L AWG A Z E T T E .CO.

UK 1 8 O CTO B E R 2 0 2 1

Closing arguments
Offices and shops are so last year – but commercial property
lawyers have adjusted swiftly to our changing urban landscape

P LUS: WALES • ROZENBERG • JUNIOR LAWYERS • ROUNDTABLE • COMPETITION • MILITARY JUSTICE

LEADER
L AWG A Z E T T E .CO.UK 1 8 O CTO B E R 2 0 2 1

19 Bell Yard, London WC2A 2JR

DX: Gazette LDE100
www.lawgazette.co.uk
www.lawgazettejobs.co.uk
Law Society telephone 020 7242 1222

Cover pic: Alamy

To reach us by email:
firstname.surname@lawsociety.org.uk Soft soap, hard border Closing arguments
Offices and shops are so last year – but commercial property
lawyers have adjusted swiftly to our changing urban landscape

EDITORIAL PLUS: WALES • ROZENBERG • JUNIOR LAWYERS • ROUNDTABLE • COMPETITION • MILITARY JUSTICE

Editor-in-chief ‘Inexorable’ was the adjective deployed by the counsel general

Paul Rogerson 020 8049 4007
News editor
Michael Cross 020 8049 3976
Features editor
Eduardo Reyes 020 8049 3813
Deputy news editor
John Hyde 020 8049 3905
Reporters
Monidipa Fouzder 020 8049 3984
Jemma Slingo 020 8049 3971
Digital publishing manager
Kirsty Wright 020 8049 3736
Web content editor
Amy Coleman 020 8049 3726
Sub-editors
Nick Goodman, Ryan Southwell
Contributing writer
Jonathan Rayner
ADVERTISING
sales@lawsociety.org.uk
For display or recruitment please call
020 8049 4000
Head of Media Sales
Sarah Clegg 020 8049 4074
Key account director
Alison Sharpin-James 020 8049 3721
PRODUCTION
production@lawsociety.org.uk
Manager
Ian Clark 020 8049 3867
Senior executive
Graham Matthews 020 8049 3849
Executive
Sarah Cotterrill 020 8049 4067
Web
Gwinyai Mparutsa 020 8049 3852
SUBSCRIPTIONS
gazette-subscriptions@lawsociety.org.uk
Supervisor
Jenny Mould 020 8049 3890
Executive
Shama Khan 020 8049 4077
© 2021 The Law Society. All rights
reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced or transmitted in any form or
by any means, including photocopying and
recording, without the written permission
of the publishers. Written permission
must be obtained before any part of
this publication is stored in a retrieval
system. Registered at the Post Office as a
newspaper, published by the Council of the
Law Society, 113 Chancery Lane, London
WC2A 1PL. Printed by Precision Colour
Printing Ltd, ISSN 0262 1495.
for Wales in 2018. ‘Unanswerable’ was the preferred epithet of his NEWS
successor this month. 3 Up Front
Jeremy Miles and Mick Antoniw wanted – and want – to believe that 8 In Focus
wholesale devolution of justice and policing to Wales is merely a matter Cardiff and London remain
of time. And that cause received a major fillip two years ago this week, at loggerheads on devolving
when the landmark Thomas Commission recommended that Cardiff justice and policing to Wales
wrest full control of both policy and funding from Westminster. 9 Lawyer in the News
Unveiling his 558-page blueprint, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd
argued in October 2019 that ‘justice should be determined and COMMENT
delivered in Wales so that it aligns with distinct and developing social 11 Rozenberg
policy and a growing body of Welsh law’. The way that responsibilities Will the latest proposed
are split between Westminster and Cardiff ‘has created pointless legislation on assisted dying
complexity, confusion and incoherence in justice and policing in make it on to the statute book?
Wales’, declared the erstwhile LCJ. 12 Starting Out
Westminster, however, for all its platitudes, is clearly reluctant to A new collaborative era dawns
engage. At this year’s Legal Wales conference (news focus, p8), senior for junior lawyers
justice minister Lord Wolfson of Tredegar offered little but bromides 13 Seen & Heard
in response to Antoniw’s exhortations.
London and Cardiff remain miles apart, indicated Wolfson – but are FEATURES
‘aligned in a desire to improve the way justice is delivered in Wales’. A 16 Roundtable: view from the
truism if ever there was one. engine room
Of course, as powers vested in the Welsh administration increase How technology powers
and laws diverge, the perceived anomalies inherent in two legal profits and growth
systems will be writ larger. A clearly frustrated Antoniw can only 20 Moving to new premises
pledge to press on with those Thomas recommendations which can National property conference
be implemented within the present settlement.
It is difficult to see the Conservative administration at Westminster IN PRACTICE
going much further. The union is under enough strain as it is, and 22 Legal Update
devolving justice and policing to Wales would only bolster the Competition law
separatist cause. 24 SDT
The pandemic is credited with raising the profile of the devolved
administrations, and in politics too much public education can be a REVIEWS
dangerous thing. As justice is wilfully starved of funds, why would 27 Books
Boris Johnson want to give Wales a chance to demonstrate that it could Military Justice Handbook
operate such a fundamental pillar of our democracy better than he? (2nd edition); Litigation
Handbook (Practice and
Procedure in the Business and
Property Courts); and Second
Helpings
Paul Rogerson
Editor-in-chief REGULARS
10 Obiter
THIS WEEK’S CONTRIBUTORS 31 My Legal Life

Volume number 118/35

Joshua Rozenberg Kerstin Morgan Peter Broadhurst Jonathan Hodge Sharon Smith Ashleigh-Hannah
Print: Audited circulation 68,069
Legal commentator Mishcon de Reya Crowell & Moring Junior Lawyers Conduent Spencer
(July 2020-June 2021) Division Fletcher Day
Online network: Unique browsers monthly
460,671, Page impressions 1,629,430
(July 2019-June 2020)

2 LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021

I N FO C US
Firms on ‘hiding to nothing’ with SDT
Jemma Slingo
The commercial imperative
for solicitors to ‘come quietly’
and avoid lengthy disciplinary
proceedings is getting stronger
as the insurance market
hardens, a regulatory specialist
has said, amid growing concern
that young solicitors cannot
adequately defend themselves
at the tribunal.
Gregory Treverton-Jones QC
(pictured), long-time co-author
of The Solicitor’s Handbook,
said the problem of funding for
Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal
cases is becoming more acute
because the insurance market
is tightening.
‘The large firms tend to be well
insured and are covered for
the legal costs of participating
in SRA investigations, but I
understand that such cover
is getting harder and more
expensive to find,’ he told the
Gazette. ‘As for the smaller
firms, they are on a hiding to
nothing, as they tend not to
have insurance cover. On the
current state of the law, if they
are acquitted in the SDT they
are most unlikely to get an order
that the SRA pays its costs. So
the commercial imperative to
“come quietly” and do a deal
with the SRA is very powerful.’
The Law Society has
acknowledged that there is an
‘inequality of arms’, and said
it is exploring ways to support
lawyers appearing at the SDT.
One proposed solution,
put forward by president
of Westminster & Holborn
Law Society Paul Sharma,
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
is that the Society pay for
representation (Gazette, 11
October). He told the Gazette
there are several funding
models the Law Society
could adopt, which would be
significantly cheaper than the
regulator’s ‘extravagant’ model.
Marc Beaumont, a barrister
specialising in disciplinary
proceedings, supported the
concept: ‘For as long as I’ve
been involved in defending
solicitors, the disparity has
been even worse than it is at
the bar. I don’t think funded
defence representation is
something to be feared at all. It
should be welcomed because
it’s a validation of the fairness of
the system.’
However, Beaumont said
the business case was flawed
as, under current case law, if
the regulator loses it does not
have to pay the respondent’s
costs except in exceptional
circumstances. ‘That’s not an
attractive proposition if you’re
18 OCTOBER 2021
U P F RONT
an insurance company,’ he said.
Treverton-Jones predicted
objections to any proposal
that Society funds be spent
upon those who have allegedly
brought the profession into
disrepute. ‘Some sort of
discretionary fund, whereby
funds are provided by the Law
Society in deserving cases,
might be the answer – but who
is to judge what is a deserving
case?’ he said.
The treatment of junior
lawyers by firms is also under
scrutiny, with one solicitor
claiming that the pressurised
culture ‘forces mistakes and
bad judgement’.
Edward Sparrow, chairman
of the City of London Law
Society, said: ‘Complexities
can arise around establishing
whether a lawyer needs support
or discipline, and here firms
are faced with the question of
where they draw the line and
what constitutes a matter for
the regulatory authorities.’
3
U P FRONT
JR bill in Commons
The second reading of the
Judicial Review and Courts Bill,
which would implement the
government’s proposed curbs of
judicial review, begins at 3.30pm
today.
Amazon claim
A group claim brought over the
employment status of 3,000
Amazon delivery drivers could
lead to compensation payouts
of up to £140m, human rights
firm Leigh Day said. Amazon is
contesting the claim.
Solar courts
HM Courts & Tribunals Service
announced a £40m investment
in solar panels, electric car
charging points and other green
measures, to ensure the justice
system ‘is playing its part to
tackle climate change’.
Heathrow appeal
Tim Crosland, the barrister fined
£5,000 for contempt of court
after leaking a Supreme Court
decision about the expansion
of Heathrow, will appeal his
conviction before five Supreme
Court justices today.
Judicial pay plea
TheCityUK has asked the
Treasury to ‘proactively address’
judicial remuneration and
pensions, arguing that the best
commercial barristers and
solicitors will be deterred from
becoming judges due to under-
investment.
Conveyancing testbed
ULS Technology, a stock
exchange-listed provider of
conveyancing IT, acquired
Bolton-based firm Amity Law to
help it test new digital products
and services in live matters.
Welsh counsel
Supreme Court justice Lord
Lloyd-Jones is to head a law
council to promote education,
training and awareness in
Welsh law. This body was
recommended by the 2019
Thomas Commission.
4 LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
Boyce: Chancery Lane has
‘clear definitive successes’
in preserving the rule of law
Society hails legislative coups
Gazette reporter
Successes in shaping several
pieces of proposed legislation
were among Law Society
achievements hailed at the
inauguration of the body’s 177th
president last week.
Addressing an event at
Chancery Lane, I. Stephanie
Boyce spoke of ‘clear defi nitive
successes’ in preserving the rule
of law. ‘Or, in some cases, the
prevention of harmful changes.’
Measures amended following
Society intervention include:
OThe Overseas Operations
Act, which became law in April.
‘Its new presumption against
prosecution does not – despite
the government’s original
intentions – apply for crimes
against humanity, genocide,
Mishcon loses crack team as IPO looms
Jemma Slingo
London fi rm Mishcon de
Reya has lost seven senior
lawyers, including six partners
specialising in white-collar
crime, to a rival ahead of
Mishcon’s imminent stock
exchange float.
Partners Kathryn Garbett,
Jo Rickards, Claire Broadbelt,
Annabel Thomas, Martin
Shobbrook and Hannah Blom-
Cooper, together with legal
director Matt Hancock, have
joined US-based Greenberg
Traurig as ‘shareholders’, a role
similar to partner.
torture, and war crimes, thanks
to our lobbying,’ Boyce said.
OThe Professional
Qualifications Bill, which
will revoke the EU system of
qualification recognition. ‘When
it was announced, members
raised concerns that, as drafted,
the bill could allow foreign bars
to challenge the independence
of UK solicitors and barristers
since it potentially permits the
government to make decisions
on equivalence. We listened, we
influenced, and we were assured
that government amendments
solving the issue will be
brought upon the bill’s return to
parliament,’ she said.
Meanwhile the Judicial Review
and Courts Bill was published
‘without some of the more
Mishcon de Reya’s plan to join
the ranks of stock exchange-
listed law fi rms, approved in
a partner vote in September,
appears to have prompted
several departures. Earlier this
month, it was reported that two
other disputes partners had
left the fi rm, while Karel Daele,
head of the fi rm’s international
arbitration practice, is
reportedly poised to join Taylor
Wessing.
The firm declined to comment
on the departures or give further
details of its initial public
offering. Media reports have
18 OCTOBER 2021
objectionable proposals from
the UK government’s initial
consultation on ouster clauses
and nullity – a victory for our
early engagement with the UK
government on this issue’.
Boyce said she was also
delighted by the success
of the Society’s ‘town hall’
programme, set up to entrench
ties with local societies.
Boyce is the 177th Society
president but only the sixth
female and the fi rst black
office-holder. ‘I am not a passive
reaction to changed attitudes
and opportunities,’ she said.
‘I have fought to get where
I am, and will always fight
for diversity, dynamism and
equality and social opportunity
in the profession.’
said the fi rm could be valued at
£750m, but a spokesperson said
it was too early to speculate.
The new hires will bring
Greenberg’s London litigation
practice up to 40 fee-earners,
including nine shareholders.
‘When combined with other
recent strategic hires across
the firm’s European offices, the
arrival of Kathryn, Jo, Claire,
Annabel, Martin, Hannah,
and Matt, delivers on the fi rm’s
strategy of continuing to grow
our dynamic London office,’ said
London litigation practice chair
Masoud Zabeti.
I N FO C US NE WS

SRA pilot to push unbundled services

John Hyde
The Solicitors Regulation
Authority is renewing efforts to
persuade reluctant solicitors to
offer unbundled services – but
the mission has already been
written off as near impossible
by solicitors and insurers.
The regulator wants to
encourage fi rms to join a pilot
study on the best way to offer
services on one or more tasks
without completing the whole
process. The idea has long
been hailed as a solution to
reducing unmet legal need
among consumers and small
businesses; but has been used
sparingly by solicitors wary of
letting down clients, alerting
regulators and unnerving
professional indemnity
insurers.
Th is time the SRA’s pilot will
create what has been described
as a ‘safety blanket’ for fi rms
involved in family law to work
together, share ideas and ask
others for advice. The SRA
Regulator: ‘Many firms are
already experimenting with
offering services in this way’
principle to act in the best
interests of each client remains
in place, but the pilot is likely to
be drawn up to ensure fi rms are
insulated from any action.
The Law Society has agreed
to take part in the process of
identifying pilot fi rms.
A survey this year by the Legal
Services Consumer Panel found
that unbundling accounted for
16% of legal services in 2020 –
down from 19% in 2015 – but
the SRA remains keen and says
unbundled services can help
people get professional help they
would not normally be able to
access.
A spokesperson said: ‘Many
fi rms are already experimenting
with offering services in this
way, with differing results. Some
have found difficulties, while
others have had success and
have continued to make such a
service available.’
The Law Society said that
while some practitioners have
started to deliver elements
of unbundled services, there
remains an inherent risk of
solicitors being found negligent
for matters believed to fall
outside the retainer.
The Society added: ‘Th is risk
is one of the biggest barriers to
the prospects for unbundled
services to deliver costs savings.
We hope that the SRA pilot study
will provide robust evidence
of the issues that unbundled
services raise.’
Insurers have previously said
they are not keen on law fi rms
providing unbundled advice,
as the risks in many cases
outweigh the potential rewards
of the limited fees chargeable.
In a comment piece earlier this
year, insurer broker Howden
said there were reasons why
PII proposal forms ask whether
fi rms undertake unbundled
services: ‘Insurers have seen the
fallout in terms of claims activity
when an unbundled legal
service goes wrong,’ the broker
said. ‘The level of risk associated
with providing advice and
services on a fragmented basis
should not be underestimated.’

Looking to work
for a business
that cares?
Simplify Works for you
We care about our customers and We are always looking for inspiring,
colleagues. We want customers to innovative, and caring conveyancers,
feel valued when they give us their so if you want a business that cares
business. It’s our people who make about people, why not see how
that possible; so, we work hard Simplify ‘works for you’?
to make you feel proud to be part
of the leading conveyancing and
property business in the UK.

recruitment@simplify.co.uk
www.simplify.co.uk/careers

Simplify incorporates six of the largest UK conveyancers; Advantage Property Lawyers, Cook Taylor Woodhouse, DC Law, Gordon Brown Law, JS Law and Premier Property Lawyers.

LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021 5

N E WS

Regulator’s AML crackdown

snared 7 law firms a month
John Hyde
Professional regulators went
to an average of seven law
firms a month in the past year
to follow up concerns about a
lack of anti-money laundering
policies.
In its first report as a
professional supervisor under
the Office for Professional
Body Anti-Money Laundering
Supervision (OPBAS), the
Solicitors Regulation Authority
revealed last week that it made
a total of 85 visits in the period
and carried out a further 168
desk-based reviews.
The most common reasons
for non-compliance with anti-
money laundering regulations
were not having a proper risk
assessment in place, poor client
due diligence and insufficient
SCHOOL’S OUT FOR WEIGHTMANS’ CLASS OF 13 checks on the source of funds.
Other reasons for rule breaches
National firm Weightmans has welcomed 13 school leavers on to its were a failure of staff to follow
first solicitor apprenticeship programme. The fresh-faced recruits procedures, inadequate
will work across the firm’s legal departments while studying for an training or supervision, and
undergraduate law degree and preparing for the Solicitors Qualifying poor AML policies.
Exam. The programme will last for six years, meaning the apprentices In total 273 reports of
will be fully qualified by 2027. potential AML breaches
The firm also wants to develop commercial and digital skills, and were made to the SRA, with
candidates will be offered placements in areas such as finance, HR 29 enforcement actions
and marketing, and Weightmans’ ‘innovation department’. resulting in fines of £160,000.
Solicitor apprenticeships are gaining traction under the new The regulator also made 39
qualification regime, with Allen & Overy and Norton Rose Fulbright suspicious activity reports to
also recruiting school leavers. the National Crime Agency.
SRA board chair Anna
Bradley said: ‘I know from
our discussions with local law
societies that meeting their
obligations is something that
matters a lot to the profession.
The overwhelming majority
want to do the right thing,
but there is still a small but
nonetheless significant
proportion of firms which
are just not doing enough to
prevent money laundering.
‘As well as allowing
criminals to profit from their
actions, they undermine
the trust consumers place
in the profession, damaging
confidence in the rule of law
and the administration of
justice.’
The supervisor report is a
requirement placed on all
relevant regulators by the
money laundering regulations
and guidance from the OPBAS
and HM Treasury.
The SRA says that more than
6,500 firms are captured by the
scope of the AML regulations
– particularly those working in
conveyancing.
The regulator fined more
than a dozen firms in rapid
succession over the summer
for providing their AML
declaration – a firm-wide risk
assessment – more than a year
late.

Family judge rejects 28 ‘identical’ divorce petitions

John Hyde
A family court judge has
dismissed 28 divorce petitions
drawn up by the same online
business after finding that
particulars of behaviour were
‘absolutely identical’.
Mr Justice Moor declined
to refer the responsible
unregulated business to the
director of public prosecutions
but warned he would have ‘no
hesitation’ in doing so if there
was any repeat.
The 28 petitions were listed
in open court after they were
all referred by Deputy District
Judge McHardy, in day-to-day
charge of the divorce unit at
Bury St Edmunds.
Moor J said it was ‘quite
impossible’ for each of the
28 respondents to have behaved
in exactly the same way, but
their particulars of behaviour
were described identically
over some 145 words in each
petition. He concluded that the
petitions were ‘improper’.
All 28 petitions were drafted
and filed by a company
identified as iDivorces, an
unregulated provider added
as an interested party. Its
director, named as Mr Eastham,
accepted that the company
used standard wording on each
petition and sent it to each
client asking them if there was
anything included that was
wrong.
The judge said it was
‘tolerably clear’ that none
of the petitioners made any
amendment but added this
was not the correct way to
proceed. ‘It follows that I have
no alternative but to dismiss all
28 of these divorce petitions,’
he continued. ‘The petitioners
will simply have to start again. I
hope it will be possible for them
to proceed relatively quickly.’
He had considered a reference
to the DPP on the basis this
was potentially a crime of
perverting the course of justice.
It was noted that Eastham
apologised in court, said it was
a misunderstanding and that
it would never happen again.
The judge concluded that there
would be insufficient public
benefit in referring the cases.

6 LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021


‘Pay £10 a year to maintain SIF’
Paul Rogerson
Solicitors should ‘top up’ their
practising fee every year for
protection against potentially
ruinous negligence claims
after retirement, it has been
proposed. An extra £10 a year
each could sustain the Solicitors
Indemnity Fund, which provides
post-six-year run-off cover
(PSYROC) for firms that closed
without a successor practice.
Lymington sole practitioner
Clive Sutton revealed the latest
development in the SIF saga
at the Ascot conference of the
Sole Practitioners Group on
9 October. Sutton has been
involved in talks with the
Solicitors Regulation Authority
on protecting solicitors from
post-six-year run-off claims
after SIF closes. The fund is
scheduled to close in September
2022 following repeated
postponements.
Insurers have so far shown
little interest in providing
Firms blocking solicitors from bench – circuit chief
Paul Rogerson
A prominent district judge has
accused law firms of blocking
solicitors from getting on the
first rung of the judicial ladder.
The trend is worsening and
could hamper efforts to ease
the case backlog, according to
Paul Richmond, chair of the
Northern Circuit District Judges
Association.
Richmond addressed the Sole
policies for PSYROC. The SRA is
now expected to launch a public
consultation on what to do next,
on the grounds clients could
be exposed when this cover
disappears next September.
‘That does not leave very
much time,’ Sutton told the
conference. ‘My fear is that [in
2022] we will be back where we
were a year ago.
‘The worry is that if the result of
the consultation is there should
be continued protection of the
public in the post-six-year run-
off period, this will be made a
condition of the minimum terms
for the current [professional
indemnity insurance] policies.
This will really disappoint the
insurance industry and, if
forced to provide those terms,
will exponentially increase the
cost of run-off insurance to
effectively make it impossible for
any solicitor to retire. It would
also be a disincentive for people
to join the profession.’
Practitioners Group on the topic
of ‘how to become a deputy
district judge’. DDJs sit on a fee-
paid basis in the county courts
and district registries of the
High Court.
‘On my circuit, there is a
monumental demand for DDJs
because of Covid,’ Richmond
said. ‘The only way that we have
got anywhere near carrying out
the work and minimising the
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
S O L E P RACT I T I O N E R S G RO U P
Clive Sutton: ‘My fear is that [when
the SIF closes in 2022] we will be
back where we were a year ago’
The SPG has instead proposed
that SIF continue to operate in
amended form, ‘topping up’,
where necessary, net assets that
currently total over £20m.
‘An additional levy, voluntary
or otherwise, of about £10 a
head from each of the 150,000
members of the Law Society
would produce £1.5m per
annum, which could easily
cover the apparent running
costs of the fund,’ Sutton said.
He also delivered a timeline of
the clearly fraught negotiations
since spring 2020. At that point,
he claimed, the Society was
proposing to divert the £30m
of assets sitting in SIF Ltd into
its own ‘free funds’, which
left negotiators ‘apoplectic’.
However, the Society disputes
this, insisting such a move was
never on the cards.
Sutton also revealed that
the SRA was threatened with
judicial review over SIF’s
‘apparently arbitrary’ closure.
backlog is by having lots and
lots of DDJs doing lots and lots
of work.
‘Because we can’t block-list,
and because you can’t get
through work as quickly on the
telephone or on Teams as you
can having people walking in
and out, we need more bodies.’
Richmond detects a shift in
DDJ recruitment away from
solicitors and towards the bar. A
18 OCTOBER 2021
Elgin marbles
‘stolen goods’
Paul Rogerson
‘The British Museum is in
possession of stolen goods. The
Parthenon Marbles were stolen
by Lord Elgin – they never were
the “Elgin” Marbles. They are
the Parthenon Marbles, as a
matter of law.’
So declared renowned
media lawyer Mark Stephens
CBE, addressing the
Sole Practitioners Group
conference.
Stephens called for the
marbles and other historical
artefacts – notably the Easter
Island moai – to be returned to
their rightful owners. He even
suggested Greece could veto
any proposed UK-EU trade deal
pending their return.
The precedents are
multiplying. Stephens, of
Howard Kennedy, acted for
the US government in the
repatriation to Cambodia of
temple structures in the Norton
Simon museum in Pasadena.
‘It is shameful that our
country is holding on to stolen
goods, just like any common
thief,’ he added. ‘It is time to
rethink our museums and
return cultural heritage to the
places it belongs.’
Meanwhile, Leigh Day has
circulated a legal opinion
stating that 11 artefacts stored
in the British Museum – but
never exhibited – could
be legally restored to the
Ethiopian Orthodox Church
under the British Museum Act
1963.
reason for this is that solicitors
interested in becoming DDJs
are encountering growing
hostility from their firms.
‘Firms of solicitors are
becoming less keen on senior
figures taking time out, several
days a month, to serve as deputy
district judges,’ he said. ‘They
know that those solicitors might
well leave [for the permanent
post of district judge].’
7
I N FOCUS
H20 Freight Bold
two deck headline
News standfirst in red. 9pt FreightSans Pro Meduim, locked to the
10pt baseline. News standfirst in red. 9pt FreightSans Pro Meduim,
locked to the 10pt baseline.
9pt Byline Bold
TX IntroText. 8.25pt Utopia
Std Regular, locked to the 10pt
baseline with no inset.
TX Text 8.25pt Utopia Std
Regular, locked to the 10pt
baseline with 2mm inset.
Time for Westminster to let go?
In the wake of the Thomas Commission’s radical blueprint for the
devolution of justice in Wales, there are renewed calls for Cardiff
to control funding and policy. But is London listening?
Monidipa Fouzder
and John Hyde
Cardiff and London remain
at loggerheads over the full
devolution of justice, keynote
speeches at the Legal Wales
Conference this month
confirmed. While justice
minister Lord Wolfson of
Tredegar appeared to offer
an olive branch, the general
theme of his address suggests
Westminster won’t be handing
over control anytime soon.
It has been two years since the
Thomas Commission on Justice
in Wales unveiled its radical
and wide-ranging blueprint
that recommended Cardiff
wrest full control of both policy
and funding from Westminster.
But in January 2020, then
justice minister Chris Philp
MP told Westminster that
the government had no plans
to adopt the commission’s
recommendations.
Then Covid-19 struck.
Grappling with Welsh law
in daily life as a result of the
pandemic had made people
more conscious of devolution,
Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd said
in September 2020. Then, just
last month, Mick Antoniw MS,
counsel general for Wales, told
members of Senedd Cymru that
8 LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
it was time to kickstart fresh
discussions about the future of
justice in Wales.
Addressing the Legal
Wales Conference on 8
October, Antoniw accused
Westminster of playing a
‘political trick’. It was ‘hugely
disappointing’ that the UK
government had not responded
positively to the commission’s
recommendations. The policy
was backed by the majority of
Welsh voters and supported
by the majority of elected
representatives in the Senedd,
he claimed. ‘The failure to
devolve justice is a political
trick which has little to do
with the best administration
of the justice system and the
wellbeing of the Welsh people.’
Antoniw said the Welsh
government would make
incremental changes to suit
the system in Wales until there
was a change of government
at Westminster or the present
The failure to devolve justice is a political trick which has
little to do with the best administration of justice
Mick Antoniw MS, counsel general for Wales
Mick Antoniw: in areas such as
housing, family and welfare law,
the argument for devolution is
‘unanswerable and already made’
administration has a change
of heart. Wales and the rest of
the UK were heading towards
an increasingly two-tier justice
system, and he suggested
that devolution could help
to address some of the issues
of access that have arisen in
recent years.
‘[The current system is] one
where those with the necessary
resources have access to the
justice system and those without
– usually the poorest and most
vulnerable – do not and are
effectively excluded from it,
often becoming disempowered,
angry and frustrated victims of
the justice system and whatever
it delivers to them.’
In areas such as housing,
family and welfare law, the
argument for devolution was
‘unanswerable and already
made’, he said.
Asked whether the idea of
a devolved justice system
was supported by law firms
with offices in Wales but
headquarters in England,
Antoniw said concerns had been
‘validly made’ over potential
18 OCTOBER 2021
problems, but he sought to
reassure lawyers it would not
affect their ability to practise.
‘No one is talking about
creating barriers that would
prevent cross-border ongoing
work that is so important to the
commercial viability of so many
firms,’ he added. ‘There is every
advantage to the law firms to
engage and support this process.
I don’t think it will impact on the
broader commercial interests.’
However justice minister Lord
Wolfson (David Wolfson QC)
assured the conference that
the UK government is looking
seriously at the Thomas report.
‘The counsel general’s opening
address looked at building
a consensus for change for
justice in Wales,’ he said on a
conciliatory note. ‘While the UK
government’s position differs
from the Welsh government’s
on the Thomas Commission’s
overarching recommendation
that justice should be devolved,
we are aligned in our desire to
continue to improve the way
justice is delivered in Wales.’
The Ministry of Justice ‘has
also been examining the
commission’s report to see
what can be taken forward
to improve justice in Wales
– and indeed is already
undertaking work in relation
to some of the commission’s
recommendations’, he said.
But jurisdictional devolution is
not on the agenda. Lord Wolfson
stressed: ‘This government
is committed to protecting
and promoting the combined
strengths of the union, building
on hundreds of years of
partnership and shared history.
We want to strengthen the union
to ensure the institutions of
the UK are used in a way that
benefits people in every part of
our country, from Aberdeen to
Aylesbury, Belfast to Brecon.
The union strategy we have is to
prioritise the promotion of a UK-
wide legal sector and services in
the three UK jurisdictions.’
The risk, of course, is that the
perception that the government
is ignoring the Thomas
Commission’s overarching
recommendation will strain the
union further, not strengthen it.
OSee leader, p2

