Problems viewing this? Click to view in your browser
The Times

Monday, May 22 2017

Frances Gibb and Jonathan Ames bring this morning’s must-read of all things legal, including news, comment and gossip.

Today in court: Goodwin and ex-RBS execs face £700m shareholder claim

Fred Goodwin, the disgraced former Royal Bank of Scotland chief executive, and three of his lieutenants are to give evidence at 14-week Commercial Court hearing that starts this morning in London.

The £700 million claim is brought by thousands of the bank’s shareholders who allege they suffered financially in the wake of a £12 billion 2008 rights issue. The deal came just months before the global financial crisis that forced the British government to hand the bank a £45.5bn bailout, effectively taking it into public hands. The Sunday Times reported that some 4,000 RBS shareholders have died while waiting to take on the bank’s former directors in a legal action that was launched five years ago.

Also today ...

  • US ‘likely’ to request Assange extradition
  • My lawyer was rubbish, LOL: Ombudsman opens live chat
  • Judge pledges to stop alleged abusers cross-examining
  • 70% rise in cases at fast-track IP court
  • Right to die review opens at the High Court
  • Deliveroo workers’ rights claim kicks off
  • Comment: Lib Dems are a beacon for justice and humanity
  • The Churn: Joseph Hage Aaronson head bails after three months
  • Blue Bag: Manning hops the PR train after release

Plus, see our plans for Brief Premium and archive of articles so far. Tweet us @TimesLaw with your views.

 
Story of the Day

US ‘likely’ to request Assange extradition

The authorities in America are likely to file a request with their British counterparts for Julian Assange’s extradition, the WikiLeaks founder’s former lawyer said at the weekend.

Mark Stephens (pictured left), the English solicitor who represented Assange during the earlier stages of his case, told The Times: “There is already a warrant under seal that was communicated to Interpol under the previous Obama administration.”

However, Assange’s present lawyer in the US called on the UK government to allow the Australian to leave the country. Barry Pollack, based in Washington, said Assange had been “unlawfully detained for years” and that “at this point it is more apparent than ever that the UK should provide Mr. Assange safe passage to Ecuador”.

Assange has been holed up in the Ecuadorean embassy in London for five years while Swedish prosecutors considered allegations of sexual assault made against him. They announced on Friday that they had dropped the investigation and that Assange had no case to answer in Sweden.

On the balcony of the Ecuadorean embassy, Assange proclaimed victory after the decision of Marianne Ny, the Swedish director of public prosecutions. Assange, who said he avoided extradition to Sweden because he feared that he would be sent from there to the US, had been accused of raping an activist as she slept.

The US authorities want to speak to Assange about the publication on WikiLeaks of hundreds of thousands of classified and otherwise sensitive diplomatic and military documents. The files were leaked by Chelsea Manning when she was a soldier known as Bradley Manning.

Manning was sentenced to 35 years in prison for her involvement in the leak but was pardoned by President Obama at the end of his term late last year, and was released last week.

It is understood that Assange will now seek asylum France. Stephens, a partner at the London law firm Howard Kennedy, pointed out that the French have stronger restrictions on extradition with the US than the UK.

Edward Grange, a partner at London law firm Corker Binning, pointed out that Assange faces a legal hurdle en route to France, however. “There still exists an extant arrest warrant issued for Mr Assange by Westminster magistrates’ court for his failure to surrender to the court,” he said.

“Unless this is withdrawn, should Mr Assange step foot outside the Ecuadorean embassy he would be liable for arrest and, if arrested, would be likely to receive a custodial sentence for his deliberate failure to surrender.”

See Blue Bag below

 
 
What lawyers want from a new government ... a new lord chancellor, restored legal aid eligibility and the scrapping of tribunal fees. Frances Gibb and Jonathan Ames provide a preview edition of the Brief Premium podcast
 
 
News Round Up
My lawyer was rubbish, LOL: Ombudsman opens live chat

Solicitors will soon find that it is easier than ever for clients to moan about them as the complaints watchdog has launched an online “live chat” facility for the public.

The Legal Ombudsman said on Friday that the facility would allow dissatisfied clients of law firms to send instant messages to its complaints-handlers. The ombudsman’s office said it would be “particularly useful for those unable to talk over the phone during the day”.

However, high street solicitors’ firms are likely to have their concerns as many take the view that the ombudsman’s office is already more than sufficiently active in encouraging complaints against lawyers.

