and several of the Supreme Court Justices.

In almost every city we visited, we were given the opportunity to address members of the local legal community. We gave presentations on the British legal system and were able to explain to those in attendance the significance of the division between barristers and solicitors, the fact that criminal barristers in the UK prosecute and defend, and the impact of Brexit on the UK’s legal system.

Sharing our experiences, learning from and debating with American lawyers is at the heart of the cross-border collaboration that the Pegasus Scholarship is designed to promote. It was hugely valuable.

PS

The scholarship was not, however, confined to the law.

Arriving in Washington one year after Donald Trump’s election and just as the first arrests were made in Special Counsel Mueller’s inquiry into that election, it was impossible not to become engrossed in American politics.

The AIC committee organised a fascinating array of political activities for us. I enjoyed guided tours of the Senate and the House of Representatives, met the chairman of the Republican National Committee and attended the influential Federalist Society’s annual convention. I was also able to experience hands-on campaigning when assisting a putative Democratic candidate for Virginia’s fifth congressional district with fundraising for her primary selection.

“Sharing our experiences, learning from and debating with American lawyers is at the heart of the crossborder collaboration that the Pegasus Scholarship is designed to promote.

It was hugely valuable”

90

Finally, visits to the CNN studios and a backstage tour of the world-famous ‘Newseum’ provided an alternative view of politics from the perspective of the press, which is rapidly adapting to the unique challenge posed by the new President.

Despite our packed schedule, there was also plenty of time for fun. Our incredibly kind hosts in Orlando arranged visits to the Kennedy Space Centre, an NBA basketball game and a trip to Harry Potter World at Universal Studios.

Undoubted highlights of the trip were the formal celebrations, to which I was honoured to be invited. The AIC’s ‘Celebration of Excellence’ in the Supreme Court building was a wonderful evening, with the great and the good of America’s legal system gathered in the courtroom and antechambers for a blacktie dinner. I was pleased to find that my head of chambers, David Pittaway QC, was in attendance representing the British Inns of Court as the Treasurer of Inner Temple.

My time in the USA proved an unparalleled experience. I am so grateful to have been chosen for the scholarship, and equally thankful for all the time and effort my volunteer hosts put into executing our schedule and answering all my questions. There were far too many wonderful people to mention all by name, but the outpouring of goodwill and kindness was extraordinary.

Theo Barclay

Pegasus Scholars

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

HONG KONG

By Kyra Cornwall, 1 Hare Court

Sitting down to write my application for the Pegasus Scholarship, I could never have imagined what a fascinating and rewarding summer it would turn out to be. Whilst I anticipated, of course, that it would be an interesting way to spend a few months doing something a little different from day-to-day life at a busy family law set, I had no idea that it would be so filled with experiences and relationships that will stay with me for years to come.

Arriving in Hong Kong, straight off the back of a hectic few weeks in chambers in England, I was immediately struck by the energy of the city, and the thought that would return regularly throughout my summer: everything seemed familiar yet so very different from life in London.

My first port of call was a month sitting with the family team at Withers Hong Kong, headed up by Sharon Ser. There I spent my time watching, learning and helping out on matrimonial finance and children disputes, particularly attending client meetings, going to court and generally assisting with finding ways through the more complex financial structures that the mixed community of Hong Kong, expatriate and Chinese families all bring in to the mix. This turned out to be something of a steep learning curve, made all the more interesting by the fact that the law in matrimonial finance is so very similar in many ways to what I deal with day-today in chambers, but in some respects so very different.

My second placement was a month at Temple Chambers with Richard Todd QC, which involved multiple hearings in the High Court and Court of Appeal, as well consultations meeting with clients and planning strategies for the cases that were coming up. Having worked at Withers for the first part of the summer, there was some continuity into the second half of my stay, as Richard acted in many of the cases that I had been helping to prepare previously. A particular highlight was a few days spent at the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre, where we held a private Financial Dispute Resolution hearing before a retired High Court judge, attempting to negotiate a final settlement in a complex big money divorce involving extended members of the family.

Finally, I spent a week marshalling with Her Honour Judge Melloy. This was, in a way, the week in which I learned the most, since it was something of a novelty to be sitting on the other side of the bench for once. As a very busy district judge sitting in the Family Court, her list was filled with cases running the full length of the spectrum – from litigants in person, who spoke neither Cantonese nor English as a first language, in dispute about their children to the very wealthy represented by multiple counsel and teams of solicitors litigating about their assets.

All in all, I found the family law world in Hong Kong to be a very welcoming and tightly knit community, many of whom I had the pleasure of getting to know over the course of the summer. There was a real camaraderie both amongst solicitors and at the Bar, and everyone I met was very keen to make further introductions and keep me involved in everything that was going on throughout July and August.

The upshot of this was that I hardly had a moment to sit still all summer. Alongside time in the office and in chambers, I found myself being introduced to so many people who then invited me to dinners, drinks, the races and the occasional hike up the Peak, along the Dragon’s Back or to the top of a stream in Sai Kung. Not only did I feel fully settled into life working in Hong Kong within a matter of days, but I also started to feel very much at home within a very short space of time.

The summer of 2017 was very interesting time to be in Hong Kong as the 20th anniversary of the handover was celebrated in my first few weeks, marked by incredible fireworks watched (in the rain) from the Peak, and later on in the summer Joshua Wong was jailed for his part in the protests in 2014, which resulted in a brief resurgence of the Umbrella Movement outside of the court building. Both of these issues featured regularly in conversations with clients, colleagues and friends, with much discussion of what was next for Hong Kong and in particular the legal world.

A description of life in Hong Kong is incomplete without comment on the spectacular views that are enjoyed from almost everywhere on the island and which never failed to blow me away. I was particularly fortunate to find myself a regular commuter on the Peak Tram, although the wildlife on the way home left something to be desired at times!

I came away from Hong Kong with a better understanding of my own practice, having had the time to step away and consider it from a different angle; the beginnings of an understanding of life at the Hong Kong Bar; friendships I will carry with me forever and a desire to get back out there again and again.

I am hugely grateful to all those who gave me the opportunity to spend the summer in such a wonderful place, and I couldn’t recommend the experience more highly to those who are considering applying in future.

Kyra Cornwall

91

PS

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Pegasus Scholars

UGANDA

By Emma Fenn, Garden Court Chambers

On a freezing January day earlier this year, I made my way to London Heathrow to begin my journey for a two-month stint working at the Ugandan High Court and Supreme Court in Kampala.

Despite the number of helpful tips, I was unsure of what to expect from Kampala or the judiciary itself. One of the first things I was to discover was that you could often walk places quicker than you could drive. There were thousands of boda boda drivers, a type of motorbike taxi carrying (sometimes many) passengers and occasionally livestock on the back; they make crossing the road a continuous hazard – even pavements are not off-limits – and soon had me reminiscing about the comparatively safe crush of a rush-hour train.

PS

A week into my scholarship, I attended a conference hosted for the entire Ugandan judiciary, convened to ensure a consistency of training and to try and promote the morale of the judiciary.

The President opened the conference in what was to be a real eye-opener into the formalities employed to open a Ugandan public event or conference: brass bands, official photographs, an ordered list of the guests present often longer than this article and a timetable of events rarely stuck to. This conference featured Mrs Justice McGowan speaking about the sentencing process in the UK and allowed the judges, based in far-flung corners of the country, time to discuss frankly the problems with the system, the changes that needed to be made and how they could address the well-known case backlog, which sees some defendants waiting up to five years on remand for trial. It was interesting to see at close-hand an entire country’s judiciary in one place talking about their willingness to challenge the status quo, and speaking openly about what things the legal system and individuals working within it are getting wrong and what the judges wanted to work hard to improve.

Following the judicial conference, I was given my main project of proposing a redraft of Uganda’s sentencing guidelines for capital offences. According to BBC News, in January 2018, Uganda has 278 prisoners on death row. It has not used the death penalty since 2005 as the President has an amnesty on executing prisoners in place. Whilst I was in Uganda, the President made a number of speeches threatening to restart executions, including in a speech made at the judicial conference. It was a real shock to see so closely the impact that had on prisoners on death row and the panic that this caused within the prisons. It also brought into sharp focus how being a barrister is a profession. My personal views, strongly held in relation to capital punishment, had to be put to one side when I was drafting sentencing guidelines dealing with offences that can be punished with death. However, it allowed me to provide a proper framework for these guidelines based on international conventions that Uganda is a signatory to. In fact, Uganda has been at the forefront of issues surrounding the death penalty in Africa in recent years. In the Susan Kigula case, it issued stringent guidance that the death penalty should only be used as a sentence in the “rarest of the rare” cases and where international obligations can be complied with. This case was ground-breaking, and its conclusions have since been mirrored by Kenya and other African jurisdictions.

My time in Kampala also brought me into close proximity with the work that Pepperdine University Law School does in Uganda. It has mediation fellows working in a pilot scheme in the family courts of Uganda and in trying to establish a plea-

92

bargaining system to try and ensure that those defendants who want to plead guilty are given an opportunity to do so.

This was fascinating given the UK’s general wariness of the US concept of plea-bargaining. In reality, this scheme has a number of overlaps with the negotiations that would take place in our domestic cases. However, it is vital to ensure that as Uganda’s plea-bargaining project evolves, some necessary rules and protections are put in place in a country where bribery and corruption within the justice system remain widespread.

Pepperdine runs prison projects each year to try and assist prisoners awaiting trial. I was the leader of one group of students in Jinja Prison. One of the most refreshing parts of my time in Uganda was the relationship that the prison staff and Governor-equivalent have with the prisoners. The prison staff acted as real advocates for prisoners, understanding well the complex emotions felt by those not knowing when their trial will take place and therefore how long they would spend in prison. The staff expressed a fascinating insight into how the prison environment is a community and consistently spoke in favour of rehabilitation. They outlined the problems caused by treating one group of offenders particularly severely in that it destabilises the entire environment when individuals have little incentive to rehabilitate and reform.

They believe this impacts disproportionately on the goals of rehabilitation within the prison in general. This was particularly the case in relation to young offenders where the prison staff were heavily focused on reintegration.

Crimes committed by offenders under 18 years old can attract a maximum sentence of three years’ imprisonment, and prison staff in Uganda were repeatedly shocked at the sentences available for child offenders in the UK and the US. It did not take me long to find out why Uganda is described as the Pearl of Africa. Luscious vegetation all year round, a beautifully temperate climate and welcoming, friendly people always keen to try and help you find your way. I fitted in all that I could alongside work, including hiking with mountain gorillas, going on safari, camping in the middle of the wilderness, monkey tracking and white-water rafting the Nile.

I was constantly surprised and rewarded by my decision to pick a Pegasus Scholarship in Kampala rather than a placement working within one of the more developed legal systems. I am incredibly thankful to the Pegasus Trust, the Chief Justice Bart Katureebe and Andrew Khaukha, the Technical Advisor to the Judiciary in Uganda, for their invaluable support and warm welcome to Kampala and for the opportunity.

Emma Fenn

Pegasus Scholars

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

USA

By Aadhithya Anbahan, St Ives Chambers

When I boarded my Virgin Atlantic flight, bound for Washington DC back in October of 2017, I can honestly say that I had no idea what to expect from my Pegasus Scholarship to the USA. I consoled myself that, worstcase scenario, this would be a six-week frolic to the USA and the chance to spend some more time in a country that I have always enjoyed visiting. What I was not expecting was six weeks packed with the most interesting legal activities, surrounded by the kindest, most informative people I have had the privilege of meeting in my life. It will come as no surprise to those who have read reports from the numerous previous scholars who write equally fondly of their time in the US, but for me the experience was as surprising as it was special.

My co-scholar and I spent an incredible six weeks embarking upon a whirlwind tour of the States, from the crisp fall leaves of Delaware and Virginia to the sultry climes of Florida and California. Each day was packed with events and activities, carefully arranged and cultivated towards our own law practices and outside interests.

Washington DC, the promised land for those of us with even a modicum of political interest, did not disappoint in any way. We were fortunate enough to have rented an apartment in the Dupont Circle/Adams Morgan area and being a stone’s throw from all the sites of DC certainly served to drive home how incredible the experience was. Walking past the White House, through Lafayette Square with the Capitol and the Washington Monument persistently on the horizon will be a view I will always treasure and eternally miss, now that I am back home. There is nothing quite like being in the middle of a city so steeped in history – one that serves as a monument both individually and in parts. There was also the added bonus, on our last night, of nearly being run down by the presidential motorcade, which truly satisfied the House of Cards fan within me.

Our three weeks in DC brought with it days spent with our hosts at the Department of Justice, meeting a whole range of people, from the Solicitor General to litigators from the National Security Team. We were fortunate enough to meet with people from Congress, Senatorial staff and Supreme Court Justices, in addition to watching an array of litigation in cases that spanned the importation of big game to the criminal trial of the Benghazi bomber. A personal highlight was a day spent at the Pentagon discussing an array of legal and quasi-legal political matters with Generals from the Judge Advocate General Unit, former ambassadors and military death penalty litigators. The incredible opportunity

to hear an appellate case before the US Supreme Court was only topped by a private tour of the courthouse and meeting with Associate Justice Gorsuch thereafter.

We also spent two days in the first state of Delaware amongst the Chancery courts and State Supreme Court hearings largely relating to corporate law, leading my co-scholar and I, along with our host, to spend the vast majority of a two-hour drive passionately debating the grammatical interpretation of a comma within a contractual clause.

We then spent an exceptional week hosted by the Orlando chapter of the George C Young Inn of Court, sitting in on an array of criminal, civil and regulatory proceedings.

Highlights included meeting with the teams at Channel 6 news and discussing issues in media law alongside visiting with the FBI and SWAT teams based in out of Orlando.

In Los Angeles and Long Beach, we spent significant time in the criminal courts. The ability to see all aspects of courtroom advocacy, particularly the unfamiliar voir dire process, was riveting. A personal highlight was a visit to NBC Universal Studios, where we had the opportunity to meet with the global head of litigation for the studio before being given a behind-the-scenes tour.

Given the volume of things we did, highlighting is rather difficult, but in DC visiting Jefferson’s Monticello, a private tour of CNN Studios and tickets to the Mean Girls musical preview have to be amongst my favourites. In Orlando, a final night consisting of a fantastic dinner at the Palm at Hard Rock followed by an impromptu late-night visit to Universal Studios theme park for Halloween Horror Nights will go down as one of my favourite evenings ever. The amazing private tour of the Queen Mary ship in Long Beach also deserves to be mentioned.

In DC, Delaware, Orlando and LA, the opportunity to address members of the legal community, in audiences spanning from over 90 people to more intimate groups, was a real privilege. These wonderful discussions and debates amongst legal professionals across a wide range of disciplines and jurisdictions really served to hammer home why programmes like the Pegasus Scholarship remain so important in our ever-shrinking world.

The friendships and connections forged as a Pegasus Scholar are simply priceless and a wonderful and unexpected boon from the programme. The Pegasus Scholarship was an extraordinary experience for me and one I will carry very close to my heart throughout my future at the Bar. Aadhithya Anbahan

93

PS

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Pegasus Scholars

AUSTRALIA

By Sophie Beesley, Old Square Chambers

Between March and May 2018, I spent ten weeks working in and around Sydney, Australia, with the support of a Pegasus Scholarship. I worked with the Aboriginal Legal Service and with barristers practising civil law in the city.

The aim of the Pegasus Scholarship is to help those who benefit to become more internationally minded, to learn about the practical working of the common-law system in another country and forge links between lawyers around the world.

I was able to achieve all these aims.

I experienced civil and criminal practice in New South Wales in the local and divisional courts, in the city and in regional areas. Much of what I was doing was familiar, in that I drafted pleadings, representations, appeals and submissions. I also instructed counsel in trial hearings. But what was very different was the context. Given the commonality of language, I had expected legal practice, and the social and cultural environment in which it operates, to be similar to that of the UK. I discovered that both were very different.

PS

I quickly became aware of the very significant overrepresentation of the Aboriginal community in the criminal court system and the social issues around this: younger family members pressured into providing alibis for relatives, health problems such as foetal alcohol syndrome, prescription opiates leading to ICE addictions. Although the UK has comparable issues, I was surprised how rarely community sentences were used, the emphasis in sentencing invariably being on punishment rather than rehabilitation or restorative activities.

I became particularly familiar with the relatively new (and controversial) concept of ‘show cause’ offences where the burden of proof in relation to bail is reversed and to achieve bail a defendant must show why their detention is not justified. This often leads to defendants spending lengthy periods in custody, often without effective representation.

On the civil side, cases are funded and litigated differently. For example, clinical negligence claimants rarely have access to legal insurance and are therefore at much higher risk of having to pay the costs of their cases themselves. This very significantly affects who pursues such cases, the quality of evidence that can be gathered and how far cases progress. Cases invariably felt ‘defendant-minded’ and it can be very difficult to find medical legal experts to support claimants. Cost budgeting and one-way qualified cost shifting are unfamiliar concepts. Courts are more relaxed in relation to non-compliance with orders. More cases are litigated through to trial. Litigation generally feels more aggressive with far less emphasis on joint settlement meetings and mediations.

Away from formal practice, I found practitioners to be welcoming and open. I met many solicitors, barristers and judges and formed a strong network of contacts. Everyone I met was particularly keen to talk about practice in the UK, similarities and differences, with lessons learnt and ideas generated on both sides. For example, I spent time with Kevin Connor SC at Maurice Byers Chambers. We shared ideas about how to maximise losses in personal injury and clinical negligence cases, and I showed him how I build schedules of loss in MS Excel. I helped him to implement this time-saving technique in one of his cases. In return, I learnt how Kevin is using technology to assist remote working between solicitors, barristers, medical experts and lay clients. Kevin also explained his recent focus on letters of instruction to medical experts with the aim of improving evidence and written reports.

Life in chambers is also very different to the UK. Sydney chambers do not have traditional clerks with barristers managing their own diaries, billings, bookings, fee negotiations etc. This gave me a renewed sense of appreciation for my own clerks and how much time they release for fee-earning work. In Sydney, perhaps because of the lack of clerks, barristers appear to operate much more independently, with the collective personality of the chambers much less clear. Clients and work are not often shared, and few joint marketing opportunities are undertaken.

This experience has also given me much personal learning and development. For example, before I left, although looking forward to the trip, I was concerned about the effect of the time away on my UK practice and whether solicitors would ‘desert’ me. In the event, this was absolutely not the case. Not only is my diary still full, but solicitors seem to find my willingness to try practice in another jurisdiction appealing.

This, added to the experience of living and practising in another country, has given me more confidence. It has shown me that being a good lawyer is not enough and that clients are looking for personal as well as professional strengths. They are looking for someone they like and trust, who has interests and is a person in the world, and someone who shares their values.

The Pegasus Scholarship has given me more than I ever expected. Since returning to the UK, I have taken on pro-bono cases arising from the Manchester Arena terrorist attack and have begun researching opportunities to volunteer for a refugee charity that works with asylum seekers being held in the Australian detention facilities in Papua New Guinea.

I am very grateful to the Pegasus Scholarship for the opportunity it provided. It has given my practice new depths, understandings and insights, which are already influencing my future.

Sophie Beesley

94

Pegasus Scholars

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

INDIA

By Nia Gowman, 30 Park Place, Cardiff

“ We can’t change the direction of the wind, but we can adjust the sails.”

Indian proverb

As I embarked on my journey to India on an outgoing Pegasus Trust and Kapila and Nirmal Hingorani Foundation scholarship, I hoped that the experience would provide me with an insight into how other legal jurisdictions operate within the context of their unique historical, social and cultural identity. My Indian experience exceeded that hope.

Being submerged in the legal world at a period of time which saw the promulgations of the landmark Supreme Court ‘triple talaq’ and ‘right to privacy’ decisions is reflective of my experiences and the level of empowerment I felt through my associations with those individuals working tirelessly to effect positive change in the country.

I arrived in Delhi at 5 am on Saturday morning and exited the airport to a wall of heat and commotion. I navigated my way through the sea of people, dodging further offers of “Taxi?” to meet my driver, who welcomed me with a warm smile and an air-conditioned ride. The thrilling journey from the airport provided an insight into the beautiful chaos that is Delhi. Rules of the road were ignored, forcing emergency stops within inches of rickshaws, cows, monkeys, road vendors and a troupe of rollerbladers – all set to a score of deafening car horns. Whilst Delhi’s innate madness excited me, my heart felt conflicted, as I was struck by the sights of extreme poverty and homelessness lining the streets.

Later that day, I visited the Supreme Court of India and my wonderful hosts at the Kapila and Nirmal Hingorani Foundation.

I enjoyed meeting Dr Aman Hingorani, Dr Shweta Hingorani and Priya Hingorani, and we sipped green tea as we discussed the work of their incredible parents in the sphere of public interest litigation and the placements the Foundation had planned for me for the next eight weeks. The programme was flexible and varied, offering an in-depth overview of the Indian legal system, including observation bolstered by practical experience of research, drafting and fieldwork.

The first week was spent in the Delhi High Court with the office of Rahul Mehra, Standing Counsel for the Government of Delhi. I reviewed case files and made notes on the applicable points of law and submissions that I would make on each case.

I then discussed my views with the advocate responsible for the case and attended court to observe him presenting his arguments. The High Court was a hive of activity, with in excess of 50 advocates sitting in most courtrooms at any given time and hundreds more congregating in the waiting areas. Judges often had unimaginable caseloads exceeding 100 cases per day, which often left no more than five minutes for each party to make brief and direct submissions. On my final day, I was fortunate to observe the Acting Chief Justice of the High Court presiding over lengthier cases, including cases relating to direct foreign investment in Indian airlines and the infamous 1984 anti-Sikh riots. It was a joy to watch Justice Mittal, an intelligent, compassionate and empowering woman, excelling in a largely male-dominated field. The placement provided an incredible introduction to the Indian legal system, a system that remains heavily influenced by India’s British colonialist past. It struck me that whilst there are many similarities between the Indian and British systems in terms of language, infrastructure and legal concepts, the law is in fact implemented and practised very differently in both jurisdictions. I found myself questioning whether the imposition of a British system upon such a socially and culturally distinct population adequately serves the Indian people. It is a complex question and I remain undecided.

95

PS

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Nia Gowman, Pegasus Scholars

I spent the next three weeks with the Delhi Commission for Women (DCW), a statutory body of the government of Delhi steered by the astonishing activist Swati Maliwal, which was constituted to investigate and examine all matters relating to the safety and security of women. The DCW has a broad mandate and I was able to observe and participate in all of its initiatives.

Delhi’s red-light district, where we spent the day issuing 125 summonses to brothel owners. There are reportedly over 15,000 women living in the brothels on GB Road, many of whom were trafficked, together with over 1,000 children. The living conditions in these multi-storey brothels are grossly inhumane, and it was encouraging to see that the DCW were focusing their efforts to support the women and effect change.

I first assisted at the DCW’s first points of contact, ie the helpline and help desk, which offer telephone and walk-in counselling and advice services for women in distress. In certain circumstances the DCW’s 24-hour mobile help desk will be dispatched to assist in emergency or crisis situations. I went on multiple mobile help desk missions and assisted counsellors as they provided advice and support to the women upon arrival. Where there had been an allegation of rape, the DCW’s specialist rape crisis cell assisted complainants with practical, legal and emotional support during the legal process. It was often the case that despite reassurance, women did not want to report matters to the police due to fear of retaliation and social stigmatization. The experience served to demonstrate the deeprooted cultural and social factors influencing behaviours and the challenges faced by those attempting to encourage change.

During my time with the DCW, I assisted with research and drafting on particular files of concern. I undertook research into the legality and functioning of a detention centre used to detain foreign nationals prior to deportation. I drew upon reports of those detained together with legal research and my own experience in order to draft recommendations to the Home Minister of India on behalf of Swati Maliwal. I also undertook research into the management and condition of an old-age home in Delhi and drafted a notice requiring the Minister of Social Welfare to take certain action to remedy concerns identified following a visit to the home. Of further particular note is an Order for Compensation that I drafted to compensate a five-year-old rape victim for her ordeal.

I also attended one of the 50 Mahila Panchayats operating across Delhi. The MP is a community collective which runs meetings designed to increase legal awareness, to empower community participation in dispute resolution and to spread messages pertinent to women living in the community.

The meeting was attended by 400 women and involved motivational and informative speeches by the DCW, local NGOs and local counsellors, the gathering of grievances from the women, verbal advice if appropriate and the referral of grievance for further action by the DCW if necessary.

PS

In my fifth week, I spent time with the Delhi’s branch of the All India Democratic Women’s Association, an independent left-orientated women’s organization with stated aims of achieving democracy, equality and women’s emancipation.

I was fortunate to meet its unit president, Maimoona Mollah, who spoke encouragingly about their work. I also attended with members of the AIDWA to encourage membership. At the end of my fifth week, I attended the Delhi Family Courts and was fortunate to observe Priya Hingorani in action.

Further to the above, the DCW has a quasi-judicial role and has the power to issue witness summonses, request evidence and disclosure, and investigate grievances through hearings.

Of particular note was my visit to Garstin Bastion Road,

“In my fifth week, I spent time with the Delhi’s branch of the All India Democratic Women’s Association, an independent left-orientated women’s organization with stated aims of achieving democracy, equality and women’s emancipation”

96

Pegasus Scholars

The sixth week saw time spent with Indira Jaising and her NGO, the Lawyers Collective. Indira Jaising is a Senior Advocate and prominent human rights activist who was ranked 20th of the 50 Greatest Leaders of the World by Fortune magazine in 2018. The Lawyers Collective is an NGO promoting human rights issues, particularly issues relating to women’s rights, HIV, tobacco, LGBT rights and parliamentary corruption in India.

The focus of my week was to complete work on the case of Tushar Gandhi v Union of India. The case involves a petition by the great-grandson of Mahatma Gandhi for the Union of India to take stern action to stop violence by cow vigilante groups across India. I assisted in compiling a chronology of dates of incidents and undertook legal research into whether there was any legal basis legitimizing the acts of the vigilante groups. At the end of the week, Indira Jaising presented her arguments at a hearing before the Supreme Court and successfully persuaded the court that the issue was not confined to one of law and order and that the Centre was required to take action.

The final two weeks were spent with Supreme Court and High Court Advocate Manish Bishnoi. Mr Bishnoi has developed an excellent reputation for representing parties involved in significant commercial disputes. Over the course of the two weeks, I conducted research toward Mr Bishnoi’s busy caseload and observed him presenting arguments in both the High and Supreme courts. Of particular note was research I undertook on the interpretation of the transitional provisions of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act 1973 and its predecessor, the Foreign Exchange Management Act 1999, regarding the appropriate appellate forum. A niche

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

point of law, I was successful in locating a case which was supportive of Mr Bishnoi’s client’s position. During the second week, I focused my efforts on a contract case involving monetary claims against the National Highway Authority of India by the contractor employed to complete works on a highway. After contributing research to support the client, I attended an arbitration hearing in respect of the case.

Aside from taking advantage of all that Delhi had to offer in terms of work opportunities, in my spare time I enjoyed playing the tourist, socializing with new friends and seeking out new experiences. I joined a local yoga class, visited the sights, enjoyed the incredible local cuisine, attended celebrations, and attended cultural evenings consisting of exhibitions, Sufi music concerts and dance recitals. I also took advantage of my weekends, taking overnight buses and trains to visit Rishikesh, Varanasi and Amritsar. Following eight weeks in Delhi, such was my love for the country, I opted to stay in India for a further four weeks of adventure, my journey taking me through Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Goa and Kerala.

My Indian experience was wonderful, and it is difficult to articulate how immensely grateful I am to the Pegasus Trust and the Kapila and Nirmal Hingorani Foundation for gifting me such a life-changing opportunity. I am thankful to those who contributed to my experience. It was an honour to engage with such charismatic personalities who work passionately and tirelessly to inspire positive change in India. I have made lifelong friends and have developed a deep love for the country.

I hope to return soon to continue my Indian journey.

Nia Gowman

PS

97

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Master Brooke

MASTER BROOKE A tribute by Dr Christopher Brooke given at the funeral service for Master Brooke at St Luke’s Church, Chelsea on 20 February 2018

C

Henry “labour[ed] night and day”, as we’ve just been singing.

He didn’t work hard because he had to – and we know that because he went on working for more a decade after he ‘retired’ (with ‘retired’ in inverted commas). He didn’t work to get away from his family, because he liked them, and they liked him – more on this a little later. I don’t think he was motivated primarily by guilt, either, relating to the privileged life that he led. And he wasn’t really working as a way of distracting himself from the anxieties we all have from time to time about whether anything means anything at all.

Karl Marx – who once lived a few minutes’ walk from here, on Anderson Street – says that when we work on our own projects (these are his words), “the result is the self-realization and objectification of the subject, therefore real freedom, whose activity is precisely labour”. That’s a bit obscure, to be sure, but it gets at something important. Henry worked hard because he wanted to, because that’s the kind of person that he had disciplined himself to be, because he had worthwhile things to be getting on with, because he was the right person to be getting on with those things, and because it was the best use of the time that had been given to him.

It was not all work, even if it mostly was. There was also a lifelong interest in cricket. This stretched from the War, when the ordinary rhythms of domestic and international competition had been suspended, avidly reading his older brother Peter’s copy of Plum Warner’s Cricket Between Two Wars about matches that had been played well before he was born, through to visits to Lord’s with his grandson Wilf more than 70 years later; with a lot of volumes of Wisden in between – first of all, as birthday presents from his godfather and then, for 30 years, from his father-in-law, another Wilfrid. Henry had himself been a decent middle-order batsman, once upon a time, though with a bad habit of playing across the line. An impossible ball he faced from the Middlesex leg-spinner R V C Robins that pitched at a right angle was one that he remembered for the rest of his life. On his most recent birthday, he wrote on his blog that he was 81 not out; but he wasn’t able to add to his score before – as he himself would have put it, we can be quite sure of this – Old Father Time removed the bails.

But apart from cricket, and walking in the Alps for his summer holidays, Henry didn’t really have hobbies. There was an experiment with keeping tropical fish in the early 1990s. But the piscine mortality rate was high, and the tank was never reassembled after the move to Chelsea. Nor was he especially good around the house. On one occasion when Biddy was visiting her relatives in Newcastle, Caroline remembers finding him at home alone looking for the stopcock: he was trying to use the washing machine and was working 98

through the manual from the beginning – except that its opening pages contained the installation instructions. When he went into hospital last month, he was advised that when he came out, he shouldn’t do the hoovering for a bit. Biddy said she thought that there was not much danger of that.