McFarlane reveals scale of
mediation voucher success
Family Division president discloses that more than three-quarters
of eligible cases reached whole or partial agreement
Monidipa Fouzder
More than three-quarters
of family cases eligible for
mediation vouchers introduced
earlier this year were
successfully resolved away
from court, the president of the
Family Division has revealed.
The Ministry of Justice hoped
to bolster the use of mediation
after referrals nosedived
following the 2013 legal aid cuts
with a £1m voucher scheme.
Families could apply for £500
vouchers towards the cost of
mediation, which is usually
charged for unless one of the
parties has access to legal aid.
In a speech to the Jersey
Family Law Conference, Sir
Andrew McFarlane revealed
that the Family Mediation
Council distributed just over
2,000 vouchers, averaging 130
vouchers a week, and that 77%
of cases reached whole or partial
agreement.
The government allocated a
further £800,000 to the scheme
in August, which is expected to
help 2,000 more families.
The voucher scheme was
introduced during Robert
Buckland’s tenure as justice
secretary but its success is likely
to grab the attention of Dominic
Raab, who told the Conservative
party conference that he wants
to see fewer civil disputes go
to court. ‘Court ought to be in
many of these areas the point
of last resort. We should use
much more alternative dispute
resolution for these things,’
he said.
A government call for evidence
on how to settle family, business
Parents and children will be able to access a hub website
providing information and signposting them to services
in the hope they can avoid coming to court
Sir Andrew McFarlane
and other civil disputes away
from court closes on 31 October.
Meanwhile, McFarlane
revealed further details about
pilots in north Wales and Dorset,
beginning next year, that
will test ‘a more investigative
approach’ in private children
cases. Under the pilots, a
child impact assessment by
a multi-agency panel led by
Cafcass will gather information
to identify safety issues and
family needs. A resulting ‘child
impact report’ will enable a
triaging legal adviser or judge
to decide how best to proceed,
which could be by means of a
further welfare report, fact-
finding hearing, short hearing
to deal with straightforward
issues, directions hearing or
pausing the proceedings to refer
the parents to an out-of-court
service.
When an outcome has been
decided or agreed, a non-
hearing review by Cafcass will
check the order is working,
clarify any uncertainties or refer
the parents to further support if
needed.
The concept of a ‘family hub’,
operating separately from the
court, will also be developed.
McFarlane said the hubs would
bring together an integrated and
coherent structure of services
for separating parents and their
children together with wider
support from education, health
and faith groups. ‘Parents
and children will be able to
access a hub website providing
information and signposting
them to services in the hope they
can avoid coming to court.’
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
IN FOC U S
Oliver Carter, Irwin Mitchell
Who? Oliver Carter, associate solicitor in the public law and human
rights team, Irwin Mitchell.
Why is he in the news? Represents the family of Megan Davison, a
teacher who was diagnosed with diabulimia and took her own life in
2017. Following legal submissions, the attorney general consented
to Megan’s mother making an application to the High Court, seeking
to quash the original inquest and for a fresh hearing to be held into
Davison’s death.
Thoughts on the case: ‘Megan’s parents suffered the trauma of
losing their daughter at just 27, and hoped the inquest would provide
answers, as well as the opportunity for lessons to be learned to
prevent future deaths. However, the coroner only called two witnesses
to give oral evidence, neither of whom knew Megan well, and did not
call any witnesses from the Community Eating Disorder Service to
which Megan had been referred for treatment and management of
her diabulimia (an eating disorder, also known as Type 1 diabetes with
disordered eating, which involves the deliberate omission of insulin
doses). The coroner also did not hear evidence from any witness
with expertise in diabulimia. Since the inquest, new evidence from a
leading expert has been provided to the attorney general in support
of the application for a fresh inquest by Megan’s parents. The attorney
general has granted consent for this application to be heard by the
High Court. We are waiting for a hearing to be listed.’
Dealing with the media: ‘We are lucky to have an expert and
dedicated press team who work with us and our clients to engage
with the media. While this application for a fresh inquest has been
in progress for some time, Megan’s parents recently chose to speak
publicly about it after the attorney general granted consent to
proceed. There was local and national media coverage shortly after
Megan’s death, but her parents did not have legal representation at
the original inquest. We were instructed after the original inquest, as
Megan’s parents felt a sense of injustice and a lack of closure.’
Why become a lawyer? ‘To use the law to try to help people who
need it most, particularly those faced with potentially unlawful
conduct by public bodies.’
Career high: ‘A successful settlement in a judicial review case against
a government department which should benefit thousands of people.’
Career low: ‘The cuts to legal aid in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and
Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, and ongoing restrictions on access
to justice. If people do not have the practical means of enforcing their
rights – in court if necessary – those rights become meaningless.’
18 OCTOBER 2021 9
O B I T ER
Experts getting
tied up in knots
The recent roasting of an expert in Reynolds v
Stanbury shows how experts can be a liability
to the side calling them – and sometimes a
deadly danger to the defendant in a criminal
case. The classic example is the ‘expert’ called
for the defence in the 1931 Rouse murder
trial. He was destroyed when he could not
tell Norman Birkett the coefficient of the
expansion of brass, something Birkett had
found in that year’s Engineers’ Diary. And for
the prosecution in another case, when the
expert on material did not know the difference
between Egyptian and Indian cotton.
The Victorian barrister Henry Hawkins dealt
with a witness in short order when he gave
a handwriting expert six slips of paper. ‘I see
you are trying to put me in a hole,’ said the
expert. ‘I am,’ said Hawkins, who wanted to
know whether the six slips were written at
the same time and by the same person. ‘No,
by different persons at different times,’ said
the expert after briefly examining them.
‘You are in a hole,’ said Hawkins, ‘I wrote
them all myself this morning at this table.’
The dangers of evidence from witnesses
who had been hypnotised had long been
understood in England but, although the Home
Office issued guidelines in the 1980s, they
seem to have been honoured in the breach.
In 1987 at Maidstone Crown Court the judge
stopped a case against the defendants after
hearing that the hypnotist used by the police
was self-taught and had learned his technique
by reading books from his local public library.
On a happier note, James Comyn, who later
became a High Court judge, used to tell the
story of a doctor he called in a medical case in
Dublin. The judge had been at Trinity College.
The witness, wearing a Trinity tie, came
through his cross-examination unscathed and
was commended by the judge at the end of
it. Comyn walked with the man to his car. On
the back seat was a collection of regimental,
school and college ties.
‘Oh yes,’ said the doctor blithely, ‘I always
check the night before I’m giving evidence to
find out where the judge went to school or
college and I wear the appropriate tie. I find it
helps an awful lot.’
James Morton is a writer and former
criminal defence solicitor
10
Twitter on a roll over marbles
Puce-faced rage is never in short supply on
social media. Back in the hot-metal era, however,
editors knew of one hardy perennial guaranteed
to have Herbert Gussett and his ilk reaching for
the Basildon Bond: any suggestion that the ‘Elgin
Marbles’ (sic) should be returned to Greece.
It was no surprise, then, to see Mark Stephens
CBE’s tour de force at the SPG conference
(news, p7) tweak the British lion’s tail.
He doesn’t hold back, Mark. ‘The British have
a long and dishonourable history of looting,
ransacking, pillaging and plunder,’ he opened.
Stephens had barely sat down before the anti-
woke keyboard warriors stirred to life.
‘What a load of left-wing rubbish,’ raged one
commenter.
‘They were lawfully purchased by Lord Elgin and
then donated,’ sneered another. Well yes, that’s
the museum’s ‘position’. And Obiter believes in
Santa, but that doesn’t mean he exists.
More diverting was the observation that ‘by
the same token, we should transfer Gibraltar and
the Channel Islands back to Spain and France
respectively’. Mmm. Following the same line
‘Mr Bitcoin’ has bit between his teeth
For the past 10 years, it has been an article
of faith among the entrepreneurs, visionaries
and outright rogues who make up the global
bitcoin community that the identity of ‘Satoshi
Nakamoto’, the cryptocurrency’s inventor,
is a mystery. ‘I’ve moved on to other things,’
Nakamoto wrote in 2011, before disappearing.
But that’s not how it looks in the law courts.
Dr Craig Wright, an Australian academic and
businessman resident in England, has lately been
highly active in pursuing legal actions based
upon his case that he is the elusive Nakamoto.
Earlier this year, Dr Wright obtained a default
judgment in the Business and Property Courts
against a website over the copyright in bitcoin’s
founding text, Satoshi Nakamoto’s 2008 white
paper.
Dr Wright is now taking vigorous legal action
against bitcoin geeks who – sometimes in highly
Wolfson goes back to his roots
Explaining his bona fides for attending the Legal
Wales Conference this month, Lord Wolfson
of Tredegar (David Wolfson QC) revealed
that he faced an unusual dilemma after
becoming a justice minister. There was
already a Lord Wolfson (of Aspley
Guise) so the new one was told he
would have to put a geographical
designation in his title.
Why Tredegar? Well, Wolfson’s great-
grandparents ended up in Tredegar, Blaenau
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021
of reasoning, shouldn’t someone tell Narendra
Modi to give us India back?
All good, knockabout stuff – but the last
word goes to Stephens, who, unabashed as
ever, tweeted: ‘Amused and astonished at the
number of unlawyerly comments untrammelled
by knowledge or hearing the analysis. Enjoy
the cornucopia of blind – knee jerk, amoral –
prejudice.’
Ooof. Mark knows, as Oscar Wilde did before
him, that there is only one thing worse than
being talked about…
intemperate language – dispute his claim. This
month his lawyers, international firm Ontier,
claimed a ‘significant victory’ in a pre-trial
review against one such commentator. In a
256-paragraph judgment, Mr Justice Julian
Knowles dealt with applications for two separate
amendments to the claim, an application to
strike out part of the defence and an application
by the defendant to re-amend his amended
defence. ‘The case has a long and protracted
procedural history,’ the judge observed with
some understatement.
A three-day substantive hearing next February
looks set to hinge on whether the complained-of
publications meet the ‘serious harm’ test set by
the 2013 Defamation Act. In the meantime, Dr
Wright is involved in at least four other actions
in England and the US.
Obiter will watch on with fascination.
Gwent, when they came to the UK in the 19th
century.
There were a number of Jewish
communities in south Wales. ‘I thought
it quite right to recognise the welcome
which by and large these immigrants
received,’ Wolfson said. He also
revealed that his great-uncle Jack was
known as ‘Jack the riot baby’ because
he was ‘literally born in the middle of the
Tredegar riots in 1911’.

Joshua Rozenberg
Columnist
Will latest Assisted Dying bill get through?
The Assisted Dying bill that the House of
Lords will debate on Friday is significantly
different from a bill of the same name
introduced seven years ago by Lord
Falconer, the former lord chancellor. As
originally drafted, Falconer’s private
member’s bill had no judicial safeguards. It
lapsed in 2015.
In its latest incarnation, sponsored by the
crossbench peer Lady Meacher (pictured),
the bill includes some amendments that
were accepted by Falconer in 2014 and
approved by other peers. But there is still
uncertainty over the responsibilities that it
would impose on the judiciary.
If enacted, the bill would give new rights
to adult residents of England and Wales
who are ‘terminally ill’. That means they
have been ‘diagnosed by a registered
medical practitioner as having an inevitably
progressive condition which cannot be
reversed by treatment’ and, as a result, they
are ‘reasonably expected to die within six
months’.
After a person had made a formal
declaration, it would become lawful for
a doctor to ‘prescribe medicines for that
person to enable that person to end their
own life’. There would be an amendment
to the Suicide Act 1961, under which it is
currently a serious criminal offence to help
people to kill themselves.
The bill would not legalise euthanasia, its
supporters explain, because it says that ‘the
decision to self-administer the medicine
and the final act of doing so must be taken
by the person for whom the medicine
has been prescribed’. However, a health
professional – who may be a registered
nurse authorised by the attending doctor
– could prepare the medicine for self-
administration; prepare a medical device
to enable self-administration; or assist
the person to ‘ingest or otherwise self-
administer the medicine’.
Because some people might understand
‘assisted dying’ to include either palliative
care or euthanasia, it would surely be less
confusing to call this the Assisted Suicide
bill or the Suicide (Amendment) bill.
Indeed, some peers thought the drafting
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
Judges are not doctors, of course.
But it seems hard to understand
why courts should not be allowed
to test the medical evidence on this
fundamental issue
could be made even clearer if the word
‘medicine’, which usually means something
intended to help you recover, was replaced
by a term like ‘lethal drugs’ or ‘poison’.
Under Meacher’s bill, the courts would
have to decide whether an individual ‘has
capacity to make the decision to end his or
her own life’. Judges must also be satisfied
‘that the person has a voluntary, clear,
settled and informed wish to end his or her
own life’. That would presumably require
oral evidence from the applicant as well as
assessment of any medical evidence.
What the judges would not have to decide
was whether a person was terminally ill.
That would be a decision for the treating
doctor and an independent doctor. Both
physicians would also need to be satisfied
that the individual had ‘the capacity to
make the decision to end their own life
and has a clear and settled intention to
18 OCTOBER 2021
OPINION
end their own life which has been reached
voluntarily, on an informed basis and
without coercion or duress’.
Judges are not doctors, of course. But
it seems hard to understand why courts
should not be allowed to test the medical
evidence on this fundamental issue. It’s also
odd that questions of coercion and duress
would be for doctors rather than judges –
although those requirements are implicit in
the shared tests.
And which judges would they be? The bill
requires the consent of ‘the High Court
(Family Division)’. This drafting strikes me
as both too vague and too narrow. Why not
say ‘a judge of the High Court’? Parliament
should not fetter the lord chief justice’s
discretion to assign the most appropriate
judge in each case.
But perhaps the judges’ role is to be no
more than a fig-leaf or a rubber stamp.
As the bill is drafted, they would not be
asked whether assisted suicide was in an
individual’s interests or whether a refusal to
assist would breach an individual’s human
rights. The judges’ main job would be to
assess applicants’ wishes and capacity
– though judges would also be expected
to verify the age and residence status of
applicants.
Meacher’s bill has plenty of drafting
ambiguities. Applicants must have been
‘ordinarily resident in England and Wales
for not less than one year’. Does that mean
in the year preceding the application? Or
at any time in their lives? Those with a
conscientious objection are not required
‘to participate in anything authorised’ by
the bill. Does that apply to the judges? And
could there be appeals?
But perhaps it’s unfair to quibble. For a
private member’s bill to get through the
House of Commons, it needs government
support. That includes redrafting by
parliamentary counsel. But, according to
a report in the Telegraph this month, Boris
Johnson does not support a change in the
law. If that’s true, then drafting problems
are the least of Meacher’s concerns.
joshua@rozenberg.net
11
O P I NION
Jonathan Hodge
Starting out
Embracing the collaborative era
As I approach the end of my two-year seat
on the executive committee of the Junior
Lawyers Division of the Law Society, I
find myself in a reflective mood. I heard
once that the world is run by 30-year-olds
– people in their 20s are generally more
inexperienced, and people in their 40s and
50s pass work down. That is probably true,
and members of the executive committee
are no exception. However, they are
exceptional. Over the last two years, I have
had the privilege of working with a group
of incredible individuals. Every one from a
different background, but every one special,
driven, intelligent, capable. Honestly, I do
not know how I ended up on the committee
and often wonder if there may have been
an error. But here I am, and as I finish my
tenure, at the end of a bizarre two years I am
forced to compare the junior lawyer world
as it was then, to how it is now.
You can tell that, as I write, I am circling
several themes, none of which have I yet
landed upon. Perhaps there is a theme in
that – in a way, we have all spent the last two
years circling and never landing. I do not
know anyone who has not been ‘slammed
with work’, but at my first face-to-face event
in 18 months the other weekend at Middle
Temple, I realised the last time I had seen
some committee members in person I was
two years younger. So in a way, much has
happened, and yet nothing has.
But running on a treadmill can
still be valuable. By being forced into
introspection, we have naturally learned a
lot about ourselves. We have become better
lawyers and better people. We all joke
about ‘if I have one more Teams meeting’,
but the prevalence of video conferencing
is a demonstration of the indomitability
of our team spirit. Many people say what
we have just gone through is the greatest
upheaval they will face in their lifetime.
Looking at the significant threats posed
by climate change I am less optimistic,
but it has been undeniably challenging.
And that challenge has forced us to be
more collaborative, even with our worst
opponents. If we all call it a skylight,
nobody can call it a collapsed roof.
12
Lord Leggatt: modern way of assessing contractual relationships
So I am not going to bang on the drum
of ‘the SQE isn’t necessary nor fit for
purpose’ (although in my opinion it isn’t
on either count and the long-term damage
it will cause to the perceived quality of UK
lawyers internationally will be significant.
I still have not found out whose bright idea
I am working on a case in which
I am deploying arguments on
relational contracts; a relatively
new area of commercial contract
law that says parties owe each
other obligations of mutual trust
and good faith
it was.). I am not going to try to sell you
tickets to an event (although I do highly
recommend JLD events). I am simply going
to point out that, when the doors closed,
the conversations opened. The world
has changed, and for the better. Let us
embrace that and maintain it, and not slip
backwards through complacency.
I am working on a case in which I am
deploying arguments on relational
contracts; a relatively new area of
commercial contract law that says parties
owe each other obligations of mutual
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021
trust and good faith – endorsed by Lord
Leggatt, who is primarily responsible for
commencing this modern way of assessing
contractual relationships from his time
sitting in the Court of Appeal (and who
also gave the recent judgment of the
Supreme Court in the Uber case, which
contains similar principles in recognising
the rights of workers).
The way we work, both outwardly and
internally, is changing. I have recently
become a consultant, operating through
both my previous firm and Nexa. Both are
forward-thinking and effective businesses
that have embraced change and made it
work for them. As we move out of lockdown
fully, the flexibility posed by new models
of working will grow in prevalence, and
everyone will be better for it.
As perhaps the most famous Middle
Temple lawyer once said, ‘if we could
change ourselves, the tendencies in the
world would also change’. As our new
collaborative era begins, we can remember
that we work in the greatest legal
jurisdiction in the history of the world. Let
us keep it that way.
Jonathan Hodge is an executive committee
member of the Junior Lawyers Division and
a commercial disputes consultant solicitor
at Aquabridge Law in Chelmsford and Nexa
Law in London

