On deliberate contempt as professional martyrdom

A personal Statement from 'barrister' and director of plan.b earth (published yesterday) Tim Crosland has caused a stir, because of an apparently deliberate and pre-meditated breaching of a Supreme Court embargo on its decision on Heathrow’s Third Runway (published today). It began like this: Tomorrow, 16 December, the Supreme Court will publish its judgement on … Continue reading On deliberate contempt as professional martyrdom

Personal Lives and Professional Principles: Beckwith, Integrity and the High Court

Does it matter that a regulatory rulebook contains professional principles that are headlines only and have no detailed content? To what extent is it ok for those engaged in professional discipline to be interested in the private lives of professional people? These are the two main substantive questions (although not framed in that way...) in … Continue reading Personal Lives and Professional Principles: Beckwith, Integrity and the High Court

Integrity, independence, and culture: not a Russian problem, a professional problem

The Navigator Equities v Deripaska [2020] EWHC 1798 (Comm) provides an interesting account of a troubling case. It raises questions about the conduct of the case by a Clifford Chance partner. It left me wondering if the SRA needs to conduct a thematic review of the area. And whilst it is tempting to ask again … Continue reading Integrity, independence, and culture: not a Russian problem, a professional problem

What should COVID-19 CEOs do about The Mayson Report Section 4.12, if anything?

This guest post by Ciarán Fenton first appeared on his blog. On the morning of June 11th. 2020 The Centre for Ethics and Law, University College London, published a report written by Professor Stephen Mayson with the title: “REFORMING LEGAL SERVICES – REGULATION BEYOND THE ECHO CHAMBERS – FINAL REPORT of the Independent Review of … Continue reading What should COVID-19 CEOs do about The Mayson Report Section 4.12, if anything?