One of the curiosities about Henry’s occasional stays in hospital is that he didn’t mind eating hospital food. In part, this was generational: he belonged to the cohort who grew up with wartime rationing and post-war austerity. The food in those years was often appalling but it meant that those who had experienced it could eat anything after that uncomplainingly (though his sister Honor has a memory of quite a small Henry announcing that “I will not eat marrow on this or any other day!”). But it was more because he was so very good at being institutionalised. His life passed from one kind of institution to another: from prep school and public school, to National Service with the Royal Engineers, to Balliol College, to the Bar, and then on to the judiciary (with its Judges’ Lodgings) – and he generally flourished in these settings. His association with Balliol bookended his adult life: he was four years there as an undergraduate student of classical literature, ancient history and philosophy; and for the last four years of his life, he was an Honorary Fellow of the College, a status he very much enjoyed – though he would worry when he turned up to events there that he would be old and deaf and dull and that nobody would want to talk to him; and then he would always have a whale of a time, and come away buzzing, though there was also the occasion that he fell down the steps of the Hall after a long dinner and banged his head, and had to spend the night in A&E at the John Radcliffe. In later years, he was in and out of the Chelsea and Westminster, and he ended his life, appropriately enough, in another Great British institution – Bart’s Hospital Ward 1C – in the generous care of just the kind of dedicated public servant that, in a somewhat different register, he had been himself.

Henry drew a lot from the institutions that structured his life, but he never wanted them to remain as they were. A committee for Henry was an engine-room for driving change. He chaired the Bar’s IT committee, its race relations committee, the Ethnic Minorities Advisory Committee of the Judicial Studies Board and the Law Commission – in all four cases pushing to modernise aspects of the archaic legal world. His grandest monument on the technological side is the BAILII website, a fantastic resource for lawyers, students, but above all for citizens; and he said that he thought his 1993 Kapila Lecture, which explored strategies for overcoming racial and other cultural prejudices in court, was the best thing that he ever wrote. In retirement – again, imagine the inverted commas – he worked for Prisoners of Conscience, the Public Law

Celebrate the life

Project, the Harrow Law Centre, the Free Representation Unit, JUSTICE, the Bingham Centre, Prisoners Abroad, Zacchaeus 2000, the Slynn Foundation, Law for Life, Peace Brigades International and for the Republic of Albania, which made him – splendidly – a Knight of the Order of Skanderbeg.

But he was also, of course, a judge – and a good judge, too.

His opinion in the conjoined twins case is already a classic and much commented-upon piece of judicial reasoning. His judgment in Greene v Associated Newspapers is an important defence of the freedom of the press. And if some of his finest judgments, such as that in the case of the Luton girl who wanted to wear her jilbab to school, were overturned by the House of Lords, this in part owed to the fact that Henry believed – admirably – that the Human Rights Act made more stringent demands on routine administrative procedure than they did. An Oxford law don recently told me that he used the cases where Brooke LJ was reversed in his teaching (these are his words) “because law students tend to assume that when the House of Lords overturns the Court of Appeal it always had the better arguments, whilst your father’s outstanding and humane judgments provide a nice antidote”.

Henry was careful of course to keep out of party politics while he was on the bench. But there was nevertheless a distinctive and unusual party-political trajectory. He began his life as the

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

been training as a Mediator and was putting the various things he’d been learning into practice, and so started leaning forwards, making eye contact and nodding, whenever anyone spoke to him. It was very disconcerting, and Biddy didn’t like it one bit, but happily things quickly reverted to normal.

Jane recalls that when she was first going out with Michael, the four of them went together to a pub in Pimlico, and she found herself thinking that she hoped that Mike would look at her in 30 years’ time the way that Henry was then looking at Biddy. “I was bats about Biddy when I met her,” he once said, not that many years ago, and then he added, “I still am.”

Henry liked going to parties – other people’s, and his own.

In his last dozen years, these latter were quinquennial birthday affairs – at 70, at Brooks’s Club in St James’s, which also marked his retirement and 40th wedding anniversary; at 75, in a pavilion at London Zoo, just along from the emu; and at 80, in the gorgeous Conservatory at the Barbican Centre. Around that 80th birthday, he was systematically disentangling himself from his various organisational commitments, resigning and retiring from things, as patron, chair or trustee. Nevertheless, in his final 18 months or so, he continued to work, and he really poured himself into Willy Bach’s Commission on Access to Justice for the Fabian Society.

It was just the right job for him, at just the right time: he still had the energy, it was stuff he could mostly do from his desk

“ A committee for Henry was an engine-room for driving change” child of not one but two Conservative politicians – and later was the brother of a third. Peter was reminiscing to me about Henry’s participation in the public inquiry concerning ward boundary changes in Camden in the mid-1960s, remarking that “he had not in my view crossed the Rubicon at that stage”. But by the early 1980s, he was active in the SDP–Liberal Alliance, as it then was, in Richmond; and much later he was part of the mass influx of new members into the Labour Party following the 2015 general election, perhaps the least likely Corbynista of them all. Did his politics change? I’m not sure they did, much; rather, the kind of commitment to human rights and the rule of law that Henry took so seriously was increasingly unfashionable amongst the political class, with Home Office ministers, in particular, so frequently a disgrace; and that commitment ended up with him in a more leftish place than he otherwise might ever have chosen to occupy. One of his final campaigns was in support of the North Kensington Law Centre, in the aftermath of the terrible fire at Grenfell Tower, just three miles away from this Church; and only last October, he spoke at a Labour Party Conference fringe meeting at the Brighton Holiday Inn – really not something that I ever thought he would do.

Henry’s home life was contented. He loved his four children, and we loved him in return. He loved his seven grandchildren, too – though I have to report that he used to behave very badly in the café that the youngest, five-year-old Lucy runs, trying to order off-menu, and making complaints about the speed of service, so much so that Lucy occasionally (and correctly) had to ban him. He loved in particular his three daughtersin-law – Julie, Jane and Josephine – and his son-in-law, Adam, because they would listen to what he had to say with far greater care than did his own, highly talkative offspring. Above all, he loved Biddy – lovely Biddy – who has lost her mate of more than half a century. Henry and Biddy really were the most tremendous advertisement for what married life might be. One rare disharmonious moment came when Henry had

at home, it gave him material to stick on his website, and it was all in the service of a cause that was so dear to him. It’s not too much at all, I think, to say that with the publication of the Bach Report, Henry’s life-work really was done.

But there was one last thing. Given his Stakhanovite work habits and meticulous attention to detail, you will not be at all surprised to hear that Henry left careful instructions, “to be opened only in the event of my death” and dated the day before he went into hospital. Mortality had been on his mind.

So many people have remarked on his kindness since he died, and this was his final act of kindness to his own family.

We wouldn’t have known what to do. This is the funeral he wanted – here at St Luke’s, where Charles Dickens married Kate Hogarth in April 1836 (and at the end of his life, he had been writing essays for his blog on legal themes in Dickens’s novels).

And, with what I thought a P G Wodehousian touch, he left us what he would have called “short notes” on various clergymen he knew, ranking them in order of suitability for conducting the service – and I’m pleased to say that the Reverend Canon Nick Sagovsky, here with us today, was top of the pops. Our final hymn, ‘Guide Me, O Thou Great Redeemer’, was Henry’s specific request, in honour of his own mother, a Welshwoman.

Now, though, it is time for me to sum up, deliver a judgment, and pray that it won’t be overturned in the divine Court of Appeal. In the early 1980s, as many people here will know, Henry served as Counsel to the Sizewell B nuclear reactor public inquiry. It went on for a very long time, and when it ended, the commemorative sweatshirt – in honour of the idiosyncratic way in which people often spoke at that inquiry – carried the slogan, “I’ve acceptably met the criteria.”

And, my goodness, Henry did.

The Rt Hon Sir Henry Brooke CMG, 19 July 1936– 29 January 2018.

Dr Christopher Brooke

99

C

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

The Running of a world-class Choir

THE RUNNING OF A WORLD-CLASS CHOIR By the Director of Music

TC

Musically on a par with the choirs of England’s cathedrals and Oxbridge chapels, the Choir of the Temple Church is a very different animal. With no residential choir school, there is a different rhythm to its liturgical week – an imposed structure of short after-school rehearsals which are the pulse of this choral foundation. It is a pattern which brings virtue out of necessity and presents rewards as well as challenges. In 2013 (following 23 years and three successive posts at Rochester Cathedral), I stepped quietly into the resting place of the Knights Templar, took in the spacious church and newly refurbished four-manual Harrison organ, and became Director of Music here. What sets the musical regime apart from collegiate institutions?

The big difference is that the boys come from all over London, there’s no one school that we collaborate with, though we do work closely with the (neighbouring) City of London School for Boys. An aspiration of the boys who come here is that they will get a place there aided by a financial scholarship from the Temple Church, which has to be spent on education. The scholarship is generous: equivalent to two-thirds of the fees at the City of London School. A further advantage to attending CLS is that it is just a 15 minute walk away along the Thames. There is no onus on choristers to go there though; indeed, if a boy attends a state school, all his scholarship money is paid into a bank account for him to draw on when he heads off to university.

Interest in choristerships continues to be healthy, and last year advertising proved unnecessary. Following a successful

100

voice trial, boys join aged seven or eight, though they can audition as early as they like. The probationary period lasts 18 months. That lengthy probation also means that if any are unsuited to life as a chorister, or if their parents find that the support they need to provide just isn’t practicable, that emerges sooner rather than later; it is a major commitment. When we audition the boys, we are really auditioning the parents at the same time. Missing a rehearsal here is a big issue.

Choristers sing at Choral Mattins each Sunday morning in term time. But to assume that this is all that they do would be misleading. The Temple Church Choir exists to serve the Inns of Court and there are regular memorial services for past members (around 12 a year). There is also a choral evensong on Wednesdays. The boys sing at this on a number of key days in the liturgical calendar: Candlemas, Ash Wednesday, Ascension Day, the feasts of St Luke and St Peter, plus Christmas carol services. Other Wednesday evensongs and Holy Week and Easter liturgies are shared with the Temple Singers – the regular choirmen plus professional sopranos singing the top line. Concerts form a regular focus for the choir with at least two performances a year, sometimes recorded, either at the Temple Church or at other venues, such as St John’s Smith Square.

This regime is supported by four weekly rehearsals on Monday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday from 4.25pm to 5.15 pm.

Pre-probationers attend two of these and, at the same time, receive musical tuition from the Assistant Director of Music, Greg Morris, and from current Organ Scholar, Rosie Vinter.

After some time they become full probationers, attending all

The Temple Church

four rehearsals and sitting in choir in a cassock. After around 18 months, they are admitted to a full choristership and are put ‘on contract’, and start to receive their scholarship money. Fifty minutes of rehearsal time four times a week isn’t much in reality, I admit; my [cathedral] colleagues would think this is a complete dream of a job with just one service a week – but it’s really not! It isn’t long to achieve the standard that we aspire to. That includes theory and vocal training, learning new pieces, keeping the repertoire up.

When I was at Rochester, the 8.00 am rehearsal meant the boys were fresh and without the baggage of the school day. At the Temple, they arrive tired – frazzled from travelling on the Tube to get here in a hurry – so in the first five minutes I aim to steer them into a frame of mind ready for 20 minutes of really focused rehearsal… by which time they are all whacked and can’t wait to go home! It’s amazing what we do manage based on those challenges.

A choristership at Temple offers a different experience to those at St Paul’s Cathedral or Westminster Abbey.

There is no boarding, and I think that this is attractive to many parents today. I also try to keep Saturdays free so the boys can enjoy other hobbies and activities. The big question is ‘Does it take longer to build rapport and a sense of teamwork than in a more cloistered environment’?

Yes, it does take longer and, for me, it is the heartbeat of the choir to build (a team). Because they don’t board, the boys are freer to do other things; some attend the junior department of the Royal Academy of Music and work at their instruments. They tend to be more energised; they are quite extrovert; they look forward to coming here and seeing their friends. Honestly, I don’t think I have found any boy resenting the commitment of belonging to this choir, whereas I had seen that occasionally in a boarding environment.

A clear advantage for the Temple and choristers alike is the flexibility offered for the length of tenure boys can expect.

At Westminster Abbey, for instance, boys will leave aged 13, often with the very best year of their voices still to come, and then Harrow or Eton will reap the benefit of all that training as they sing treble for another year. Here, I can keep the boys

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

singing as long as I want until vocally the time is right for them to stop; and their scholarships will continue until then.

Building the esprit de corps among the choristers was one of my primary aims. We have arranged a training weekend at Felden Lodge (a conference centre and HQ of the Boys’ Brigade in Hemel Hempstead). It is residential, there is no performance, but we learn and have fun. There are team- building games; we work on singing, technique, repertoire, acting…performancerelated training. It’s good for boys who have not been away from home before as preparation for going on a choir tour.

Overseas tours are now part of our ambitions. In 2016, we took just the boys of the choir, promoting them as an entity. It was a challenge to take them to Australia and Singapore without the ‘jet engines’ that the power and skill of the men provide, especially if the boys are tired. The boys had to take responsibility for all the repertoire, often in three or four parts, with the dangers of jet lag affecting voices. It was a great success. We reached out to other choirs and connected with local communities. In October 2018, the boys will tour Washington singing at the Library of Congress and New York at St Thomas’s Fifth Avenue.

Recording is important as well – for the choir it is an opportunity to finesse their repertoire and it is a calling card and ‘window’ into the quality and excellence of the Inns. A survey of the liturgical year for treble voices, and including the Poulenc Quatre motets with men’s voices, is due out in September. I found his inspiration in the approach of the late Allan Wicks who was organist at Canterbury Cathedral. In their recordings, despite some technical infelicities, the innate musicality that Wicks conjures from the boys’ ensemble is extraordinary. When we recently recorded the Purcell anthem ‘Evening Hymn’ with the six senior boys here, I felt that we achieved that too.

We recently started a youth choir and piloted a concert to include girls from City of London School for Girls. Instilling in children a love of music and excellence is what gives me inspiration to carry on.

Roger Sayer Director of Music, June 2018

101

TC

Irish at the English Inns of Court

IRISH AT THE ENGLISH INNS OF COURT

By Dr Colum Kenny BCL BL from an address to the Inner Temple History Society on 16 March 2018 Down the centuries, many Irish have been members of the Inner Temple. Indeed, between 1542 and 1885 the law obliged anyone intent on practising at the Bar in Dublin first to attend a London Inn of Court.

Anglo-Normans who from 1169 invaded Ireland found a long-standing system of Gaelic or ‘Brehon’ law already established there. Brehon law schools taught native, civil and canon law, and their students learnt music and other arts.

An address to an Irish law student, written in verse about 1290, advises him, among other things, to “learn every old precedent here… It is on its premise you will best give judgment.”

Some Gaelic law schools survived into the 16th century.

A number of the old Anglo-Norman families, including Nettervilles, D’Arcys, Barnewalls and Plunkets, became closely associated with the administration of common law in parts of Ireland: “To learne which laws”, some men from Ireland had (it was said in 1421) been admitted to the English Inns of Court.

A

Such lawyers founded King’s Inns in 1541, in a confiscated Dominican friary on the banks of the River Liffey in Dublin. However, London was unwilling to permit this new society to enjoy the same status as an English Inn. Thus, the Statute of Jeofailles of 1542 obliged persons wishing to plead in the King’s Courts in Dublin to spend time first residing each year at one of the English Inns of Court. The number of years was to be set by order, declining from five in the 17th century to two by the mid 19th. The statute had an unarticulated socializing, cultural or ideological purpose.

However, during almost the entire 343 years that it was in force, no course of systematic legal education in London was specified for persons intending to practise at the Irish Bar. Roman Catholics came to be entirely excluded from the Bar. Meanwhile, during the 17th century Irish Protestants, and Irish Catholics when allowed, made their way to the Inns of Court in London. Unlike Dublin, London then had no university of its own, but some English writers were now referring to the Inns of Court and Chancery as ‘colleges’ and bracketing such ‘colleges’ with various non-legal institutions in London as part of an imagined ‘third university of England’ that might be more secular in its curriculum than Oxford or Cambridge. Yet Irish Catholics going over to the Inns continued to find themselves playing cat and mouse with anti-Papist recusancy laws. Those travelling included future influential lawyers such as Patrick Darcy and Nicholas Plunkett.

102

For his part, the protestant Maurice Eustace, future Lord Chancellor of Ireland, was admitted to Lincoln’s Inn in 1619. He was advised by the Lord Deputy of Ireland, Oliver St John, Viscount Grandison, that (as Eustace later recalled) “the study of the Law was like the letter Y written in the Roman hand which was sharp and narrow in the first entrance ‘sed requies in vertice summo’ [but gives rest at the top] like a chair wherein a man might rest with ease…”. As St John himself had been forced to flee Lincoln’s Inn and to abandon forever his own legal training because he killed a man in a duel, his advice seems somewhat affected.

Later that same century, Irishmen in London included John Barnewall of Crickstown, Co Meath, admitted to the Inner Temple in 1673. Descended from ancestors believed to have come to England with the invaders of 1066 and to Ireland with the invaders of 1169, his family had long produced prominent members of the legal profession in Ireland, including chief justices. In 1689, John became one of the judges that King James II appointed, but was the very last Barnewall to sit on the bench in Ireland. He is the only Jacobite judge in Ireland of whom an old portrait is known to exist. He was superseded after the Battle of the Boyne, when Catholics were removed from the bench and put out of the Bar. During the 18th century, among the foremost champions of an Irish nation led by an independent but Protestant Parliament was Henry Grattan MP (c 1746–1820). His father was the recorder of Dublin, and in 1767, Grattan shared rooms at the English Inns with the future judge Robert Day (1746–1841). It was not only to law that such young men turned their attention in London. A contemporary newspaper reported that Robert Day had married a local young woman – a woman “whose smallest accomplishment”, so it was written, “is a fortune of £10,000”.

In the year that Henry Grattan entered Middle Temple, Edmond Malone (1741–1812) was called to the Bar in Dublin.

Malone had been admitted to the Inner Temple in the same year as James Boswell and became a close associate of Dr Johnson.

Malone himself was to undertake a pioneering edition of Shakespeare. He is said to have also been the first historian of early English drama and later provided close literary collaboration and personal support for Boswell.

During the 1760s, the Irish poet Oliver Goldsmith (1728–74), author of The Vicar of Wakefield and other works, was found at the Temple in the company of law students. They frequented a nearby coffee house called The Grecian (on the site of the later Devereux pub, recently closed). Goldsmith was no barrister but rented rooms at the Inns of Court. At first he shared with the butler of the Inner Temple, on the library staircase. Visited there by Dr Johnston, he felt ashamed of his circumstances and subsequently overstretched his finances to live in greater comfort at 2 Brick Court, where he had three rooms overlooking the gardens. He borrowed money from Edmund Bott of the Inner Temple, who lived opposite him on the second floor.

Dr Colum Kenny BCL BL

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Archives

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Bott was “a barrister, author of a work on the Poor Laws, said to be revised in its style and arrangement by Goldsmith”.

Goldsmith kept company with some lively people. It is said that below his rooms were the chambers of William Blackstone, then writing his famous Commentaries on the Laws of England and that Blackstone “made frequent complaint” about the noise upstairs. Blackstone’s successor there “occasionally amused his friends with details of the visitors and parties, sometimes neither very early or regular, of the sociable poet”. Goldsmith is buried at the Inner Temple where, in his honour in 2014, the Irish Ambassador to the United Kingdom unveiled an inscribed stone.

Among Irish Protestants attending the Inns in the 18th century were some whose Catholic ancestors had conformed. One was William Stacpoole. When, in 1780, riots against the Relief Acts for their concessions to Catholics turned to looting (the Gordon Riots), Stacpoole organized 20 Irish law students and barristers to protect the Middle Temple and Inner Temple.

A person who escaped the constricted future of Catholics after 1688 was Charles Carroll (1660–1720), admitted to the Inner Temple in 1685. He was a member of an old Gaelic family in Ireland. With the ‘Glorious Revolution’ about to blight the prospects of Catholics, Carroll “left London in a considerable hurry, not bothering to pay his remaining fees to the Temple…”.

He sailed for Maryland, where he became its Attorney General and was known as ‘Charles Carroll the Settler’. To judge from his bookplate in 1702, Carroll was still happy to be associated with the Inner Temple. Indeed, in due course his son and namesake, Charles Carroll of Annapolis (1702–82), recognizing the value of a legal training for Catholics negotiating their survival in the predominantly Protestant American colonies, insisted that his own son (again a namesake, Charles) attend the Inner Temple to which the boy’s grandfather had been admitted in 1685. The young man resisted, writing from Europe that “I should be glad to know whether you would have me entered of the Temple as the Roman Catholic religion is an obstacle to my being called to the bar”. He also wrote that Catholics were not allowed to attend Blackstone’s innovative lectures at the University of Oxford. Back in America later, this third-generation Irish-American Charles Carrroll (of Carrollton) became the sole Catholic signatory of the US Declaration of Independence.

With Catholics readmitted to legal practice in the early 1790s, albeit only at the junior bar, among those soon attending a London Inn was Daniel O’Connell (1775–1847). He was to be the architect of Catholic Emancipation in 1828, and arguably the greatest Irish nationalist leader. While keeping terms in London, he wrote home that “every member of the Temple, every student of law is supposed to be a Gentleman; as such there is a certain appearance absolutely necessary to be kept up. I could never go to the Temple unless in full dress, with silk stockings etc. I could scarce appear in the streets after 12 o’clock otherwise. You must not hence conclude that I would wish to look up to, or ape after the follies of persons of large fortune, who have the name of studying the law, whilst they in fact spend their time in riot and idleness…”

John Barnewall of Crickstown, Co Meath (artist and date unknown, from a private Irish collection)

Following a campaign on legal education in the United Kingdom that was spearheaded by the Londonderry Protestant Tristram Kennedy and the Waterford Catholic Thomas Wyse MP, King’s Inns commenced professional law lectures in 1851.

In 1885, the requirement to eat “so many legs of mutton” in London, as critics described it, was finally abolished.

Since 1885, Irishmen (and later women) have continued to be admitted to the London Inns. They have included James Comyn, a prominent QC and friend of John Mortimer, who occasionally practised in the Republic of Ireland while also having chambers at the Inner Temple. He became a judge in Queen’s Bench. Another was Rex Mackey of the Inner Temple, who before his death in 1999 was ‘father’ of the Irish Bar (oldest practising barrister).

Dr Colum Kenny BCL BL Emeritus Professor of Communications at Dublin City University and an Honorary Bencher of King’s Inns. In 2017, he was awarded the gold medal of the Irish Legal History Society.

About this time, the Benchers of King’s Inns moved to their present premises, designed for them by the bestknown architect of Georgian Dublin, James Gandon.

Sketched by William Brocas about 1818, two outer wings had yet to be completed during the 1840s. These were to include rooms where systematic legal education would be provided again in Ireland, for the first time in centuries.

In 1839, Henry Grattan’s son blasted the residency requirement as “one of the badges of servitude long worn by the people” of Ireland. His words were repeated later by Edward Carson when the latter too lamented the provision that Irishmen must attend a London Inn. A future leader of Unionism and future law lord, Carson resented the fact that he had had to obtain the signatures of two English barristers as guarantors to vouch for his personal honour, “lest he might steal the silver spoons”.

103

A

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Master Vaughan

MASTER VAUGHAN A tribute given by Lord Anderson KBE QC at a memorial service for Master Vaughan on 30 April 2018 in the Temple Church.

All of us at the Bar are asked from time to time to advise on the chances of winning a case. For the fainter hearts among us, this is an exercise either in studied equivocation or, if pressed, the use of percentages within touching distance of 50. Not so for David Vaughan. His advice came in just two variants: “I should think bound to lose” or, rather more frequently, “Pretty much bound to win”. Clients liked the absence of tiresome uncertainties, and the fact that their counsel was prepared to stand up and be counted.

Among those clients were the Spanish fishermen who came 30 years ago to David for advice, their livelihoods threatened by a brand new Act of Parliament. The forces ranged against them were immense, and implacable. As a Chief Justice put it more than 300 years ago, in a turn of phrase worthy of David himself: “An Act of Parliament may do no wrong, though it may do several things that are pretty odd.” To escape this one would require a constitutional revolution.

C

Yet David did not hesitate in predicting victory. Others saw legal difficulties. He saw fishermen, respected if not in England then at least in Milford Haven, where they had constructed an ice plant and taught Welsh boys the delicate art of longlining. He saw hard work and enterprise, threatened by mean-mindedness. Above all, he saw injustice, to which for him there could only ever be one response: to fight.

Twelve years later, after three visits to the House of Lords and three to the European Court of Justice, David’s fishermen had won on all counts. A constitutional revolution had been declared – by Professor Wade, no less. For Lord Denning, who had once compared European Law to an incoming tide, it was now “a tidal wave…flowing inland over our fields and houses – to the dismay of all”.

The bronze statue dedicated to David in the fishing port of La Coruña, the hem of its gown rubbed to a shine by the ministrations of the devout, was never more than a fantasy – though one that greatly tickled its subject. But the original Spanish fisherman, John Couceiro, spoke truly when he credited David for leading him on “a journey that I would not have missed for the world”. More even than his many other celebrated cases, Factortame showed everything that David was about; a keen interest in fishing; a convivial love of Europe and its peoples – in this case, the Galicians and Basques whom he considered honorary Welshmen; scepticism of government, whether here or in Brussels: he was never one to put his trust in princes; utter fearlessness; an instinct for fairness and decency, with which he could prick the conscience and spur the courage of even the driest tribunal.

And central to it all, a boundless generosity of spirit that bubbled over into fun, for himself and all around him, in everything he did.

104

Master Vaughan

These qualities are all the more remarkable because David’s upbringing, on paper at least, was highly conventional. He was born in Datchet, his father a naval officer who promptly walked across the fields to put him down for Eton. Spells in Edinburgh and in Bath, prep school in Hampshire, then after Eton, national service in the 14th/20th Hussars, law at Trinity College, Cambridge; London and the Bar. But David prized the unconventional – not least in his own family history, as you have just heard in the story of Colonel James Achilles Kirkpatrick and the Indian princess Khair-un-Nissa.

And the instinct for fun was a regular theme of his early life.

A sporting highlight often recalled was the British Army cricket tour of Denmark, for which David was selected as reserve umpire and, one suspects, master of ceremonies. At Cambridge, he was a hard worker: he is remembered perambulating the Great Court reciting cases before his finals. But his passion was reserved for the Trinity Foot Beagles, where, as a whipperin, he was described as “the glue that held us all together”.

Then there was Europe: the youthful drive to Portugal and back, featuring dinners at both Taylor’s and Sandeman’s, and in the summer after Cambridge, a grand tour worthy of Patrick Leigh Fermor himself: sports cars on the Grossglockner Pass, the foot race at Olympia, a stay in Florence with Stanley Spencer’s brother, the cooking of Roman Snails in San Marino and – most exciting of all – the discovery in Norway of a novel fishing technique, reminiscent of minesweeping.

Celebrate the life

But David was no dilettante. After pupillage with Brian Neill, he buckled down to a common law practice at the Bar. And it was at this stage that he first demonstrated another abiding theme of his life: a remarkable ability to spot talent in others. So it was that both Robert Alexander and Nicholas Phillips were attracted

by David to join 1 Brick Court, as it then was – the three of them largely responsible, in their different ways, for its later renown.

David’s first marriage, to Philippa, sadly did not last. But then he met Leslie. Their mutual love of fishing developed into a deep love for each other which was undiminished to the end, and perfectly obvious to anyone who met them. As David pioneered the practice of European law, he and Leslie brought energy, glamour and sparkle to the legal soirées of the Continent.

They were just as unfailingly sociable in deepest Wales. And central to their life together was their large and happy home in Oxford Gardens, where passing colleagues might find themselves helping to wash a dachshund, and innumerable European students found a welcoming berth in London.

When William and Kitty entered his life, David’s joy was complete. He was the most attentive of fathers, keen to show them the right way. So even as toddlers, his children were taken to see the Lord Mayor’s Show from David’s room in chambers overlooking Fleet Street, and taught to react appropriately to the various floats. “Milk Marketing Board – boo, Kitty. William, cheer for ICI!” And nor was he bound by old-fashioned gender stereotypes. He is still remembered for his decisive role in a mothers and daughters’ netball match and as “one of the more popular mothers” attending lunches at Lady Eden’s. As a friend of Kitty’s wrote to her: “The wonderful thing about dads like David is you can’t shake them off.”

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

David loved to join in – as a worshipper at this Temple Church, as a member of the Courts of Appeal of Guernsey and Jersey, whose collegiate nature gave him so much pleasure, at the Notting Hill Carnival, or at the Welsh Pony Club events where, not trusted with the ponies, he was happy to serve as lavatory attendant.

More unusually for a barrister, he was a founder of institutions.

If David was the father of European law in this country, it is not just because he was one of the first practitioners to see its significance. It is because he understood instinctively that its essence was to be found not only in books, but in travel, in exchange and in friendship across borders. And because he knew that if the young were to be tempted into a discipline often perceived as tedious, sinister or both, it had to be fun.

So his two great creations, the Bar European Group and the European Circuit, have for many years met not just in London but in congenial and cosmopolitan surroundings across the continent. His conference on Wine, Beer and Spirits in European Law, which in a strategic masterstroke he decided to hold in Bordeaux, is remembered almost 30 years on for its combination of learning, jollity and gastronomic delight. For the bolder traveller, there is the Slynn Foundation, which during the period of David’s influence exported European law, English and Welsh style, to countless judges, lawyers and – especially – students in the new democracies to the east. London became, with Brussels, the chief global centre of European law, with David its star practitioner. And attracted to his orbit were future judicial talents as distinguished as David Lloyd Jones, Gerald Barling and Nicholas Green.

“ An instinct for fairness and decency, with which he could prick the conscience and spur the courage of even the driest tribunal” That is very much how we feel in chambers. He cared so very much about us. And working on a case with David, as Maya Lester has put it, was more a lifestyle choice than a junior brief. There were the fact-finding trips to coal mines, to dairy farms or – in a case about betting – to the Windsor evening races. The popping down to the junior’s room every five minutes to ask “How’s it going?” and see how his manuscript changes looked on the screen. And to prepare for David’s frequent appearances in the European Court in Luxembourg, the days spent working in the modest auberge of Gaichel, ending with a high-spirited meal and evening walk to the defunct customs post on the Belgian border.

Then there was the unforgettable year of Sunday trading – a guerrilla campaign fought for B&Q in a series of largely rural magistrates’ courts. In the village of Gowerton, near Swansea, David was in his element – explaining European law to Their Worships, and indignantly demanding of the other side’s expert economist why he had chosen to affirm rather than swearing on the Bible. Then to cap the morning’s triumph, leading the way into the pub next door and promptly ordering steaks for his large supporting cast.