The ombudsman says the move is based on successful past use of an online live chat facility to advise on client disputes with claims management companies. “Modernising our systems with live chat should fit better into people’s busy lives and make it much easier for consumers to seek support about poor service from the legal industry and get the advice they need,” Kathryn Stone (pictured), the chief legal ombudsman, said.

“People often don’t know where to turn when they have issues with legal providers, but we want them to know that we are here for them online as well as just a phone call or email away.”

The ombudsman accepted 7,223 complaints involving lawyers and another 2,290 involving claims managers in the last financial year. In addition to solicitors and claims managers, the organisation deals with complaints involving barristers, licensed conveyancers, cost lawyers, legal executives, notaries, patent attorneys and trade mark attorneys.

Family judge to stop victims being cross-examined by alleged abusers

A senior family court judge has pledged never to allow victims of domestic abuse to be questioned by their alleged abusers at trial.

Mr Justice Hayden, who is based in the family division of the High Court in London, said in a recent case he had found it “necessary” to allow a woman to be cross-examined by an estranged husband who she said had abused her.

The judge said the process was “inherently and profoundly unfair” and a stain on the reputation of the family justice system. He said he would not allow it again.
Mr Justice Hayden outlined his thoughts in a ruling on the case published on Friday.

The Conservative party said in its manifesto last week that if in government they would end the ordeal of victims of sexual violence being cross-examined in court by allowing pre-recorded cross-examination to be admitted in trial.

However, there also needs to be legislation to stop alleged abusers carrying out that cross-examination. This is being urged by Sir James Munby, the most senior family judge in England and Wales, as well.

In court on Friday, Mr Justice Hayden said that the man and woman in the case had been involved in a dispute over a child. He said the child could not be identified.

He said: “I found it extremely disturbing to have been required to watch this woman cross-examined about a period of her life that has been so obviously unhappy and by a man who was the direct cause of her unhappiness. She was prepared to submit to cross-examination by her husband in order that the case could be concluded. She was faced with an invidious choice.

“For my part, I am simply not prepared to hear a case in this way again. I cannot regard it as consistent with my judicial oath and my responsibility to ensure fairness between the parties.”

70% rise in cases at fast-track IP court

Small businesses are increasingly litigating to protect their intellectual property with a fast-track court handling nearly a rise in claims of nearly 70 per cent over the last year, figures released today show.

The intellectual property enterprise court, established seven years ago, dealt with 339 cases last year, up from 202 in 2015 and the highest number in its history.

The court handles claims worth up to £500,000 and caps the costs recoverable from the losing side at £50,000. It boasts streamlined procedures in an effort to force cases towards a quick resolution.

Claims before the court have risen steadily since its launch; there were 116 in its first year and 188 in 2012.

Tracey Singlehurst-Ward, a partner at law firm Hugh James, which obtained the court figures through a request under the Freedom of Information Act, said the rise in cases was largely the result of an “increasing awareness of the value of intellectual property in the technology sectors; the online presence of SMEs; and the growing financial incentives to protect IP”.

Singlehurst-Ward pointed that the online environment puts small businesses at greater risk of having intellectual property - such as digital images, styles and designs - stolen. She said the court was “especially designed to help SMEs take the action they need to protect their IP”.

Deliveroo workers’ rights claim kicks off

Another legal staging post in battles over the “gig economy” will be reached tomorrow as a tribunal begins hearing a case against the food delivery company Deliveroo.

The Central Arbitration Committee, which oversees the regulation of UK collective bargaining law, will determine the employment status of Deliveroo riders in what could be a landmark ruling with national implications.

In a hearing listed for three days, the committee will look at whether Deliveroo riders are workers or independent contractors, as Deliveroo classes them at present.

The claim is being brought by the Independent Workers Union of Great Britain, which says it is “confident” the tribunal will rule that the riders are workers. Similar decisions have been handed down over the past few months by the the central London employment tribunal over CitySprint couriers and Uber drivers.

The London law firm Leigh Day is acting for the union and has instructed John Hendy, QC, of London and Bristol set Old Square Chambers.

Jason Moyer-Lee, general secretary of the union, said: “For years employers in the so-called gig economy have been able to get away with unlawfully depriving their workers of employment rights to which they are legally entitled.”

Deliveroo was launched in London in 2013 and now operates in 84 cities in 12 countries. It is thought to have 20,000 riders on its books, whom the company maintains are self-employed contractors.