Magistrates
could help ease
the burden on
Crown court
Bev Higgs
National chair, Magistrates’
Association, Letter to the
Guardian, 8 October
The prime minister and the
justice secretary have both said
that they are anxious to improve
the criminal justice system with
reference to prosecutions and
the time it takes to get offences
concerning violence against
women and girls to trial.
‘Non-priority’ cases
backlogged in the Crown courts
are now listing into 2023/24. It
is not good enough for victims
of crime or defendants to have
their lives on hold and to have to
relive events in court months or
even years after they took place.
Magistrates’ Association
members hold the highest values
of fairness, justice and the belief
‘that justice delayed is justice
denied’. Many magistrates’
courts, after a period of fantastic
commitment by volunteer
magistrates throughout the
pandemic, have little or no
backlog of cases. We are well
placed to stop sending cases
to the Crown courts if only our
jurisdiction could be increased
to a 12-month custodial
sentence for a single offence.
This would ease the burden
on Crown courts, speeding up
justice for all.
Achieving ‘real-world’
practical change to improve the
justice system for women and
girls, and for all victims and
witnesses who suffer because of
long Crown court backlogs, is
urgent, and it could start now.
Female lawyers
in Afghanistan
are desperate
to escape
Tony Fisher
Lawsocieties.eu
Many judges, prosecutors, and
lawyers have been attempting
to leave Afghanistan to a safer
third country and have received
death threats from the Taliban.
While it has been confirmed
that legal professionals at risk
would fall under the ACRS
[Afghan citizens resettlement
scheme] eligibility criteria
and some have been able to
leave – the pressure has to
be kept up. The situation is
becoming ever more dangerous
in Afghanistan, especially
for those female judges
and prosecutors who are
desperately trying to escape.
Reports have been received
directly from a number of
judges that they have received
death threats and threats of
other violence to them and their
family. Many are moving from
place to place almost daily to
try and avoid Taliban capture.
Despite the extraordinary
efforts made to secure their
passage to safer third countries,
more legal professionals at
risk need to leave Afghanistan
as soon as possible. Most
female judges, prosecutors
and lawyers are still there and
facing extreme danger. Even
those who have escaped have
not all been able to bring family
members with them.
When helping lawyers, judges,
and others at risk, the legal
profession internationally is
seen at its best. Let’s keep up
the fight.
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
Campaigners
want to make
misogyny a
hate crime
Megan Specia
The New York Times, 10 October
In England and Wales, an
offense is considered a hate
crime when it is proved that the
perpetrator was motivated by
hostility or prejudice related to
one or more of five categories:
race, religion, sexual orientation,
disability or transgender
identity. This allows judges to
hand down steeper sentences
and gives the police more clarity
on enforcement by categorizing
these crimes as more serious.
Campaigners want gender to
be added to this list.
The Law Commission, an
independent body that reviews
laws in England and Wales and
advises the government, is in
the middle of a government-
ordered review into existing
hate crime laws. While its
official recommendation is still
pending, an initial conclusion
has recommended adding
sex or gender to the protected
characteristics list under hate
crime laws.
Andrew Bazeley, policy
manager for the Fawcett Society,
a gender-equality charity
campaigning for the change,
said: ‘It’s about acknowledging
the misogyny that exists within
existing crimes.’
Some women’s rights
advocates have suggested that
an amendment to extend the
definition of a hate crime be
added to a policing and crime
bill making its way through
parliament. But Boris Johnson
opposes the move.
18 OCTOBER 2021
SEEN & HEARD
Jane Crowley
@daisynlil
It’s hard to argue
against the need to
avoid delay in children cases,
especially in public law. Trying
to line up reps for at least four
parties is a challenge. Deeply
frustrating though when you
have worked on a case which
then needs to be moved.
Idle Courts
@CourtsIdle
Yesterday Notts.
2-handed conspiracy
trial. One in custody. 1 counsel
attended. CPS contacted 45 sets
and none could provide counsel.
Defence sols have spent weeks
looking for counsel. None
available. The one who attends
was instructed last week. Trial
stood out to Feb 22.
Kevin Maguire
@Kevin_Maguire
I’m a Sunderland fan
and it was suggested
to me that now Newcastle
United are owned by the bone-
sawing Saudi Arabian regime the
club sees its main rivals as PSG,
Real Madrid, Juventus, Bayern
Munich and the UN Declaration
of Human Rights.
Gerard
McDermott
@McDermottQC
Costs budgeting…
what can I say…
Colm Nugent
@Wigapedia
That it’s a drain on
court resources
and a waste of time? That the
hearings are characterised by
inconsistent approaches and
sometimes (too often) by the
personal whims of the judge
concerned? That the 21-day pre-
lodging of the budget on pain of
ultimate sanction is ludicrous?
Monidipa
Fouzder
@MonidipaFouzder
A PM who respects
the rule of law doesn’t ‘clash’
with judges.
13
RO U NDTABL E B U S I N E S S S E R V I C E S

View from the engine room

The Gazette’s latest roundtable discussion, sponsored by Conduent, focused on the role
of business professionals and technology in powering profitability and growth in large law
firms. Joanna Goodman reports

In the past 18 months, notwithstanding the
upheaval of Covid-19, law firm profitability
has generally been maintained, with
many firms reporting increased profits.
Improved productivity has also yielded
steady growth, supported by a stream of
M&A activity. A critical success factor
was that lawyers were able to transition
to online working pretty much overnight.
This was largely due to the business
professionals behind the scenes: the
non-fee-earners who plan and manage
the systems and processes that enabled
lawyers to communicate with their clients
and each other, and access the knowledge
and information they need. As firms shift
their operations to a hybrid model that
combines office and remote working,
the Gazette brought together senior
management figures from large firms to
discuss how their firms are leveraging
the operational agility and IT capabilities Business services are critical
developed during the pandemic to boost to opening new international
profitability and growth. offices. Most of the integration
work following a merger happens
Agile mindset behind the scenes
Digital transformation is business critical
for global firms like Dechert. Chief Neville Eisenberg, Bryan Cave
administrative officer George Pantelides Leighton Paisner
highlights the efficiency benefits of

16 LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021


digitising processes and reducing the
need for physical presence and paper
documents. ‘My role on the [firm’s] Future
of Work committee is to help the firm
embrace an agile mindset. Specifically,
we want to harness the learnings from the
past 18 months, get rid of preconceptions
about how work is done and find out how
data and technology can help us become
more efficient,’ he explains. ‘My team is
the engine room behind what lawyers
do, and we are seeing a shift in roles,
from supporting document production to
document logistics.’
The right allies
Kerstin Morgan, head of practice
transformation at Mishcon de Reya,
adds that as business services transition
from a back-office function to a service
function, they need ‘the right allies in the
business. Digitising process and driving
tech adoption means helping people
use and understand the technology we
are introducing into the business. The
direction of travel for the non-legal roles
is positive. I started out 10 years ago
in continuous improvement, and back
then it was very much about knocking
on doors and trying to explain the value
proposition. Now business services have
evolved into a broader offering, bringing
together continuous improvement,
business development, pricing, resource
management, and include new roles: legal
technologists, legal engineers and legal
project managers’.
Neville Eisenberg, senior partner and
CEO of BCLP Cubed, at Bryan Cave
Leighton Paisner, explains that business
services underpin almost all routes to
growth. ‘Business services are critical to
opening new international offices. Most
of the integration work following a merger
happens behind the scenes across multiple
business services departments. Even
organic growth can only be successful
with the right recruitment programmes,
training programmes, business
development strategy, client relationship
management and service quality. Business
services are critical components of any law
firm growth strategy.’
Multidisciplinary teams
Law firms are increasingly recognising
that in order to become a true driver of
growth, the business services teams need
to become client facing too.
Eisenberg continues: ‘So, at BCLP we
have put together multi-disciplinary
teams, which include lawyers, to deliver
legal services. These teams include
multiple areas of expertise: knowledge
management, process engineering,
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
RO UNDTA B L E B U S I N E S S S E R V I C E S
technology, legal project management,
and people involved in running service
centres. These teams do not just function
in the background but are increasingly
client-facing. We’ve found that clients’
response to dealing not only with a lawyer
but having access to a wider range of
disciplines within the firm, is hugely
positive and opens relationships with
clients in the most extraordinary ways.’
At Gowling WLG too, multi-disciplinary
teams are driving growth by working more
closely with clients. ‘For example, our
legal engineers work directly with clients
to apply the right technology,’ explains
chief operating officer Andrew Edginton.
‘The international aspect is another key
theme,’ he adds. ‘It’s important to transfer
learnings from each jurisdiction to drive
growth right across the portfolio. This
means making sure that the innovations
that we create and use in the UK are
properly embedded and rolled out across
other jurisdictions.’
Profitability through efficiency
Like Morgan at Mishcon de Reya, Mark
Collins, senior legal technologist at
Eversheds Sutherland, is focusing on
bringing together people, processes,
and technology to drive profitability
and growth. This includes process
improvement for matter management.
‘Rather than having a distributed model
with lots of different systems that do
different things, anybody working on
a matter can access the entire process
from start to finish on a single platform,
from client instruction, through matter
opening, document drafting, investigation,
negotiation, execution, completion and
closure of a matter. This echoes the need to
move away from the paper-based processes
that firms have had for many years. That
single platform integrates with lots of other
elements, including AI, data analysis and
data visualisation.’
Covid-19 accelerated the adoption
of technology solutions that had been
available previously but did not gain
traction until the pandemic turned them
from a ‘nice to have’ into a necessity.
‘For example, organisations have
spent years trying to roll out electronic
signatures, but have only seen pockets
of adoption, but over the last 18 months,
people have been asking for these
solutions,’ says Collins. ‘Electronic
signatures such as DocuSign are a really
interesting example of how the pandemic
has moved us on. We’ve been waiting years
for this to happen.’
David Aird, IT director at DAC
Beachcroft, adds that growth does not
necessarily boost profitability. ‘At DAC
18 OCTOBER 2021
Beachcroft, we’ve grown our profits 20%
year on year for the last seven years. We
have concentrated on sustainable value
and profitable growth, rather than just
adding lateral hires, which boosts the
size of the firm, but may not improve its
profitability.’
Changing behaviours drives tech
adoption
Kathryn Pearson, head of knowledge and
client service solutions at Bird & Bird,
observes that the pandemic accelerated
adoption because it forced behavioural
change: ‘During the first lockdown one of
our corporate partners used our online
deal room for a closing for the first time.
When I asked him, “Which new piece
of functionality led you to work in a
different way?” he admitted that there
was no new functionality – the driver was
the discipline of working online during
lockdown and ensuring that the associates
managing each work stream kept all the
documents and task lists up to date so
that the client had full visibility. It was
about the way the pandemic had changed
people’s behaviours rather than the tech
itself. So, our challenge is navigating
multiple requirements from across the
business and getting across to partners
and teams the realisation that successful
legal tech implementation requires a lot of
“grunt” work too.’
Optimising the hybrid model
The discussion turned to the challenges of
shifting from working entirely remotely to
creating a new hybrid model that was the
best fit for the business.
‘We have concentrated on sustainable value
and profitable growth, rather than just adding
lateral hires,’ says Beachcroft’s David Aird
17
RO U NDTABL E B U S I N E S S S E R V I C E S

GETTING VALUE FROM DATA

Nyembo Mwarabu, vice-president and global head of sales at Conduent,
observes that the pandemic highlighted the challenges and opportunities
around data: the cybersecurity issue, and the opportunities to leverage client
data. ‘Law firms’ efforts to digitise documents and processes have led to
increased interest in getting insights out of data they have already collected and
analysed; and seeing how the work products that they’ve developed for specific
clients and matters can be reused,’ he says. ‘This has created more demand
for analytics and AI tools, not just to look at individual cases and matters, but
to gain broader insights that help law firms become better partners to their
clients.’
Neville Eisenberg at BCLP Cubed agrees: ‘Particularly with more
commoditised legal services, we’ve seen keen interest from clients on data
capture and data analytics. One of the biggest growth opportunities lies in
law firms acquiring the ability to digitise their data and use it create business
insights for clients. Business services, technologists and data scientists will be
critical to opening up that growth opportunity.’
DAC Beachcroft’s insurance practice accounts for 50-60% of the firm, and
David Aird and his team are sharply focused on data: ‘We have a lot of data,
and a lot of case management around it, so we have a lot of data points. We
are seeing more data analysis in other practice areas too. We’ve got advanced
data capture tools, but the question for more traditional firms is where are
you going to record the data? You might have business intelligence tools in
your practice management system, but where are you going to record other
data points? Before you consider data analysis tools to offer your clients data
insights, you need to record and capture the data, and that is quite a difficult
thing to get lawyers to do.’

Sharon Smith, director of multichannel
services at Conduent, highlights the value
of the digital mailroom that supports
agile working and digital transformation.
‘Now that firms are in hybrid mode, it’s
essential to consider structured in-bound
digitisation of documentation, so that
in-bound documents can integrate easily
into back-office systems and offer the
agile working that most legal firms are
now trying to adopt. We have a range of
technical solutions that support different
workflows, routine requirements and
matter organisation systems.’
Dechert’s Pantelides stresses the
importance of planning the hybrid
workforce and workplace: ‘We want to
balance the benefits of being together
with the benefits that our employees
get from the flexible life. This is about
balancing trust and autonomy.’ He refers
to a 2015 report from The Peter Drucker
Institute, ‘Convene to collaborate,
isolate to concentrate’, adding that more
concentrated work will probably stay
remote, and the physical environment
will need to be adapted to maximise the
benefits of in-person collaboration.
Nyembo Mwarabu, vice-president
and global head of sales at Conduent,
considers business continuity when
building the hybrid model. ‘We have
seen a lot of organisations trying to make
sure that remote working goes from a
temporary sub-optimal solution to a
permanent superior experience,’ he says.
‘Managing document review is one of the
key challenges for our law firm clients
because they were reviewing our clients’
most privileged and confidential data.
Having to move that service remote and
online has forced us to adopt a number of
critical technologies, including monitoring
people through their webcams. It’s been a
challenging transition.’
Business services and tech
procurement
Conduent’s Smith emphasises the need
to apply a strategic approach to tech
procurement and implementation: ‘People
think that there is a piece of tech for every
problem, but each time you add more
products, you need more integrations.
Processes become complicated and
ultimately less productive. It’s important to
take a strategic view when deciding what
tech is most beneficial for your business.’
Richard Gaston, head of knowledge and
research at Addleshaw Goddard, highlights
the significant gatekeeper role that business
services have when it comes to decisions
around tech procurement. ‘Business
services teams tend to work across the
entire firm,’ he explains. ‘While the crisis
has been a brilliant catalyst, sustainable
growth requires strategy and governance,
and recognising that you don’t necessarily
need sophisticated technology to deliver
efficiencies.’
Rachel Dabydoyal, head of alternative
delivery solutions at Hogan Lovells, agrees,
advocating a strategic approach to tech
procurement, supported by collaboration
between partners and business services:
‘Rather than just buying in shiny new
products, it’s important to look at what
you’ve already got: what can be used
in different ways. Communication is
important too, so that lawyers are aware
of tech resources and functionality and
business services teams understand the
products. It is key to take a joined-up
approach across the firm and not end up
Our challenge is navigating
multiple requirements from
across the business and getting
across to partners and teams the
realisation that successful legal
tech implementation requires a lot
of “grunt” work too
Kathryn Pearson, Bird & Bird