Though that episode did not end well. Resuming at 2 o’clock, David expressed the hope that the Bench too had enjoyed a good lunch. The chairman’s response was wintry: “Cold ham salad, Mr Vaughan.” There duly followed a rare defeat.

C

David would never have been so presumptuous as to speak of the mark he left on the law. But what a mark it was. Factortame was only the start. With B&Q, he not only prepared the way for Sunday trading, but set the European law of free movement of goods on to a wiser and more sustainable path. For ICI, and the whistle-blower Stanley Adams, he secured enduring rights for those unlucky enough to get the wrong side of the European Commission. Crehan established the principles for compensating victims of market abuse. Kadi gave rise to nothing less than a new layer of due process in the United Nations. And as the People’s Mujahideen of Iran, for whom David fought alongside Gordon Slynn, wrote to Leslie: “Your husband stood with us in the darkest days of our history, and defended justice.” No lawyer could hope for a better epitaph.

I don’t know whether Vaughan the young cavalry officer had the same qualities as Vaughan QC. If so, we must imagine him not in an immaculately drilled squadron, manoeuvring on the plain, but on a daring mountain raid with his band of irregulars: approaching at a wild gallop, gleefully scattering his enemies, then feasting with much merriment by the fire.

To borrow a phrase used recently by Oliver Sells of our colleague Jonathan Hirst, David was given much in the lottery of life, but returned it, with interest, to all those whose lives he touched. He was my father in the law, the best I could have had. He was the finest of men – and all of us are a little finer for having known him.

Lord Anderson KBE QC

105

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Forensic Identification from the Hand

FORENSIC IDENTIFICATION FROM THE HAND From a lecture given by Professor Dame Sue Black OBE FRSE FRAI FRSB on 30 March 2018

We are an incredible species. And we are incredibly narcissistic. We are the species that developed the mirror because we like to look at ourselves. We are not only obsessed with how we look on the outside; scientists are equally obsessed with how we look on the inside.

Anatomy, one of the oldest sciences, is predicated on the human’s tendency to want to know what we look like.

Identification requires looking at those inherent or acquired features that make a person different from other people: biometric characteristics. Can we use those characteristics, and if we can use them, how do we use them?

RL

I have looked at the drawings of Leonardo da Vinci and of Albrecht Dürer, and I believe Dürer to have been a much better anatomical artist. When you look at his drawing of a hand – the amount of detail, the intimacy of that image – you can see it is by somebody who has clearly studied anatomy. I can identify when Dürer has used his own hands as a model, and when he has used his brother’s hands, because they are not the same.

We use our hands in so many different ways, every single moment we are awake. They are one part of the body that we tend not to cover. We may put gloves on, but by and large, it is a part of the human body that we feel comfortable exposing to the rest of the public around us.

A lot of the features of our hands start to form before your mother even knew she was pregnant. At 46 days in utero, you can see a hand clearly; it is a pentadactyl limb. By the time you get to 51 days, you have a recognisable hand, that is different to the appendage of any other animal species.

By 63 days, and your mother is having her first ultrasound scan, your perfectly formed hand is waving back.

In the criminal world, hands are also visible. We know about fingerprints; we know about palm prints. But what about the other side, the back of the hand?

Nick Marsh, the head of the Metropolitan Police Imaging Unit had a case that was rattling round for a number of months: a young teenage girl alleged that at night her father would come into her bedroom, and he would sexually interfere with her. She told her mother, and her mother did not believe her. Smart young girl, she set up her Skype camera. At night, a Skype camera goes into infrared mode. In infrared light, we are able to see the patterns of superficial veins.

We could then compare those images to the vein pattern of the biological father. The pattern that I saw on the suspect looked the same as the pattern I saw on the offender. I got called to court in London, to give evidence on a technique that does not exist, with limited science behind it. All I could say 106

was that, “It doesn’t mean it is him. I could not tell you how many people it could be. All I can tell you is we cannot exclude him.”

The individual was found not guilty. That surprised me somewhat, the question being, who was in his daughter’s bedroom at half past four in the morning that had the same vein pattern? I asked the QC, “Was there a problem?”

She said, “I do not think you could have done more. I just do not think they believed the girl. She was not upset enough.” That worried me terribly. It made me think that there must be something in here that we can use.

The Metropolitan Police asked us to look at another case, that of Dean Lewis Hardy. He had spent some time in Thailand, and he was suspected of being a sex tourist. They arrested him when he came into Heathrow; they secured his cameras, and his computers, and they found a number of indecent images that we could compare with the suspect.

The offender’s left index finger showed a four-point punctuated scar as did that of the suspect. The suspect is a redhead and has freckles. We know that freckles are totally variable; no one has been able to find two sets the same on any two individuals, including your own right and left sides, and identical twins. We were able to match the patterns of freckles across the fingers of suspect and offender.

Then we looked at skin creases associated with the knuckles.

The pattern of skin creases is different on every finger, and different across both hands. They form in the fetus, as a result of joint formation, so they are like a big fingerprint.

In this case, the offender’s left thumb matched the suspect’s left thumb. When the report was disclosed to Mr Hardy, he changed his plea. It was the first time that a paedophile in the UK had been identified or had changed their plea to guilty, based on the anatomy of their hand.

Then the Metropolitan Police produced a documentary called, How to Catch a Paedophile. I was very against it, but when it went out, four other people came forward, and there was an additional sentence associated with it.

At this point the brakes had to go on – we needed research.

It just so happened that we were training the UK National Disaster Victim Identification Response capability. When you have 500 police officers, you have a ready-made database.

The police officers all agreed to allow us to photograph their hands, forearms, arms, feet, legs and thighs. To a man and a woman, they all agreed, because they knew we were trying to set up a database that would allow us to assess variation and assist in their fight against child sexual abuse.

Reader’s Lecture Series

When we perform anatomical mapping, we are looking for things that are genetic: the shape of the hand, skin colour, nail shape, the propensity for pigmentation etc. Many anomalies, clinical conditions and tendon patterns are related to genetic conditions.

Once you are out of the uterus, you are exposed to the external environment. You will develop scars that result from burns or cuts, freckles, conditions and modifications.

You will also have variation at the cellular level: birthmarks, freckles, liver spots (if you are old enough).

These are known as punctate pigmentation.

There is also personal choice. Some people choose to tattoo, or to pierce. Some choose to put implants into their hands. When you have features of at least five different aetiologies, you have a layered, multi-modal set of biometrics, and that is what makes the hand definable.

The ability to pattern-match is inherent in every single one of us. Members of the public are just as reliable at picking out the same hands from a pool as an expert.

Our value is to ensure that the features that we choose have a strong research and scientific background behind them. That research is now established.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

He suffered from a condition, melanonychia, streaks of colouration passing through the fingernails. We could see that melanonychia on the right-hand ring finger, in both sets of videos. From our evidence, we were able to say that there was nothing to suggest that there was more than one individual involved in both sets of videos.

Then the question was, could it be Mr Oketch?

Mr Oketch made a no comment interview. When the report was written, he changed his plea to guilty. He was given a 15-year sentence for the drugging and the rape of a girl of two years. Greater Manchester Police gave the team the highest police commendation.

It was truly one of the most horrendous episodes that we have ever had to witness. In our job, we have to view the videos. We have to see the images.

It can be traumatic, not only in the courtroom for juries and for judges, but also for the scientists who must look at images of the most heinous crime perpetrated on those that are our most vulnerable in society Our caseload started in 2006 with just one, and now in 2018, we take on about 50 cases a year. We take them on because we feel we can assist. We turn down a lot more than

“ It can be traumatic, not only in the courtroom for juries and for judges, but also for the scientists who must look at images of the most heinous crime perpetrated on those that are our most vulnerable in society” We were contacted by Strathclyde Police (as they were at the time) about one of the largest paedophile rings in Scotland. The image that caused particular horror within the courtroom was called the ‘Hogmanay’ image. This was the anal rape of an 18-month old baby boy. In that image, we were able to see the right hand of the offender, in particular, the right thumb. For whatever reason, the defence decided that they would photograph the suspect’s thighs.

The photographer went on his own, which meant that the suspect held the photographic scale with his right thumb visible next to his right thigh and his left thumb visible next to his left thigh. I now had two images of the suspect’s thumbs that we could compare with the Hogmanay image.

At the base of a nail, there is a little half-moon called a ‘lunule’.

For most of us, it is just a half-moon shape. But if it is damaged, it can assume an unusual shape. The offender in this case did not have a half-moon: it had a peak and a little chunk taken out of it. We could then go through our database and identify all the individuals who have unusual morphologies associated with their lunules. We were unable to find an individual that matched perfectly. We could then put some statistics on that: very low-level statistics, but something that we were not able to do before we had our database.

All of the accused were found guilty, and Neil Strachan was found guilty of being the perpetrator of the Hogmanay image.

Jeremy Oketch was a trainee pharmacist. He was charged with the multiple rape of a child of two years of age, and various charges associated with the making of indecent images of children.

We compared the hands in two groups of videos. We saw in both sets of videos a two-point punctuated scar in the interdigital web between the index and the middle finger. We could start to trace some of the vein patterns as well. Between the two sets of videos, there were only similarities, no differences.

we take on, depending on the quality of the images, and whether we feel we are able to make a comparison. We have worked for almost every police force in the UK, the child exploitation and online protection services (CEOP), the FBI, and a variety of other countries around the world who have taken on the technique that we developed within Dundee.

There is a real scientific basis behind what we now do, and it very much links to what is known about the anatomy of the human and the variation of the human.

We want to do it better, quicker, and cheaper. The trouble with photographs is that they are rarely in a single position. We want to develop computer algorithms that will be able to extract these features from the images. We have started this for veins, but we will do it for pigmentation and knuckle creases as well.

That will mean that we do not have to look at all of these images; the algorithms will extract patterns for us. We will be able to run these algorithms through the millions of such photographs that are held by Interpol and police forces across the world, and it may allow us to link cases that have never been linked before, simply because we need to be able to do this at such incredible speed.

Just when we think there’s nothing that can surprise us, we get a police phone call, “We’ve got a motorcyclist gone through a speeding camera, we’ve got a photograph of him; can you identify him from his hands?” “No, he’s wearing gloves.”

We are good, but not that good.

Professor Dame Sue Black OBE FRSE FRAI FRSB Pro Vice Chancellor for Engagement, Lancaster University Formerly Centre for Anatomy and Human Identification, Leverhulme Research Centre for Forensic Science, University of Dundee The full version of this lecture is available at

innertemple.org.uk/lectures/hand

107

RL

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

First 100 Years

FIRST 100 YEARS:

CELEBRATE THE PAST TO SHAPE THE FUTURE FOR WOMEN IN LAW

By Dana Denis-Smith Grand portraits hang in the halls of the legal profession’s buildings – including this very Inn. Such depictions do a great job at coherently charting the history of men in the legal profession over hundreds of years. They tell of imposing, confident, impressive individuals who have been some of the country’s leading names in law. Not so for women (although very encouraging to see the first group portrait of high-achieving women members of the Inner Temple now hanging in Hall) – however confident, achieving, impressive and successful their story, it is generally not written in canvas and oil, and only a few of them have risen to the very top. It is high time that this should change. Enter the First 100 Years project I founded in 2014 and launched officially in March 2015, with the support we received from all corners of our profession.

T

It all began with an image from 1982 I discovered in an alumni magazine at the end of 2013. At a glance, the picture made me realise that I, also a qualified lawyer, had never asked myself: when did the history of women in the legal profession begin? What was our place in history and could this lack of knowledge of our past be the context we needed to help us to understand the present and the challenges women said they continued to face in their work in law?

The group image captured my imagination – it depicted the partners of a city law firm marking the firm’s centenary at Grocers’ Hall in London. In the centre of the group of 50 or so men, there was a blue-clad woman – the only visible female partner of the firm. I was anxious to ask her how it felt to be a lonely star? And I am delighted Dorothy Livingston, the woman in the middle, has embraced the project and has shared her story with us all.

We have come a long way since 1982. As of 2018, three of the 12 Supreme Court Justices will be women, to include Dame Mary Arden who will join Lady Hale and Lady Black, who was elevated in 2017. Women have become the majority in

the solicitor profession and now make up half of the junior judges. But women have been entering the profession in higher numbers than men for decades and, at the current pace, their progression up the partnership ranks remains painfully slow. We are constantly preoccupied by the percentage change in the numbers of women at the top of the legal profession. By setting the debate in a historical context, could it be easier to see the rapid rise of women in the profession in the last 30 years? Could it allow the profession to identify the missing pieces in the puzzle that can lead women and men to feel equals in the legal profession?

Lord Neuberger speaking at the Spark21 Conference 2017.

Of course, the 1982 photograph tells the story of its day – not dissimilar to that of, say, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher’s cabinet photographs, in which she, too, is the only woman.

Many of the leading women in law practising in the 1970s and 1980s would have found themselves similarly lonely in professional circles. To me, this 1982 image, taken within my lifetime, encapsulated not a long-lost past, but the professional journey of women that are still active in the legal profession today. It made me realise that without hearing more individual voices, past and present, it will be difficult to understand what the future of women in the profession will really look like. Thus, the First 100 Years project was born.

The photo which inspired the project: Dorothy Livingston, the sole female partner at what was then Herbert Smith in 1982.

108

Treasury

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Helena Normanton and Rose Heilbron, the first two women to take silk at the English Bar in 1949.

The aim of the First 100 Years project was ambitious and clearly defined from the outset: a five-year project (2014–2019) to build up to the centenary of the Sex Disqualification (Removal) Act, which passed through Parliament on 23 December 1919 and thus paved the way for women to enter the legal profession as they could no longer be excluded on grounds of gender.

To create the world’s first digital museum (first100years. org.uk) dedicated to the journey of women in law, it would commission 100 filmed personal stories of women lawyers as well as hundreds of digitised artefacts and exclusive content to chart our own journey in the legal profession since 1919 to the present.

The First 100 Years project is the first ever project dedicated to the women in the legal profession that aims to chart their progress over the last 100 years. It is the most ambitious multimedia project, looking to make information on women in the law accessible to all in a visual, structured and engaging way. The project is a partnership with most of the industry’s professional bodies, from the Law Society to Cilex and the Inns of Court. Since it’s official launch, we have collaborated with researchers and academics to enrich our digital archive but also to ensure that it rises to the highest possible standard of quality and accuracy. We’re well on track to meet our original aims to create an interactive and engaging story of professional women to inspire the generations that are coming through, as well as to record the progress of women in the profession in video interviews that will be a valuable resource in the future.

Since I have founded the First 100 Years, I have had the privilege of meeting and discovering a long heritage of women in law, and each of those whom we have interviewed for the project have left me truly in awe of how much has been achieved.

Dame Linda Dobbs, whose name was Tippexed out of cases because she was a woman or was told to cover up with ‘chalk’ to represent a National Front defender, went on to become a High Court judge; Baroness Butler-Sloss, without a degree, went on to become a Court of Appeal judge; Baroness Hale, an academic non-practising barrister, became the first woman president of the Supreme Court. Diversity isn’t just about gender or race but also about the different recipes in which we can achieve success, and I believe it is an inspiring message to the future generations, men and women.

T

Georgina Wood, former Chief Justice of Ghana; Baroness Hale, President of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom; Dana Denis-Smith, Founder of First 100 Years; Beverley McLachlin, former Chief Justice of Canada; and Susan Kiefel, Chief Justice of Australia, together in London in July 2018.

There’s something empowering about understanding one’s history and celebrating. Although the family tree for women in law goes back less than 100 years, it is for us all to bring each piece of the puzzle we possess to make the picture complete – if not for our sake, for the sake of the next generation of women in law who need to build on the confidence of the past to secure an equal future.

Dame Elizabeth Gloster in interview for the First 100 Years Project, March 2018.

If someone had asked me to name a woman lawyer that inspired me when I was in practice at Linklaters, just over 10 years ago, I would have struggled. I cannot recall any of the books during my legal education including judgements by women to highlight their contribution to the profession.

They just didn’t seem to be included in the mainstream.

As we approach the centenary of women in law in 2019, we would like to hear from you if you can contribute to the project. We are not just interested in hearing from women: if your story features an inspirational woman in your career, we want to hear from you too.

We also plan some special projects and are looking for benefactors that would like to support the commission of a new piece of music for the centenary and a piece of public art to commemorate the role of women in the professions.

Please do get in touch: info@first100years.org.uk Dana Denis-Smith Founder, First 100 Years First100years.org.uk 109

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

The Council of The Inns of Court

THE COUNCIL OF THE INNS OF COURT Pupillage Matched Funded Scheme

COIC welcomes applications for matched funding for 2019–20 and 2020–21 pupillages.

The COIC Pupillage Matched Funded Scheme (PMF) helps provide additional pupillages in Chambers, and other approved training organisations, predominantly engaged in legally aided work. Encouragingly, a growing number of Chambers are applying for COIC matchedfunded grants. COIC match-funded 47 pupillages in 2017 and is set to support 45 pupillages in 2018. This is an impressive improvement on the scheme’s first year of operation in 2014, when it supported 14 pupillages.

COIC

HOW THE SCHEME WORKS It is a prerequisite of the scheme that chambers understand that matched-funded pupillages are in addition to those they would have offered in any event. COIC match pupillage funding already provided by chambers with a total grant of £6K to fund the first six months of a second pupillage. Chambers are now also able to elect to receive an increased level of funding of £7K, provided that all pupils in chambers receive an income of at least £14K for the year a figure closer to the National Living Wage.

1MCB CHAMBERS We are a set with a long-standing commitment to publicly funded work. The legal aid cuts that have been imposed over many years have affected many of the most vulnerable in our society, resulting in whole classes of people not being able to afford access to justice. At the same time, fees have been slashed, with the unsurprising result that chambers doing large amounts of publicly funded work have had to review and reconsider the viability of offering pupillage.

In this increasingly difficult environment, the COIC pupillage matched funding grant has supported 1MCB Chambers to offer pupillage. The grant, as a source of funding for the first six months of pupillage, is invaluable to chambers undertaking publicly funded work and this initiative ensures that those sets can continue to offer pupillage. The ability to train pupils in chambers where legal aid work is valued is vital to the future commitment of the Bar to publicly funded clients.

Bernadette Smith Head of the Pupillage Committee

HOW TO APPLY Applications to match fund 2019–20 and 2020–21 pupillages are invited between 3 September and 22 October 2018.

Decisions will be communicated during the week commencing 5 November. Online applications can be made at coic.org. uk/pupillage-matched-funding. To find out more, please email Hayley Dawes, COIC Secretary: hdawes@coic.org.uk Nathalie Lieven QC Chair, COIC Pupillage Matched Funding Grants Committee

LAMB BUILDING As a set with a very strong focus on publicly funded work we have to maintain very tight controls over spending.

Despite this, Lamb Building is committed to educating pupils, who are the future of this profession. The matched funding scheme allows us to offer a third pupillage each year to someone who shares our commitment to helping those in society who are often the most vulnerable. We are grateful to COIC as, doubtless, are those many bright and talented people who gain their opportunity to succeed through those extra spaces provided by this scheme.

Daniel Darnbrough Head of Pupillage

110

Nathalie Lieven QC

Celebrate the life

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

MASTER KNORPEL Henry Knorpel QC, skilled and dedicated ‘guardian of parliamentary democracy’

In a tribute to a gifted and well-respected legislator, Inner Temple flew their flag at half-mast when Henry Knorpel, Companion of the Bath and QC, died at the age of 93.

He spent his legal career dedicated to his position of Solicitor to the Department of Health and Social Security, in essence, heading up its vast legal section. Colleagues remember him as a kind, generous leader who was happy to share and teach his superb drafting skills.

Born in south London, Henry lived with his parents and four siblings above the family dress shop on the Walworth Road, Elephant and Castle. Most of his life was spent in south-of-theriver Jewish communities, for which he had a great affection and loyalty. He attended the local South London Jewish Primary school, augmented by cheder three nights a week.

City of London School followed, including a stint as a boarder at Marlborough College, where the school was evacuated during the war. He went up to Magdalen College, Oxford, and took an undergraduate and postgraduate law degree.

Awarded a senior scholarship by the college, he was called to the Bar by Inner Temple, where he was later elected a Bencher. He joined the Government Legal Service in 1952.

A combination of a brilliant legal mind and dedication to his work resulted in speedy promotions until he was appointed Solicitor to the DHSS. In 1953, Henry married Brenda Sterling, sister of Jeffrey, now Lord Sterling of Plaistow, and John Sterling. Coincidentally, their maternal grandmothers were school friends from a village outside Krakow. Henry and Brenda settled in Epsom, Surrey, with their daughters, Melanie and Helen.

In his capacity as Solicitor to the DHSS, Henry represented the UK on working committees of the European Commission and the Council of Europe. In the early 1980s, the British government was called before the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg on a complex point of social security law that would have led to an avalanche of unintended claims.

An adverse ruling would have cost the taxpayer, in today’s terms, over £100 million. Rather than engaging a leading practising Silk, Henry was given the position of lead advocate.

With a rather uncharacteristic flourish, he surprised everyone by addressing his concluding remarks to the bench of judges in fluent French. The case was successfully defended.

On retirement from the DHSS, Henry was appointed Counsel to the Speaker of the House of Commons, giving legal advice to the Speaker, committees and departments of the House, and overseeing the drafting of Bills. Lord Kirkhope of Harrogate, MEP, remembered Henry as “one of those rare people that kept legislators on the ‘straight and narrow’ as far as Parliamentary rules, law and procedures were concerned.

He had an encyclopaedic memory and an unmatched and up-to-date knowledge. Apart from his undoubted skill – he was also very generous with his time – everyone respected and trusted Henry to safeguard parliamentary democracy and to provide first-class briefing and support. He was a firstclass servant of the House and a very well-liked individual.”

C

Master Knorpel

Every Shabbat, Henry took his daughters to Epsom Synagogue, of which he became Vice-President; he represented it on various United Synagogue committees and played a key role in its merger with Sutton and District Synagogue. In recognition of this, he was made a life member of the Sutton Board of Management and later served as Chairman.

To celebrate 65 years of existence, some five years ago the Sutton Jewish community created a book from a collection of Divrei Torah from their members, covering all the weekly portions.

The 88-year-old Henry picked Emor with its overarching theme of holiness. He discussed the Law of the Stranger – both entitlements and obligations – and his concluding paragraph, describing the significance for the Jew in the diaspora where the biblical roles are reversed, suggests this reversal “has become a part of his path to holiness”.

It perfectly encapsulates his views of life, which he meticulously followed both in his public service and his family-centred personal life.

Henry is survived by his wife, Brenda; brother, Gerald; sister, Maureen Samuels; daughters, Melanie Gold and Helen Lorie; five grandchildren and four great-grandchildren. He was a man of the utmost integrity, humility and high achievement.

Henry Knorpel: born 18 August 1924, died 1 December 2017.

Courtesy of Hilton Lorie The Jewish Chronicle

111

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Anatomy of a Case

ANATOMY OF A CASE:

A STUDY IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN ENGLAND AND WALES In August 2017, Master Pittaway, whilst Treasurer of the Inn, delivered this lecture to the Attorney General’s Chambers in Brunei, the Supreme Court of Singapore, the Kuala Lumpur Regional Arbitration Centre and the Bar Association of Sri Lanka.

The topic that I am speaking to you about is very wide.

I will try to give you some insight into the modern way of conducting clinical negligence litigation in the UK through the eyes of one high value claim. These types of cases form the backbone of my clinical negligence practice.

High-value clinical negligence cases are almost invariably concerned with birth injuries and failure to diagnose serious illness in children. Before the recent change in the discount rate, the value of these types of cases was typically between about £6 and £12m, and now it is somewhere between two or three times that figure, depending on the length of the claimant’s life expectancy. The claims almost always involve catastrophic brain damage with consequential requirements of 24-hour care, specialist equipment, therapies and accommodation.

The classic errors in the delivery of a child arise out of incorrect decision-making, usually a failure to proceed to an emergency

T

Morwenna was a 14-year girl who was taken to her GP shortly before Christmas because she was unwell. It transpired she had developed a common form of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. She first presented with a cold, cough, wheezing and a fever, and was treated with prednisolone and becotide for asthma. There was an initial improvement, accompanied by further visits to the GP practice, which was then followed by a deterioration, acute nausea and vomiting. The impression recorded by the GP who saw her was of a viral illness.

Morwenna continued to be unwell and saw her GP at an emergency appointment on the Saturday morning before Christmas. Her impression was of a viral illness but importantly she noted “need to exclude pneumonia”. She arranged for an X-ray and blood tests to be carried out privately on Monday.

Her clinical judgment was that Morwenna did not require admission to hospital at that time.

“ although breach of duty may be established, there can be formidable problems in proving legal and medical causation” caesarean section because of misinterpretation of the CTG traces or a failure to appreciate clinical signs of distress.

In cases involving children, the claims arise out of misdiagnosis on presentation, or failure to arrange for immediate admission, or failure to admit or refer for specialist treatment, or failure to commence treatment quickly enough.

In both types of cases, although breach of duty may be established, there can be formidable problems in proving legal and medical causation.

The starting point for the claimant’s parents is to obtain copies of the medical records, often voluminous, but in reality containing only a small number that are relevant to the alleged misdiagnosis or treatment itself. The legal teams set about the task of obtaining witness statements, usually of limited significance for claimants, but of considerable significance for defendants, usually by reference to the medical records, explaining what and why decisions were reached.

Both parties instruct experts. Before the trial is heard, the experts in like disciplines discuss their opinions, setting out the areas of agreement and disagreement in joint statements.

In most cases, there are then joint settlement meetings where the parties’ barristers settle the claims, leaving a comparatively small number that are tried. If the cases do come to trial, then factual witness statements and experts’ reports are exchanged and stand as evidence in chief subject to cross-examination.

The case of Morwenna Ganz, in which I appeared for the general practitioners, illustrates a typical but complex case.

112

Morwenna’s condition deteriorated. By Saturday afternoon, she was lethargic, thirsty, tired and light-headed. She had to be carried to the lavatory. Her parents contacted the outof-hours service at 3am. The doctor gave telephone advice but did not examine Morwenna. He later admitted that it was in breach of his duty of care not to examine her. The parents contacted the out-of-hours service again at about 8am. Another GP attended and Morwenna was admitted to hospital shortly before 10.30am on Sunday morning.

The accepted test in professional negligence actions has long been that an individual who professes a special skill is primarily judged by the standards of his peers. As is well known, in Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee, McNair J directed the jury that a medical practitioner has not acted in breach of duty if he has acted in accordance with the practice accepted as proper by a responsible body of medical people skilled in that particular discipline.

How did the trial judge seek to apply the Bolam test in Morwenna’s case?

There were a number of factual disputes between Mrs Ganz and the GP as to Morwenna’s condition at the time she attended the GP on the Saturday morning and as to the content of the consultation. Faced with a detailed medical record of the GP’s consultation, the trial judge largely resolved these issues in favour of the GP. He did, however, find that the GP did not advise Morwenna’s parents to take her to the A&E department of the local hospital if her condition deteriorated but, instead, advised her to contact the out-of-hours services.

Treasury

“ if every child with a non-specific infection was referred to hospital, the capacity of the system to manage would be in question” In applying the Bolam test, he isolated two essential questions: (a) at what level of suspicion concerning potential pneumonia in a 14-year old child should a reasonably competent GP admit the child to hospital for tests; and (b) did the presentation of Morwenna on the Saturday morning cross the relevant threshold of suspicion.

As to the first question, having considered the GP expert evidence, he found that any suspicion of pneumonia in a child should be followed up immediately to exclude it from further consideration.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

The key to establishing the nature of the damage often lies in the neuroradiological evidence pinpointing where the damage has in fact occurred. In this case, expert neuroradiologists accepted that the disability from which Morwenna suffers was consistent with damage to the basal ganglia, albeit there was no neuroradiological evidence to support that damage had in fact occurred. The neuroradiologists agreed that the damage was consistent with an acute event on the day of admission to the hospital and that a hypoxic injury could not be excluded.

The defendant’s case was that she had suffered from a medical condition, MPE, mycoplasma pneumoniae encephalitis, or if that could not be shown, an unidentified mechanism caused her brain damage. It was conceded on behalf of Morwenna that if she had been suffering from MPE, it could not be shown that earlier treatment with an antibiotic would have altered the course of the pneumonia and encephalitis.

As to the second question, once the GP had noted “need to exclude pneumonia”, he considered that it was in breach of duty not to have referred her to A&E at the local hospital that day.

Those in medical practice might consider that finding to have draconian consequences. GPs see children with non-specific infections every day in their surgeries and they have to exercise their clinical judgment as to whether the individual child’s condition merits referral to the local hospital.

Otherwise, if every child with a non-specific infection was referred to hospital, the capacity of the system to manage would be in question.

The outcome of cases is often fact-dependent, and so it was in Morwenna’s case. The trial judge considered that if Morwenna had presented to the GP on a weekday, she would have been referred to hospital.

T

At hospital, although there was a prompt triage, there was a delay in Morwenna being seen by a specialist registrar. When she was seen, sometime after 12.30pm, her Glasgow Coma Score was 7 out of 15. She was very unwell and resuscitative measures were started but, unfortunately, it was too late. Morwenna had suffered catastrophic brain damage. At a late stage the hospital admitted breach of duty in not arranging for Morwenna to have been seen by a member specialist paediatric team sooner.

There had been a delay of about an hour.

Morwenna’s pleaded case on causation was that her brain injury was caused by oxygen deprivation when she arrived in hospital which remained uncorrected for too long. As the case developed it became more complex, that the damage was caused by hypocapnia, cerebral vasoconstriction, reduced carbon dioxide levels in the blood, or hypoxia or a combination of the two.

Master Pittaway

113

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Anatomy of a Case

“ Causation issues arise typically in cases where two or more factors have contributed to the adverse result for which the damages are claimed” Although the treating specialists had never been able to diagnose the cause of Morwenna’s brain damage, the trial judge rejected the defendant’s submission that her injuries should be attributed to an unknown cause.

He concluded that a combination of hypocapnia and hypoxia had caused the injury, but he was not satisfied that the hospital’s breach of duty, delaying treatment for about one hour, would have stopped the process developing. He was, however, satisfied that earlier admission on Saturday, or indeed Sunday morning, would have led to effective resuscitation measures being taken that would have avoided the injury. Morwenna’s claim against the GPs succeeded but failed against the hospital.

The starting point for establishing causation is the ‘but for’ test. The test requires a claimant to show that, ‘but for’ the defendant’s breach of duty, the claimant would not have suffered the injury of which she complains.