The company has consistently denied that it deprives its delivery riders of their rights. It recently issued a statement saying: "We are proud to offer flexible, well-paid work to over 15,000 self-employed UK riders, and receive over 10,000 new applications every week.

“Riders choose when and where to ride with us, and for how long, giving them the flexibility and freedom to work with us around their other commitments such as studying, running a small business or working for another company.”

Right to die review opens at the High Court

Noel Conway’s landmark judicial review hearing of the law on assisted dying will begin today with a directions hearing in the High Court in London.

The retired college lecturer, who is 67, had motor neurone disease diagnosed in November 2014 and is not expected to live more than another year. He lost his High Court battle to die at a time of his choosing in March. MND is a progressive illness that causes weakness and eventually paralysis. Death is usually caused by paralysis of the muscles used for breathing.

The campaign group Dignity in Dying is supporting Conway’s judicial review, which comes after a successful appeal in which an earlier decision to deny the case permission to proceed was overturned.

Lawyers at Irwin Mitchell, the law firm acting for Conway, who is from Shrewsbury, said he is bringing the case against the Ministry of Justice "to fight for his right to have the option of an assisted death when he is in his final six months of life". The firm said a full hearing was expected in the next few months.

In Brief

Complaints about police corruption double in four years – The Times

Allen & Overy sues project finance client over unpaid legal fees – Legal Week

Barrister disbarred after failing to pay share of fees to chambers – Legal Futures

Inheritances come with strings attached – The Times

 
 
 
Byline
Comment

Lib Dems are a beacon for justice and humanity James Sandbach

The first of The Brief’s three-part series in which lawyers with the main national political parties make the case for how their side would tackle legal issues if in government

Liberal Democrat lawyers argued that the party’s manifesto should include a strong narrative around rule of law and justice nationally and globally.

We were therefore pleased to see a section called “Defend Rights, Promote Justice and Equalities”. It makes clear that we see Brexit as a threat to international law and and co-operation while back home our cuts to legal aid have “denied effective access to justice”.

The manifesto commits to reversing court and tribunal fee increases, and to an urgent and comprehensive review of the dreaded “legal aid cuts law” – the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 – although we would have liked to have seen a clearer indication of what sort of system of legal advice and support should replace it. Nonetheless, the manifesto hints that some criminal legal aid for corporate crime could be covered through corporate insurance.

Lib Dem lawyers also argued that our manifesto offer must ensure that applicable rights and jurisdictional arrangements developed through European institutions are put into domestic legislation, including fundamental human rights and civil liberties, and also employment, social and economic rights.

The manifesto commits to retaining “international arrangements for jurisdiction” in civil and family law, staying within Europol and European criminal justice co-operation, defending the Human Rights Act and enshrining important international instruments like the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child in UK law.

The manifesto also recognises that “there are too many people in prison”, going on to say that “our reoffending rates are terrible and our prisons, many old and squalid, are in crisis”. The manifesto commits to a presumption against short term custody – promoting restorative justice and community justice panels and non-custodial sentencing [instead] – and [against] over-representation of individuals from ethnic minority backgrounds in the criminal justice system.

It also commits to rehabilitative prison reform, recognising that criminal justice policy must balance the rights of victims and offenders, it proposes a new victims’ bill of rights, funding a national rape crisis helpline with extended hours, and it commits to reviewing rules of evidence in sexual and domestic violence cases.

That strongly rights-based focus is replicated elsewhere in the manifesto – for example, committing to abolish the Tories’ “rape clause” and two-child policy on family benefits, scrapping the bedroom tax and the oppressive work capability test and oppressive sanctions system, extending childcare and parental leave rights and introducing new rights for carers.

On Brexit there are strong statements on the protection of rights for EU citizens and UK citizens, and on maintaining liberal immigration rights and free movement policies.

And there is a commitment to safe and legal routes to the UK for refugees and a welcoming asylum policy, especially in relation to unaccompanied refugee children and vulnerable Syrian. This shows a Lib Dem vision for Britain at its best, an open and fair country that is a beacon for justice and humanity.

James Sandbach is the Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate for Suffolk Coastal and is policy secretary for Lib Dem Lawyers; he has worked for a range of advice and legal advocacy charities.