18 LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021


with lots of shiny toys in the sandpit that
no one is using.’
Lights-on tech v innovation for growth
Notwithstanding the acceleration in tech
adoption, did the pandemic lead firms to
prioritise lights-on tech and implementing
remote working over strategic innovation
for growth? Mishcon de Reya’s Morgan
flags up one of the key challenges for
technology development. ‘While tech
adoption around electronic signatures
and online communications got a massive
boost from the pandemic, because people
couldn’t meet in person, the development
of more sophisticated solutions may have
been put on the back burner,’ she says .
‘However, because people needed better
communication and coordination, it
also brought the concept of legal project
management to the fore.’
Gaston highlights the embarrassment
of choice created by the growing legal
tech marketplace. ‘Many new legal tech
providers are small startups which are
ill-equipped to deal with law firms’ long
procurement process, which is often about
the supplier due diligence that we have to
do, because of regulatory requirements
and our duty to protect the confidentiality
of our clients’ data,’ he says. ‘Sometimes
the opportunity cost for a small supplier
of going through our onboarding process
might mean it’s not worth it. So we risk
limiting ourselves to large vendors who
might have less interesting technology,
unless of course they acquire smaller tech
businesses.’
Aird also struggles with managing
the balance between tech innovation
and regulatory and confidentiality
requirements: ‘Some larger firms are
spinning out tech businesses in order to
pilot technology without taking risks with
client data. We are exploring whether
we need to do that or whether there’s a
way to be innovative, perhaps using a
sandbox without upsetting my colleagues
in risk, governance and cybersecurity. It
is certainly a challenge and it’s interesting
to try and innovate within our traditional
frameworks, because even where we have
outsourced IT innovation, we still have
to consider our internal governance. We
certainly have not got that lit but it’s part of
our new IT strategy.’
Morgan’s tactic is to involve the
procurement function as a key
collaborator. ‘It’s really important to
develop a mutual understanding of each
other’s perspective and processes. If I
involve them earlier, and I know what
checks they have to do in the background,
including IT security, that can only
streamline and improve the process. I work
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
RO UNDTA B L E B U S I N E S S S E R V I C E S
‘Electronic signatures such as
AT THE TABLE DocuSign are a really interesting
example of how the pandemic has
Mark Collins moved us on,’ says Mark Collins
Eversheds Sutherland
Neville Eisenberg*
Bryan Cave Leighton
Paisner
Kathryn Pearson
Bird & Bird
David Aird
DAC Beachcroft
Rachel Dabydoyal
Hogan Lovells
Kerstin Morgan
Mishcon de Reya
Richard Gaston
Addleshaw Goddard
George Pantelides
Dechert
Andrew Edgington
Gowling WLG
Nyembo Mwarabu
Conduent
Sharon Smith
Conduent
Eduardo Reyes
Law Society Gazette
(chair)
very closely with our procurement team. and I think procurement can play a really
The challenge is that lawyers are keen to big role in looking at the commercials
liaise with tech vendors and suppliers and helping with the more difficult
directly, and it’s hard to consolidate that,’ conversations.’
she explains. Finally, the group looks at strategic
priorities and changes that would
support profitability and growth. While
delegates agree about business services
managing the strategic tension between
tech innovation, procurement and risk,
Eisenberg’s observation that true digital
transformation for profitable growth
requires lawyers to become less controlling
around service delivery is shared by
everyone around the table. ‘The change
that would really make a huge difference is
if lawyers came to terms with the fact that,
Rather than just buying in shiny in the future, they will have less control
new products, it’s important to look over the way legal work is done. In the past,
at what you’ve already got: what lawyers had complete control over the way
can be used in different ways the legal service was delivered to clients.
But now, increasingly, they will need to let
Rachel Dabydoyal, Hogan Lovells go a bit and share control over how work
is delivered and share client relationships
with other disciplines within the firm.
‘So, I’m working on a legal tech catalogue Lawyers’ acceptance of that will help
to take stock of what we already have law firms grow their businesses in
and monitor adoption and follow up with the future. As law firms increasingly
lawyers and vendors if utilisation drops. professionalise their management, the
It’s important to work with procurement role of business services will become
on the rationalisation of vendors and tech, increasingly critical to law firm growth
and to develop a mutual understanding strategies.’
and a clear process for renewals. It is
also important for me to develop good * Neville Eisenberg has since left Bryan Cave
relationships with vendors and suppliers, Leighton Paisner
18 OCTOBER 2021 19
COV ER STORY COMMERCIAL PROPERT Y
National property conference
Jonathan Rayner
Moving to new premises
Property lawyers have rarely known such
turbulent times. On the one hand, residential
conveyancers have been working seven days
a week to keep pace with purchasers trying
to beat the stamp duty holiday. They have
also been acting for buy-to-let landlords
whose tenants have accumulated massive
rent arrears since Covid took away their
livelihoods. And they have been grappling
with a sharp rise in conveyancing fraud,
where criminals have hijacked email
accounts, gained access to bank details and
pressured purchasers into acting quickly
without due care.
Commercial property lawyers have also
been striving to meet new challenges. High
street icons such as Mothercare, Debenhams
and Carphone Warehouse have closed their
shops, leaving empty premises throughout
the country. Smaller traders, often family-
owned, many of them cafes or bars that
normally cater for office workers, have sunk
without a trace. And then there are the
multi-storey office blocks, whose workforces
have deserted the inner cities for a commute-
free life working from home or for a bigger
– and often less expensive – bolthole in the
countryside.
The government, with the best of motives,
complicated matters. It has introduced a
whole Scrabble-set of initials – regulations
to improve safety and save the planet – such
as Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards
(MEES) and Energy Performance Certificates
(EPSs). And against all this, there is the ever-
present threat of money laundering and the
swingeing penalties awaiting any firm that is
found negligent in complying with the anti-
money laundering (AML) regulations. The
Solicitors Regulation Authority even warned
delegates at a recent conference about
the emerging threat of organised crime
infiltrating law firms.
Difficult times behind and ahead of us, and
an array of problems which last week’s Law
Society National Property Law Conference
(5-7 October) sought to address.
First up for the Gazette was the long-
running search for a form of electronic
signature to replace the traditional wet
ink signature that, for hundreds of years,
20
has signalled a binding contract. The wet
ink process requires two or more copies of
each document – one for each party to the
contract – and depends upon the documents
being physically posted or couriered to the
other side. Delays can easily occur, with the
process typically taking days to complete.
Electronic signatures promise to reduce the
time needed to complete a transaction to
mere hours.
Two lawyers, the Land Registry’s Emily
D’Albuquerque and the Law Commission’s
professor Sarah Green, discussed the
progress towards engineering a fully
electronic solution. Both agreed that the
qualified electronic signature (QES) is the
way forward. A QES allows the signer’s
identity to be verified by a ‘qualified
trust service provider’ – an individual or
company that has been certified by the
Information Commissioner’s Office to
provide a service that protects electronic
data and demonstrates that it can be trusted.
D’Albuquerque cautioned: ‘Biometric and
other safeguards built into the electronic
signature certainly add to its security, but
firms should not neglect the usual due
diligence checks as well.’
Green said: ‘The biggest obstacle to
adopting QES is lack of confidence on the
part of users and their legal advisers. And yet
it is confidence that drives the development
of technology solutions. But despite initial
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021
resistance, we shouldn’t underestimate
the inevitability of adopting electronic
signatures. Look at how much life has
changed over the last decade. Compared
with 10 years ago, our electronic activity,
in particular online shopping, has evolved
beyond recognition.’
‘The elephant in the room,’ said Taylor
Wessing’s real estate senior professional
support lawyer Clare Harman Clark,
who chaired the session, ‘is fraud.’ Green
countered: ‘Forging someone’s handwritten
signature is easier than forging an electronic
signature, with all its biometric and other
built-in safeguards. But we should all remain
vigilant.’
Vigilance is key, too, to countering money
laundering, a threat to which law firms
that deal with commercial or residential
conveyancing are particularly vulnerable.
After all, each transaction typically entails
hundreds of thousands of pounds changing
hands – a tempting prize for criminals
looking to disassociate (or clean) the money
from their criminal enterprises.
Shoosmiths director of quality and
risk Alison Matthews started her AML
presentation with a simple admonition:
‘If a client asks you to do an exceptionally
big deal, stop and ask: Where are the funds
coming from? It is not rude to pose the
question. After all, you are both simply
complying with regulations. And anyway,
the more you know about your clients, the
better your relationship with them and the
more you can fruitfully achieve together.
These questions are not a waste of your time.’
Matthews advised firms to look at bank
statements, audited financial accounts,
income from share capital and proceeds
from other transactions to determine the
source of funds and wealth. ‘It is essential,’
she urged, ‘to document what you have
done at every stage of the AML process.
The regulator’s view is that if it is not
documented, it did not happen. High-risk
transactions call for even more stringent
checks.’
Such transactions may involve politically
exposed persons (PEPs) – individuals who
are or have been entrusted with prominent

public functions, for example heads of state,
senior politicians, senior executives of state-
owned corporations and important political
party officials.
‘In the end,’ Matthews conceded, ‘it comes
down to whether you are comfortable with
a transaction. And what is comfortable?
Well, how long is a piece of string? Use
your experience to decide whether the
transaction smells right. Keep your client
due diligence and risk assessments up to
date. Keep the client and the matter under
review. Know what to look for – what are the
red flags? Stay alert and know where to go for
guidance and advice – the SRA website is an
excellent source of both.’
The session ‘Using technology and
disruption to grow commercial property
practices’ was delivered by Mishcon de
Reya’s real estate partner Nick Kirby and
head of practice transformation Kerstin
Morgan.
Kirby began by explaining that the firm’s
MDR LAB acts as an incubator for legal tech
startups, developing innovative ways to
digitise property transactions using machine
learning, artificial intelligence and related
tech tools. These transactions range across
the gamut of operations that are central to a
client’s business, such as title and lease due
diligence, tenancy schedules, structured
information databases and generating
interactive reports to give clients a deeper
insight into their own deals.
He gave an example of a time-saving
tech innovation: ‘We offer an out-of-the-
We are re-engineering what has
forever been a time-consuming
paper process for lawyers whose
attention could be more profitably
directed elsewhere. That must be
an unarguable selling point for all
lawyers
Kerstin Morgan, Mishcon de Reya
box standard commercial lease checklist
that allows clients easily to compare their
own leases against standard tenancy
schedules, forfeiture clauses and the rest.
It then automatically produces a report for
the client. Essentially, we are capturing
knowhow to help clients build their business.
It is tech-enabled client collaboration.’
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
COVER STO RY COMMERCIAL PROPERT Y
The law is traditionally regarded as a
profession resistant to change. Will this new
technology make any lasting difference?
Morgan said: ‘We are re-engineering what
has forever been a time-consuming paper
process for lawyers whose attention could
be more profitably directed elsewhere. That
must be an unarguable selling point for all
lawyers.’
She added that the focus must be on
people, not the nuts and bolts of how the
technology works: ‘People are part of the
journey. Technology needs to be at the centre
of what the firm does. It should become
an integral part of lawyer training and an
individual’s engagement with it should be
recognised in the firm’s reward structure.
After all, people who prize technology are
also the people who improve it.’
A session giving an overview of recent
developments in commercial property was
presented by consultant Alan Riley. He
manages Property PSL, a web-based source
of professional support for commercial
property lawyers. He confided that when
in private practice he used to ‘get it in the
neck’ from other departments within the
firm because commercial property was
constantly having claims brought against it:
‘Why so many claims? Because commercial
property law is so very difficult.’
One reason that it is so difficult, explained
Riley, is that ‘despite the wide availability
of good precedent property documents,
drafting can still lead to difficulties,
especially where the transaction is of such
complexity that no true standard precedent
exists’.
Despite their innate fallibility, commercial
property lawyers have generally coped
well with the challenges thrown up by the
pandemic. One such challenge, Riley said,
is insolvency. The past 18 months have seen
a surge in tenants going into liquidation
and administration, as well as proposing
company voluntary arrangements:
‘Insolvency law evolves and it’s important to
keep forfeiture clauses up to date.’
Another pandemic challenge is the
result of the retail industry’s move towards
turnover rents. These entitle the landlord to a
proportion of a retail outlet’s turnover on top
of the agreed annual rent. Footfall in some
cases disappeared completely during Covid,
depriving landlords of a significant part of
their income.
And finally, with commercial property
activity picking up, more and more tenants
are demanding pandemic rent suspension
clauses in leases. These will see rents
wholly or partially suspended in the event
the government reimposes restrictions
upon the ability of non-essential retailers
to trade. ‘These clauses will prove popular
with tenants,’ Riley observed, ‘but
18 OCTOBER 2021
negotiating them with landlords is going to
be tough.’
As the conference neared its conclusion,
delegates were taken on a whistle-stop tour
of the future threats and opportunities
facing commercial property investors and
lawyers. Our tour guide was Mat Oakley,
head of European research at international
estate agent Savills.
‘The anticipated strong growth of UK GDP
in 2022 is a huge positive,’ Oakley began.
It is essential to document what
you have done at every stage of the
AML process. The regulator’s view
is that if it is not documented, it did
not happen. High-risk transactions
call for even more stringent checks
Alison Matthews, Shoosmiths
‘But on the negative side, some investors
have stayed away or deferred investment
decisions because of Brexit. Also there has
been no firm decision yet on how services
are to be treated now we are out of the EU,
although an equivalence agreement might
be in the offing.’ (Equivalence in this context
refers to the decision by one state to recognise
another state’s differing legal requirements
for regulating goods or services.)
Oakley continued: ‘The agile working genie
is out of the lamp and surveys show that
many people, to avoid the commute, favour
working from home. This may signal the end
of office culture, the surveys suggest. But
these findings are contradicted by evidence
that companies are not so much giving up on
offices as looking for offices with more space.
Staff have been complaining about the Covid
risks of overcrowding, as well as the usual
gripes about smells and noise.’
So there is cause for optimism? ‘Some,
although supply-chain problems and labour
shortages will continue to be a problem,’
Oakley said. He concluded with a national
quandary and a money-making proposition:
‘What are we to do with the huge department
stores that are now standing empty? They are
too big and deep for conversion to homes. If
you have a solution, you could earn a fortune.’
● For information about the Law Society’s
Property Section, please go to communities.
lawsociety.org.uk/property.
21
LEG AL UPDATE
Competition
Peter Broadhurst, Crowell & Moring
Scrutinising digital mergers
On 12 August 2021, the UK Competition
and Markets Authority (CMA) issued
its provisional findings in its in-depth
investigation of Facebook, Inc.’s acquisition
of GIPHY, Inc. The CMA has provisionally
found that the deal raises competition
concerns, resulting in a substantial
lessening of competition in social media
and display advertising, harming social
media users and businesses in the UK; and
that Facebook should be required to sell
GIPHY, in its entirety, to a suitable buyer.
Facebook did not notify the deal
voluntarily to the CMA and had completed
it on 15 May 2020, before the CMA began its
investigation. By the time the CMA began
to review the deal, GIPHY had already been
effectively integrated into Facebook.
GIPHY provides a significant online
database and search engine, allowing users
to search and share GIFs or GIF stickers
(digital files displaying short, looping,
soundless videos or animated images).
Facebook is the largest provider of social
media and messaging services in the UK
(and elsewhere). Popular features of social
media and messaging platforms are GIFs
and GIF stickers, of the type provided by
GIPHY.
CMA concerns
The CMA identified two main concerns.
First, a horizontal concern in relation to
the supply of display advertising in the
UK, where the CMA identified Facebook
as a major player with a share of circa
50% of total supply. The CMA felt that,
although GIPHY is not a direct competitor
of Facebook in this market in the UK (or
indeed elsewhere), it had started to roll
out a novel form of paid advertising, where
big brands could promote themselves
through the use of GIFs. If the merger had
not gone ahead, the CMA felt that GIPHY
would likely have become more of a direct
competitor, potentially also in the UK.
Second, the CMA identified a vertical
concern: whereas currently GIPHY’s
products are available to all social media
and messaging platforms, post-merger
Facebook may have no incentive to allow
22
its competitors to continue to use GIPHY.
Given GIPHY’s position on the market
for searchable GIF libraries (60-70% of
searches globally, with only one significant
competitor), the CMA is worried that
Facebook’s rivals will have few other good
choices and so may not be able to compete
effectively with Facebook in the future.
The CMA considers that the only way
to deal with these concerns is to require
Facebook to sell the whole of GIPHY to an
independent third party. The CMA would
want to be satisfied that this sale does not
raise any competition concerns itself.
These only represent the provisional
findings of the CMA, not its final decision.
However, it would be unusual for the CMA
to completely change its views between
these two phases of the process.
Why is this of interest?
This CMA’s review is interesting for a
number of reasons, both in terms of its
assessment of this specific transaction;
and also what that tells us about the CMA’s
changing approach to scrutiny of mergers
– in particular digital mergers – in the UK
more broadly.
One early point of note was the noise
around the CMA’s imposition of an initial
enforcement order (IEO). The CMA employs
IEOs when investigating deals which
have completed. They are the inevitable
consequence of the voluntary filing regime
in the UK. Given there is no prohibition
on completing a deal before CMA review,
the purpose of the IEO is to freeze any
integration efforts and require the parties to
hold the target separate from the acquirer.
If the CMA then concludes that there is
a competition concern and a divestiture
of all or some of the target’s business is
necessary, the IEO ensures that as far
as possible the target is being operated
independently of the acquirer and the value
of its business is maintained. Therefore, the
ability to implement any divestiture is not
compromised and the target can return to
being an independent competitive force.
Parties in breach of an IEO can be and are
fined; and the level of those fines is rising.
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021
The CMA uses a standard IEO text,
from which parties must chisel out
derogations, which must be fully reasoned
and supported by evidence. It is not at all
unusual, therefore, given Facebook had
completed this deal, that the CMA imposed
an IEO within a month of the deal being
announced. What is more unusual is the
fact that Facebook challenged the CMA’s
refusal to grant derogations, calling the
decision unjustified and disproportionate.
Many parties to transactions who have
been subject to a CMA IEO may empathise
with the spirit of such an appeal. But,
arguably unsurprisingly, the Competition
Appeal Tribunal and then the Court of
Appeal dismissed the challenge without
much hesitation, confirming the CMA’s
wide discretion in relation to granting
derogations from the ‘hold separate’
requirement.
In terms of the substantive assessment, the
provisional findings underline the growing
importance of dynamic competition in the
CMA’s thinking and analysis, particularly
in the digital space. The CMA’s horizontal
concern is based not only on a more
traditional theory of harm that future
competition may be lost because the target
is a potential competitor which can no
longer enter the market; but also, on a theory
of dynamic competition which says that,
even if the potential entrant might never
have successfully entered the market, their
continued presence can effectively constrain
the behaviour of competitors and act as a
spur to continued and greater competition
and innovation. This constraint – and its
loss as a result of a merger – is particularly
important where the acquirer is strong,
because it is already subject to weaker
competition. The importance that the
CMA places on dynamic competition was
highlighted in its recently revised Merger
Assessment Guidelines.
As is increasingly the case, the review of
internal documents formed an important
part of the CMA’s assessment and evidence
base, including its concern that GIPHY
will likely become a more important
Continued on page 24
 T&N LIMITED (now named Federal-0RJXO/LPLWHG‡)('(5$/-02*8/$)7(50$5.(78./,0,7('‡)('(5$/-MOGUL BRADFORD
/,0,7('‡)('(5$/-02*8/%5,'*:$7(5/,0,7('‡)('(5$/-02*8/&$06+$)7&$67,1*6/,0,7('‡
FEDERAL-02*8/&$06+$)76/,0,7('‡)('(5$/-MOGUL ENGINEERIN*/,0,7('‡
FEDERAL-02*8/(852)5,&7,21/,0,7('‡)('(5$/-02*8/)5,&7,21352'8&76/,0,7('‡
FEDERAL-02*8/,*1,7,218./,0,7('‡)('(5$/-02*8/32:(575$,16<67(06,17(51$7,21$//,0,7('‡)('(5$/-MOGUL
6($/,1*6<67(06&$5',))/,0,7('‡)('(5$/-MOGUL SEALIN*6<67(0652&+'$/(/,0,7('‡)('(5$/-MOGUL SEALING
6<67(066/28*+/,0,7('‡)('(5$/-02*8/6($/,1*6<67(06/,0,7('‡)('(5$/-02*8/6+25(+$0/,0,7('‡
FEDERAL-02*8/6,17(5('352'8&76/,0,7('‡)('(5$/-02*8/6<67(063527(&7,21*5283/,0,7('‡)('(5$/-MOGUL
7(&+12/2*</,0,7('‡7%$,1'8675,$/352'8&76/,0,7('‡
AE DAYTON SERVICES LIMITED ‡AE HOLDINGS LIMITED ‡ASHBURTON ROAD SERVICES LIMITED ‡
AEROPLANE & MOTOR ALUMINIUM CASTINGS LIMITED ‡%5$.(/,1,1*6/,0,7('‡
&5$1+2/'/,0,7('‡'8521/,0,7('‡('081'6:$/.(5 &2/,0,7('‡
FEDERAL-02*8/8./,0,7('‡)(52'2&$(51$5)21/,0,7('‡)(52'2/,0,7('‡
)/((76,'(,19(670(176/,0,7('‡)5,&7,210$7(5,$/6/,0,7('‡+$//6*$6.(76/,0,7('‡
,167$17:21'(5/,0,7('‡-:52%(576/,0,7('‡/$127+/,0,7('‡
NEWALLS INSU/$7,21&203$1</,0,7('‡7$),17(51$7,21$//,0,7('‡
T&N SHELF SEVEN LIMITED (formerly known as BIP Chemicals Limited, British Industrial Plastics Limited and The British Cyanides
Company Limited) ‡
T&N SHELF TWENTY LIMITED (formerly known as Flexitallic Gaskets (Wood Bros.) Limited, Flexitallic Gaskets Limited, Flexitallic
Limited and Wood Bros. & Co. (Gaskets) Limited) ‡
T&N SHELF TWENTY-ONE LIMITED (formerly known as Coopers Filters Limited, Flexitallic Sealing Materials Limited, Permanite Sealing
Materials Limited, T&N Shelf One Limited, TBA Sealing Materials Limited and The British Laminated Brass Company, Limited) ‡
T&N SHELF TWENTY-SIX LIMITED (formerly known as TAC Construction Materials Limited, Tenmat Limited, Turners Asbestos Cement
Company Limited and Turners Asbestos Cement Limited) ‡
7%$%(/7,1*/,0,7('‡7(/)25'7(&+12/2*<6833/,(6/,0,7('‡:(//:257+</,0,7('‡
7+(:$6+,1*721&+(0,&$/&203$1</,0,7('‡7851(5 1(:$///,0,7('‡
TURNER BROTHERS ASBESTOS COMPANY LIMITED