T

Causation issues arise typically in cases where two or more factors have contributed to the adverse result for which the damages are claimed. These problems have led to modification of the ‘but for test’ rule in some circumstances.

In Bailey v Ministry of Defence, the Court of Appeal concluded that in a case where medical science cannot establish the probability that ‘but for’ an act of negligence the injury would not have happened but can establish that the contribution of the negligent cause was more than negligible, the ‘but for’ test is modified, and the claimant will succeed.

That issue did not arise in Morwenna’s case because the trial judge found that her brain injury was caused by a combination of hypocapnia and hypoxia. Even if the defendants had been able to establish that MPE was one of the causes of Morwenna’s brain damage, that would not have been sufficient for the defence to succeed.

Some of us believe that the decision in Bailey weighs the scales too heavily against defendants, by comparison with dose-related industrial disease cases, where judges have traditionally made an apportionment without clear medical evidence.

114

If I may return to return to the narrative, in Morwenna’s case, the GPs applied for permission to appeal against the trial judge’s findings, the application was contested at the permission stage.

You will recollect that the trial judge posed two essential questions on the issue of breach of duty, first, at what level of suspicion concerning potential pneumonia in a 14 year old child should a reasonably competent GP admit the child to hospital for tests and, second, did the presentation of Morwenna on the Saturday morning cross the relevant threshold of suspicion.

It was submitted that the second question was incomplete, in that it properly had two components: (1) what was the presentation as the GP believed it to be; and (2) was the GP’s belief acceptable (in the Bolam sense). The appeal on causation turned upon the trial judge’s flawed interpretation of the expert evidence, usually a less fertile ground for an appeal.

Nevertheless, two Lord Justices granted permission and shortly before the full hearing before the Court of Appeal, there was a settlement meeting between the legal teams, which led to the claim being compromised for a considerably reduced sum.

I would just like to add that, in my view, there is considerable scope in clinical negligence claims for defendants to decide at a much earlier stage whether claims should be admitted or contested than they presently do. I believe that the NHSR and the medical defence organisations should consider early neutral evaluation of claims in routine cases.

In complex cases like Morwenna’s, however, I accept that the position may be more difficult. Whilst the likely effect of the emergency appointment being on the Saturday before Christmas could be carefully weighed against the GPs expert evidence, the causation evidence, complex and often dense, did not emerge fully until after the joint experts’ meetings had taken place and during the trial.

David Pittaway QC Treasurer 2017

BEDROOMS

PEGASUS

In the heart of London’s legal quarter, the Inn’s two bedrooms, the Boswell and Chaucer Rooms, are the perfect accommocation choice. Based in №3 Dr Johnson’s Building, the Chaucer and Boswell Rooms are available seven nights a week for only £160 a night.

CHAUCER ROOM

Hours Weekdays, 10am – 10pm Web innertemple.org.uk/pegasusbar

BOSWELL ROOM

Open to members of all Inns and their guests for coffee, lunch or afternoon tea, the Pegasus Bar is a quiet oasis in the heart of the city.

With early starts in court and late night events, why not relax in one of our beautiful on-site bedrooms?

 catering@innertemple.org.uk  020 7797 8180  innertemple.org.uk/bedrooms

MEETING ROOMS Short of space in Chambers?

The Inner Temple has a number of rooms for up to 12 people for meetings, conference calls and quiet working space.

Equipped with Wi-Fi, conference call facilities and refreshments on request, the Committee Room and newly refurbished rooms in the Buttery are available for hire.

Hourly rates available on request Please contact the Inner Temple Catering team call 020 7797 8230 � catering@innertemple.org.uk

115

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Domestic Violence: a Human Rights Issue

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: A HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE From a lecture given by Dr Shazia Chowdhury on 13 November 2017

Our understanding of violence against women – VAW – is constantly evolving. It occurs in many different forms and in many different places. It is a gender-based phenomenon: it is violence that women experience because they are women or because it affects women disproportionately. As a result, it has been recognised that this form of violence is inextricably linked to gender discrimination and inequality.

The United Nations’ Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women (DEVAW) acknowledges the root cause of VAW to be unequal power relations. DEVAW also condemns the “crucial social mechanisms by which women are forced into a subordinate position as compared with men”. There is a growing trend of talking about violence against women in a genderneutral way. Whilst violence against men clearly does occur, it is at a much lower incidence. It is a different type of violence.

Violence is a very individual experience: it affects women differently. Intersectionality, or multiple discrimination, is very relevant. Depending on the situation, experiences and factors, one may have a very different experience of violence and have very different needs as a result. This is something for which the law and policy should cater.

RL

Domestic violence can be understood as a human rights violation in three ways. First, as articulated by a number of international human rights instruments, states are not only obliged to refrain from committing violations themselves, but they are also responsible for otherwise private acts if they fail to fulfil their duty to punish and prevent such acts.

“ Violence is a very individual experience: it affects women differently” Secondly, states are required under international law to provide all citizens with equal protection. If a state fails to provide individuals who are harmed by an intimate partner with the same protections it provides those harmed by strangers, it has failed in respect of this obligation.

Thirdly, domestic violence has been recognised as being within the scope of a number of human rights, particularly Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The genomics of domestic violence closely resemble the defining elements of torture. It causes severe physical and mental pain.

It is intentionally inflicted for specified purposes and with some form of official involvement, whether active or passive.

The most striking similarity between torture and domestic violence is that it is perpetrated for the same unlawful purpose: namely to establish and maintain power and control over another.

116

I refer particularly to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, commonly referred to as ‘CEDAW’. The UK is a state party to CEDAW and its Optional Protocol. The case law emerging from CEDAW shows the way in which the CEDAW Committee examines state parties’ measures to prevent and combat violence against women.

AT v Hungary was the first case on domestic violence that came before the CEDAW Committee. The complaint was submitted by a Hungarian woman who had been subjected to domestic violence for four years by her former partner.

She could not escape the violence, because there were no appropriate women’s refuges and there was no protection available under Hungarian law. Once her ex-partner had moved out of the family home, she had taken steps to permanently exclude him, but the Hungarian courts had refused this because her husband jointly owned the property, and it was argued this would breach his right to property.

The CEDAW Committee found that Hungary had failed. It stressed that women’s rights to live and to physical and mental integrity cannot be superseded by other rights, including the right to property and the right to privacy.

The next area is law enforcement obligations. In two complaints, the Committee focused on the fact that the women had made multiple appeals for assistance from law enforcement and courts. Şahide Goekce was shot dead by her husband, following repeated incidents of domestic violence, all of which were known to the police. In Goekce v Austria, the CEDAW Committee concluded that the police were accountable for failing to exercise due diligence. They stressed that a perpetrator’s rights to freedom of movement and fair trial cannot supersede a woman’s rights to life, physical and mental integrity.

In Yildirim v Austria, the Committee found Austria to be in violation and recommended that Austria strengthen its implementation and monitoring of its laws. Remember: this is Austria, usually held out as a beacon for its laws and policies. These two cases demonstrate that it is not a case of having good laws and good policies. It is a case of having good implementation and good monitoring.

In González Carreño v Spain, a father had murdered his sevenyear-old daughter during a court-approved parental visitation.

The mother brought suit against the Spanish authorities, and the national court ruled against her. She brought it to CEDAW. The Committee found for the mother, stating that the Spanish authorities should have taken into account the existing context of domestic violence in the family. It ruled that Spain must provide training to judges and other professionals.

Where is the UK in terms of CEDAW and our commitments?

CEDAW’s recommendations were made in its last report in 2013. The Committee said we should: ensure that women can access courts effectively; ratify the Council of Europe Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence against Women, the so-called Istanbul Convention, which we have yet failed to do; make forced marriage a criminal offence,

Reader’s Lecture Series

which we have done; adopt a comprehensive national action plan to tackle trafficking in women and girls; and improve mental healthcare in all prisons. Finally, it said we should take steps to end occupational segregation, the concentration of men and women in certain jobs, or in certain levels of job, and reduce the gender pay gap, which we have not really dealt with, as we know from recent media.

The regional instrument that is most relevant to us is the European Convention on Human Rights, which was incorporated by the Human Rights Act 1998, the HRA. Article 2 of that Treaty is the right to life. In a number of cases, it has been claimed that the state ought to have protected the victims, but it failed to do so. The European Court of Human Rights first recognised this aspect of Article 2 in LCB v United Kingdom, and significantly extended it in the case of Osman v United Kingdom, which is now referred to as the ‘Osman Principle’. This concerned a former teacher of a 15-yearold boy, who wounded his pupil and killed the boy’s father.

The case concerned the question of whether the authorities could and should have done more to protect the victims.

The European Court of Human Rights found that the applicants had failed to show that the authorities knew, or ought to have known, that the lives of the Osman family were at real and immediate risk. They could not be criticised for relying on the presumption of innocence or for failing to use its power of arrest. The positive obligations flowing from Article 2 should be interpreted in a way which does not impose a disproportionate burden on the authorities.

Nonetheless, the court made it clear that it is willing to extend the positive obligations inherent in Article 2 to the victims of violence, and particularly domestic violence.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

The first case in which they did that was Kontrová v Slovakia.

The applicant had filed a criminal complaint against her husband for assaulting her. Accompanied by her husband, she then later tried to withdraw her criminal complaint.

The keywords are “accompanied by her husband”. This is where the police should have stepped in. A month later, her husband shot dead their daughter and son. Before the European Court of Human Rights, she alleged that the police were aware of her husband’s abuse and threatening behaviour. They had failed to take appropriate action. The court held there had been a violation of Article 2 and also a breach of Article 13, the right to an effective remedy, because she was unable to apply for compensation.

In Opuz v Turkey in 2009, the applicant was assaulted and threatened over many years by her husband. Both she and her mother were left with life-threatening injuries. With only one exception, no prosecution was brought against him, on the grounds that both women had withdrawn their complaints, despite the explanations that the husband had harassed them into doing so. He subsequently stabbed his wife seven times and was given a fine of €385, payable in instalments. He then shot dead his mother-in-law. He was convicted for murder but was released pending his appeal, whereupon he continued to threaten the wife.

The Court held here there had been a violation of Article 2 and Article 3. The court also held, for the first time in a domestic violence case, that there had been a violation of Article 14, which is the prohibition of discrimination. It observed that domestic violence affected mainly women, while the general and discriminatory judicial passivity in Turkey created a climate that was conducive to it.

RL

“ …this form of violence is inextricably linked to gender discrimination and inequality”

117

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Domestic Violence: a Human Rights Issue

“ The story broke in the media and many more women came forward to report their assaults” Bevacqua v Bulgaria involves children: the applicant claimed she was regularly beaten by her husband. She left him and filed for divorce, taking the second applicant, her three-yearold son, with her. She finally obtained custody only when her divorce was pronounced more than a year later. The following year, she was beaten again by her husband. Her requests for a criminal prosecution were rejected, on the grounds that it was a private matter requiring a private prosecution.

The court held there had been a violation of Article 8. The domestic court’s failure to adopt interim custody measures without delay amounted to a failure to assist the applicants.

The court stressed that considering the dispute to be a private matter was incompatible with the authorities’ obligation to protect the applicant’s family life.

The other key point is that when the Convention was drafted, children’s rights were an anathema. But this case specifically dealt with the impact of domestic violence on the three-yearold child and found that the child’s rights had been breached.

RL

In the UK, the significant cases involving VAW have been made under the HRA. Van Colle v Chief Constable of Hertfordshire Police and Smith v Chief Constable of Sussex Police were two cases heard together. The first involved a trial witness who was shot dead by the accused; the second involved a same-sex couple where domestic violence had taken place, with one person shot dead. This second case, Smith, was a claim in negligence against the police for failures to protect the victim from violence, on the basis of the Osman Principle. In this case, the court acknowledged the possibility of a HRA claim against the police for failing to protect some victims in prescribed circumstances.

Subsequently, Michael v Chief Constable South Wales concerned a woman who was a repeated victim of domestic violence. She was known to local police. She had phoned her local constabulary, and said, “I’ve had threats to kill, and he is going to come round. He’s going to kill me.” Unfortunately, the person who took the call graded it down to a category where a response was required in 60 minutes. Eight minutes later, the victim was shot dead. Her family brought a claim both in negligence and under the HRA. The Supreme Court approved the striking out of the negligence application but allowed the HRA claim to proceed to trial.

118

At the moment, we have D v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis. Colloquially known as the ‘black cab rapist’, John Worboys preyed upon vulnerable young women looking for a safe ride home for the better part of a decade. In March 2009, he was convicted of 19 criminal counts.

The claimants are two of his victims who reported to the police. However, neither case resulted in further proceedings, until 2008, when a routine computer check carried out by specialist sexual assault officers identified factual similarities in four recorded allegations, leading to the reinvestigation of their claims. Such was the weight of the evidence that, when it was finally pursued, he was arrested very quickly.

The story broke in the media and many more women came forward to report their assaults. By the conclusion of a post-trial report carried out by the Met, 105 separate complaints involving him had been lodged. There is a catalogue of errors in terms of the police’s response to this, which has formed the basis of this claim from the two women who are suing the police for their investigative failures, relying upon the framework of the HRA. The High Court upheld the claims that the police had breached their obligation under section 6 of the HRA and that under Article 3, the police owed a duty to investigate to victims of serious crimes of violence perpetrated by private parties. On the facts, this had been breached.

All that international human rights case law and all that activism has been used in court and achieved a good decision.

The decision was appealed, and in 2015 the Court of Appeal upheld it on all essential points.

We are awaiting judgment from the Supreme Court on it. It is a case involving a rapist, but clearly it has ramifications quite far and beyond in terms of the HRA, and the tortious liability of the police. We are very much hoping that they uphold the decision.

Dr Shazia Choudhry Queen Mary University of London Academic Fellow of the Inner Temple

Treasury

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

“ASK NOT WHAT YOUR INN CAN DO FOR YOU – ASK WHAT YOU CAN DO FOR YOUR INN”

By Zachary Bredemear, Chair of the Bar Liaison Committee It may seem grandiose to appropriate the words of President Kennedy for an article about volunteering for the Inner Temple, but this Inn is proud of its achievements (did you know we are ranked 24th of the top 50 employers for taking action to improve social mobility in the workplace?) and even the present incumbent of the White House resorts to hyperbole on occasion.

So, why would you want to volunteer for the Inn? The chances are that members of Inner Temple have given up their time to help your career. Perhaps someone spoke to you at a reception when you were a student about life as a barrister. Maybe you received advocacy training when you were a pupil. You might have been interviewed by members of the Inn for a scholarship. You might even have received a scholarship. Whatever role the Inn played, I expect most of my readers will at some point have thought to themselves, “One day I will give something back”.

If that is you, then you can skip the next paragraph.

If getting involved in one the Inn’s activities has never occurred to you let me offer some thoughts about why gratitude or altruism need have no part in your decision to give some time to the Inn. The pitch to do pro bono work often focuses on the personal development and exposure that it offers.

Involvement in the Inn is no different and has helped me acquire new skills and develop existing competencies. For instance, learning to be an advocacy trainer not only helped me to deconstruct my own advocacy but familiarity with the Hampel Method (in which the trainer identifies just one aspect of the performance to be addressed) gave me an adaptable teaching tool that can even be deployed in the home (“My headline for you is the measurement of the ingredients. You emptied half the packet of baking powder into the pancake mix. The reason this needs to be addressed is…etc.”).

Having addressed ‘motive’ I should turn to the issues of ‘means’ and ‘opportunity’.

If (like me once) you think that your help is not needed because there are plenty of barristers who know more and better anecdotes about retired judges than you do, please think again. The lessons from your route to the Bar are as valuable as anyone else’s and the Inn has wonderful and approachable staff who will support you in whatever you volunteer for.

One area where volunteers are particularly needed is for our Outreach work. The Inn believes that the Bar can recruit the best people to the profession if it selects from the

widest possible pool of candidates. The Inn aims to ensure that groups who have traditionally been underrepresented in the profession have information about the profession through its Outreach work. A significant challenge for the Inn’s Outreach work is that whilst 55% barristers practise on the South Eastern Circuit, predominantly from Chambers in London, only 15% of the population of England and Wales lives in London. In 2018/19 the Inn will expand its programme of out of London Outreach activities. The Inn will launch a pilot project in Liverpool to help Year 12 students understand the importance of the rule of law and will increase the number of ‘Insight’ career events it holds. The Inn will also be launching a new set of resources to support barristers and judges who wish to engage with their local universities or schools. All these events and projects require volunteers.

Another area where you can help is to make sure that your chambers is enrolled on the Pegasus Access and Support Scheme (PASS). PASS offers mini-pupillages for high achieving students from under-represented backgrounds. PASS also supports its participants by providing a focused professional and advocacy skills development programme which relies on volunteers to conduct mock interviews and lead advocacy exercises.

T

Our Outreach work is not the only area where we need your help; scholarship interviewing is another area of the Inn’s work that relies on volunteers. At the foot of this article is a table of contact details of who to contact about the Inn’s activities. Please get involved and if you do, don’t be surprised if you get back more than you expected.

OUTREACH

SCHOLARSHIP INTERVIEWS

Struan Campbell 020 7797 8214

Sellisha Lockyer 020 7797 8210

scampbell@innertemple.org.uk

slockyer@innertemple.org.uk

MENTORING

BAR LIAISON COMMITTEE

Georgina Everatt 020 7797 8211

Henrietta Amodio 020 7797 8181

geveratt@innertemple.org.uk

hamodio@innertemple.org.uk

ADVOCACY & ETHICS TRAINING

CIRCUITS LIAISON

David Miller 020 7797 8209

Jude Hodgson 020 7797 8206

dmiller@innertemple.org.uk

jhodgson@innertemple.org.uk

JUNIOR BAR ASSOCIATION

David Miller 020 7797 8209 dmiller@innertemple.org.uk

Zachary Bredemear Chair of the Bar Liaison Committee

119

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Master Gower

MASTER GOWER A Tribute to John Gower QC abridged from a speech by his son, His Honour Judge Peter Gower QC

C Master Gower

John, Daddy, Pa, Grandpa, Judge, Your Honour, the size of the congregation packed into this Church pays a more eloquent tribute than any I can hope to achieve; but I will do my best.

formations, and dogfights between British and German fighters – memories which he was able to pass on directly to his four grandchildren.

Let me start at the end, which is the sad part. John was admitted to Pembury Hospital in early April and stayed there for just over two months. But we got him home and, although he never really rallied, he was comfortable, surrounded by those who loved and cared for him, and died peacefully in his sleep. He bore these last few weeks with absolute stoicism, fortitude and dignity; repeatedly expressing his gratitude to those around him, never once complaining. It was the one time in John’s life when he was, for the most part, quiet.

John started his National Service towards the end of the war, in the army, eventually rising to the dizzy rank of Staff Sergeant.

Understandably, life for John was never the same after his wife Shirley’s death in December of 2012. Of one thing I am sure: John died in the firm and settled belief that he was joining his beloved Shirley, and that was a great source of comfort to him.

What of the rest of John’s life?

Born on 6 November 1925, the younger of two sons, his father a JP, John spent the early part of his life in Pembury, much of it on his grandfather’s farm, Elmhurst at Kipping’s Cross, a tenancy on Lord Camden’s Bayham Estate.

John went to the Primary School in Pembury and then to Skinners Grammar School. By now, John’s father, Jack, had remarried, his mother, Edith, having died when he was a baby.

Jack, his new wife, Doris, and the boys moved to Camden Avenue in Southborough where they had a smallholding. It was from there, as he vividly described to us as children, that John watched the Battle of Britain unfolding that summer: Spitfires getting among the German bombers, splitting up their 120

John did not go to university, but passed what legal exams he had to in order to get into Bar School by way of a correspondence course with London University. He was Called to the Bar by the Inner Temple in 1948, having come second or third in the Bar exams that year, and joined the Chambers of Elliot Gorst at 6 Pump Court in the Temple, as his pupil.

John’s practice at the Bar was wide-ranging: general civil work, landlord and tenant, planning and local government and, of course, crime. He was, by all accounts, an outstanding advocate. Andrew Patience QC described John in a recent letter as “one of the finest advocates of his generation”.

Giles Rooke QC, an old sparring partner of John, felt it necessary to devise what he called his “Anti-Gower kit”. This consisted of a series of flash cards on which were written such words as “don’t interrupt”, “sit down”, “don’t lead” and “the jury have had enough”, which were produced by Giles at times best calculated to put off his opponent.

John took silk in 1967. As a QC, he represented (among many others) the Royal Court Theatre, calling as a witness one Sir Laurence Olivier. I remember his long absences from home defending, down in Wales, a member of what, by today’s standards, would be regarded as a comparatively amateur terrorist group known as the Free Wales Army. His closing speech was met by a standing ovation from the public

Celebrate the life

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

gallery, most of whom were Welsh Nationalists, and John was made an honorary member of the Free Wales Army.

John was made a circuit judge in 1972, but had been sitting part-time as a Deputy Chairman of Quarter Sessions in Kent since 1968. As a full-time judge, he continued to sit for another 10 years at Maidstone and Canterbury, before moving to Sussex where he was the resident judge from 1986 to 1996. He was the second circuit judge in the country to be invited to sit in the Court of Appeal Criminal Division, and he sat as a deputy High Court judge.

John retired as a full-time judge in 1996, although he sat on part-time for another three years. But he did not retire from professional life. By now, he was a Bencher of the Inner Temple and threw himself wholeheartedly into advocacy training. He also served as Chair or Vice Chair on a number of committees, including one relating to the administration of criminal justice in Northern Ireland, which was central to the peace process, and another investigating the conduct of prosecutions by HM Customs and Excise.

Those with first-hand experience of John as a judge talk of his wisdom, integrity and sense of fairness; of his dedication to public service. They speak in terms of fondness and respect.

John would have been flattered to know that tributes have been paid to him.

Master Gower on his first horse, Sandy

But John’s life extended far beyond the law.

“ He was a Bencher of the Inner Temple and threw himself wholeheartedly into advocacy training” As a young man, he was active in politics, and for a while contemplated a career in politics. There is a tape recording of John addressing a Tory Party Conference in the late 1950s.

It was a staunchly pro-trade union speech, in defence of the closed shop. I think he would have felt like a fish out of water in a Conservative Party led by Margaret Thatcher.

Fish out of water: John was responsible for many of those – as a passionate and skilled fly-fisherman, most of them caught on flies he had tied himself.

John and Shirley both took up golf in the 1960s, but it did not last. Although Shirley had a good eye for a ball and was a talented tennis player, John did not and was not. I therefore read with some surprise a first-hand account of a defendant whom John had just sentenced chucking an apple at him the length of the courtroom from the dock. John caught it one-handed and nonchalantly lobbed it back with the words, “You need this more than I do.”

Another sport both our parents took up at the same time was riding. John would never claim to be a particularly accomplished rider, but what he lacked in skill and finesse he made up for with his customary enthusiasm. John started hunting in the mid 1960s. He was known by some as ‘the Galloping Judge’. Hacking miles to meets before we had a trailer, the mist of those early September mornings at the start of the season were part of our growing up and brought us closer to Pa. Another lifelong passion of John’s was cats. John would indulge his sense of the ridiculous by putting one of our cats, in particular the Siamese called ‘Growler’, in the big pocket at the front of his apron so that his head was sticking out of the top.

He would then hop around the kitchen, playing ‘kangaroos’.

He was never happier than relaxing in his armchair after dinner with a cat on his lap.

strong faith. He was sidesman at Withyham for a good number of years and a churchwarden from 2005 to 2007, and again from 2009 to 2011. He sang in the church choir at Pembury as a boy, and lustily as a member of the congregation.

John was a scholarly man. He had a keen interest in, and extensive knowledge of, history. In this, he was aided by his elephantine memory. He had an aptitude for learning foreign languages. His Latin was good, and when I started to learn ancient Greek at school, he started to learn as well – the better to help me with my homework. He could converse in French and Italian. Holidays to Greece led him to take up modern Greek. His long case in Wales immersed him in Welsh.

Once John had finally retired, he turned to the university education he had, at least in part, missed out on. He wrote to London University asking if he could finish off the law degree he had only partially completed, and was a little miffed to be told he could not. So, he started a theology degree, again by correspondence with London University. He was delighted that his tutors included a rabbi and a Jesuit priest. The degree involved his learning Hebrew. He got a long way with it but, as he had always predicted, he simply ran out of time.

Is it possible to sum up a life so rich and varied in a few words?

Probably not. John had a zest for life, an enthusiasm for all he did, which, in turn, was infused with his all-pervading sense of humour. While of course we are all entitled to be sad, should we not be celebrating an interesting, long and full life led by a thoroughly decent, respected and much-loved man?

His Honour Judge Peter Gower QC 21 August 2017

Another love of John’s life was the Church. He always had a 121

C

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Temple Women’s Forum

TEMPLE WOMEN’S FORUM Speeches by Master Taylor and the Lord Chief Justice at the annual Temple Women’s Forum Networking Party on 2 July 2018 MASTER TAYLOR :

THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE:

Good evening and, on behalf of the Committee, I welcome you to the fourth Temple Women’s Forum Annual Networking Party.

It is a pleasure to be here and to be able to say a few words to such a distinguished gathering of lawyers. Deborah has spoken of my personal commitment to diversity and also my aim to increase public understanding of the role of the judiciary and the rule of law in our country. The two are linked. If we can encourage bright youngsters from all backgrounds to consider a career in the law, we will not only improve the diversity of the legal profession but also its quality.

Every year we have held this event, more and more of you have come: last year 450, and this year over 700. It is now established as one of the main diversity events of the year.

It is probably the largest in London this year, other than the march to celebrate 100 years of women’s suffrage.

Of course, we are delighted to welcome you all, but because of the numbers, I had to make two important phone calls. Firstly, I rang the Met Office, and said, “Keep this weather switched on, because if it rains, we will be a bit squashed in the marquee” – and they agreed!

T

Emboldened by my success, I then rang the England manager, and said, “Gareth, you can’t come top of the group. You have to play on Tuesday. On Monday, the Lord Chief Justice is speaking to 700 lawyers.” He didn’t hesitate. He said, “Say no more. Harry’s on the bench.” Quite fitting really. It took me a couple of seconds to realise that he wasn’t telling me that Harry Kane was the latest judicial appointment from an untraditional background.

No doubt it would be a very popular appointment at that.

Now I may not actually have had that conversation with Gareth Southgate, but we certainly are honoured that the Lord Chief Justice, The Right Hon Lord Justice Burnett, is speaking this evening.

He was appointed a High Court judge in 2008 after a highly distinguished career at the Bar practising mainly in public and administrative law, including acting on inquiries into rail disasters such as the 1987 King’s Cross fire, the 1997 Southall rail crash and the 1999 Ladbroke Grove rail crash; the inquiry into the mis-convictions of the Guildford Four and Maguire Seven; and the inquests after the 1997 deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales and Dodi Fayed. In 2014, he was appointed to the Court of Appeal, and in October last year was appointed Lord Chief Justice, the youngest for over 50 years.

Since his appointment, he has supported measures aimed at increasing diversity in the professions and in the judiciary and has made it a central part of his role to increase public understanding of the role of the judiciary in the constitution and in the daily life of the country, and the importance of the rule of law in society.

122

Diversity is important for the purpose of enhancing public confidence in the legal profession and particularly the judiciary.

The latest picture painted by the Judicial Appointments Commission statistics bulletin published on 2 June 2018 is very encouraging so far as gender diversity is concerned. For those who have both the time and the inclination, a quick canter through the bulletin is very worthwhile. The way in which the statistics have been presented is more sophisticated than hitherto. The JAC has attempted to put diversity statistics in context looking at rates of appointment against realistic comparators. They take account of the representation of different groups in the legal profession at a stage in practice when judicial appointment might be a realistic option. The figures also look at rates of appointment as compared with the rates of application and caution against too simplistic an approach which fails to take account of statistical significance.

All that said, the steady increase in the proportion of women being appointed as judges has continued. On the broadest measure, which includes appointment to both legal and nonlegal judicial roles, women accounted for 47 per cent of those recommended for immediate appointment but only 43 per cent of applicants. In legal exercises, women represented 43 per cent of applicants and 40 per cent of recommendations for immediate appointment. That high rate of recommendation is not reflected in appointments to the Circuit Bench and above. In the recent Circuit Judge exercise, 36 per cent of applicants were women and 35 per cent were appointed. Last year’s High Court competition saw women recommended for 29 per cent of the appointments. We await the announcement of the High Court appointments for this year. I would be very disappointed if the figure were not much higher.

Treasury

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

AFTERWORD Thank you to the Lord Chief Justice for coming this evening and for such encouraging words.

None of those here will have missed the announcement last week of the new justices for the Supreme Court. When Lady Justice Arden joins that court in October, a quarter of its members will be women. The appointments to the Court of Appeal also announced last week to take effect during the course of the next legal year include three women out of seven, which will take the proportion to just over a quarter. ut the representation of women at all these levels of B the judiciary compares very favourably with that in the professions. The picture continues to improve.

At all levels, we need to encourage suitably qualified candidates to apply for judicial appointment. The job is one of the best in the world. The Treasurer of Inner Temple, Dame Elizabeth Gloster, just retired from the Court of Appeal, reminded me to say that. Almost all judges speak of how much they enjoy the job of judging and recognise its importance for those whose disputes they are resolving, and more widely.

It brings with it enormous responsibility but provides stimulation and satisfaction in deciding difficult and fascinating issues. I should add that overwhelmingly one’s colleagues are good fun and the atmosphere is enjoyable.

Before we really start the party, I would like to thank Rachel Langdale QC, who has recently stepped down as Middle Temple Convenor, for her hard work, commitment and good humour in that role. It has been a great pleasure to work with Rachel in this collaboration with Middle Temple, and I am also delighted that HHJ Khatun Sapnara has taken over from her.

I would also like to thank the staff of the two Inns, Inner and Middle Temple, who put so much work into the arrangements and in making this, and all the other Forum events, so enjoyable. I would also like to thank the Inns themselves for their support. Without the goodwill of successive Treasurers and Benchers, this event would not have got off the ground.

So now it is time to take advantage of their support. I know that many of you will see this as an opportunity to meet old friends and to relax after a day at work. But it is also an opportunity to meet new people, and I am going to encourage you do so. Here’s a challenge: don’t leave before speaking to five people you don’t know. Who knows where it may lead.

Her Honour Judge Deborah Taylor Co-Convenor of the Temple Women’s Forum

Enormous strides are being taken by the Judicial Committee, chaired by Lady Justice Hallett, and the Diversity Forum to support and encourage applications. If you are interested and think you have what it takes, find out about the different roles available; explore the JAC website. Identify a role which you might enjoy – and apply.