 
 
Tweet of the Day

Stop what you're doing and register to vote. Or carry on doing it and register at the same time. Either way, REGIST… https://t.co/PQ0T6amBjY

Anna Mazzola @Anna_Mazz_Law

 
 
Blue Bag

Manning hops the PR train after release

Chelsea Manning, the transgender American soldier who, when she was Bradley Manning, leaked hundreds of thousands of confidential diplomatic and military files to Wikileaks, has not wasted her time in prison. If nothing else she has learnt that, in the modern world, a PR team is just as valuable as a legal team.

Manning served seven years of a 35-year jail term before Barack Obama commuted her sentence last January. On release last week, a PR agency rushed to tell the world’s media that Manning’s “legal team confirm Chelsea’s safe release from military prison”.

Her two main lawyers were wheeled out. Nancy Hollander, a door tenant at Doughty Street Chambers in London, who recently detailed the legal battle in The Brief, and Vincent Ward released a joint statement thanking “everyone for ensuring her safe release and respecting her privacy as she starts to adjust to life outside of prison and rebuild her life following seven years of confinement”.

Chase Strangio, a box office name if ever there was one and a lawyer with American Civil Liberties Union, also joined in. “It is incredible to witness Chelsea Manning's freedom after having seen and worked with her behind bars for four years,” he told reporter. “We can all finally truly celebrate the strength and heroism she has shown in surviving and sharing her truth and life with all of us.

“Through extended periods of solitary confinement and up against the government's insistence on denying her medical care and existence as a woman, Chelsea has emerged with grace, resilience, and an inspiring amount of love for others. I am humbled to fight alongside such a fierce advocate for justice.”

Then it was back to the PRs, who sent out at least two notices with Manning’s post-release photograph as she made “her first steps as a free woman”. It was, of course, a link to a tweet. The PRs reminded us that “this photo is … the preferred image to use in stories about Chelsea moving forward for the time being”.

Hollywood awaits?

In the fast lane to Sierra Leone

Lawyers at in-house legal departments tend to have low profiles compared with some of their private practice brethren – must be something to do with non-existent PR budgets.

But Claire Walls, a lawyer with Barclays’ in-house team in Canary Wharf, is charging – almost literally – into the limelight. This Sunday she will not only run what is colloquially known as “the world’s craziest marathon” – an event in Sierra Leone – but will immediately afterwards take part in the inaugural West Africa Cycle Challenge, a 300km jaunt from Bo in Sierra Leone to Robertsport in Liberia.

Has working with high-density bankers driven Walls slightly round the twist? Far from it – instead the lawyer is tackling the brutal challenge to commemorate the life of her father’s best friend, who died the day before the 2014 London marathon.

She will also be raising money for a charity in Africa, as proceeds from the marathon go to programmes to aid local street children. “I couldn't be more inspired by the chance to help young people from incredibly deprived backgrounds in some of the world's poorest countries receive an education and that chance to build hope in their own lives,” says Walls.

 
 
The Churn

A run down of the big partner and team moves this week

Joseph Hage Aaronson head bails after three months

Peter Charlton, former head of one of the elite “magic circle” firms, set tongues in the City of London wagging last week when he bailed out of his leadership role at a litigation niche practice after only three months.

Charlton, who was managing partner at the international giant Clifford Chance, was reported to have left the same role at Joseph Hage Aaronson citing “personal reasons”.

The Lawyer magazine reported that the firm, which was launched four years ago, said Charlton had stepped down after “he came to realise that his role required a total commitment of his time, and Peter felt that he could not provide that commitment and also devote the time he wants to his family and particularly his six-year-old son.”

Elsewhere, the City office of the US law firm Mayer Brown appointed Sally Davies as its first woman London managing partner. The litigation specialist will start a five-year term at the beginning of July, succeeding Sean Connolly who is standing down after a decade in the role.

Hanna Basha has joined privacy and media department at Payne Hicks Beach, a London practice renowned for its high net worth divorce team. Basha joins as a partner from Hill Dickinson.

James Bell has jumped ship from the Anglo-Australian legal services business Slater & Gordon to join the partnership at the London firm Hodge Jones & Allen. Bell was S&G’s head of clinical negligence law in the capital.

Across the Irish Sea in Dublin, Joanne O’Sullivan joins the local office of Kennedys, a City insurance specialist practice. She makes the move from the Royal Free London NHS Foundation Trust, where she was deputy head of legal services.

 
 
Quote of the Day

"For more than two millennia, the Jews lived and breathed learning, analysis and law"