On 11 October 2006 ("the Effective Date"), the Administrators' proposals for Company Voluntary Arrangements ("CVAs") dated 23 June 2006
became effective.

Asbestos claims The CVAs provide among other things for the establishment of the UK Asbestos Trust to compensate people who suffer from
Asbestos Disease caused by the activities of the Companies listed above ("asbestos claimants"). The UK Asbestos Trust was established by a
Trust Deed which became effective on the Effective Date. It is now operating in respect of the Companies listed above.

To apply for compensation from the UK Asbestos Trust, asbestos claimants must complete a Proof of Claim form or instruct a lawyer to do so on
their behalf.

Proof of Claim forms and other information about the UK Asbestos Trust are available from the UK Asbestos Trustee by writing to: The T&N
Asbestos Trustee Company Limited, Suite 11B, Manchester International Office Centre, Styal Road, Manchester M22 5WB. Alternatively, you can
telephone the UK Asbestos Trustee on 07767 044 727. Further information is available at http://tandnasbestos.org.uk/.

Aeroplane & Motor Aluminium Castings Limited ‡Ashburton Road Services Limited
‡Brake Linings Limited ‡Contact 100 Limited ‡Duron Limited ‡Federal-Mogul Aftermarket UK Limited ‡Engineering Components
Limited ‡Federal-Mogul Bradford Limited ‡
Federal-Mogul Camshaft Castings Limited ‡ Federal-Mogul Engineering Limited ‡
Federal-Mogul Eurofriction Limited ‡Federal-Mogul Friction Products Limited ‡
Federal-Mogul Sealing Systems (Rochdale) Limited ‡Federal-Mogul Sealing Systems (Slough) Limited ‡Federal-Mogul Sealing Systems
Limited ‡Federal-Mogul Shoreham Limited ‡
Federal-Mogul Sintered Products Limited ‡T&N Limited ‡Wellworthy Limited ‡
TBA Industrial Products Limited ‡TBA Belting Limited ‡ TBA Belting (Residual) Limited ‡
TAF International Limited ‡T&N Shelf Twenty-Six Limited ‡ T&N Shelf Twenty Limited ‡
T&N Shelf Seven Limited ‡ Newalls Insulation Company Limited ‡JW Roberts Limited ‡
Halls Gaskets Limited ‡T&N Shelf One Limited ‡Ferodo Limited ‡Ferodo Caernarfon Limited ‡Federal Mogul Technology Limited ‡T&N
Shelf Eighteen Limited

Asbestos claims

The T&N Group had Employers’ Liability insurance for its employees and apprentices in the UK in the period 1 October 1969 to 30 April 1995.
Schemes of Arrangement ("EL Schemes") have been approved by creditors and sanctioned by the court in respect of the companies in the T&N
Group listed above and became effective on 10 October 2006. The EL Schemes provide for the establishment of the EL Schemes Trust Fund
from funds provided by the Insurers in settlement of the litigation between the T&N Group and the Insurers. The EL Schemes Trust compensates
certain employees and apprentices of certain companies in the T&N Group during that period who were exposed to asbestos or asbestos products
and who suffer from an asbestos related disease, their dependants, and other employers who employed them ("asbestos claimants").

To apply for compensation from the EL Schemes Trust, an asbestos claimant must complete a Proof of Claim Form or instruct a lawyer to do so on
their behalf. Proof of Claim Forms and other information about the EL Schemes Trust are available from the EL Schemes Trustee by writing to:
The T&N Asbestos Trustee Company Limited, Suite 11B, Manchester International Office Centre, Styal Road, Manchester M22 5WB.
Alternatively, you can telephone the EL Schemes Trustee on 07767 044 727. Further information is available at http://tandnasbestos.org.uk/.
LEG AL UPDATE / SDT

competitor in the market for display
advertising (although the CMA notes that
there was no evidence from Facebook’s
internal documents that it perceived GIPHY
as a potential competitive threat in this
area). The CMA reviewed 280,000 internal
documents from the parties.
The only remedy that the CMA currently
considers appropriate is the divestiture of
GIPHY in its entirety to a third party. In
addition to pushing back on the substantive
theories of harm, the parties will also
fight hard to convince the CMA that a
narrower remedy would be acceptable to
address remaining concerns. A particular
challenge in relation to this transaction, if
the CMA continues to insist on some form
of divestiture, is that before the IEO was
imposed GIPHY’s business had already
largely been integrated into Facebook.
Before GIPHY (or any part of it) could be sold
to a third party, that integration will need to
be reversed.
More aggressive approach
The CMA’s review and provisional findings
in this case are also further evidence of
a more interventionist and aggressive
approach in enforcing UK merger control.
The CMA has been testing the boundaries
of the jurisdictional thresholds, in
particular the share of supply test, which
requires that both parties are active in
supply of the same category of goods and
services; and together represent more than
25% of the total supply of that category. In
a number of recent decisions, the CMA has
found the share of supply test to be met in
deals where the parties’ activities are not
intuitively in the same category. Even in the
Facebook/GIPHY provisional findings, there
is much justification on why the parties’
services fall within the same category. This
certainly reflects the complex nature of the
digital products and services involved. But,
it is also because these activities might not
instinctively be seen as horizontal – and
therefore directly competing – in nature.
The substance of these provisional
findings reflects a wider trend of the
CMA being more sceptical in its scrutiny
of deals and of the arguments being put
forward by the parties as to why there is no
concern. The CMA is identifying more deals
which it alleges raise serious substantive
concerns which require remedies or even
a prohibition decision. And other deals,
although not making it to a decision, have
been abandoned by the parties in the face of
CMA’s mounting opposition.
This change of attitude by the CMA stems
from a growing feeling that enforcement
in digital deals has been too weak, with
credible competition concerns dismissed
because they were too uncertain. This
view is supported by a number of reports,
including the Furman report (February
2019) which still represents the principal
advisory report in the UK on competition
law issues in digital markets. It makes a
number of recommendations for bringing
the UK competition law and merger control
rules into the digital age. The report lies
at the heart of the government’s July
2021 proposals for a new competition
enforcement regime for digital markets.
Until any new legislation is introduced,
it is clear the CMA will make full use
of its existing powers to ensure that
competition law enforcement remains
effective, including in the digital space.
The CMA’s efforts to stretch the application
of the merger control rules to their outer
bounds are an example of this. Other
competition authorities around the world
are looking at ways to regulate so-called
‘killer acquisitions’, where a company buys
a smaller rival – or even a company that is
not yet a rival – to avoid the possibility of
future competition. Given the size of such
targets, these deals are often not reviewed
in advance by competition authorities.
Arguably, the UK system is showing itself to
be sufficiently flexible to catch and deal with
these types of transaction.
Inevitably, where a competition authority
(or any other regulator) starts to push
against the boundaries of existing law, that
becomes an area that is ripe for challenge.
As such, we should expect to see the number
of appeals on points of CMA procedure and
substance continuing to increase.
Peter Broadhurst is a partner in the antitrust
and competition group at Crowell & Moring

Decisions Decisions filed recently with the Law

Society (which may be subject to appeal)

Simon Sui Ping Hsu
Application 12181-2021
Admitted 1990
Hearing 3 August 2021
Reasons 26 August 2021
The SDT ordered that the
respondent should be struck off
the roll.
While in practice as a solicitor
at Swan and Dale LLP, the
respondent had (i) informed Ms
W that £40,000 was required for
payment of SDLT when that was
not the case; (ii) had transferred,
or caused to be transferred,
£18,199 of client money to WCS
without Ms W’s knowledge
and/or a proper reason for
making the transfer; (iii) had
received £700 in client money
from Ms W for the purposes
of paying a deposit on legal
fees and had not paid it into
the firm’s client account and/
or recorded the dealings with
the client money properly or
at all; (iv) misappropriated, or
caused to be misappropriated,
or otherwise misused, or caused
to be misused, sums which his
client had paid to the firm and/
or the respondent in respect
of the transaction, thereby
breaching principles 2, 4, 5, 6
and 10 of the SRA Principles
2011 and/or rules 14.1, 20.1, 29.1
and 29.2 of the SRA Accounts
Rules 2011. He had acted
dishonestly.
He had failed to cooperate
with the SRA’s investigation in
not providing full and accurate
explanations to questions from
the SRA, thereby breaching
paragraphs 7.3 and 7.4 of the
SRA Code of Conduct for
Solicitors, RELs and RFLs.
He had misled the SRA as
to his whereabouts, thereby
breaching principle 5 of the SRA
Principles 2019 and rules 7.3
and 7.4 of the code. He had acted
dishonestly.
The parties had invited the
SDT to deal with the allegations
against the respondent in
accordance with a statement of
agreed facts and outcome.
It was a serious case of
professional misconduct
which was aggravated by two
admissions of dishonesty. The
respondent had repeatedly
used the claimed ill-health of
his mother as a shield to try to
deflect him from scrutiny by
his regulator.
No exceptional circumstances
had been put forward, and there
was nothing in the material
before the SDT that could
be considered exceptional
circumstances.
The respondent was ordered to
pay costs of £35,171.
Meena Kumari and
Teena Banga
Application 12163-2021
Hearing 21-23 June 2021
Reasons 17 August 2021
The SDT ordered that the first
respondent (admitted 2000)
should be suspended from
practice for 24 months from
23 June 2021. Upon the expiry