We will welcome you with enthusiasm.

But in the meantime, enjoy this evening, this wonderful garden and the good company of those here.

Thank you.

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Burnett The Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales

123

T

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Inner Temple Summer Party

INNER TEMPLE SUMMER PARTY

T

124

Treasury

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

T

125

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Master Flather

MASTER FLATHER Judge and MS sufferer who carried on working in court thanks to his dog and a good sense of humour.

Gary Flather, who sat for ten years as a deputy High Court judge and for 27 years as a recorder, battled multiple sclerosis for 40 years and turned his disability into a means of promoting greater awareness of the needs of wheelchair users, while serving as a role model for continuing to achieve great things “while sitting down to work”, as he liked to put it.

For a while, he tried to conceal his MS, afraid that he would lose work as a barrister. “In spite of my fears, solicitors never turned a hair,” he recalled. “Even clients joined in the spirit of the thing. On one occasion, having conducted a long crossexamination in the Chancery Division, I felt my knees lock. I whispered my dilemma to the client, sitting behind me. I said I would just have to fall back on to counsel’s bench, and could he catch me? To which he replied, ‘If you don’t mind I will catch your head first, because that’s the part I am paying for.’”

C

Flather’s quest to live life as fully as was humanly possible was illustrated on a family trip to Walt Disney World in Florida, when he made it clear that he was going on the Big Thunder Mountain Railroad roller coaster. When staff said that he could take the ride only if he assured them that he could climb down more than 50 steps from the peak in the event of a power cut, he thought for a moment, then asked if there was a time limit. There wasn’t, they said. He told them that it would be no problem, and he went round several times strapped into his cart. Only later did he confess that it might have taken him hours to make his way down to the ground.

Flather was moved to tears when Nelson Mandela came down the steps in Westminster Hall, after making his speech to MPs and peers, and approached Flather first to thank him for coming to hear him. Flather said that he had come only 50 miles, while Mandela had come many thousands.

The first indications of MS had appeared while Flather was skiing in Chamonix in his early 40s, when he felt unsteady on his legs. Then, during a climb to the top of Kilimanjaro, his toes started to curl, another telltale sign.

With typical tenacity, and the help of fellow climbers whom he did not know, he still made it to the summit.

“I used to berate my husband for drinking too much,” his wife, Baroness Flather, recalled, “but neither of us realised that his lack of co-ordination was an early symptom of the MS. It came as a terrible shock.”

In court, when it was time for lunch, his dog would yawn to order. He became increasingly dependent on sticks and his wheelchair, and gradually became less mobile. By the end, he was having to be hoisted into bed and into the shower. However, he had allies in his work – his first canine partner was Gracie, “the Countess of Woof”. She was succeeded by Mac, who would wait outside Flather’s door in the mornings. Able to open doors, pick up objects and summon help, the dogs allowed him some independence, as well as serving as a magnet for attention, helping to ensure that Flather was never ignored.

126

“ In court, when it was time for lunch, his dog would yawn to order” They sat quietly by him in court, sometimes relieving the tension of proceedings when tempers were frayed. Once, when his wheelchair toppled over – possibly because he was going too fast – Gracie bounded free to return shortly with help. On another occasion, when his wheelchair was jammed outside his house, Gracie was able to ring the doorbell. And in court, when someone was speaking at length and it was time to break for lunch, Gracie would yawn to order.

In 2003, at a party at Buckingham Palace attended by Flather and Gracie, an official from the charity Canine Partners for Independence, which had supplied the dog to Flather, asked the Queen if she had seen Gracie before. “Oh yes,” the Queen replied, “she comes along to all my parties.”

Flather used his disabilities for good. He founded the Bar Council Disability Committee, chairing it for ten years and campaigning for improved access in courts and for disabled students’ rights.

Many of the court buildings in England and Wales are more than 100 years old, and almost as many are listed. There was much to do to improve access.

“Public access is a nonsense,” he said in 1997. “We need to raise the profile of the disabled. In one county court in west London the loo in the judge’s chamber is too narrow for my wheelchair.

I had to ask the usher to help me walk the few paces.” In some courts, he had to sit as a judge at the same level as the rest of the court. Today, all courts are designed with disability in mind, and there are grants for disabled student lawyers – thanks in large part to Flather.

His campaign to make courtrooms more accessible led to other work. He became a commissioner for the Chelsea Pensioners, worked to improve disabled access to theatres and promoted equal opportunities on the Bar Council. Probably his favourite cause, however, was Canine Partners for Independence.

Gary Denis Flather was born into one of Sheffield’s leading steel families to Joan and Denis, who was a Master Cutler, effectively an ambassador for the industry. Gary went to Oundle School, then read law at Pembroke College, Oxford, having battled with his strong-willed father, who wanted him to join the family steel business. He did his national service with the infantry in Aden, then served in the Territorial Army for three years.

He did have a short stint in the family business, but was called to the Bar in 1962, taking silk in 1984. He made many lifelong friends along the way, such as Michael Howard (later Lord Howard), Donald Anderson (later an MP and then a peer) and a future Lord Justice of Appeal, Robin Auld, with whom he shared rooms for 18 years. He also had many pupils of great distinction, including Andrew Collins, who became a High Court judge.

Celebrate the life

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

C

Master Flather

Flather loved to travel, and on a visit to Delhi as part of a world tour, he met Shreela Rai. They married in 1966 and Shreela, who began her career teaching English as a foreign language, went on to register a number of firsts. She was the UK’s first female local councillor from an ethnic minority, the first Asian female mayor and the first Asian woman to sit in the House of Lords. They had two sons: Paul, a Fellow at Mansfield College, Oxford, and the first head of the Central European University; and Marcus, professor of cardiovascular medicine at East Anglia University.

Flather continued an active law practice, even though his disability barred him from the most senior appointments, serving as a deputy High Court judge for a decade.

He also took on a dizzying array of tribunals, dictating his judgments using voice-recognition software. These included the Mental Health Review Tribunal, of which he was president for 23 years; the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, for whom he standardised procedures; police disciplinary appeals; an insider-dealing bank inspection for the Department of Trade and Industry; and the Inner London Education Authority’s teachers disciplinary tribunal – including the

controversial inquiry into William Tyndale Junior School in the mid-1970s, after radically progressive methods had been introduced at the north London primary, and which led to increased government control over education.

As a deputy High Court judge, Flather noted, his memory improved dramatically. “It was impossible to take notes and it’s difficult to turn pages.” He noted how the Bar had no safety nets. “If you fall ill it is catastrophic, because earning ability is affected if it is known that you have an impairment.

For me it was a very lonely business.”

He carried on working, dictating a complicated judgment the week he died. He also continued to indulge his zest for travel, enjoying often challenging cruises, the easiest mode of travel for him, including trips to the Caribbean, the Mediterranean, the Baltic and the fjords, and earlier in 2017 to the Pacific, where he contracted pneumonia. He had a recurrence of it but had appeared to be on the mend just before he died.

Gary Flather QC OBE judge and disability campaigner, was born on 4 October 1937. He died of complications from multiple sclerosis on 9 October 2017, aged 80.

Courtesy of The Times / News Licensing 127

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Oral History Project

ORAL HISTORY PROJECT Extracts from an interview with Master Morland conducted on 21 November 2017 by Alison Grant, a non-practising member of the Inn. The conversation focuses on Master Morland’s practice on the Northern Circuit and changes to the Bar during his lengthy career.

A

Michael Morland

MM: After I was called to the Bar, I joined the Northern Circuit and became a pupil in the leading civil set in Liverpool; my pupil master was Bob Nicklin, who had by far the largest civil practice in the Liverpool Bar. I got into chambers in Liverpool, and the pupillage, because a great friend of my father was the in-house solicitor to Pilkington Brothers, the glass manufacturers. And he sent all Pilkington’s work to my future pupil-master. On the strength of that, not as a result of any competition as would happen today, I ended up in those chambers; and eventually, after my pupil-master had become a county court judge, I then started to get, and eventually got, all the work of Pilkington Brothers! I was a junior in Liverpool until I took silk in 1972.

By that time, rather like my former pupil-master, I had certainly the largest civil practice in Liverpool, and probably one of the biggest practices on the Northern Circuit.

But my happiest time on the Circuit was as the Junior of the Northern Circuit, when I organised the dinner for Lord Chancellor Kilmuir, who’d been Junior of the Northern Circuit in about 1920, and a Liverpool junior as David Maxwell Fyfe, and Jack Ashworth, who was Fyfe’s, or Kilmuir’s, first appointment as a High Court Judge – Ashworth being of course a Bencher of the Inner Temple. When I applied for silk, I wrote to two Benchers of the Inner Temple to support me. One was Ashworth, and the other was Basil Nield, who was again, had been, Junior of the Northern Circuit, a junior in Liverpool. Ashworth had been Junior of the Northern Circuit; and they were my 128

referees for my application for silk, which I applied for in January 1972, becoming a silk on Maundy Thursday in 1972.

Shortly before I got silk, I was offered a brief in Carlisle, on the nomination of the Attorney General. In those days, counsel for important prosecutions was selected by the Attorney General, and his clerk would ring up the Junior’s clerk, and say, “There’s a brief for you in Carlisle.” My clerk rashly said to the Attorney General’s clerk that I was far too busy to do a criminal case in Carlisle; so, the Attorney’s clerk said, “Well, if he gets silk in, at Easter, tell him there’ll be a place for him in my – our chambers.”

So, the result was, I went into Peter Rawlinson’s chambers – who was then the Conservative Attorney General. I moved to London from Cheshire, and my family came down too.

The acting head of chambers when I moved in – because Peter Rawlinson was then Attorney General – was Douglas Lowe, also a Master of the Bench of the Inner Temple, and renowned for being a gold medallist in the 800 metres in the 1924 and 1928 Olympics. And I shared a room with him. We had a rule on the Northern Circuit until about 1960 that everybody taking silk had to leave their circuit chambers and could not live within 50 miles of a circuit town – one of the reasons I moved to London.

I was a great supporter of this old rule, which was eventually reversed in about 1960, because two clever people from Manchester decided on a postal vote, which meant that the women members of the Bar and the London practitioners could all vote, and so the rule was then

Archives

changed. But as I supported the retention of the old rule, I had to move. Our chambers were 12 King’s Bench Walk, and I remained there until I went on the Bench in 1989.

In 1989, I got a telephone call in February, from James Mackay the Lord Chancellor, who of course is a Bencher at this Inn, saying would I go and see him next week.

And I did; and after discussing for three-quarters of an hour his Green Paper, I thought he was going to ask me to become a judge in the Family Division, which I was going to refuse. Because I got a letter about two months before the telephone call, saying would I agree to sit as a deputy High Court judge in the Family Division.

AG: When you were on the Northern Circuit, in the early days, did you have many links with Inner Temple then.

MM: Well, yes, whenever I had a case in London, I would always come to lunch in the Inn, and I frequently used to stay in the Devereux Hotel, which is just off, the Middle Temple. Is it Devereux Street? It’s now closed, I think.

I do remember of course using the library. I remember I was led by, Richard Bingham, who was a Bencher of this Inn, and a Conservative Member of Parliament. Later, he was a member of the Beeching Commission, which ended the Assizes as we know them today; after he’d destroyed the railways, Beeching destroyed the Bar. And Dick Bingham was on that Commission, which I think was set up by Lord Gardiner and

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Rashly, I said I would. And then, anyway, after three-quarters of an hour he said, “Would you like to be a judge?” I said, “It depends what sort of judge.” He said, “Well, what about the Queen’s Bench?” So, I said yes and that’s how I became a judge. And then in 1981, I was sitting in Winchester, which is a wonderful place to sit, for the whole of the summer term there, and I got a letter from Geoffrey Lane, the then Lord Chief Justice, saying would I like to be the presiding judge of the Northern Circuit?

“ Well, if he gets silk in, at Easter, tell him there’ll be a place for him in my – our chambers” brought in the Courts Act and the modern Crown Courts and so forth. But I remember being led by Dick Bingham before a judge called Mr Justice McNair, and our case depended on a decision in 1707. I remember being told by Bingham to go and look this case up in the library here in the Inn. I did have trips to London. I remember very, very early on, one of my first case I got a brief in Manchester before Mr Justice Austin Jones, and my opponents were the silk Neville Laski, who was a Bencher of the Inner Temple, and the father of Marghanita, and the brother of Harold Laski who was chairman of the Labour Party. Neville eventually became – in about 1956 I think – Recorder of Liverpool. And he was a great help to me in my early days at the Bar. But I remember in this case against him, I got very rough treatment in the Court of Appeal when I appealed a case, and Neville Laski and his junior, who was my predecessor as Junior of the Northern Circuit, Mark Carlisle, were not called upon to argue, and I had to battle against Hilbury, who was presiding in the Court of Criminal Appeal.

The answer was “Yes”, and I became a presiding judge in October 1990. And I was presiding judge of the Northern Circuit until October 1995. For the last four years, I was the senior presider because Johan Steyn, who was my senior when I was appointed to that post, then went to the Court of Appeal. When I was presider of the Northern Circuit, it meant that half my time was spent on the Northern Circuit and half my time in London. And it was only after that that I again circulated round the country.

What I didn’t mention was that the year after I was appointed as silk, I was asked by Peter Rawlinson to go to Northern Ireland to act for the Crown in internment appeals, and for that purpose we lived in Long Kesh prison, later the Maze prison.

The inmates – the other inmates being suspected terrorists, and that was – we travelled out in luxury from Northolt by RAF planes, and then with armed police drove to Long Kesh. And we were there for the week. At the weekends we flew home.

The Bar in those days was very different from the Bar today.

It was very much smaller. There were under 2,000 barristers in the whole of the English Bar. On the Northern Circuit, there were only 100 (about) in Liverpool and about 100 in Manchester. And very few women of course – other than Rose Heilbron, who was a QC before I was called to the Bar. Of living people, I suppose I’m the person who did the most cases against Rose Heilbron. She became the first woman to lead our circuit after I became a QC, when all the men QCs decided not to stand, so Rose could be elected unopposed.

I remember her saying – she was then by no means a young lady – on a train trip down to London, “I don’t think I’m ever going to become a judge.”. And I said, “Oh, Elwyn Jones,” who was the Lord Chancellor, was a Bencher of Gray’s Inn, and I said, “You’re in Gray’s Inn, I’m sure he’ll appoint you!” Sure enough he did.

Carrying on about the Inner Temple: I was on the Library Committee after I became a Bencher in 1979 (in those days you became a Bencher basically ‘Buggins’ turn’). Hardly anybody who was a silk didn’t become a Bencher, and it normally took about seven years in those days. I then became chairman of the Library Committee, succeeding Master Hobhouse, another nominal Northern Circuiteer. I seconded him for election to the Northern Circuit. He spent his childhood in Liverpool, and he of course became a Lord of Appeal. And I succeeded him as chairman of the Library Committee in about 1987.

The Rt Hon Lord Rawlinson of Ewell QC, Treasurer 1984, by Keith Breedon RP

129

A

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Oral History Project

But a funny incident in that period was that I only dealt with Protestants, terrorists, alleged terrorists, and the evidence, so-called, was all hearsay or double hearsay, normally given by the assistant Chief Constable, a Mr Bradley, who was the head of Special Branch in the Northern Ireland – it was then called the Ulster police.

and we made two recommendations, which were accepted by the Labour government. One was we recommended a very speedy end to internment, which did take place very shortly after. And then the Diplock Courts – when the terrorists were tried without juries – were brought in.

He gave evidence behind a screen. And one internee was a man called McMichael who sadly was murdered shortly afterwards.

And Mr Bradley, from behind the screen, was saying that McMichael was a notorious terrorist. After I had dealt with the Crown’s case, the internee, in this case McMichael, was allowed to ask questions of the police officer behind the screen.

McMichael said: “Mr Bradley!” He said: “I recognised you by your boots!”, which of course protruded through the bottom of the screen! But, ah… and he obviously knew McMichael was quite a well-known character, and I think his son was at one time a member of the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Following on after the Conservative government fell, in 1974, the Labour government set up a committee of inquiry chaired by Lord Gardiner, the previous Lord Chancellor, who coincidentally had been head, before my time, of 12 King’s Bench Walk. I was on holiday at a cottage we had bought up in Northumberland, at a place called Allenheads. And, of course, we had no telephone, and there were no mobiles in those days, and I and my wife and the two children had been for a walk and when we got home to the cottage – it was 15,000 feet in the Fells – there were two uniformed policemen there.

A

And they said would I telephone the Attorney General. So that meant a 20-minute walk down to the public telephone in Allenheads village, and putting cash into the machine to get the telephone to work and press button A. Anyway, the Attorney General was Sam Silkin, and after a bit of conversation, I said, “I’m running out of money!” So, I said, “Can you ring me back on this public telephone?” And he did, and he asked me to be a member of this committee, chaired by Lord Gardiner, considering the law and terrorism in Northern Ireland.

I was the youngest member of that committee. There was Lord MacDermott, just retired as Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland; Alastair Buchan, the son of John Buchan, who was a member of this Inn, and a professor at Oxford; Kathleen Jones, a professor of something like social studies at York University, who’d been on the Chadwick Commission on the Established Church, and the Church and State Commission; an unusual historian from Queen’s University, called Dr White, who was a Catholic Unionist; and then there was a Northern Ireland silk, who was a nationalist, a Republican nationalist. This committee sat in 1974, and we met in Ireland, in Hillsborough Castle, which is now the Queen’s residence in Scotland, which was the old Governor’s House.

And again, we were treated royally, because the Governor had only just left – the last Governor – and the staff was all there; and one of the amusing things was that Gerald Gardiner and Lord MacDermott were politically poles apart.

Gerald of course was Labour Lord Chancellor; Lord MacDermott was a Tory Unionist of extreme form. And we always sat at 9 o’clock in the morning; Gardiner was always first to go into the room where we sat, and MacDermott was always the last. I was the creep who was always second, and MacDermott used to say, “What wonderful bacon and egg we had for breakfast!”, which would infuriate Gardiner, and one morning he said, “Who gave me an apple-pie bed last night? I know it was one of you!” – looking at Gardiner.

Gardiner didn’t regard this as proper conduct on this important committee. Anyway, eventually we published a report,

The second was the end of special category prisoners, which were people who were terrorists, or alleged terrorists, who were in the Maze prison, and were treated separately from ordinary criminals. We recommended that that should end, and that convicted terrorists should be treated in exactly the same way as other convicted people; and that caused the famous hunger strikes. That was accepted by the Labour government, and eventually by the Tory government, and Margaret Thatcher had to deal with the sad death of Bobby Sands, who died of a hunger strike.

That was my period in Northern Ireland, and I didn’t return to Northern Ireland again until after I’d retired as a High Court judge in 2004, when I was asked to chair the Rosemary Nelson inquiry. Rosemary Nelson was a Catholic, nationalist solicitor who was tragically blown up outside her daughter’s school in her car, her two sons being on a school ski-ing trip at the time, to the Alps. Charlie Falconer, the Lord Chancellor, asked me to chair that inquiry.

Initially, I refused; eventually, I agreed. We sat, both in London and in Belfast, from the end of 2004 until 2011, when I was two months short of my 82nd birthday.

Leading counsel for the inquiry was Rory Phillips, who’s now Master of the Bench of the Inner Temple.

AG: You mentioned earlier on that the Bar itself has changed considerably?

MM: Yes. AG: Has the Inner Temple changed in the same way?

MM: Well, the number of Benchers has increased hugely.

Another thing that has changed, really since I stopped being a High Court judge, is the number of Benchers lunching in the Inn has dropped almost to a minimal number. When I was a judge, I lunched in the Inn almost every single day, even when I was trying substantial cases across the road. Rarely now do we see puisne judges at lunch, and very few silks.

When I was a silk, I always lunched in the Inn if I was appearing in the Royal Courts of Justice across the road. That seems to have…of course in those days, one appeared in all courts wearing bands, and one lunched in bands, and the judges walked across from the courts wearing their bands, and…that has definitely changed.

And, of course, the other big change is the number of women at the Bar, and the number of women who are High Court judges now. The Northern Circuit on Saturday is giving a dinner to five people, four of them women. Brenda Hale, President of the Supreme Court, who was a fellow Northern Circuiteer and three new women High Court judges, all Northern Circuiteers: Mrs Justice Yip, Mrs Justice Moulder and Mrs Justice Knowles.

Now, what else about the Bar has changed? One is the size of chambers. Some chambers, even on circuit, are 50, 60 or more people. When I joined my chambers in Liverpool at the end of my pupillage, there were six of us. I was the only one of the senior people who hadn’t been in the war!

I suppose the most well-known case I ever tried was the Bulger case, when two ten-year-old boys, Thompson and Venables, were convicted of James Bulger’s murder. Prosecuting counsel was Richard Henriques, who is a Bencher of this Inn. AG: Thank you very much for your time, and all your memories.

Sir Michael Morland in interview with Alison Grant

130

Celebrate the life

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

MASTER ANAND Former Chief Justice of India, Justice Dr Adarsh Sein Anand, passed away on 1 December 2017 in Delhi. He was 81.

Anand was the 29th Chief Justice of India and the first from Jammu and Kashmir to serve as CJI. Born on 1 November 1936 in Jammu, Justice Anand received his early education in Jammu and graduated from the then Jammu and Kashmir University. After completing his Bar-at-Law in 1964, Anand set up a lucrative practice at the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Chandigarh.

Having practised in criminal law, constitutional law and election law at the Punjab and Haryana High Court, he was appointed as Additional District Judge at Jammu and Kashmir High Court from 26 May 1975.

Justice Anand was confirmed as a permanent judge in the Jammu and Kashmir High Court in 1976 and rose to be the Chief Justice nine years later.

He became the Chief Justice of Jammu and Kashmir High Court on 11 May 1985 and transferred to the Madras High Court on 1 November 1989 and two years later elevated as a Supreme Court Judge.

He enjoyed one of the longest tenures as Chief Justice, from 10 October 1998 to 31 October 2001, since Justice Y V Chandrachud.

He had also written several books, including The Constitution of Jammu and Kashmir: Its Development and Comments.

Justice Anand was awarded the degree of Doctorate in Law (Honorary) by Lucknow University in 1996 and was unanimously elected the President of the International Institute of Human Rights Society in 1996.

He was the first Indian to be honoured with a fellowship of University College London in 1997.

On 17 February 2003, he took over as the Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission and was succeeded by Justice Rajendra Babu on 2 April 2007.

In February 2010, he was appointed to chair a five-member committee set up to examine the safety aspects of the Mullaperiyar Dam in Kerala. The panel submitted the report on 25 April 2012.

Justice Anand believed justice to be a constitutional right and insisted that steps were required to be taken to provide inexpensive justice to people. Known for his strictness in judicial matters, Justice Anand was renowned for his judgments concerning public interest.

He had refused to relax the time limit set for scrapping of old commercial vehicles, which contributed to the rising pollution levels. He was also known for the exemplary work done as the Chairman of the National Legal Services Authority and had taken effective steps to establish Lok Adalats in every district of the country.

His daughter Munisha Gandhi is a lawyer at the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi expressed grief at the passing away of Justice Anand.

“Saddened by the demise of former Chief Justice of India, Justice AS Anand. My thoughts are with his family in this hour of grief.

May his soul rest in peace,” Modi said in a tweet.

Master Anand

Governor NN Vohra has condoled the sad passing away of Dr Anand, whom he had known well for many years.

In a message, the Governor prayed to the Almighty for granting peace to the departed soul and strength to the bereaved family to bear this unfortunate loss.

Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti expressed grief over the demise of Dr Anand.

In her condolence message, the Chief Minister described Justice Anand as an eminent jurist of the country who considered justice to be a constitutional right and would long be remembered for providing inexpensive justice to people.

She said that his judgments on issues of public interest would continue to guide the legal and legislative fraternity to work for the collective good of the society.

Mehbooba also recalled the contribution of Justice Anand, a son of the soil, in introducing the concept of Lok Adalats as the Chairman of National Legal Services Authority and also as the Chairman of National Human Rights Commission of India.

The Chief Minister has prayed for peace to the departed soul and extended her heartfelt sympathies to the bereaved family of Justice Anand.

Deputy Chief Minister Nirmal Singh condoled the demise of Dr Anand. In a message, Singh prayed for eternal peace to the departed soul and strength to the bereaved family to bear this unfortunate loss.

State Law Secretary Abdul Majid Bhat has also expressed grief over the death of former Justice A S Anand.

“His death is a great loss to the legal fraternity and to the State of J&K,” Bhat said.

Dr Farooq Abdullah and Omar Abdullah expressed profound grief and sorrow over the demise of Justice Anand.

Extending their heartfelt condolences to the bereaved family, the Abdullahs prayed for peace to the departed soul.

Saying that Justice Anand was an illustrious son-of-the-soil and had brought laurels to the State, Farooq highlighted his contributions in the field of justice and said that his work would be remembered for a long time to come.

Senior National Conference leaders including Ali Muhammad Sagar, Sheikh Mustafa Kamal, Nasir Aslam Wani, Devender Singh Rana, Junaid Mattu and other party functionaries and legislators expressed grief over Justice Anand’s demise and prayed for peace to the departed soul.

Director General of Police SP Vaid condoled the demise of Dr Adarsh Sen Anand. In his message, the DGP said that Anand was a proud son of the soil whose services to the country in general and to the judiciary in particular will be remembered for a long time.

Courtesy of Greater Kashmir 131

C

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Temple Big Picnic

TEMPLE BIG PICNIC

T

132

Treasury

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

T

133

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

A Tropical Attorney General

A TROPICAL ATTORNEY GENERAL

By John McKendrick QC

T

It’s fair to acknowledge most of us have wondered what it might be like to leave the Temple behind and practice law from a small, sun-drenched island. When the role of Attorney General in Anguilla was advertised in March 2016, one month after I had taken silk, I needed no encouragement to apply.

Anguilla is a partly self-governing British Overseas Territory in the north-east Caribbean. It has the most beautiful beaches I have ever seen. The Governor (a British civil servant) appoints the Attorney General, who is employed by the government of Anguilla. It’s a busy role. The island has a population of 15,000 and AG’s chambers is only 14 strong, so the AG is also the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Solicitor General. Having come from a fairly broad practice at Outer Temple Chambers, I was used to dealing with different issues, but nothing could quite prepare me.

The AG advises all of government, sometimes papering over tensions between the Governor and the Chief Minister.

The AG prosecutes all crime. The role also involves a more political role, sitting ex officio in Executive Council (Cabinet) and the House of Assembly (Parliament). I arrived knowing nothing about Crown leases and will leave having read and advised on too many. There is no average day. Every morning I entered the office knowing there were no area of law off limits. There would be a regular diet of advice in respect of investment contracts, development MOUs, land disputes, advice to the Royal Anguilla Police Force (there were more than one or two grisly murders in my time), employment disputes, mental health prisoners, abducted children, trafficked women and corruption investigations.

But of course, there was more to my time than work. We had a fabulous house with sweeping views of St Martin and St Barth from our plush pool deck. Weekends involved boat trips, snorkelling, swimming and lots of great lunches as anyone who has followed me on Twitter will know (@johnMQC). Work also required me to travel extensively: Barbados, Turks and Caicos Islands, Trinidad, Bermuda, Antigua, Dominica, St Lucia, Guyana, Panama, Miami and Montserrat. What hardship.

134

Two storms defined my tenure. The first storm was predictable.

I was well warned by the then Governor that living and working as an openly gay couple would create some tensions for my partner and me. As soon as we arrived in early September 2016, the island appeared incapable of talking about anything else.

The churches, in particular, protested and asked the Governor to revoke my appointment. A number of prominent people resigned from public offices. There were demonstrations in the street and the issue was front page news for several weeks.

Other Caribbean islands made clear they would never tolerate “a gay AG”. All of this was manageable, but the low point was being woken in the middle of the night by six armed police officers delivering a ‘safety briefing’. Never again do I want to try to sleep with armed police officers outside the house. Inevitably, the storm calmed and, in true Caribbean style, by Christmas we featured in a fairly humorous Calypso song. I am proud to have been the Caribbean’s first openly gay Attorney General.

The second storm wasn’t really predicted until too late.

Hurricane Irma ripped across the island on 6 September 2017, killing one person, injuring several and damaging most of the houses on the island. Our home was very badly damaged, as Irma ripped off all the hurricane shutters and then sucked out all the windows and doors. I was speaking at a conference in Cambridge and my partner, alone, had to run for his life. It was upsetting. I managed to charter a flight and returned to the island a few days later. Flying over the island in a small plane revealed the extent of the devastation: Anguilla was a mess.

We spent over three months in temporary accommodation without mains power or running water. The island felt overrun by soldiers, DFID, Red Cross and UNICEF officials. Boris Johnson came to visit and we sat with him drinking a bottle of Mount Gay, on the lawn of the Governor’s badly damaged residence.

It was a strange, oppressively hot, bewildering few months. In time, the island partly recovered and my work moved on from disaster response to focus on criminal and family justice reform – the Church once again in conflict with me over planned decriminalisation of possession of small amounts of cannabis.

Treasury

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

“ As soon as we arrived in early September 2016, the island appeared incapable of talking about anything else. The churches, in particular, protested and asked the Governor to revoke my appointment” T

John McKendrick QC

There are dozens of legal positions in the UK’s 14 overseas territories. These roles combine fascinating work in some of the most beautiful and remote places on the planet. I encourage anyone to consider taking up a post for a few years. I learned more about myself and the law in two years than the rest of my comfortable Temple career and am deeply fortunate to leave with an abiding love for the Caribbean.

John McKendrick QC Attorney General of Anguilla 2016–2018

135

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Master Murphy-O’Connor

MASTER MURPHY-O’CONNOR Archbishop of Westminster shaken by the crisis over child-abusing priests “Tuo e colpevole!” – “You’re to blame!” – Pope Francis said to Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor shortly after being elected to the papacy in 2013. The former Archbishop of Westminster gently demurred. At 80, he was no longer eligible to enter the conclave, but, thought by some to be a king-maker, he was spied eating risotto with the future Pope.

The word ‘blame’, however, had less pleasant associations for the jovial, red-faced Murphy-O’Connor, who in 2000 became the leader of the 4.1 million Catholics living in England and Wales.

Months after his appointment as the tenth Archbishop of Westminster, he was mired in a scandal over a paedophile priest in his former diocese. While he was the Bishop of Arundel and Brighton, he had made a known abuser, Father Michael Hill, the chaplain of Gatwick airport.

C

In 1997, Hill was jailed for five years for child abuse, and after admitting further offences he was sent to prison again in 2002. Of Hill, Murphy-O’Connor later confessed: “Of course, I was very wrong. I should have reported him to the police and the social services. I didn’t.” A sharp learning curve ensued after Murphy-O’Connor’s Westminster appointment. “For the next two years it felt as if I was always going on the Today programme and being harangued by John Humphrys… I started to dread reading the newspapers,” he wrote.

By then he had met numerous survivors of sexual abuse by priests in London and, later, Ireland, at public hearings and private meetings. He said: “To my shame, it only gradually began to sink in just how much damage abuse causes to victims – pain and damage that will be part of their life for ever.” In full mea culpa mode, he described himself as “naïve and ignorant”.

While such damage could not be undone, Murphy-O’Connor did oversee the design and introduction of the first guidelines to deal with sexual abuse and the Catholic Church in England and Wales.

Weeks after the Hill story broke, Murphy-O’Connor was approached with an offer of help by Lord Nolan, who had previously chaired a committee on parliamentary sleaze for John Major’s government. Nolan assembled a committee, including a detective chief inspector of the Met, that recommended guidelines applying – for the first time – to every Catholic diocese in England and Wales on procedures for sexual abuse committed by priests.

In later years, Murphy-O’Connor questioned his own authoritativeness in dealing with paedophile clergy. “Perhaps I lack the ruthlessness that really successful leaders have,” MurphyO’Connor admitted in his 2015 memoir, An English Spring. Hill, who Murphy-O’Connor had removed from a parish and sent for therapy, had begged tearfully on his knees for further work as a priest. Baffled by conflicting psychiatrists’ reports, including one suggesting that he be given work far away from children, Murphy-O’Connor had sent him to Gatwick, then other parishes.

“Rather than tackle a difficult issue, I can be inclined to leave it aside and turn to something more cheerful and positive,” he confessed. In moments of difficulty, he would reach for his golf-putter and gently tap a ball across his office.

136

Master Murphy-O’Connor

Close to New Labour – even if he disagreed with their stance over same-sex adoption – he received Tony Blair into the Church in 2007, six months after Blair left office. Previously, Murphy-O’Connor would telephone Cherie Blair to voice his views on policy under discussion by the cabinet.

The resolutely informal Murphy-O’Connor insisted that his staff call him ‘Father’ rather than ‘Your Eminence’ and retained the air of a friendly parish priest. Tea and crumpets or, if the hour were late, Irish whiskey would be offered to visitors. The privileged heard him play Chopin on his grand piano, or shared his suppers of pasta, washed down with Châteauneuf-du-Pape.

He floundered in early interviews as Archbishop, but offscreen he was smoothly charming, mingling adroitly with the great and the good. Invited by Gordon Brown to join the House of Lords, he declared that as a priest he had to reject this offer to join “the best club in London”. Murphy-O’Connor relished the telling of anecdotes with a twinkle in his eye.

One involved him asking Pope John Paul II to beatify the Victorian English Cardinal John Henry Newman. There was a problem, John Paul II protested. No miracle had been attributed to Newman’s intercession. “That’s the trouble, Holy Father,” replied Murphy-O’Connor. “The English think of God very much as a gentleman and they don’t like asking him for things.”

Cormac Murphy-O’Connor was born in 1932, the fifth son of Patrick George Murphy-O’Connor, a doctor from Cork, and his wife, Ellen (née Cuddigan). Their 21-room house contained a doctor’s surgery. Ellen hired a French governess and insisted that her sons speak French at one meal a day.

Their attempts often ended in laughter. Three of her five sons became priests and one an Irish rugby international. As a child, Cormac once joined his brothers in stealing apples.

When war broke out, he was sent to Ireland to live with his grandparents and his accent, while English, retained a subtle Irish cadence. He discovered a priestly calling when he was a teenager, having announced at the age of three a future career as a doctor or the Pope. Educated at the Presentation College in Reading and Prior Park near Bath, he went to train for the priesthood at the age of 18 at the Venerable English College.

Celebrate the life

He struggled to understand the quick-fire Latin of his lectures at the Gregorian University and, although he enjoyed philosophy, sometimes skived his dry scripture sessions to sneak off for a coffee. He was ordained in Rome on 28 October 1956 and appointed to Corpus Christi parish in Portsmouth.

The poverty of his parishioners, most of whom worked in the naval dockyard, came as a shock. Murphy-O’Connor felt that his lectures from Rome were useless. An attempt to evangelise standing on a soapbox on the seafront at Southsea attracted hecklers. “I wasn’t sharp or witty enough to respond in kind,” Murphy-O’Connor later recalled.

As the secretary to the meticulously organised Bishop of Portsmouth, Derek Worlock, he learnt the art of planning and managing meetings. In 1971, Murphy-O’Connor was dispatched to Rome, a city that he once described as “like a good wine, to be sipped not gulped”. The next six years, when he was the rector of his alma mater, the English College, were perhaps his happiest. A highly popular rector, he treated his many guests to expertly prepared negroni cocktails.

In 1977, Murphy-O’Connor returned to England to be consecrated as the Bishop of Arundel and Brighton. A keen ecumenist, he was a long-term co-chairman of the Anglican and Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC), the official organ of theological dialogue between the Anglican Communion and the Roman Catholic Church. In 2000, he was awarded a doctorate of divinity by Dr George Carey, then Archbishop of Canterbury, in recognition of his work for Christian unity.

The relationship was not entirely conflict-free – in 1992, the Church of England voted to ordain women priests, and this led a number of Anglican clergy to become Roman Catholics.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Privately, Murphy-O’Connor said that he felt more Irish than English. He disliked stuffiness, the elitism of public schools and anything smacking of excessive organisation, once telling a foreign associate that he found the Scouts “too English for me”.

In Rome, he walked with an extra spring to his step. And, unlike Hume, he understood how to manage the Vatican.

When enraged by Rome, Cardinal Hume often threatened to fly out and confront the Curia. In contrast, Murphy-O’Connor would offer to tackle brewing problems himself at the first hint of trouble. He did so notably when Masses were being held for gay Catholics in Soho in an Anglican church. Some campaigned against the Masses, claiming that they went against Church teaching. Murphy-O’Connor spoke to the head of the Vatican’s doctrinal watchdog. Its prefect, Cardinal William Levada, a native of San Francisco, was not unfamiliar with such questions. A solution – that the Masses be moved to a Catholic church and a statement issued saying that no Church teaching was being opposed – was promptly reached.

Sometimes he made light-hearted jests about becoming Pope: “Don’t you think that Pope Cormac the First has a certain ring?” However, his self-deprecating charm masked an adept leader. He knew how to steer a meeting gently, when to lighten proceedings and when to press for consensus. In England, the more traditional Catholics labelled MurphyO’Connor a liberal. Broadly supportive of papal teaching, Murphy-O’Connor endorsed the ordaining of married priests and declared that it might be licit for married Catholics to use condoms as a defence against Aids. Although his relations with Pope Benedict XVI were warm, he indicated that he had not voted for him in the 2005 conclave.

“ He enjoyed impromptu singalongs, including one with the Queen Mother” Murphy-O’Connor, unlike some of his fellow bishops, took pains to welcome them into the fold. He enjoyed impromptu singalongs, including one with the Queen Mother.

An avid sportsman, he played golf nearly every Monday, a sport that put him in such a buoyant mood that his priests often came out with tricky requests on the golf course. Sometimes his answer would run counter to established policy in his diocese.

Details often eluded him, but he revealed during his first Mass as Archbishop of Westminster that bookies had laid odds of him obtaining the post at 25-1. The first news of his appointment came through an irritated press officer informing MurphyO’Connor of a report in The Sunday Times. Only a day later did the Spanish papal nuncio confirm that the report had been correct, saying: “Well, Father, the elephant is out of the bottle.”

Murphy-O’Connor’s appointment as the tenth Archbishop of Westminster surprised many. Cardinal Basil Hume had brought a religion long perceived to be the dangerous antithesis of Englishness to a position of newfound respectability. MurphyO’Connor’s surname, however, resonated strongly with the ‘foreign’ Catholicism of old, when it was largely the faith of Irish immigrants. Ostensibly, he marked a return to the status quo. In fact, he symbolised a large strand of England’s Catholic community: middle-class with a slab of Irish pedigree.

A friend of the 17th Duke of Norfolk – whom he met while he was Bishop of Arundel – he once led a ‘“Bishop’s XI’ cricket team against the duke’s family. In 2002, MurphyO’Connor was invited to Sandringham, becoming the first Roman Catholic clergyman since 1688 to preach a sermon to the reigning monarch. He arrived to find the Queen completing a jigsaw puzzle. While he was sitting next to the Duke of Edinburgh, the Archbishop parried the Duke’s digs against the Catholic ban on artificial contraception.

C

He put considerable energy into courting the New Labour government, which, in common with most English bishops, he thought better disposed towards the Church than the previous Tory government. However, when in January 2007 the Church asked to be exempted from new laws on gay adoption, the cabinet rejected the exemption. Murphy-O’Connor said that this left Catholic adoption agencies with little choice but to close.

In 2009, he resigned, becoming the first Archbishop of Westminster not to die in office. To mark his departure he took a small party to the Ritz and was delighted to be placed at the best table, where, in the words of one present, “he could not only see others, but be seen”. Only once did he leave the table – to chat to the pianist and suggest songs to enliven the party. Blessed with a fine tenor voice, Murphy-O’Connor was prone to impromptu singalongs, once giving a rendition of The White Cliffs of Dover with the Queen Mother. His energy was unflagging – when organisers of a dinner marking his diamond jubilee worried that he might be overwhelmed, Murphy-O’Connor promptly increased the number of guests.

A soaring figure – he was 6ft 4in tall – Murphy-O’Connor brought a cheery air to the office of Archbishop, although his sermons replete with jokes led critics to nickname him ‘comic’.

However, his faith in the unerring benevolence of the Church – a projection, he said, of his happy upbringing – was shaken to the core by the crisis over child-abusing priests.

Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, the tenth Archbishop of Westminster, was born on 24 August 1932. He died on 1 September, aged 85.

Courtesy of The Times/News Licensing

137

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Weddings and Baptisms

WEDDINGS & BAPTISMS ndrew Clarke and A Amarachi Uzowuru on 16 June 2018 © Sara Platt

ndreas Gledhill married A Catherine Callaghan on 21 April 2018

TC

L ily Tomkins and Anthony Searle married 9 June 2018 © Alex Beckett

abriella Cope – G 13 May 2018 baptism

138

The Temple Church

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

L aura Herbert and James Bone married 24 March 2018 Š Verity Quirk

TC

arren Ruhomon and Harper W Marshall married 5 May 2018

nnabel Jamieson and A Stephen Edwards married 7 July 2018

139

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Master Little

MASTER LITTLE A tribute by Master Pittaway given at a memorial service for Master Little held in the Temple Church on Wednesday 4 July 2018

Master Little © Birkbeck

C Over the past few years, I have listened to a good number of tributes in this church, some of them chronological, others thematic, and some of them long; however, today, I sense that Peter would have been embarrassed by the attention and would have said, “If you must, keep it short.”

If I may, I would like to concentrate on Peter’s career as Sub-Treasurer of the Inner Temple, which he came to after a distinguished career in the Gurkhas, at one time commanding the 1st Battalion. Following a long and fulfilling career, he decided to leave the Army when he completed his post at the MOD, as Director of Military Assistance Overseas.

I am told that he was recognised early as a man to watch and his varied subsequent postings reflected his ability.

The word which is repeated regularly when Treasurers of the Inn describe Peter is wise. As any of us who have been fortunate to occupy that role know, wisdom, guidance, steadfastness and friendship are required. Peter had all those qualities and more. He had an extraordinary ability to head off problems before they became a full-blown crisis.

It used to amuse Peter that the Inn’s advertisement for the post in The Daily Telegraph contained an errant “not”. It read: “He or she will not show marked communication skills, a sound grasp of figures, a rational approach to organisation and ability to deal appropriately with the widest range of people.” It would have been difficult for the Inn to have appointed anybody who could have exemplified those qualities better than Peter.

At the time of his interview, there was a strong field of candidates, including a number of retired service offices.

Peter, as a brigadier, was junior in rank to the other candidates.

When the panel came to consider which of the candidates it would recommend, one of the panel members posed this question: “If you came in to the Inn as Treasurer one morning to

140

be told by the Sub-Treasurer of some crisis which had occurred overnight, which of the candidates would you like to be the informant?” The unanimous response of the panel was Peter: he was the person the panel would all have trusted in a crisis.

I once asked Peter why, at the age of 51, with a successful career in the army, he had decided to put his military career behind him; his answer was unambiguous: that he wished to leave at an age when he could embark on a full second career.

He was an outstanding Sub-Treasurer, greatly respected by the Treasurers whom he served, and the other three Under Treasurers with whom he worked. He steered the Inn through challenging times when the Inn was beginning to reassert itself both as a provider of education and training and modernising the estate, including the purchase of Serjeants’ Inn. What were the qualities that Peter brought to the Inn? He had total dedication to all aspects of the work of the Inn, a dedication based on his lifetime of experience as an officer in the Gurkhas.

One story is told that as a young officer in the 2nd Battalion of the Gurkhas, he was on active service in Sarawak, where, with no experience of jungle warfare or of mangrove swamps, he would find himself waist-high in water amongst tropical plants and unseen creatures. On one occasion after an unsuccessful operation, Peter said to his commanding officer: “I am really very grateful to you and want to thank you for allowing me this experience.” There was no irony. It exemplified his innate courtesy and willingness to learn.

That willingness to learn Peter brought with him when he arrived at the Inn, appreciating the need to work closely with his senior management team, Rod Cunliffe, the Surveyor, and Nick Paladina, the Collector, who took over from Brian Hirschfield.

Celebrate the life

One of the committee chairman has written: “What was crucial for me was that Peter inspired mutual confidence between him and me. Whether I justified his confidence is not for me to say but knowing that I had it enabled me to take a number of difficult decisions in the certainty that I would be supported even if they turned out to be less than successful.

One of them was very difficult indeed: it turned out alright, but I wouldn’t have got it right if I had not been sure that Peter would back me. In turn I had the regard for him which only an outstanding commanding officer obtains: I can see that, as an officer, he would never have had to issue an order because his officers and men would have stood ready to fulfil his wish long before there came a question of an order being given.”

Peter had a profound sense of fairness. He was even-handed in his dealings with everybody in the Inn, whatever their position, from the humblest to the greatest in the Inn. He had the loyalty and support of William, our silver steward, to senior members of the judiciary on the Executive Committee. Both could speak to him on equal terms but, more importantly, he was able to speak to them on equal terms.

He had an ability both to be a good commander and a good subordinate, qualities, which another Treasurer has observed, perhaps do not often go together. He gently guided the Treasurers during their year in office as he did the chairmen of the committees. Peter once observed that it was during his time that the role of Treasurer would be occupied for the first time since the war by a Bencher who had not carried out National Service. He need not have been concerned. Peter effortlessly led him through the importance of building relationships with the Inn’s staff. Loyalty was a very strong trait. No one heard him say anything critical of another Bencher, though he must have been tempted from time to time. He did not do anything in order to ingratiate or aggrandise himself. What he did, he did because he thought it was right for the Inn. He had great skill in gaining the confidence of the Benchers, barristers and staff of the Inn, making them feel that their views formed part of the decision-making process. He had an ability to disseminate information at a level that he judged others should have. Practised observation knew that when

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

He gave unfailing support for all the staff of the Inn at every level, and his care and kindness for those who had any personal difficulties.

In the book prepared for his retirement, there was a note from a member of staff, Joan, who delivered his tea each day, and had been experiencing difficulty in renewing her passport. It read: “ To My Knight in Shining Armour, who came to the rescue after a year-long trying to get my passport renewed. I think they thought I was a smuggler of gold and diamonds because they kept on rejecting my form.”

Peter had it resolved within a week. One Treasurer said of Peter that he had been brought up in an Army tradition where the officer ensured that his men were fed before he was himself.

Peter’s book contained not only contributions from all his Treasurers, Benchers and barristers, but the Inn’s staff wrote wonderful messages to him – full of humour and anecdotes.

He was enormously respected and had time for them all. It is telling that the staff contributions were funny and relaxed.

They knew him well and loved him. A committee chairman to whom Peter had said, “No one is irreplaceable” wrote in the book: “Your retirement may for once prove you wrong.” One member of the Inn’s staff wrote: “In my mind, Peter will always be THE SubTreasurer, he was the rhyme and reason in the running of the Inn.” He had a dry and effective sense of humour. Occasionally, there were glimpses of inter-service rivalry: when Middle Temple appointed a retired RAF officer as Under-Treasurer, he remarked to the Treasurer of the day that Middle might need to appoint someone else to take care of the social activities of the Inn. To Stephen Layton, then Director of Music, he once wrote: “The anthem last night brought a tear to my eyes – but if you tell anyone I will deny it as it’s bad for the image.”

One committee chairman wrote: “I feel I am not really giving you the picture. The warmth, the intelligence, the friendship, the enigmatic smile which would still play at the end of a conversation about something tricky – an almost rueful grin that all would always end well, even if the path to the end was strewn with thistles rather than rose petals.”

“ To My Knight in Shining Armour, who came to the rescue after a year-long trying to get my passport renewed. I think they thought I was a smuggler of gold and diamonds because they kept on rejecting my form” he said, “I feel I know you well enough to tell you”, it was a clear indication that the person was not being told everything but what Peter thought it was necessary for that person to know.

He had a lightness of touch in dealing with difficult situations.

As one Treasurer recounted: “On one occasion at a guest night, a valuable 18th-century silver snuff box was missing from the Bar table at the end of the evening. There was no precedent for dealing with such a situation and Peter and I agreed that the police ought to be informed. One of us, it was probably Peter, hit on the idea of writing to each barrister on that table explaining what had happened and suggesting that it was possible that his guest, at the end of a good evening, had taken the box as a joke or a memento. I did this and wrote that if that should turn out to be right, the least embarrassing course would be for the box to be returned in a plain paper envelope to the Treasury Office with no further explanation. In that event, the matter would rest.

If it was not returned, the police would be informed. Two days later, the box was returned, and we breathed a sigh of relief.”

Peter was also a family man, with Penny constantly by his side. As Robin has said, the Inn and the Church owe a great debt of gratitude to Penny. Penny played an active role in the Inn, supporting him at the many social and educational activities, whether they were in or out of London. Penny loved him completely and they were happy in their own company, living latterly in Somerset and travelling extensively. He was very proud of his three children and their achievements: Patrick and Jake in the army, and then in civilian life, and Edward in the Civil Service Peter was an adored father-in-law to Sam, Avril and Sara. He was also completely devoted to his six grandchildren and in retirement would engage in rough and tumble with them, perhaps an un-Peter-like activity.

At Peter’s funeral, Nigel Haynes said of him that he was a gentleman who put more back into life than he took out. I think we would all agree with that opinion.

David Pittaway QC

141

C

A Barrister-at-Law – Eugène Marais

“ OF THE INNER TEMPLE, BARRISTER-AT-LAW, ADVOCATE OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TRANSVAAL”

Marais bust, circa 1931

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

The subtitle from Eugène N Marais’ first book, Deeds Office Practice of the Transvaal, 1903.

Heini Kotze examines the life of Eugène Marais, South African lawyer, naturalist, poet and writer

A

JOURNALIST

STUDENT

Eugène Marais had lost his wife to puerperal fever shortly after the birth of their son in July 1895. During December of 1896, aged 26, Marais applied for permission to travel to Britain with the view to read law. At the time, he was both owner/editor of the Land en Volk newspaper in Pretoria. He was also taking morphine.

Within a fortnight of his arrival, he enrolled at the Inner Temple, nominated by Henry Currey, a student at the Inner Temple with ties to Cecil John Rhodes.

During the years leading up to his departure, disenfranchised prospectors in the Transvaal sparked a stand-off between the Kruger government and the uitlanders, spearheaded by the gold-mining magnates Wernher, Beit & Company, dubbed Corner House. Marais was well acquainted with one of its directors, J B Taylor, as well as Percy FitzPatrick, company secretary and later author Jock of the Bushveld.

“ He spent much time looking into hieroglyphics, hypnosis, spiritualism and theosophy. Britain certainly piqued his interest in the natural sciences and literature” Marais, part of the anti-Kruger, pro-Joubert clique known as the ‘progressives’, showed some sympathy for the uitlanders. Charles Leonard, a legal representative for Corner House, offered Land en Volk financial assistance to secure a voice with the Afrikaans’ populace.

The Prime Minister of the Cape, Cecil John Rhodes, and the British Minister of Colonies, Joseph Chamberlain, joined the movement plotting to overthrow Kruger’s ZAR government.

In December 1895, the Jameson Raid commenced while Marais consulted with the uitlanders. In January 1896, Jameson was captured. Marais’ relationship with Corner House raised considerable suspicion, as did his appeal in Land en Volk to exonerate those associated with the Raid.

Meanwhile, Ewald Esselen, a prominent legal figure and protagonist of the ‘progressives’, urged Marais to read law at his alma mater, the Inns of Court. Marais boarded the Dunnottar Castle set for London on 12 December 1896 and arrived at the East India Docks on 9 January 1897.

142

Marais was admitted on 19 January after paying the £40 admission fee and a refundable deposit of £100. Class fees amounted to £40 per annum while £7 went towards the compulsory dinners during the four terms. He went on to hire rooms in Lewisham.

The Times, Daily Mail and The Manchester Guardian published his letters on ‘British and Boers in South Africa’. Marais suspended his lectures during February to assist the Transvaal Consulate in the House of Commons’ Committee of Enquiry into the Jameson Raid at Westminster Hall.

During his first year, Marais attended the required number of dinners in the Inner Temple Hall. The Council of Legal Education records note that he failed to write the Trinity exam in May of 1897. He spent much time looking into hieroglyphics, hypnosis, spiritualism and theosophy. Britain certainly piqued his interest in the natural sciences and literature. In October 1897, Marais scraped through his Roman law paper and prepared for the Hilary exam in constitutional law and history of law due in December, which he failed.

Marais had always entertained the notion of studying medicine. Between January and April 1898, he attended medical lectures at the University of Bonn as a visiting student (gasthörer). He returned to London late in April and attended six dinners at the Inn during the Easter term and relocated to another residence in Lewisham. At the end of May 1898, he repeated the Trinity exam with success, by which time he had only completed five terms.

Marais applied for exemption from lectures and dinners, citing ill health. In fact, he returned to South Africa to report on the escalating political tensions between Britain and South Africa.

His name again cropped up in the minutes of the Inner Temple Dispensation Committee in April 1899, the year in which he was declared a British subject and the Anglo Boer War started.

He moved into “shabby rooms” in Teddington. He would later write extensively about the infant chimpanzee he nursed in his rooms, given to him by a London Zoo caretaker. Marais resumed taking dinners at the Inner Temple and, by December 1900, after writing another exam, had completed 11 terms. He attended additional lectures in criminal and procedural law.

Archives

In January 1901, Marais wrote an extensive letter to Joseph Chamberlain entitled Mission to Boer Prisoners in Ceylon, which Chamberlain in turn forwarded to Lord Milner, who referred to Marais as “… (the) person named is to be relied upon”.

He continued his translation of FitzPatrick’s book entitled De Transvaal van Binnen Beschoud with great difficulty.

He had another two exams, the first in the Michaelmas term, and a number of dinners to attend to before he could graduate.

With the Anglo Boer War raging, Milner, Chamberlain and Lord Roberts singled Marais out as a “Dutchman of education” who could persuade the Boers to lay down their weapons.

During February, Marais’ friend Ewald Esselen wrote: “During the two days in London I could find out nothing about Eugène.

What I did hear is that opium had carried him past redemption…” Nevertheless, Marais had been requested to translate Percy FitzPatrick’s book The Transvaal From Within: a Private Record of Public Affairs into Dutch. Marais in the meantime was keen to return to South Africa to publish his newspaper as an instrument of truce. He needed to complete one term (and one legal paper) to qualify as an advocate. In March, students gathered to write their final paper in Gray’s Inn Hall. Marais was not amongst them.

Towards the end of March, Marais met with Joseph Chamberlain.

In May, Marais enrolled for a two-day exam (trusts, company and estate law) at Lincoln’s Inn, which he failed.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Ewald Esselen paid Marais a visit and wrote: “I found Eugene sane and well…” Marais handed a 2,600-word memorandum over to Chamberlain on The Future Government of the Two States from a Boer Point of View. It was well received by the Ministry of Colonies who sent copies entitled Suggestions (by an ExBurgher) to the governors of Ceylon, St Helena and Viscount Kitchener, Commander-in-Chief of British forces in South Africa.

A number of Marais’ suggestions were later implemented by Alfred Milner (who referred to Marais’ memorandum as “very valuable”) when he was appointed as British High Commissioner in South Africa.

During October of 1901, Marais wrote his final papers at Gray’s Inn. Eligible for admission to the Bar, he obtained references by Frederick Mackarness, a Bencher, as well as J B Taylor and Percy FitzPatrick. On 19 November, after almost five years, Marais was admitted to the Bar. Percy FitzPatrick offered to cover his travel costs (£200) to South Africa on condition that Marais completed his translation. Marais departed for Pretoria in April 1902 via Europe, Egypt and a sojourn into Portuguese East Africa, where he learnt of the cessation of the Anglo Boer War.

A

Marais’ ex libris, circa 1898

143

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

A Barrister-at-Law – Eugène Marais

“ Marais displayed a firm interest in natural science and instigated the promotion of Afrikaans as a written language with his seminal poem Winternag in 1905, the year he sold Land en Volk” POLYMATH

A

Suffering from malaria, Marais appointed Gustav Preller as editor of Land en Volk shortly after his return in August. The paper continued to be funded by Corner House. Alfred Milner and Marais often met to discuss editorial content while Marais made a feeble attempt to practise as an advocate.

Marais returned to Pretoria in 1917 to practise law. “As I remember it”, said advocate Charles te Water, “we spent most of the mornings chatting…law bored him.” A relative remarked: “He had not that quality of forensic insolence that is so essential for getting on at the Bar.”

In 1903, the Land en Volk press printed Deeds Office Practice of the Transvaal in book form. The legal manual in which Marais commented on Deeds Office proclamations and regulations was produced as a result of a request by the British authorities. Marais displayed a firm interest in natural science and instigated the promotion of Afrikaans as a written language with his seminal poem Winternag in 1905, the year he sold Land en Volk.

Marais co-founded Die Boerevrouw, the first Afrikaans magazine for women in 1918. Three years later, he joined a legal firm as partner in Bronkhorstspruit; in 1922, he relocated to Heidelberg to set up another law firm. By now, his main source of income was derived from writing.

Lured by prospecting, he left for the mountainous Waterberg in 1907, where he was appointed as mine physician at the Union Tin Mine. He soon conducted extensive observations on the behaviour of Chacma baboons. His notes were first published as My Friends the Baboons and later as the acclaimed The Soul of the Ape. It is widely acknowledged that Marais was a pioneer in the field of ethology.

In Waterberg, Marais became known as the ‘miracle doctor’ as a result of his medical knowledge. Marais cured a young teacher by means of hypnosis – she suffered from paralysis for 17 years. He also studied snakes and the effects of snake venom on a variety of mammals. He was appointed as Resident Justice of the Peace in Waterberg. Yet in 1910, his friend Charlie Pienaar wrote: “Regarding Eugène, I fear we can do nothing with the man. He undoubtedly has a powerful and brilliant intellect, but the fellow…prefers to be where he needs to see as little of humanity as possible.”

Marais made the acquaintance of an old Bushman and transcribed his tales. Published as Dwaalstories, it was lauded as “some of the greatest prose in our language”

by N P van Wyk Louw. Marais also discovered the Waterberg cycad Encephelartos eugène-maraisii.

He wrote an essay on drought (he manned the rainfall station in Waterberg). In 1914, the Smithsonian Institution in Washington published Marais’ essay Notes on Some Aspects of Extreme Drought in Waterberg in their yearbook.

His intensive studies of termites ensued and was later published as The Soul of the White Ant. Serialised in a popular South African magazine, it was plagiarised by the Belgian Nobel laureate Maurice Maeterlinck in 1926.

144

1925 saw Marais’ first volume of poetry (compiled by his son) and the first of many biographical essays appeared in Historiese Opstelle. In 1927, he returned to Pretoria, where his application for the post as curator at the Pretoria Zoo was unsuccessful.

Marais was however appointed to the editorial staff of the newspaper Ons Vaderland as well as the Pretoria correspondent for the Johannesburg paper The Star. His writing, particularly on natural sciences, was in great demand. In 1933, the British magazine Psyche published an essay on Marais’ theory of the termite colony as a unified organism. Between 1927 and 1934, he published over 50 articles in national newspapers and magazines, wrote two plays and had eight books published.

During 1935, F G M du Toit conducted lengthy interviews with Marais as material for a biography. On 29 March 1936, Marais, aged 65, committed suicide.

Heini Kotze Heini Kotze matriculated in 1974 in the small town of Heidelberg (Gauteng, South Africa), where Marais lived between 1922 and 1927. A lifelong interest in Eugène Marais was instilled by the film The Guest, an episode in the life of Eugène Marais. Heini Kotze is writing a comprehensively illustrated biography of Marais, due to be completed this year

Celebrate the life

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

MASTER CARON

By Master Higgins

David Caron, a member of the Inner Temple since 2009 and a Bencher since 2014, died very suddenly from septicaemia on 20 February 2018. A packed service of celebration and thanksgiving for his life was held at the Inner Temple on 23 March.

Among those attending were members of the Bar who had appeared in front of him in an arbitration less than a week before his shocking demise.

He loved this Inn, its traditions and friendship. He had been called to Bar here when arbitration and other legal work brought him regularly to London. And it was typical of him that, wishing ‘to do things properly’, he determined that he would join the Inner Temple. When I came to dinners here, I would always hope that David (not yet a Bencher) was in town, and would be representing the Bar in greeting the Benchers as we entered Hall. We would solemnly bow to each other and, as old friends in international law, allow ourselves a private smile.

David Caron was a polymath. He loved sailing, scuba-diving, choir singing, music classical and modern, science fiction and much else. Above all, he was a dedicated family man, devoted to his wife, Susan Spencer, and their children, Peter and Marina.

Master Caron

“ He went to school in Connecticut, USA, and somewhat unusually chose then to spend C his college years at the Coast Guard Academy. He would explain that this was due to a love of the sea and a sense of duty to country” e went to school in Connecticut, USA, and somewhat H unusually chose then to spend his college years at the Coast Guard Academy. He would explain that this was due to a love of the sea and a sense of duty to country.

changed much, making sure that what was pro forma and routine (and attended by members as a chore) now became a pleasure. Business was transacted and members honoured in new and agreeable ways.