24 LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021


of that term of suspension,
the first respondent should
be subject to the following
conditions: that she might not
(i) practise as a sole practitioner
or sole manager or sole owner
of an authorised or recognised
body, or as a freelance
solicitor, or as a solicitor in an
unregulated organisation; (ii)
be a partner or member of a
limited liability partnership,
legal disciplinary practice or
alternative business structure or
other authorised or recognised
body; (iii) be a head of legal
practice/compliance officer
for legal practice or a head of
finance and administration/
compliance officer for finance
and administration; (iv) hold
client money; (v) be a signatory
on any client account; or (vi)
work as a solicitor other than in
employment approved by the
Solicitors Regulation Authority,
with liberty to apply to vary
those conditions.
The SDT ordered that the
second respondent (admitted
2013) should be suspended from
practice for 18 months from
23 June 2021. Upon the expiry
of that term of suspension,
the second respondent should
be subject to the following
conditions: that she might not
(i) practise as a sole practitioner
or sole manager or sole owner
of an authorised or recognised
body, or as a freelance
solicitor, or as a solicitor in an
unregulated organisation; (ii)
be a partner or member of a
limited liability partnership,
legal disciplinary practice or
alternative business structure or
other authorised or recognised
body; (iii) be a head of legal
practice/compliance officer
for legal practice or a head of
finance and administration/
compliance officer for finance
and administration; (iv) hold
client money; (v) be a signatory
on any client account; or (vi)
work as a solicitor other than in
employment approved by the
SRA, with liberty to apply to
vary those conditions.
The first respondent had
caused or allowed her firm to act
in conveyancing transactions
which she knew or ought to
have known, bore a number
of suspicious features, the
hallmarks of fraud, and the
hallmarks of money laundering,
thereby breaching principles
2, 4, 5, 6 and 10 of the SRA
Principles 2011 and failing to
achieve outcome 7.5 of the SRA
Code of Conduct 2011.
She had failed to ensure that
she and her firm had (a) carried
out proper enquiries in relation
to the transactions referred to
above; (b) properly advised her
clients regarding the payments
to third-party companies; or (c)
obtained her clients’ informed
consent to make the payments
to those third-party companies,
thereby breaching principles
2, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 10 and failing to
achieve outcome 1.2 of the code.
In relation to the transactions
referred to above, the first
respondent had entered into a
referral arrangement and had
received fee income as a result
of that work in circumstances
which had compromised her
independence and that of her
firm, and had accordingly
breached principle 3.
The second respondent
had acted in conveyancing
transactions which she knew
or ought to have known, bore a
number of suspicious features,
the hallmarks of fraud, and the
hallmarks of money laundering,
thereby breaching principles
2, 4, 5, 6 and 10 of the SRA
Principles 2011 and failing to
achieve outcome 7.5 of the SRA
Code of Conduct 2011.
She had failed to ensure that
she had (a) carried out proper
enquiries in relation to the
transactions referred to above;
(b) properly advised her clients
regarding the payments to
third-party companies; or (c)
obtained her clients’ informed
consent to make the payments
to those third-party companies
thereby breaching principles 2, 4,
5, 6 and 10 and failing to achieve
outcome 1.2 of the code.
The respondents had acted
recklessly.
The first respondent was
responsible for the supervision
and direction of the second
respondent and for the firm’s
compliance with its obligations,
both as the manager of the
firm and as its compliance
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
S O L I C I TO R S D I S C I P L I N A RY T R I B U N A L
officer for legal practice (COLP),
compliance officer for finance
and administration (COFA) and
money laundering reporting
officer (MLRO). The second
respondent had day-to-day
conduct of the matters and
was primarily responsible for
communications with clients.
The first respondent’s
culpability and the harm caused
by her was very high. The second
respondent’s culpability and the
harm caused by her was high.
While the respondents’ actions
had not been deliberately
planned and calculated they
had, through a reckless lack of
care, facilitated others to take
advantage of vulnerable people.
They had demonstrated
genuine insight and they had
made proper admissions.
Neither the protection of the
public nor the protection of
the reputation of the legal
profession justified striking off
the roll.
The respondents were ordered
to pay, on a joint and several
basis, costs of £60,000.
Charles James Ete and
Henry Onotere Mume
Application 12034-2019
Hearings 8-12 March,
1-3 June 2021
Reasons 26 August 2021
The SDT ordered that the
first respondent should be
struck off the roll. It ordered
that the second respondent
should be reprimanded, and
that he should be subject to
the following condition: from
3 June 2021 for an indefinite
period, the second respondent
might not be a head of legal
practice/compliance officer
for legal practice or a head of
finance and administration/
compliance officer for finance
and administration without
prior approval of the SRA.
While in practice as a partner
at Charles Ete & Co Solicitors
and Pride Solicitors Ltd, the
first respondent had caused or
allowed payments to be made
from the firm’s client account
which were made other than
18 OCTOBER 2021
in accordance with rule 20.1 of
the SRA Accounts Rules 2011;
and were improper, thereby
breaching principles 2, 6, and 10
of the SRA Principles 2011.
He had caused, allowed, or
acted in transactions which
bore hallmarks of fraud, in
breach of principles 2, 6, and 10.
He had caused or allowed
a minimum client account
shortage of £1,236,335.64
to arise on the firm’s client
account, which had not been
replaced promptly on discovery
or at all, in breach of principles
2, 6 and 10, and rules 6 and 7 of
the rules.
He had caused or allowed the
firm’s client bank account to
be used as a banking facility in
breach of principles 2 and 6, and
rule 14.5 of the rules.
He had failed to exercise any
or adequate supervision or
control over an individual using
the name of person A, in breach
of principles 2, 6 and 8, and had
failed to achieve outcome 7.8 of
the SRA Code of Conduct 2011.
He had failed to take any or
adequate steps to verify the
identity and regulatory status of
the individual using the name
of person A before allowing
said individual to practise as
a solicitor, thereby breaching
principles 6 and 8.
In 2018 he misled insurers in
correspondence dated 10 July
2018 in breach of principles 2, 6
and 8 (it was further alleged as
an aggravating feature that the
alleged actions were dishonest);
He had failed to appoint
a compliance officer for
legal practice (COLP) and
compliance officer for finance
and administration (COFA)
at Pride Solicitors, in breach
of principles 7 and 8 and
rule 8.5(b) and (d) of the SRA
Authorisation Rules 2011.
He had failed to cooperate
fully with the SRA and its
intervention agents, in breach of
principles 2 and 7.
The second respondent had,
while in practice as a solicitor
at the firm, failed to undertake
his role as COFA effectively,
and in accordance with proper
governance and sound risk-
management principles, in
breach of principles 8 and 10,
25
S O L I C I TO R S D I S C I P L I N A RY T R I B U N A L
Decisions
and in breach of rule 1.2(e) of
the rules.
The SDT was not persuaded
that any exceptional factors
were present in the first
respondent’s case, such that
the normal penalty was not
appropriate where there had
been dishonesty.
It was a single episode of
limited duration, in that it was
one misleading answer on one
form. However, it could not
be described as a ‘moment of
madness’ as the completion
and submission of such a form
was not a one-off instantaneous
action but an action with several
constituent parts. The first
respondent’s culpability was
high.
The second respondent’s
culpability was relatively
low. He had shown genuine
insight. Public concern about
the risk of future inadequate
discharge of the COFA role, and
the importance of that role,
could be addressed by way of
an indefinite restriction order
which prevented the second
respondent from undertaking
that role (or the COLP role)
without prior approval from the
applicant.
The first respondent was
ordered to pay costs of £64,260.
The second respondent was
ordered to pay costs of £7,140.
Silas Ogbonna and
Topstone Solicitors
Limited
Application 12206-2021
Hearing 18 August 2021
Reasons 9 September 2021
The SDT ordered that the first
respondent (admitted 2009)
should pay a fine of £12,500,
and that he should be subject
to the following condition: that
he might not hold the position
of compliance officer for legal
practice, compliance officer for
finance and administration,
money laundering reporting
26
officer or money laundering
compliance officer in an entity
regulated by the SRA for three
years, to take effect 30 days from
the date of the SDT’s order, with
the liberty to apply to vary that
condition.
The SDT ordered that
the second respondent, a
recognised body, should pay a
fine of £15,000.
The first respondent had failed
to cause the second respondent
to conduct adequate due
diligence on the clients involved
in one or more of transaction
1 and transaction 2, and on
the sources of funds received
into the firm’s client account
in respect of transaction 2,
pursuant to regulations 27 and
28 of the Money Laundering,
Terrorist Financing and Transfer
of Funds (Information on the
Payer) Regulations 2017, thereby
breaching principles 6, 7 and 8
of the SRA Principles 2011 and
failing to achieve outcome 7.5 of
the SRA Code of Conduct 2011.
He had failed to cause the
second respondent to undertake
enhanced due diligence
measures or enhanced ongoing
monitoring in respect of one
or more of transaction 1 and
transaction 2, pursuant to
regulations 33(1) and 35 of the
MLRs 2017, thereby breaching
principles 6, 7 and 8, and failing
to achieve outcome 7.5 of the
code.
In failing to identify client A as
a politically exposed person for
the purposes of the MLRs 2018,
he had failed to have in place
appropriate risk management
systems and procedures to
determine whether the client
was a politically exposed person,
thereby breaching principles 6,
7 and 8, and failing to achieve
outcome 7.5 of the code.
After transaction 1 had been
aborted, he had caused or
allowed a payment in the sum of
about £37,865 to be made from
the firm’s client account other
than in relation to an underlying
transaction and in doing so
provided a banking facility
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
Decisions filed recently with the Law
Society (which may be subject to appeal)
in breach of rule 14.5 of the
Solicitors Accounts Rules 2011,
and principles 6, 7 and 8.
By reason of the matters above,
he had failed to comply with his
obligations as the firm’s COLP,
in that he had failed to ensure
compliance with the firm’s
regulatory obligations and had
failed to report material issues
to the SRA contrary to rule 8.5
of the SRA Authorisation Rules
2011; and his obligations as the
firm’s COFA, in that he had failed
to ensure that the firm and its
managers and employees had
complied with the 2011 Accounts
Rules, contrary to rule 8.5 of the
2011 Authorisation Rules.
The second respondent
had failed to have in place
an adequate documented
assessment of the risks of money
laundering to which its business
was subject, as required
pursuant to regulation 18 of the
MLRs 2017, thereby breaching
principles 6, 7 and 8, and failing
to achieve outcome 7.5 of the
code.
It had failed to have in place
adequate policies, controls or
procedures to mitigate and
effectively manage the risks
of money laundering as was
required pursuant to regulation
19 of the MLRs 2018, thereby
breaching principles 6, 7 and 8,
and failing to achieve outcome
7.5 of the code.
It had failed to cause to be
undertaken source of funds
checks in relation to sums
received into the firm’s client
account in respect of one or
more of transaction 1 and
transaction 2, pursuant to
18 OCTOBER 2021
regulations 27 and 28(11) of the
MLRs 2017, thereby breaching
principles 7 and 8, and failing to
achieve outcome 7.5 of the code.
It had failed to have in place
any or adequate systems or
controls to prevent the firm’s
client account being used to
provide a banking facility,
thereby breaching principles 7
and 8.
The parties had invited the
SDT to deal with the allegations
against the respondents in
accordance with a statement of
agreed facts and outcome.
The SDT had reviewed all
the material before it and
was satisfied on the balance
of probabilities that the
respondents’ admissions had
been properly made.
The failures of the first
respondent had caused
significant harm to the
reputation of the profession. The
lack of due diligence undertaken
had had the potential to open
the gateway to financing
terrorist activities contrary to
the purpose of the MLRs and the
responsibilities vested in him as
COLP and COFA.
His failures were ‘very serious
misconduct’ that warranted a
fine of £25,000. However, the
SDT noted his limited means
and therefore reduced the level
of the fine by 50%.
The first respondent was
essentially the ‘controlling
mind’ of the second respondent,
making it culpable but to a lesser
extent than the first respondent.
The respondents were ordered
to pay costs of, respectively,
£6,250 and £3,750.

Calling the shots
Military Justice Handbook
(2nd edition)
Anthony Paphiti
£80, Howgate Publishing
The expression ‘walking into a
minefield’ is a phrase rooted in a
military setting and understood
throughout the English speaking
world. For anyone faced with the
minefield of the UK service justice
system (SJS), there is only one
book available to guide you to
safety – and this is it.
This updated edition provides
both the practitioner and the
barrack-room lawyer with a clear
explanation of why and how you
arrived at your problem and where
to find a route out of it. It contains
vital extracts from relevant
material and guidance.
Service law encompasses all the
legislation of England and Wales,
as well as the service disciplinary
offences of a military life such
as AWOL, dirty boots or late on
parade. The SJS encompasses
every aspect of service discipline
from barrack life in Catterick or
Colchester to a nuclear submarine
at sea, or combat operations
on land and in the air, as well as
training at locations around the
world. It even catches the family of
the service person when living and
serving overseas.
While a court martial trial is
similar in type to that in a Crown
court and is ECHR-compliant, the
SJS also has summary hearings
conducted within service bases or
at sea, held by commanding officers
or other subordinate commanders,
which are non-compliant. The
system also has a variety of
non-criminal administrative
sanctions which would equate to
employment disciplinary hearings.
Most incidents and offences are
investigated by the service police
forces of the army, navy and RAF
under different codes of practice
from civilian forces.
For the practitioner, the first
problem with the SJS is that there
is no central repository of service
policy documents, regulations, the
primary and extensive secondary
legislation, or any index of where
to look for any of this information.
Anthony Paphiti’s book supplies
this vital lifeline. No book could
contain all the legislative and
administrative material and
regular updates, but this contains
enough for daily practice and gives
the reference location for the
remainder.
This book sits by my desk and
travels in my bag to court.
Lewis Cherry is a solicitor at Lewis
Cherry Ltd
No book could contain
all the legislative and
administrative material
and regular updates, but
this contains enough for
daily practice and gives
the reference location
for the remainder. This
book sits by my desk
and travels in my bag to
court
Military Justice Handbook
E arlier this year, Major General
Nick Welch was convicted
at Bulford Military Court of
fraud, for which he was sentenced
to 21 months’ imprisonment. He
was the most senior officer to face
court martial since Lieutenant
General Sir John Murray, who was
convicted in 1815 for the offence
of having abandoned 18 siege guns
‘without due cause’ in the Peninsula
War.
While a practitioner is unlikely
to need to know what amounts to
‘due cause’ for abandoning siege
guns, there is nevertheless a host
of commonly used service offences
set out in this book of which any
practitioner should be aware.
Anthony Paphiti is a former
Brigadier of Prosecutions – that is
the day-to-day head of the Army
Prosecuting Authority – and he has
provided an excellent handbook.
While this book might be thought
to be of benefit only to those
who appear in a court martial, in
fact its remit is much wider than
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
that. Anyone working for those in
military employment will find this
to be a very clear and up-to-date
guide to the system of military
justice from minor administrative
action at the lower end (known
as JSP 833), to summary hearings
carried out by a single officer,
through to a comprehensive guide
to the court martial process.
It is a unique feature of service
life that service offences can
include non-criminal conduct of
a disciplinary nature which, at
the more serious end, may be
dealt with at a summary hearing
by the commanding officer or
may result in court martial. For
employment practitioners, the
guide to the disciplinary process
is especially useful. Anyone
involved in a personal injury claim
concerning career projections will
also find much of use in the book.
Disciplinary matters can have an
important impact upon career
projections. Reduction of rank, for
example, can occur as a result of
disciplinary action which is likely
to blow a hole in any extravagant
claim built upon future promotions
and length of service.
The section on victims and
witnesses to crime is invaluable
to anyone assisting with personal
injury cases or wanting to raise a
service complaint. Much unwanted
conduct may well be contrary
to the Armed Forces Act, for
example conduct prejudicial to
good order and discipline. It may
be appropriate for the alleged
perpetrators to be dealt with by
way of administrative action or
summary hearing. There is a small
section on service enquiries and
coroner inquests.
Civilians on or off a military base
can also find themselves caught up
in the military disciplinary or court
martial process, and there is a
useful section dealing with this.
18 OCTOBER 2021
R EV IE WSR E V IE WS
As a firm, we often receive
enquiries from service personnel
who are going through a crisis who
might be at risk of being absent
without leave (AWOL). This can
raise very difficult issues, not least
because it can lead to the more
serious offence of desertion, and,
further, any civilian who ‘aids,
counsels or procures’ commission
of the offence will find themselves
in difficulty.
A useful glossary is set out at the
front of the book which will assist
the practitioner navigating through
the seemingly endless service
acronyms. The book also contains
a very helpful appendix setting out
the key parts of the military justice
system.
The Armed Forces Act 2006
covers the disciplinary systems
of all three services and it is a
self-contained and comprehensive
code. Anyone who gives advice in
this area must do so bearing this in
mind, rather than trying to import
concepts from other areas of the
law. It is simply no use hoping that
your knowledge of criminal and/or
employment law, or what you think
might be right, can be applied in a
military context to enable you to
muddle through. You will be doing
your client a disservice.
Of course no one can carry
all the relevant information and
procedures in their head and even
the most seasoned practitioner will
need regular reminders and to be
aware of recent changes. That is
what makes this book such a useful
practical guide, as it sets out the
law with simplicity and clarity in
all the main areas you are likely to
encounter, with clear explanations
of the terminologies used and the
military structures.
Jeremy Taylor is a consultant
solicitor at Wace Morgan Solicitors,
a member of Forces Law
27
 Personal and professional benefits
We partner with businesses who offer products and services which aim to
meet your needs.
Explore the personal and professional benefits offered by our partners, for
you, as a Law Society member.