After leaving the Coast Guard, David took up a Fulbright Scholarship, studying for a Master’s degree in Marine Law and Policy at the University of Wales. There he sang bass in the choir – and choir singing remained important to him throughout his life. He was, in the time he was later to spend working in London, an active and enthusiastic member of the Parliament Choir (who were to play an important part at the service of thanksgiving for his life).

In 2013, David Caron was headhunted to become dean of the School of Law at King’s College London (renamed the Dickson Poon School of Law). After a period in the doldrums, King’s was looking for an outstanding administrator, an inspired teacher and a dean who by his force of personality could lift King’s to new heights. David entered upon this new phase in his life with the full support of his wife and family, and relishing the challenge. He was also able to move into more regular contact with the Inner Temple. Helped by the Dickson Poon funds, he did all that was hoped of him by the School of Law and King’s, whose standing in the world of law rose rapidly.

David Caron then studied law at Berkeley College, University of California, and afterwards was a legal assistant to Judges Brower and Mosk at the Iran–United States Claims Tribunal in The Hague.

The twin track of academia and practice was already clearly laid out. In 1986, he became professor of international law at Berkeley. He had a long and active tenure there and was known as a caring teacher who always found time for his students. And still he made time to write.

In 2010, he was appointed as president of the American Society of International Law, a prestigious but all-consuming post. It was typical of the full commitment he made to whatever he undertook that, from 2010 to 2012, he and his wife moved from the west coast to Washington DC, to be ‘on the job’. His period as president was remarkably successful. He

It was therefore with some surprise, and regret, that his colleagues at King’s learned that Caron was in 2015 to leave the deanship at King’s (while retaining professorial links) to take up an appointment as a member of the Iran–United States Claims Tribunal in The Hague. The call to practice was very strong and he was at the same time able to accept an appointment to serve as ad hoc judge in two cases at the International Court of Justice.

His stellar career was halted by his totally unexpected death from sepsis. He will be greatly missed by the Inner Temple, by his colleagues at 20 Essex Street chambers, and by all who worked in international law, whether in London, The Hague or the United States.

Dame Rosalyn Higgins DBE JSD FBA QC 145

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

The Role of Mentoring in the Legal Profession

THE ROLE OF MENTORING IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION From a speech given by Dr Emma Jones on 22 January 2018

wildpixel / iStock

T

This speech will consider what the role of mentoring is within the legal profession. It will argue that formal mentoring schemes should explicitly address the issue of well-being amongst practitioners.

WHAT IS MENTORING? Mentoring is commonly defined as a relationship between a senior, more experienced or older mentor and a junior, less experienced or younger mentee. It may be formal or informal, within one organisation or across a wider professional network.

At the heart of mentoring is a relationship in which the mentor will provide the mentee with either psychosocial or career support (or possibly both). Psychosocial support can include providing a shoulder to cry on, acting as a sounding board or role modelling specific values and behaviour.

This form of support can enhance the mentee’s sense of confidence and competence. Career support can include providing sponsorship, coaching, protection or increased visibility. This will be aimed at assisting the mentee in navigating through, and progressing in, their workplace.

The concept of mentoring has a long lineage, dating back to Homer’s Odyssey, the epic poem from ancient Greece.

In this, the king, Ulysses, leaves his friend Mentor to watch over his kingdom, wife and son, during his 20-year absence.

Mentoring also features in a range of more contemporary literature, films and television shows. To give a law-related example, in the Rumpole of the Bailey books and television 146

series, Rumpole himself acts as a form of mentor for the new pupil Phyllida Trant (later Erskine-Brown).

Despite the length of mentoring’s chronicled existence, there remains considerable academic debate over the concept and characteristics of mentoring. However, it has been suggested that there are a number of distinctive elements which characterise it. These include the uniqueness of each individual mentoring relationship and the way it will evolve over time, the formation of a learning partnership which results in the mutual exchange of knowledge by both parties and a sense of reciprocity, although the ultimate focus is on the mentee. It is perhaps questionable whether the notions of reciprocity and partnership are widely appreciated when discussion commonly focuses on the potential benefits accruing to the mentee. ithin the legal profession, mentoring has arguably taken W place for many centuries. For example, the English Inns of Court often appear to have offered forms of mentoring. Today, it is likely there is a significant amount of informal mentoring being undertaken within the profession, particularly where an aspiring or junior entrant demonstrates particular promise. In terms of formal mentoring schemes, it could be argued that, at the Bar, Pupil Supervisors and Pupils effectively take on the roles of mentor and mentee. However, this does raise questions around whether there can be a form of genuine partnership or reciprocity where a senior practitioner may also be involved in decisions around progression and retention. There are also schemes within the legal profession which explicitly identify themselves as providing mentoring opportunities, such as that offered by the Inner Temple.

Treasury

THE PRIVILEGES AND PITFALLS OF MENTORING

MENTORING AND WELL-BEING

Overall, the literature on mentoring tends to emphasise its positive benefits. It has been associated with favourable outcomes in relation to behaviour and attitudes in the workplace, relationships with colleagues and career progression (to name a few). However, there is also an increasing criticality and awareness that there may also be challenges involved, even, in the worst instances, forms of dysfunctional relationship, manipulation and bullying. It appears that it is informal mentoring which poses the most challenges and risk, because of the self-selecting nature of the relationships, playing into the notion of an ‘old boys’ network’ and potentially replicating existing divisions and inequalities in workplaces.

However, formal mentoring schemes also face challenges.

The above discussion of some of the benefits of mentoring implies that it may have a positive impact on individual wellbeing. However, it is arguable that well-being should also be explicitly addressed within formal mentoring schemes. In recent years, there has been a significant body of empirical research originating from the US which suggests a crisis of well-being amongst both law students and legal practitioners.

More recently, these findings have been largely replicated by a number of Australian studies. Within the UK, to date, there has been significantly less empirical research on this issue. Nevertheless, there are indications that similar issues around psychological well-being are also present. For example, the Wellbeing at the Bar project reported 50,000 visits to its website within the first three months of its launch.

Within the legal profession, the opportunities and challenges involved in formal mentoring schemes can be categorised as arising at different levels – individual, organisational and across the whole of the profession. For individual mentees, the benefits can include career assistance, increased professional visibility and networks, emotional support and a greater sense of both personal identity and job satisfaction, as a result of acceptance and validation from the mentor.

Mentoring can also help aspiring and new entrants to navigate the landscape of legal practice and its unwritten rules, etiquette and culture. This can be seen as providing a valuable opportunity, but at the same time it also offers a challenge. For, in the same way that informal mentoring may perpetuate norms within the profession that are outdated, attempts to socialise mentees into unhealthy or exclusionary ways of working can be potentially damaging to individual well-being and stifle progress within the wider profession.

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Given this interest in, and concern over, the well-being of the legal profession, it is important to consider what role mentoring can, and should, play in promoting emotional and psychological well-being. One factor commonly implicated in low levels of well-being within the profession is the challenging, pressurised environment and workload. It is possible that mentors can help mentees to prioritise and rationalise their workload, navigate the aforementioned ‘unwritten rules’ of the profession and develop their confidence. They can also assist mentees in developing key skills around time management and client care.

Another factor is a focus on extrinsic motivations such as financial rewards and status, which can lead to a sense of distance from an individual’s intrinsic motivations and values.

A mentor can act as a role model in this regard, but what they model will reflect their own motivations for practice and whether they have a genuine love of law and passion

“ There are also schemes within the legal profession which explicitly identify themselves as providing mentoring opportunities, such as that offered by the Inner Temple” For the mentor as an individual, it may be that their participation in mentoring schemes is recognised and rewarded at organisational level, that it enhances their leadership skills and that it assists them with their continuing professional development. At the same time, the mentor may have to invest significant levels of time, energy and emotional labour into the relationship to fully benefit from these opportunities.

At an organisational level, there is some evidence that participating in mentoring enhances the mentor’s commitment to both their career and their organisation and even potentially their job performance. The mentee may well find mentoring helps them to integrate into, and contribute productively to, the organisation at practical, social and emotional levels.

At the level of an entire profession, it is argued that formal mentoring schemes can promote and enhance equality and diversity. They can also facilitate the transmission of valuable knowledge and skills across generations within the workplace and foster a sense of cohesion and togetherness. However, a lack of time and resources and the wider economic, political and societal climate may all impact on what can and is being offered.

T

for justice. If not, they perhaps need to reflect upon their motivations and the messages these are relaying to mentees.

Finally, in terms of key factors influencing well-being, there is the ubiquitous notion of ‘thinking like a lawyer’. This is a particular form of rationality and reasoning that focuses on applying legal logic and analysis to problems. It can be an important tool, but difficulties arise when it becomes prized as a superior way of thinking, one which encourages law students and legal professionals to suppress or disregard their emotions in a manner which may be harmful to their well-being. Emotions are intertwined with cognition and are therefore inescapable. Instead of being ignored, a process of identifying, reflecting on and appropriately regulating of emotions is required (sometimes termed ‘emotional intelligence’ or ‘emotional literacy’). It is arguable that mentoring can assist with this by allowing both the mentor and the mentee to express, explore and reflect upon their emotions as part of their day-to-day relationship.

Formal mentoring schemes can provide valuable and important functions in relation to well-being. This does require significant training and support for mentors, high levels of commitment from the organisation, profession or other body involved in the scheme and an awareness of its place within the wider legal culture. However, the positive benefits of explicitly acknowledging the link between mentoring and well-being would be well worth the effort.

Dr Emma Jones The Open University Academic Fellow of the Inner Temple 147

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Timeline

TIMELINE By the Archivist

1619 1719 1619

The Masque of Heroes; or The Inner Temple Masque, written by the Jacobean dramatist Thomas Middleton (1580, London–1627).

The masque was intended as the “entertainment for many worthy ladies by gentlemen of the same ancient and noble house”. The theme of the masque was the death of the old year and the arrival of the new. It gently satirised the customs of keeping fast days and the time for observing Christmas, with the sects that practised self-denial and asceticism such as Anabaptists and puritans severely ridiculed.

A

The play was performed by professionals and the company included all the players employed at the Fortune Theatre and members of Alleyne’s company. The one-off performance featured speaking roles with colourful names such as ‘Doctor Almanac’, ‘Plumporridge’, ‘Fasting-day’, ‘New Year’ and ‘Time’.

Two of the actors listed, Joseph Taylor and William Rowley, formerly acted with Shakespeare and Burbage at the Globe and can be found in cast lists from the 16th century.

Nine Benchers of the Inner Temple were also included in the cast list, appearing as deified heroes sitting in arches in the clouds from where they descended and after performing a measure themselves invited the ladies to dance with them.

Frederick Andrew Inderwick (1836–1904), former Treasurer of the Inner Temple, Liberal politician (1880–1885) and transcriber of the Inner Temple Records, dismisses the Masque’s author in his introduction to the second volume of Calendars of the Inner Temple Records as “a very profuse and second rate author of poems and plays and the Masque” as “by no means free from vulgar indecency”. A W Green in The Inns of Court and Early English Drama (Yale University Press, 1931) has described the Masque as “one of the most native and sportive presented at the Inns…adopting purely English atmosphere and humour and in that is the true product of the Inner Temple being based upon the traditions, customs and restrictions of that house”.

148

1719

Once more the termly drink allowance for the Inn’s Benchers represented the highest expenditure in 1719.

ACCOUNTS Paid Mr Cotigno, the converted Jew, by the Treasurer’s Order

£2 0s 0d

Mr Edward Girdler, his Caution Money

£4 0s 0d

For newspapers for last term

£1 8s 9d

Dean Sherlock, a quarter’s payment Paid Mr Piggott, the organist, a quarter’s salary

£25 0s 0d £6 5s 0d

Paid John Lewis, an old lame porter (formerly employed by the house) by the order of the Treasurer

£10 0s 0d

Paid Ann Combden for nursing Elizabeth Temple, 13 weeks

£1 19s 0d

Paid wine spent by the Masters of the Bench, Michaelmas Term

£62 14s 7d

A dinner for the auditors of the Treasurer’s accounts

£4 12s 4d

Wine spent by the Masters of the Bench in the Hilary Term

£31 5s 3d

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

© Classic Image / Alamy Stock Photo

Archives

The Paris Peace Conference. Mr Lloyd George signs the Peace Treaty with Germany, 28th June 1919, in the Hall of Mirrors, Palace of Versailles, France

1819 In 1819, Robert Smirke, one of the three foremost architects of his generation, along with Soane and Nash became the Surveyor of the Inner Temple. Previously, as architect for the Office of Works, he had been responsible for building the British Museum, the General Post Office, the Custom House and the King’s College on the Strand.

His appointment as Surveyor to the Inn was soon followed by a further appointment as Surveyor General for the South Parts of the Duchy of Lancaster. He was responsible for the Savoy Estate Development and he undertook many private commissions as well. He built the Covent Garden Theatre and the former Royal Opera House, which was destroyed by fire in 1857. In addition, he built four clubs and various churches. He accepted 30 commissions to build private houses.

These included two homes for his friend, Sir Robert Peel, a townhouse at 4 Whitehall, and another in Staffordshire.

It was said that in later life he would not undertake any commission for less than £10,000.

Despite his lucrative moonlighting outside the Inn, he succeeded in building 1–4 Paper Buildings, and in remodelling the Hall. Subsequently, this was destroyed by fire and rebuilt by his younger brother and successor as Surveyor, Sydney Smirke.

Robert Smirke was also responsible for the rebuilding of the library (1827–8). The gothic style characterises all his work here, which represents his only work in this style.

“ It has been said that his great skill lay in his ability not to exceed an agreed budget” It has been said that his great skill lay in his ability not to exceed an agreed budget. He also kept abreast of the latest technical developments. He was particularly noted for his mastery of load-bearing foundations made from lime concrete in measured quantities. He was one of the first architects to use load-bearing cast-iron beams in domestic work. He was succeeded as Surveyor of the Inner Temple in 1846 by his brother Sydney Smirke, who built 5 Paper Buildings and was responsible along with James Savage and Decimus Burton for the restoration of the Temple Church.

1919 THE PARIS PEACE CONFERENCE

LORD SUMNER AND JOHN MAYNARD KEYNES

The opposing sides on the question of German reparations were represented by two Inner Templars. John Maynard Keynes was admitted to the Inner Temple in 1905 but was not called to the Bar. As spokesman for the Treasury at the Conference, he wished to limit reparations to £3 billion.

His arguments were challenged by Lord Sumner, who was admitted to the Inner Temple in 1880, called to the Bar in 1863 and elected a Bencher in 1909.

Lord Sumner and his friend Lord Cunliffe, former Governor of the Bank of England, sat on the committee that determined the scale of German reparations. They argued that Germany should bear the full cost of the war, £25 billion, even though this was eight times Germany’s annual GDP before the war. The pair were nicknamed the ‘Heavenly Twins’ owing to the “astronomically” large sums they sought to extract from Germany. The label was reinforced by the “beatific smile” that was known to spread across the twins’ faces whenever they prevailed during a debate. London gossips noted that the pair had become inseparable while lodging in Paris during the Conference.

They were broadly supported by the Prime Minister, Lloyd George, who sought to gratify his electorate by maximising the demands placed on Germany. Many in Britain were pressing for the highest possible reparations. Clemenceau had the support of businessmen and conservative politicians in seeking a large settlement. Woodrow Wilson was initially opposed to a heavy bill for Germany but was gradually convinced by Lloyd George, by the French, and by the ‘Heavenly Twins’ that the higher payments were necessary.

Keynes tried to argue against Sumner and Cunliffe and they gave him the insulting sobriquet ‘Herr Von K’, as if to suggest he were an agent of the Germans. Thanks to their underhand campaign of slander, Keynes was forced to resign. He wrote to Lloyd George: “The battle is lost. I leave the twins to gloat over the devastation of Europe.”

Harold Nicolson, a former resident at 4 King’s Bench Walk and a member of the British delegation at Versailles, wrote in a letter to his father: “We came to the Conference convinced that a new order was about to be established. We left it convinced that the new order had merely fouled the old.

We arrived as fervent apprentices in the school of President Wilson, determined that a peace of justice and wisdom would be negotiated. We left as renegades. It was the misfortune of democratic diplomacy. Never in the history of man has such vindictiveness cloaked itself in such unctuous sophistry.”

Celia Pilkington Archivist 149

A

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Bar Liaison Committee

BAR LIAISON COMMITTEE

BIBI BADEJO

JAMES BATTEN

EDWARD BENNETT

SAOIRSE COWLEY

Diversity & Inclusivity; Temple Women’s Forum

Junior Bar Representative; Education & Training Committee; Paintings

Estates

Employed Bar

JOHN CLIFFORD

NICHOLAS CRAIG

KATHERINE DUNCAN

SARAH MARTIN

Car Park

Estates Committee; Moots; Advocacy Training Committee

Wellbeing

Executive Committee; Scholarships Committee; Marshall Hall Trust

I

AUSTIN STOTON

ANTON VAN DELLEN

THEA WILSON

BRETT WILSON

Scholarships Committee; Outreach Committee

Archives; Library Committee; Staff Remuneration

Drama Society; Scholarships Committee; Student Societies Sub-Committee

Northern Circuit

SARA WYETH

ZACHARY BREDEMEAR

TIM PENNY QC

CAN YEGINSU

Ethics Working Group; Student Societies Co-opted

BLC Chairman; Executive Committee: Education & Training Committee; Silver

Outreach Committee; Garden

International Committee; Library Committee; Qualifying Sessions Sub-Committee

JAMES KITCHING

HARRIET HOLMES

WILLIAM CHOLERTON

MICHAEL D’ARCY

Employed Bar/BACFI representative

Qualifying Sessions Sub-Committee

Marshalling

Communications Sub-Committee; Information Technology

150

Bar Liaison Committee

REBECCA DIX

ANDREW FITCH-HOLLAND

Education & Training; Employed Bar

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

ADRIAN EISSA QC

MEL ANIE HALL QC

Advocacy Training Committee; Pegasus Scholarship Trust

Mentoring: Student Societies

SIMON MURRAY

REHANA POPAL

L AURA JOHN

JOHN JACKSON

BLC Vice-Chairman; Executive Committee; Library Committee; House; Cellar

Bar Council Representative

European Circuit

North Eastern Circuit

I

RICHARD WHEELER

JASON HADDEN MBE

JASON SUGARMAN QC

SIMON GURNEY

Western Circuit

Midland Circuit

South Eastern Circuit; Scholarships Committee; Debating

Northern Circuit

SONIA NOLTEN

CHRISTOPHER BOND

Senior Bar Auditor; Executive Committee (ex-officio); Finance Sub-Committee; Investment Sub-Committee (ex-officio)

Junior Bar Auditor; Estates Committee (ex-officio); Executive Committee (ex-officio); Finance Sub-Committee

DAVID ELIAS Wales and Chester

ALEX WRIGHT Yearbook Editor

KEY Elected Co-opted Circuit Representatives GREG DOREY CVO

HENRIETTA AMODIO

Sub-Treasurer

Head of Treasury Office & Secretary to the BLC

Ex-Officio

151

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

New Masters of the Bench

NEW MASTERS OF THE BENCH FOR 2018

MICHAEL McPARLAND QC

ELIZABETH McGRATH QC

NICHOL AS GRIFFIN QC

CYRUS L ARIZADEH QC

Barrister Governing Bencher

Barrister Governing Bencher

Barrister Governing Bencher

Barrister Governing Bencher

I

152

LEIGH-ANN MULCAHY QC

PATRICK GOODALL QC

SIMON BAKER

Barrister Governing Bencher

Barrister Governing Bencher

Barrister Governing Bencher

CATHERINE CALLAGHAN QC

PETER CL ARK

FAISEL SADIQ

Barrister Governing Bencher

Barrister Governing Bencher

Barrister Governing Bencher

HUI LING MCCARTHY QC

HIS HONOUR JUDGE SIMON PHILLIPS QC

Barrister Governing Bencher

Judicial Governing Bencher

New Masters of the Bench

THE HON MR JUSTICE WILLIAMS

THE HON MR JUSTICE CHOUDHURY

Judicial Governing Bencher

Judicial Governing Bencher

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

THE HON MR JUSTICE JULIAN KNOWLES

DR ANNETTE PRANDZIOCH Other Governing Bencher

Judicial Governing Bencher

I MS FIONA GILMORE

EDWARD CHANDLER ESQ

Honorary Bencher

Honorary Bencher

DAME CLARE MARX CBE DL FRCS

HIS HIGHNESS TUNKU BESAR SERI MENANTI NEGERI SEMBIL AN

Honorary Bencher

Honorary Bencher

THE RT HON DAVID LIDINGTON CBE MP

PATRICK MADDAMS HON FRIBA

THE HON MR JUSTICE BUTLER

Honorary Bencher

Honorary Bencher

Overseas Bencher

PROFESSOR IYIOLA SOL ANKE

PROFESSOR NIGEL LOWE QC

Legal Academic Bencher

Senior Bencher

153

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Masters of Bench

MASTERS OF BENCH Honourable Society of the Inner Temple Masters of the Bench in Seniority Order (Correct as of 10 August 2018)

TREASURER 2018

Preston Candover KG (H)

Sir Peter Singer (S)

The Rt Hon Dame Elizabeth Gloster DBE (O)

Richard Clegg Esq QC (U)

His Honour Michael Lawson QC (O)

Michael Lyndon-Stanford Esq QC (U)

The Reverend Roger ter Haar QC (B)

The Rt Hon Sir Jonathan Parker (S)

Stephen Bickford-Smith Esq (B)

John Beveridge Esq QC (U)

Mrs Margaret Bickford-Smith QC (B)

His Honour Humphrey LLoyd QC (U)

The Rt Hon Sir Jeremy Sullivan (U)

Sir Edward Cazalet (S)

The Rt Hon the Lord Wilson of Culworth (U)

READER 2018

The Rt Hon Sir Mathew Thorpe (U)

Giles Wingate-Saul Esq QC (S)

The Rt Hon Lord Hughes of Ombersley (J)

William Crowther Esq QC (U)

Gerard Elias Esq QC (S)

READER ELECT 2018

Roger Henderson Esq QC (O)

The Rt Hon Sir Jack Beatson FBA (O)

John Deby Esq QC (O)

Anthony Hacking Esq QC (S)

His Honour Anthony Thompson QC (S)

Sir Hugh Bennett (O)

MASTERS OF THE BENCH, EX-TREASURERS

The Rt Hon the Lord Armstrong of Ilminster GCB CVO (H)

Dermod O'Brien Esq QC (S)

The Rt Hon Sir Stephen Brown GBE (S)

Ian Hunter Esq QC (B)

Bruce Mauleverer Esq QC (S)

The Rt Hon the Baroness Butler-Sloss GBE (S)

Sir Peter North CBE DCL FBA QC (H)

His Honour Neil Butter CBE QC (S)

The Rt Hon the Lord Lloyd of Berwick DL (S)

Sir Martin Jacomb (H)

His Honour Duncan Matheson QC (U)

Stanley Brodie Esq QC (S)

Patrick Ground Esq QC (B)

Her Honour Christian Bevington (O)

Richard Southwell Esq QC (S)

Professor Sir John Baker QC LLD FBA (H)

Miss Caroline Willbourne (B)

The Rt Hon Sir Konrad Schiemann (O)

The Rt Hon the Lord Hutton (H)

Her Honour Judge Hughes QC (J)

The Rt Hon Sir John Chadwick (O)

His Honour James Wadsworth QC (U)

Michael Sayers Esq QC (U)

The Rt Hon Sir Bernard Rix (O)

Jules Sher Esq QC (U)

Sir Richard Henriques (O)

The Rt Hon Sir David Keene (O)

Eldred Tabachnik Esq QC (U)

Martin Bowley Esq QC (O)

Stephen Williamson Esq QC (U)

Sir Michael Tugendhat (O)

The Honourable Justice Stephen Breyer (H)

The Rt Hon Sir Anthony May (O)

John Crowley Esq QC (S)

The Honourable Justice Anthony Kennedy (H)

Vivian Robinson Esq QC (O)

The Rt Hon Sir Stephen Sedley (O)

Tom Shields Esq QC (O)

The Rt Hon Sir John Laws (O)

Dame Rosalyn Higgins DBE JSD FBA QC (S)

Sir Mark Havelock-Allan Bt QC (J)

The Rt Hon Lady Justice Hallett DBE (J)

His Honour David Elfer QC (S)

His Honour Simon Brown QC (O)

Simon Thorley Esq QC (O)

Raymond Potter Esq CB (S)

Jonathan Acton Davis Esq QC (B)

The Rt Hon Sir Stephen Tomlinson (O)

Nigel Hamilton Esq QC (U)

Anthony Temple Esq QC (B)

The Rt Hon Sir Martin Moore-Bick (O)

Sir Sydney Lipworth QC (H)

Richard Rampton Esq QC (S)

His Honour Donald Cryan (Hon) LLD (O)

The Rt Hon Lord Sumption OBE (J)

Sir Robert Owen (S)

David Pittaway Esq QC (B)

Leonard Woodley Esq QC (U)

Christopher Purchas Esq QC (B)

MASTERS OF THE BENCH

Nicholas Wood Esq (O)

Miss Pamela Scriven QC (B)

The Hon Mrs Justice Slade DBE (J)

Nicholas Padfield Esq QC (S)

The Rt Rev and Rt Hon Lord Carey of Clifton (H)

The Rt Hon Sir Patrick Elias (S)

Judge Martin Feldman (H)

Anthony Glass Esq QC (S)

Sir Ivan Lawrence QC (B)

Michael Shorrock Esq QC (O)

James Goudie Esq QC (S)

Sir Gordon Langley (O)

Christopher Lockhart-Mummery Esq QC (B)

Sir Christopher Pitchers (S)

Richard Salter Esq QC (B)

Nigel Pascoe Esq QC (S)

Sir David Steel (O)

Her Honour Judge Korner CMG QC (J)

Neil Kaplan CBE QC SC (HK) (S)

Oliver Sells Esq QC (B)

The Rt Hon Sir William Gage (S)

Kenneth Aylett Esq (S)

Paul Purnell Esq QC (U)

Andrew Tidbury Esq (B)

His Honour Jonathan Playford QC (S)

Sir Timothy Walker (S)

Sir Thayne Forbes (O)

Nicholas Merriman Esq QC (O)

Sir Brian Jenkins GBE (H)

Robin De Wilde Esq QC (S)

Murray Pickering Esq QC (O)

Peter Birkett Esq QC (B)

The Baroness Mallalieu QC (U)

Robin Purchas Esq QC (B)

Anthony Anderson Esq QC (U)

Sir Geoffrey Nice QC (B)

Harry Turcan Esq (S)

Sir Frederick Crawford DL FR Eng (H)

Gerald Angel Esq (S)

The Baroness Deech DBE QC (Hon) (S)

The Rt Hon Sir Richard Buxton (S)

Professor Sir Ian Kennedy QC FBA (H)

Professor Sir Royston Goode CBE FBA QC (H)

Sir Brian Keith (S)

Sir Christopher Holland (S)

The Rt Hon Viscount Runciman of Doxford CBE FBA (H)

His Honour John Weeks QC (U)

Sir Edward Evans-Lombe (S)

John Swift Esq QC (U)

The Rt Hon the Lord Irvine of Lairg (S)

His Honour James Stewart QC (U)

Her Honour Shirley Anwyl QC (S)

The Rt Hon the Lord Howard of Lympne CH QC (U)

Eben Hamilton Esq QC (S)

His Honour Jeremy Roberts QC (O)

His Honour John Previte QC (U)

Sir David Clarke (U)

The Rt Hon the Lord Sainsbury of

Sir Neil Butterfield (S)

ROYAL BENCHERS HRH The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh KG KT OM GBE (R) HRH The Princess Royal (R)

Guy Fetherstonhaugh Esq QC (B)

I

David Widdicombe Esq QC (U) John Willmer Esq QC (S) The Rt Hon The Lord Woolf CH FBA (S) The Rt Hon Sir Andrew Leggatt (S) William Glover Esq QC (U) The Rt Hon Sir Roy Beldam (S) Sir Oliver Popplewell (O) Sir William Macpherson of Cluny TD (U) The Hon Sir Charles Morrison QC (U) The Rt Hon the Lord Mackay of Clashfern KT (H) Professor Francis Reynolds DCL FBA QC (H) Sir Michael Morland (O) Sir John Drinkwater QC (S) Sir Michael Turner (U) Nigel Inglis-Jones Esq QC (U) The Rt Hon the Lord Scott of Foscote (S) Sir Thomas Legg KCB QC (S) The Hon Lord Tennant of Balfluig (O) Sir Richard Curtis QC (U) Sir Allan Green KCB QC (U) Neville Thomas Esq QC (U)

154

The Rt Hon Sir Anthony Hooper (O)

Michael Spencer Esq QC (B) His Honour Roderick Denyer QC (O) Victor Temple Esq QC (S) Sir Richard Plender (U) Sir Robert Akenhead (O) Dame Caroline Swift DBE (O)

Masters of Bench

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

Justin Fenwick Esq QC (B)

Iain Milligan Esq QC (U)

Professor Michael Lerego QC (O)

Thomas Baxendale Esq (S)

Sir Robert Francis Esq QC (B)

Jeremy Storey Esq QC (B)

Kevin de Haan Esq QC (B)

Miss Elizabeth-Anne Gumbel QC (B)

James Turner Esq QC (B)

His Honour Jeffrey Burke QC (U)

John Marrin Esq QC (B)

The Hon Mrs Justice Lang DBE (J)

Ian Glick Esq QC (B)

Richard Drabble Esq QC (B)

The Hon Justice Salihu Moddibo Alfa Belgore (V)

The Rt Hon the Lord Falconer of Thoroton (O)

Gavin Kealey Esq QC (B)

His Honour Judge Simon Davis (J)

The Rt Hon Jack Straw (S)

His Honour Judge Burrell QC (J)

Senior District Judge Arbuthnot (J)

Chief Justice Yong Pung How (H)

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Flaux (J)

His Excellency Judge Kenneth Keith ONZ KBE (H)

Judge Richard Posner (H)

Edward Fitzgerald Esq CBE QC (B)

Sir Wyn Williams (O)

Professor Andrew Ashworth PhD DCL FBA (L)

His Honour Judge Melbourne Inman QC (J)

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Moylan (J)

His Honour John Adams (S)

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Nicholas Green (J)

His Honour Mervyn Roberts (O)

Sibghatullah Kadri Esq QC (S)

Sir Stuart Lipton (H)

Robert Rhodes Esq QC (B)

Robert Webb Esq QC FRAeS (O)

Anthony Porten Esq QC (U)

His Honour David Tyzack QC (S)

Nicholas Davidson Esq QC (B)

His Honour Nicholas Browne QC (O)

Patrick Upward Esq QC (B)

Miss Rosamund Horwood-Smart QC (O)

His Honour Judge Pegden QC (J)

His Honour Judge Melville QC (J)

Stuart Brown Esq QC (B)

David Wilby Esq QC (B)

Miss Sally Smith QC (B)

His Honour Judge Everall QC (J)

The Hon Mr Justice Goss (J)

His Honour Judge Jeremy Richardson QC (J)

His Honour John Milford QC (S)

His Honour Judge Leonard QC (J)

Nigel Giffin Esq QC (B)

Stephen Solley Esq QC (O)

Miss Alison Foster QC (B)

Jonathan Swift Esq QC (B)

Dorian Lovell-Pank Esq QC (B)

Roger Stewart Esq QC (B)

Christopher Brougham Esq QC (B)

The Hon Mr Justice Field (S)

The Hon Mr Justice Ribeiro (H)

Nicholas Atkinson Esq QC (B)

Sir Hayden Phillips GCB DL (H)

Professor Christopher Forsyth (L)

Miss Susanna FitzGerald QC (B)

His Honour Denis Orde (O)

Professor John Gardner (L)

(Stephen) Pownall Esq QC (B)

The Rt Hon Sir John MacDermott (H)

Dr Mads Andenas PhD MA DPhil (L)

Sir Bernard Eder (O)

Sir Jeffery Bowman FCA (H)

Professor John Spencer CBE QC (L)

The Hon Mr Justice Davis (J)

Justice Richard Goldstone (H)

Richard Lissack Esq QC (B)

His Honour Michael Fysh QC SC (S)

The Rt Rev and Rt Hon Dr the Lord Williams of Oystermouth (H)

David Friedman Esq QC (S)

Malcolm Bishop Esq QC (B)

Her Honour Frances Kirkham CBE (H)

Nicholas Stewart Esq QC (B)

Mrs Gay Martin (O)

The Rt Hon Lady Justice King DBE (J)

Timothy Raggatt Esq QC (B)

Philip Sapsford Esq QC (U)

The Hon Mr Justice Michael Soole (J)

Dame Laura Cox DBE (U)

His Honour Judge Bourne-Arton QC (J)

His Honour Judge Grainger (J)

The Rt Hon Lady Black DBE (J)

The Hon Mr Justice Nugee (J)

Miss Margaret Bowron QC (B)

The Rt Rev and Rt Hon Lord Habgood (H)

Professor Dr Jürgen Schwarze (H)

His Honour Judge Seed QC (J)

Sir Richard Gibbs (U)

His Honour David Paget QC (O)

Charles Gibson Esq QC (B)

The Rt Hon The Lord Collins of Mapesbury LLD FBA (O)

Her Honour Elisabeth Fisher (O)

The Rt Hon Lady Justice Simler DBE (J)

Sir Peter Openshaw (O)

Stuart Catchpole Esq QC (B)

The Rt Hon The Baroness Clark of Calton QC (O)

His Honour Christopher Critchlow (J)

Iain Christie Esq (O)

George Staple Esq CB QC (H)

His Honour Giles Forrester (O)

Michael de Navarro Esq QC (S)

The Rt Hon the Lord Macdonald of River Glaven QC (O)

Godfrey Carey Esq QC (O)

The Rt Hon Sir Dennis Byron (V)

Rex Tedd Esq QC (B)

Terence Coghlan Esq QC (S)

Johnny Veeder Esq QC (B)

Andrew Caldecott Esq QC (B)

His Honour Toby Hooper QC (O)

Jonathan Gaisman Esq QC (B)

James Guthrie Esq QC (B)

The Hon Mr Justice Popplewell (J)

Sir Raymond Jack (U)

The Hon Mr Justice Moor (J)

His Honour David Hodson (U)

Sir Alex Allan KCB (H)

His Honour Richard McGregor-Johnson (O)

Sir Edward Caldwell KCB QC(Hon) (H)

Dr Pehr Gyllenhammar (H)

Ian Laing Esq CBE DL (H)

Sir Alan Wilkie (O)

Sir Ian McKellen CH CBE (H)

Peter Joyce Esq QC (B)

David Spens Esq QC (B)

Christopher Moger Esq QC (B)

His Honour Judge Ford QC (J)

The Hon Philip Havers QC (B)

His Honour Judge Hammerton (J)

His Honour Judge Iain Hughes QC (J)

His Honour Thomas Crowther QC (U)

The Honourable Tan Sri Dato' James Foong Cheng Yuen (V)

Tim Charlton Esq QC (B)

Sir David Maddison (S)

Guy Beringer Esq QC CBE (H)

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Floyd (J)

His Honour Nicholas Coleman (O)

D E C Yale (L)

The Hon Mr Justice Patrick Chan (H)

Sir Brian Williamson CBE (H)

His Honour Judge Nigel Lithman QC (J)

The Honourable Sir John McGrath (H)

Dr Stephen Cretney (L)

Her Honour Judge Hildyard QC (J)

The Rt Hon The Lord Sacks (H)

The Rt Hon Lord Hamilton (H)

Andrew Goodman Esq (B)

Professor Sir Alan Dashwood KCMG CBE QC (B)

The Hon Justice Michael Kirby AC CMG (H)

Grahame Aldous Esq QC (B)

Nigel Pleming Esq QC (B)

Philip Mott Esq QC (B)

Matthew Reeve Esq (B)

His Honour Judge Owen Davies QC (J)

Thomas Seymour Esq (B)

Russell Coleman Esq SC (V)

Charles George Esq QC (O)

Sir Nicholas Stadlen (O)

The Rt Hon the Lord Cullen of Whitekirk KT (H)

David Streatfeild-James Esq QC (B)

His Eminence Cardinal Vincent Nichols MA MEd STL (H)

M Jean-Paul Costa (H)

The Hon Mr Justice Dingemans (J)

Her Honour Judge Deborah Taylor (J)

M Luzius Wildhaber (H)

The Hon Mrs Justice Carr DBE (J)

Michael Humphries Esq QC (B)

Michael Austin-Smith Esq QC (S)

Dr Mary Malecka (O)

Miss Alison Levitt QC (O)

His Honour Peter Collier QC (O)

The Reverend and Valiant Master of the Temple (H)

His Honour Stephen Oliver-Jones QC (O)

Michael Redfern Esq QC (B)

Adrian Brunner Esq QC (S)

His Honour Charles Wide QC (U)

Robert Smith Esq QC (S)

Nicholas Asprey Esq (O)

Thomas Woodcock Esq CVO DL FSA (O)

Andrew Trollope Esq QC (B)

Augustus Ullstein Esq QC (S)

Professor Barry Rider OBE (L)

John Ross Esq QC (B)

The Hon Mrs Justice Juliet May DBE (J)

Abbas Lakha Esq QC (B)

I

His Honour Alistair McCreath (O) His Honour Gregory Stone QC (S) Patrick O'Connor Esq QC (B) James Corbett Esq QC (O) His Honour Judge Bayliss QC (J) Steven Kay Esq QC (B) Sir David Green CB QC (O) Peter Wright Esq QC (B) Miss Deborah Eaton QC (B) The Hon Mr Justice Lavender (J) His Honour Charles Harris QC (O) His Honour Judge Mark Brown (J) The Rt Hon Lady Justice Sharp DBE (J)

155

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

I

Masters of Bench

Professor Robert Walsh (L)

His Honour Judge Hiddleston (J)

Kieron Beal Esq QC (B)

The Honourable Justice Baragwanath KNZM QC (V)

Tim Lord Esq QC (B)

Miss Saira Kabir Sheikh QC (B)

The Rt Hon Lord Justice Peter Jackson (J)

Daniel Toledano Esq QC (B)

Justice George Wei (V)

Miss Tracy Ayling QC (B)

Miss Sarah Clarke QC (B)

Timothy Le Cocq QC (V)

The Hon Mr Justice Dove (J)

Adam Constable Esq QC (B)

Sir Michael Arthur KCMG (H)

The Honourable Justice Iain Morley (V)

Dr Vanessa Davies (O)

Dr Tom Kinninmont (H)

Dr Colin Ong QC (V)

The Rt Hon Lord Menzies (H)

Professor John Wass MA MD FRCP (H)

Miss Helen Davies QC (B)

The Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis (H)

His Honour Judge Farrell QC (J)

The Rt Hon Lord Bonomy LLD (H)

Lyonpo Sonam Tobgye (H)

His Honour Judge Aaronberg QC (J)

Judge Koen Lenaerts (H)

Philip Punwar Esq (V)

Lloyd Williams Esq QC (B)

His Honour Simon Tonking DL (O)

Professor the Hon George Hampel QC AM (L)

Miss Penelope Reed QC (B)

Paul Bleasdale Esq QC (B)

His Honour Judge Lucraft QC (J)

Andrew Tait Esq QC (B)

His Excellency Sir Elliott Belgrave GCMG KA CHB QC (V)

Simon O'Toole Esq (B)

The Hon Reginald Rhoda Esq CBE (V)

Adrian Keeling Esq QC (B)

The Hon Mr Justice Cobb (J)

Datuk Sulong Matjeraie (V)

District Judge Ikram (J)

The Hon Sir Peter Caruana KCMG QC (V)

Mrs Alison Saunders CB (O)

Her Honour Judge Evans-Gordon (J)

Dr Navinchandra Ramgoolam GCSK FRCP (V)

Ami Feder Esq (B)

Andrew Warnock Esq QC (B)

His Majesty King Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck of Bhutan (H)

His Honour David Mitchell (O)

Thomas Mitcheson Esq QC (B)

John Ryder Esq QC (B)

Ms Harini Iyengar (B)

His Honour John Wait (O)

Mark Wyeth Esq QC (B)

Ms Minka Braun (B)

His Honour Judge Philip Waller CBE (J)

Jeremy Hill-Baker Esq (B)

The Hon Mr Justice Butler (V)

The Rt Hon The Lord Maude of Horsham (O)

Crispin Aylett Esq QC (B)

Professor Iyiola Solanke (L)

Michael Pooles Esq QC (B)

Richard Humphreys Esq QC (B)

Edward Chandler Esq (H)

The Hon Mr Justice Martin Spencer (J)

The Hon Mrs Justice Roberts DBE (J)

Ms Fiona Gilmore (H)

Her Honour Judge Patricia Lynch QC (J)

Miss Máirín Casey (O)

Miss Clare Marx CBE DL FRCS (H)

Miss Susan Jacklin (J)

Miss Eleanor Laws QC (B)

Aftab Jafferjee Esq QC (B)

Martin Goudie Esq QC (B)

His Highness Tunku Besar Seri Menanti Negeri Sembilan (H)

Richard Barraclough Esq QC (B)

Alastair Hodge Esq (B)

The Rt Hon David Lidington CBE MP (H)

Peter Village Esq QC (B)

Graham Chapman Esq QC (B)

The Hon Mr Justice Williams (J)

Ian Stern Esq QC (B)

Ms Desiree Artesi (B)

The Hon Mr Justice Choudhury (J)

Miss Raquel Agnello QC (B)

Miss Fiona Jackson (B)

The Hon Mr Justice Julian Knowles (J)

Professor the Worshipful Mark Hill QC (B)

Andrew Cayley Esq CMG QC (O)

Patrick Maddams Esq Hon FRIBA (H)

Ms Patricia Robertson QC (B)

The Rt Hon The Lord Hunt Of Wirral MBE (H)

Professor Nigel Lowe QC (Hon) (S)

Sam Stein Esq QC (B)

The Hon Philip Remnant CBE ACA (H)

Michael McParland Esq QC (B)

Professor Nicola Lacey CBE FBA (H)

Robert Buckland Esq QC MP (O)

His Honour Judge Simon Phillips QC (J)

The Rt Hon the Baroness Prashar CBE (H)

Professor Sir Roger Scruton FBA FRSL (H)

Miss Elizabeth McGrath QC (B)

The Baroness Shackleton of Belgravia LVO (H)

Professor Spyridon Flogaitis (L)

Nicholas Griffin Esq QC (B)

Professor Timothy Endicott (L)

Paul Infield Esq (B)

Cyrus Larizadeh Esq QC (B)

Professor Timothy Macklem (L)

Stuart Denney Esq QC (B)

Miss Leigh-Ann Mulcahy QC (B)

Professor Julian Webb (L)

Miss Anne Richardson (B)

Dr Annette Prandzioch (O)

The Rt Hon Lord Reed (J)

The Hon Simon Davenport QC (B)

Patrick Goodall Esq QC (B)

His Honour Inigo Bing (O)

Leslie Thomas Esq QC (B)

Simon Baker Esq (B)

Charles Parsley Esq (B)

Miss Sara Lawson QC (B)

Ms Catherine Callaghan QC (B)

Miss Julia Dias QC (B)

Christopher Quinlan Esq QC (B)

Peter Clark Esq (B)

The Hon Mrs Justice Finola O'Farrell DBE (J)

Miss Camilla Bingham QC (B)

Faisel Sadiq Esq (B)

His Honour Judge Blair QC (J)

Ms Anneliese Day QC (B)

Miss Hui Ling McCarthy QC (B)

Alistair Schaff Esq QC (B)

Scott Matthewson Esq (B)

His Honour Judge Neil Clark (J)

Miss Kelyn Bacon QC (B)

Harry Matovu Esq QC (B)

Miss Rachel Spearing (B)

The Hon Mrs Justice Christina Lambert (J)

The Hon Mr Justice Nasir-Ul-Mulk (V)

Miss Taryn Lee QC (B)

The Rev Hugh Mead (H)

Philip Moser Esq QC (B)

His Honour Jeremy Carey DL (O)

His Honour Judge Simon (J)

Her Honour Judge Bancroft (J)

Alexander Hall Taylor Esq (B)

Her Honour Judge Corbett (J)

Professor Cheryl Thomas QC (L)

His Honour Judge The Reverend James Patrick (J)

John Griffith-Jones Esq (H)

Dr Anselmo Reyes (V)

Michael Payton Esq QC (H)

The Rt Hon Michael Gove MP (H)

Ms Libby Purves OBE (H)

The Honourable Justice Ann Ainslie-Wallace (L)

Judge Paul Mahoney (V)

The Hon Mr Justice MacDonald (J)

Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon (H)

Christopher Sharp Esq QC (B)

Nigel Aiken Esq QC SC (V)

His Honour Judge Tolson QC (J)

KEY

The Most Revd and Rt Hon Justin Welby (H)

His Honour Judge Sloan QC (J)

B – Barrister Governing Bencher

Richard Benson Esq QC (B)

His Honour Judge Robinson (J)

J – Judicial Governing Bencher

Mark George Esq QC (B)

Thomas Kark Esq QC (B)

S – Senior Bencher

His Honour Judge Roger Thomas QC (J)

Her Honour Judge Munro QC (J)

U – sUpernumerary Bencher

Michael Burrows Esq QC (B)

Her Honour Judge Gillian Matthews QC (J)

O – Other Governing Bencher

Jonathan Laidlaw Esq QC (B)

Miss Ruth Henke QC (B)

H – Honorary Bencher

Rory Phillips Esq QC (B)

David Wolfson Esq QC (B)

L – Legal Academic Bencher

Martin Griffiths Esq QC (B)

Paul Greaney Esq QC (B)

V – oVerseas Bencher

Richard Heaton Esq (O)

Dr Catherine MacKenzie (O)

156

Ian Winter Esq QC (B)

Wildy & Sons Ltd Serving the Legal Profession since 1830 With our knowledgeable and professional staff, we have been supplying new and secondhand books to lawyers and students for many generations, both within the Inns of Court and throughout the world. e-mail: enquiries@wildy.com website: www.wildy.com Lincoln’s Inn Archway, London WC2A 2JD tel: 020 7242 5778 16 Fleet Street, London EC4Y 1AU tel: 020 7353 4395 The only specialist law bookshop in England & Wales and proud sponsor of the Inner Temple Book Prize

Hawkins & Scott Ltd

Recycling in The Inner Temple for over 150 years

• Waste Recycling • Skip Hire • Confidential Waste Destruction • Office Paper Collections • Office Clearance

0800 783 8071 | www.hawkinsandscott.co.uk

157

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

People Finder

PEOPLE FINDER

I

TREASURY

020 7797 8250

enquiries@innertemple.org.uk

Sub-Treasurer

Greg Dorey

020 7797 8177

subtreasurer@innertemple.org.uk

Executive Assistant to the Sub-Treasurer

Jennie Collis

020 7797 8177

jcollis@innertemple.org.uk

Head of Treasury Office

Henrietta Amodio

020 7797 8182

hamodio@innertemple.org.uk

Assistant to the Head of Treasury Office

Nadia Ruiz

020 7797 8182

nruiz@innertemple.org.uk

Member Events and Administration Manager

Kate Peters

020 7797 8183

kpeters@innertemple.org.uk

Member Events and Administration Assistant

Rosy Humphrey

020 7797 8264

rhumphrey@innertemple.org.uk

Membership Registrar

Jude Hodgson

020 7797 8206

jhodgson@innertemple.org.uk

Records and Membership Assistant

Jacqueline Fenton

020 7797 8241

jfenton@innertemple.org.uk

Archivist (Wednesday–Friday)

Celia Pilkington

020 7797 8251

cpilkington@innertemple.org.uk

EDUCATION and TRAINING

020 7797 8208

education@innertemple.org.uk

Director of Education

Fiona Fulton

020 7797 8189

ffulton@innertemple.org.uk

Education Co-ordinator and Assistant to the Director of Education

Kerry Upham

020 7797 8189

kupham@innertemple.org.uk

Professional Training Manager

David Miller

020 7797 8209

dmiller@innertemple.org.uk

Education Co-ordinator

Richard Loveridge

020 7797 8212

rloveridge@innertemple.org.uk

Education Manager

Julia Armfield

020 7797 8207

jarmfield@innertemple.org.uk

Scholarships and Students Manager

Sellisha Lockyer

020 7797 8210

slockyer@innertemple.org.uk

Scholarships and Students Co-ordinator

Georgina Everatt

020 7797 8211

geveratt@innertemple.org.uk

Outreach Manager

Struan Campbell

020 7797 8214

scampbell@innertemple.org.uk

Outreach Co-ordinator

Daisy Mortimer

020 7797 8262

dmortimer@innertemple.org.uk

Events Co-ordinator

Edwina Koroma

020 7797 8213

ekoroma@innertemple.org.uk

COLLECTOR’S DEPARTMENT

020 7797 8187

collectors@innertemple.org.uk

Collector

David Bartlett

020 7797 8185

dbartlett@innertemple.org.uk

Financial Controller

Ania Johnson

020 7797 8242

ajohnson@innertemple.org.uk

Assistant Collector

Emma Prayer

020 7797 8186

eprayer@innertemple.org.uk

Accounts and Payroll Clerk

Joanna Zawada

020 7797 8187

jzawada@innertemple.org.uk

Head of IT / Systems Librarian

Peter Higgins

020 7797 8220

phiggins@innertemple.org.uk

Senior Network Administrator

Jonathan Delaney

020 7797 8188

jdelaney@innertemple.org.uk

Technology and Communications Officer

Paul Clark

020 7797 8229

pclark@innertemple.org.uk

LIBRARY

020 7797 8217

library@innertemple.org.uk

Librarian and Keeper of Manuscripts

Margaret Clay

020 7797 8215

mclay@innertemple.org.uk

Deputy Librarian

Tracey Dennis

020 7797 8248

tdennis@innertemple.org.uk

Assistant Librarian (enquiries and cataloguing) Michael Frost

020 7797 8248

mfrost@innertemple.org.uk

Assistant Librarian (enquiries and acquisitions) Sally McLaren

020 7797 8221

smclaren@innertemple.org.uk

Senior Library Assistant

Simon Hindley

020 7797 8222

shindley@innertemple.org.uk

Library Assistant

Uzma Ali

020 7797 8217/8218

uali@innertemple.org.uk

Library Assistant

Lucia Asnaghi

020 7797 8217/8218

lasnaghi@innertemple.org.uk

Library Administrator

Tina Williams

020 7797 8216

twilliams@innertemple.org.uk

SURVEYOR’S DEPARTMENT

020 7797 8200

surveyors@innertemple.org.uk

Director of Properties and Surveyor

Richard Snowdon

020 7797 8203

rsnowdon@innertemple.org.uk

Capital Programme Manager

Nicholas Waring

020 7797 8192

nwaring@innertemple.org.uk

Estates Support Officer

Lukas Jelinek

020 7797 8199

ljelinek@innertemple.org.uk

IT

Rene Hicks and Anne Mason 020 7797 8173/8200 Office Manager (Job Share)

rhicks@innertemple.org.uk or amason@innertemple.org.uk

Estates Officer

Albena Ahjem

020 7797 8202

aahjem@innertemple.org.uk

Mechanical and Electrical Engineer

Darren Readings

020 7797 8198

dreadings@innertemple.org.uk

Works Supervisor

Paul Simmonds

020 7797 8190

psimmonds@innertemple.org.uk

Facilities Foreman

Delbert Brooks (Julius Rutherfoord) 020 7797 8195

dbrooks@innertemple.org.uk

Electrical Supervisor

Ian Ward

020 7797 8197

iward@innertemple.org.uk

Plumbing and Mechanical Supervisor

Tony Baca

020 7797 8196

tbaca@innertemple.org.uk

Carpentry Supervisor

Steve Hanks

020 7797 8239

shanks@innertemple.org.uk

158

People Finder

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

CATERING

020 7797 8230

catering@innertemple.org.uk

Head of Catering

Vicky Portinari

020 7797 8231

vportinari@innertemple.org.uk

Deputy Head of Catering

Priya Patel

020 7797 8233

ppatel@innertemple.org.uk

Events Manager

Adam Bracegirdle

020 7797 8260

abracegirdle@innertemple.org.uk

Sales and Marketing Manager

Tanya Riding

020 7797 8180

triding@innertemple.org.uk

Sales and Events Manager

Niamh McCarthy

020 7797 8193

nmccarthy@innertemple.org.uk

Office and Events Co-ordinator

Lorna Pay

020 7797 8179

lpay@innertemple.org.uk

Back of House Manager

Adam Finnegan

020 7797 8244

afinnegan@innertemple.org.uk

Accounts Supervisor

Carlos Redin

020 7797 8259

credin@innertemple.org.uk

Head Chef

Michael Wilson

020 7797 8232

mwilson@innertemple.org.uk

Pegasus Bar Manager

Elcio Mendonca

020 7797 8234

emendonca@innertemple.org.uk

Head Gardener

Sean Harkin

020 7797 8243

sharkin@innertemple.org.uk

Senior Gardener

Sophie Tatzkow

020 7797 8243

statzkow@innertemple.org.uk

Trainee Gardener

Paul Jabs

020 7797 8243

pjabs@innertemple.org.uk

Part-time Gardener

Imogen Velouria

020 7797 8243

ivelouria@innertemple.org.uk

PORTERS (including weekends and silent hours)

020 7797 8255

porters@innertemple.org.uk

Head Porter

Roger Ward

020 7797 8255

rward@innertemple.org.uk

Under Porter 1

David McLeary

020 7797 8255

dmcleary@innertemple.org.uk

Under Porter 2

Robert Grier

020 7797 8255

rgrier@innertemple.org.uk

020 7583 1034

tgate@innertemple.org.uk

GARDEN

Tudor Street Gate and Night Security TEMPLE CHURCH Master of the Temple

The Rev Robin Griffith-Jones

020 7353 8559

master@templechurch.com

Reader

The Rev Mark Hatcher

020 7353 8559

reader@templechurch.com

Verger

Matthew Power

020 7353 3470

verger@templechurch.com

Administrator

Catherine de Satgé

020 7353 8559

catherine@templechurch.com

Director of Music

Roger Sayer

020 7427 5650

roger@templechurch.com

Associate Organist

Greg Morris

020 7427 5650

greg@templechurch.com

Music Administrator

Liz Clarke

020 7427 5650

liz@templechurch.com

Executive Producer

Carol Butler

020 7427 5641

carol@templechurch.com

Marketing Manager

Claire Hargrove

020 7427 5641

claire@templechurch.com

Events Assistant

Poppy Damazer

020 7427 5641

poppy@templechurch.com

COUNCIL OF THE INNS OF COURT (COIC) (at Gray’s Inn)

020 7822 0760

info@coic.org.uk

Director

James Wakefield

020 7822 0761

jwakefield@coic.org.uk

Personal Assistant to Director

Hayley Dawes

020 7822 0762

hdawes@coic.org.uk

Bar Course Project Manager

Tony Charles

020 3432 7349

tcharles@coic.org.uk

Head of Quality & Standards

Joanna Robinson

jrobinson@coic.org.uk

Digital Manager

Adrian Clarke

020 7822 0769

aclarke@coic.org.uk

BAR TRIBUNALS & ADJUDICATION SERVICE (BTAS) (at Gray’s Inn)

020 3432 7350

info@tbtas.org.uk

Operations Director

Andy Russell

020 3432 7346

andy.russell@tbtas.org.uk

Administrator

Margaret Hilson

020 3432 7348

margaret.hilson@tbtas.org.uk

THE INNS OF COURT COLLEGE OF ADVOCACY (ICCA) (at Gray’s Inn)

020 7822 0763

info@icca.ac.uk

Operations Manager

Beth Phillips

020 7822 0764

bphillips@icca.ac.uk

Events Officer

I

MUSIC OFFICE

TEMPLE MUSIC FOUNDATION (TMF)

Phoebe Makin

020 7822 0766

pmakin@icca.ac.uk

Marketing and Communications Co-ordinator Emily Prescott

020 7822 0765

eprescott@icca.ac.uk

Course Designer (Civil)

Monica Whyte

020 7822 0767

mwhyte@icca.ac.uk

Course Designer (Crime)

Patrick Ryan

pryan@icca.ac.uk

Course Designer (Crime)

Jane Hutton

jhutton@icca.ac.uk

Course Designer (Civil)

Andrea Ursprung

aursprung@icca.ac.uk

Programme Director

Lynda Gibbs

lgibbs@icca.ac.uk

020 7822 0768

159

The Inner Temple Yearbook 2018–2019

CHAIRS OF BENCH COMMITTEES & SUB-COMMITTEES EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Master Treasurer ADVOCACY TRAINING COMMITTEE Master Griffiths ARCHIVES COMMITTEE Master Baker BENCHERS SELECTION COMMITTEE Master Reader COMMUNICATIONS SUB-COMMITTEE Master Agnello EDUCATION & TRAINING COMMITTEE Master Levitt EMPLOYED BAR FORUM Master Corbett ESTATES COMMITTEE Master Fetherstonhaugh

I

FINANCE SUB-COMMITTEE Master Dias (Senior Bench Auditor)

Inner Temple Committees

SCHOLARSHIPS COMMITTEE Master O’Farrell STUDENT SOCIETIES COMMITTEE Master Hodge THE TEMPLE CHURCH COMMITTEE Ian Mayes QC (Chairman, Middle Temple) TEMPLE MUSIC FOUNDATION Master Beringer

INNER TEMPLE REPRESENTATIVES ON EXTERNAL BODIES BAR COUNCIL Master Fetherstonhaugh Master Rhodes Rehana Popal (BLC Rep)

TEMPLE WOMEN’S FORUM Master Taylor (Co-Convenor)

BARRISTERS’ BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION Master Fisher Master Toledano

TREASURER NOMINATION COMMITTEE Master Pittaway (until 31 December)

COUNCIL OF THE INNS OF COURT Master Helen Davies Sub-Treasurer

MARSHALL HALL TRUST Jonathan Waite QC

MASTERS OF THE CIRCUITS AND ASSISTANT MASTERS

COIC MATCHED FUNDED PUPILLAGE SCHEME Master Scriven INNS’ STRATEGIC ADVISORY GROUP Master Treasurer Master Reader Master Helen Davies Sub-Treasurer INCORPORATED COUNCIL OF LAW REPORTING Master Laws Master Bowron INNS OF COURT AND BAR EDUCATIONAL TRUST Master Eder (Chair) Master Rory Phillips

INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE Master Nice

European: Master Nicholas Green Master Beal

INVESTMENT SUB-COMMITTEE Master Henderson

Midland: Master Bleasdale

LIBRARY COMMITTEE Master Sally Smith

Northern Circuit: Master Birkett Master Louise Bancroft

INNS OF COURT COLLEGE OF ADVOCACY Master Stein (Inner Temple Governor) Master MacKenzie (Academic Governor)

North Eastern Circuit: Master Neil Clark Master Anne Richardson

INNS OF COURT LIBRARIES LIAISON COMMITTEE Master Sally Smith

South Eastern: Master Coleman Master Jeremy Carey Master Fiona Jackson

INSTITUTE OF ADVANCED LEGAL STUDIES (IALS) Master Havelock-Allan

OUTREACH COMMITTEE Master Fiona Jackson PEGASUS SCHOLARSHIP TRUST Master Guthrie PROJECT PEGASUS STEERING GROUP Master Reader PUPIL SUPERVISORS SUB-COMMITTEE Master Glick QUALIFYING SESSIONS SUB-COMMITTEE Master Juliet May

160

Wales & Chester: Master Parsley Western: Master Iain Hughes Master Hiddleston Master Quinlan

SELDEN SOCIETY Master Cryan TRAINING FOR THE BAR COMMITTEE Master Fetherstonhaugh TRIBUNAL APPOINTMENTS BOARD Master Willbourne Master Stern

“ T h a n k y o u f o r p r o v i d i n g p i a n o s t h a t h a v e p e r s o n a l i t y a n d e v e n m o r e i m p o r t a n t l y, s o u l .”

HÉLÈNE GRIMAUD

éÜçíçÖê~éÜóW=ã~í=ÜÉååÉâ

S T E I N W AY A R T I S T

Steinwa y H a ll 4 4 Mary le b o n e L an e L o n d o n W 1U 2 DB Fo r mo re i n fo r m a ti o n o r t o arran g e a p rivat e ap p o int ment at ou r Lo n do n sh o w ro o m s , p le as e call:

0 2 0 7 487 3391

o r e m ail in f o @ s t e in way. c o . uk

ACCESS TO CASE LAW ICLR revolutionised access to English case law in 1865. We revolutionised it again in 2018.

The Incorporated Council of Law Reporting for England and Wales, publishers of The Law Reports and The Weekly Law Reports, now provide unrestricted online access to a vast collection of unreported judgments from the High Court and the Court of Appeal.

Cases of interest are digested in free case summaries drafted by our law reporters and citator information, including appellate history and subsequent consideration, is available to all users in front of the paywall.

iclr.co.uk