Access your additional benefits at

lawsociety.org.uk/membership/offers

PROTECT THE PRECIOUS ITEMS IN YOUR

Our high-level home
and contents cover
includes accidental
damage as standard.

Experts in home insurance.

HOME OFFICE,
The Law Society
members save 12.5%*

HOME GYM,
Call 0800 840 2337 or visit
hiscox.co.uk/lawsociety

HOME BAKERY,
HOME CINEMA,
HOME SPA,
Strategic Partner HOME SCHOOL,
Hiscox Underwriting Ltd is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. *Terms and
conditions may apply. Subject to underwriting criteria. Visit Hiscox.co.uk/lawsociety for more information.
RE V I EWS
Pioneering litigation handbook ticks the boxes
Litigation Handbook:
Practice and Procedure
in the Business and
Property Courts
Adam Chaffer
£75, Law Society
Surprising as it may seem, a search
in the Law Society bookshop
for books dealing with litigation
would, until July 2021, have
yielded no results, an omission
(presumably) identified and
(certainly) rectified by solicitor-
advocate Adam Chafer in this, the
first edition of his handbook.
Like all Law Society publications,
this book is not pretending to be
something that it is not. It is £250
Colourful judge who rules with a poetic line
Second Helpings
Simon Brown
£18, Mable Hill
It is not often that a book of legal
reminiscences leads to a second
volume and not many judges
have swum the Bosporus – but
then Lord Simon Brown has had
a unique career. He was called to
the bar in the 1960s and became
a High Court judge in 1984. He
became a lord justice of appeal, a
judge of the Court of Appeal and
was vice-president of the Civil
Division from 2001 to 2003. He
30
cheaper, and contains some 3,266
fewer pages, than Blackstone’s
most recent edition of its weighty
civil practice guide, so presumably
does not have the same target
readership in mind. It contains a
comprehensive summary of The
Framework of the Civil Justice
System (Part 1), Stages of Civil
Procedure (Part 2) and Common
Interim Applications in Civil
Procedure (Part 3), all written in a
style which successfully navigates
the very fine boundary between
assuming no prior knowledge of
the subject, and managing to avoid
being overly simplistic.
This book could be compared
to a really thorough set of notes
from a carefully prepared and
well-presented civil litigation
course. It is straightforward
enough to introduce newcomers
to the subject, and explain key
concepts, in an accessible and
easily understandable manner,
while also being just detailed
enough for more experienced
litigators to reassure themselves
that their understanding of those
same concepts and their related
procedures are still up to date.
For example, despite only
running to 10 pages in total,
the chapter on the overriding
objective and the court’s case
management powers is as good
an exposition of these two areas
as I have seen in the 22 years
which have passed since they were
became a justice of the Supreme
Court in 2009.
This collection of reminiscences
from his life at the bar and on
the bench follows his delightfully
enjoyable first volume of memoirs,
Playing off the Roof & Other
Stories. Life at the bar and on the
bench seems to have been sociable
and fun. This book contains
many anecdotes, including witty
put-downs and asides from and
to judges. There are hints on how
judges should avoid ‘judgitis’, which
I am sure will be useful in some
quarters, and how judges should
begin their written judgments to
make a poetic impact. Opening
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
The Business and Property
Courts in London
introduced under the CPR. The
same applies to the chapter which
covers relief from sanctions. That
begins with an explanation of the
‘sizeable cultural shift’ brought
about by the Jackson reforms.
It then works towards a concise
summary of the current case
law on relief from sanctions via
sections on case management
and the sanctions regime, and
methods of extending time limits
to avert default and sanctions
occurring in the first place.
There is a brief explanation of
the foundations of the Business
and Property Courts in the first
chapter and, at appropriate points,
short sections on procedures
which only apply in those courts
(such as the Disclosure Pilot
Scheme contained in CPR PD 51U;
the best practice approach to
witness statements embodied in
PD 57AC; and the Flexible Trials
lines to judgments have included,
‘Is there a mango tree in the
respondent’s backyard at...?’ and ‘It
was bluebell time in Kent…’ They do
not write them like that anymore.
The book ends with an excellent
analysis of the benefits of trial
by jury and includes the tale of
Maxwell v Private Eye which was
concerned an allegation that
Robert Maxwell had tried to
bribe the then Labour leader Neil
Kinnock to get a peerage. On the
fourth day of the trial, the jury
sent a message to the judge asking
what a peerage was. Juries are not
perfect but then neither are judges.
Maybe another judge was correct
18 OCTOBER 2021
Pilot Scheme which we are told
is ‘now a permanent feature of
the civil justice system within the
Business and Property Courts’
following its introduction in
CPR PD 57AB). But most of the
contents of this book deal with the
generally applicable basics which
form the bedrock of our civil
litigation system.
It will be interesting to see how
future editions of the handbook
build on this very strong first
outing. A chapter on enforcement
would be a welcome addition,
as would some basic precedent
pleadings in key areas, but even
in its present form this is a very
‘handy’ handbook, and worthy
of its place in the Law Society
publications canon.
Sean Gordon is a senior solicitor
and COLP at Brewer Wallace
Solicitors, Hull
when they said perhaps someone
had told the jury what a peerage
was but no one believed it.
But I am not convinced by
Lord Brown’s dismissal of the
importance of Magna Carta in the
evolution of juries. He quotes the
late comedian, Tony Hancock, in
a spoof on the film 12 Angry Men,
when he said, ‘Think of your roots,
think of your history, Magna Carta,
did she die in vain?’ Apparently
judges hate the film because the
acquittal rate increases if it is
shown on television.
David Pickup is a partner at Pickup
& Scott Solicitors, Aylesbury

ALL IN THE FAMILY
I studied at the University of South Wales.
I had to choose optional units of law and it
wasn’t difficult to go for subjects that would
allow me to ultimately help people, rather than
turn to corporate law.
Before university I’d wanted to be a
criminal lawyer. However, when I studied the
family law module I realised I may be best suited
to this type of law. This affected the type of
training contract I looked for.
I decided to work in a high street firm so
I could train in family law and also other
training seats where I could help people. I
was lucky enough to get a training contract in
a local firm, Spicketts Battrick in Pontypridd,
south Wales. This was the best experience
because it enabled me to immediately work
with clients and build the trust and reputation
that is crucial to all family lawyers.
I soon learnt that my network would be
important for my career. Naturally, I was able
to meet and work with other professionals to
build my network professionally and personally.
This led to recommendations and referrals
which enabled my career to grow.
My early career as a legal aid lawyer gave
me valuable experience working with
individuals that needed specialist help.
Although I stopped doing legal aid work in 2014,
this taught me the values and strategies I still
use to this day.
During my training contract I continued to
volunteer at my local CAB, as I had done
in university, and I was instrumental in
setting up a local solicitor advice duty
system there. As a result, I was nominated by
the chief executive of the CAB for a pro bono
award, which I accepted from the attorney
general at the House of Lords in 2009.
LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE
Ashleigh-Hannah Spencer, Fletcher Day
I have continued to volunteer at the CAB in
the Central Family Court to give free advice
to individuals going through the family
court system. This is an important part of my
practice and something I will always do. The
chief executive invited me to the Law Society
roundtable to discuss pro bono work, the only
family lawyer to be involved in this roundtable.
My early career as
a legal aid lawyer
gave me valuable
experience. Although
I stopped doing legal
aid work in 2014, this
taught me the values
and strategies I still
use to this day
I recently attended the CAB at the Central
Family Court for the first face-to- face
advice interviews since the pandemic
began. This service is now offered nationally
via a helpline, meaning more individuals can
access legal help. Generally, I advise individuals
who are attempting to navigate the court
system as a litigant in person and require advice
on the law, procedure and applications and
potential outcomes they can expect.
Ironically, family law is not emotional.
For example, in financial cases the value of the
18 OCTOBER 2021
IN PERSON
assets, not the emotional ties to the family
home, is what the court is concerned with.
This can make the family law courts difficult for
individuals to navigate without legal advice, but
such advice is often too expensive.
I built successful family departments
from scratch at OH Parsons and Taylor
Rose, both located in central London. In
November 2020 I moved to Fletcher Day as a
partner where I have developed a practice in
children matters as well as divorce and financial
matters.
Helping clients with children matters is
a passion. My clients trust me to help them
during the most difficult times of their lives and
I will never take that for granted. A particular
specialism that developed naturally surrounds
parental alienation. This is where one parent
alienates the child or children from the other
parent for no justifiable reason. It is becoming
more and more of an issue that the courts need
to deal with and put in place procedures for
these increasingly complex cases.
During the pandemic I have seen a rise
in different types of family case. For
example, parents who cannot see children
due to restrictions, people who have lost jobs
and cannot pay financial orders, and a rise
in couples reviewing their ‘life choices’ and
deciding to separate or move to be closer to
family and needing a solicitor to assist them.
The court system has adapted quickly
to accommodate the ever growing cases
that require judicial assistance. We are
now entering another period of change and
consultation to see how the family court system
will continue to adapt in the future.
Ashleigh-Hannah Spencer is a partner in the
family department at Fletcher Day, London
31
J O BS 020 8049 4000 jobs.lawgazette.co.uk

LEGAL COUNSEL
LocatED Property Limited (LocatED), an Arms-Length Body of the Department for Education (DfE), which is responsible for buying and
developing sites in England to help deliver much needed new school places, is looking to recruit a Legal Counsel.
As Legal Counsel, this role will lead on managing and providing a high quality, professional legal service utilising both in-house and
external resources. This role will be home-based, ideally within easy commuting of London.

MAIN DUTIES & RESPONSIBILITIES INCLUDE:

„ Leading and maintaining a legal function which is focussed, commercial and meets LocatED’s needs
„ Providing corporate in-house legal counsel to the Operations Committee and the Executive Management Team
„ Overseeing the allocation of work and taking decisions as to how to resource work in terms of outsourcing to a panel of external legal
advisors or insourcing to LocatED’s internal legal capacity
„ Supporting property and development colleagues on property transactions and procurements ranging from conventional freehold and
leasehold acquisitions to the procurement of development partners for mixed-use developments
„ Motivating and supporting colleagues to achieve the required Key Performance Indicators
„ Identifying and building productive relationships with key stakeholders
„ Managing the work of a panel of external legal advisors that will provide the lead input on transactions and procurements undertaken
by LocatED
„ Attending meetings and providing legal support to the company’s Investment and Mixed-use Investment Committees
„ Play a leading role engaging with DfE and the ESFA particularly in respect of operational and delivery matters
„ Effectively manage the In-house Solicitor to ensure they successfully deliver against challenging objectives to help the business meet its
business targets and ensuring that they are given the opportunity to develop and grow

KEY SKILLS & REQUIREMENTS:

To be successful in this role you will need:
„ To be a qualified solicitor, holding a current practising certificate for England and Wales, with significant post-qualification experience
in the commercial property sector
„ Have a detailed understanding of Property law, including an understanding of the range of deal structures available to deliver
mixed-use schemes
„ A proven track record of successfully concluding deals with landowners, institutional investors, developers and local authorities
„ Public sector experience, either acting for public sector clients or working within the public sector
„ Some knowledge of procurement regulations governing transaction by government bodies
„ Demonstrable commercial awareness of the property market, market norms and best practice
„ The ability to empower people and teams to ensure objectives are achieved
„ To demonstrate high standards of integrity, honesty, and fairness, commensurate with the Nolan principles
„ A commitment to the value of diversity and achievement of equality of opportunity in both employment and service delivery

IN RETURN WE OFFER:
„ A basic salary of up to £110,000 depending on experience
„ 25 days annual leave increasing with service up to 28 days plus statutory holidays
„ A matched pension scheme for contributions up to 6%
„ Opportunity to earn up to 10% of salary in an annual performance related pay scheme
„ Ability to access training and other continuing professional development opportunities
„ Various discounts with popular retailers
„ Ability to work from home
Equality, diversity and inclusion is fundamental to the continuing success at LocatED. We actively encourage applicants from diverse backgrounds
and all sections of the community, regardless of race, religious beliefs, political opinions, colour, ethnic origin, nationality, marital/parental status,
gender, age, sexual orientation or disability. We also support applications from those returning from a career break or from other roles.
To apply please send your CV and covering letter detailing how your skills, experience and qualifications match this role to
careers@LocatED.co.uk
The closing date for applications is 29 October 2021.

32 LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021

020 8049 4000 jobs.lawgazette.co.uk J OB S

Litigation Solicitor (Housing Disrepair)

£41,500 per annum, plus PRP scheme
)XOOWLPHWZR\HDUȴ[HGWHUPFRQWUDFW
/RFDWLRQ%DVHGLQ/RQGRQ1

Newlon Housing Trust is a successful charitable housing association and one of the major providers of new affordable housing in
north and east London.
We have an opportunity for an experienced solicitor to join our Repairs and Maintenance Team within our Property Services
Department.
You will manage a caseload of claims against Newlon Housing relating to the Housing Disrepair Protocol, Environmental
Protection Act 1990 and the Homes (Fit for Human Habitation) Act. You will manage these cases through the complete legal
process and instruct appointed Legal representatives when necessary. In addition, you will work closely with the team’s Disrepair
Surveyor and appointed contractors to ensure agreed works are completed and may, from time to time, carry out other legal
duties related to other areas of work within the organisation.
$TXDOLèHGVROLFLWRUZLWKSURYHQH[SHULHQFHRIUHOHYDQWFDVHORDGVDQGDUHFRJQLVHGSUDFWLVLQJFHUWLèFDWH\RXZLOOKDYHDWKRURXJK
understanding of Housing Law and Housing Disrepair Pre-Action Protocol, and an understanding of Civil Procedure Rules. An excellent
negotiator and communicator, you will be at ease communicating with a variety of organisations and internal/external contacts.
,QUHWXUQ\RXFDQH[SHFWGD\VKROLGD\DQRQFRQWULEXWRU\SHQVLRQH[FHOOHQWEHQHèWVDQGéH[LWLPH<RXZLOODOVREHSDUWRI
WKHDZDUGZLQQLQJ+DOH9LOODJHUHJHQHUDWLRQSURMHFW2XURêFHVDUHVLWXDWHGMXVWWZRPLQXWHVÚZDONIURPWKHPDMRUWUDQVSRUW
interchange at Tottenham Hale.
To apply, please visit our website: www.newlon.org.uk/vacancies
&ORVLQJGDWH Monday 1st November 2021- 23:59pm.
$VVHVVPHQWGDWHTuesday 9th November - Friday 12th November 2021.
,QWHUYLHZGDWH:HGQHVGD\WK1RYHPEHU)ULGD\WK1RYHPEHU1HZORQ2êFH
No agencies please.
Newlon Housing Trust is a charitable housing association and a committed Equal Opportunities employer. We are committed to learning and
development for our staff.

CAN YOU DELIVER JUSTICE?

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) are looking for Senior Crown Prosecutors and Crown Prosecutors to join our dynamic workforce across
England and Wales.
SENIOR CROWN PROSECUTOR CROWN PROSECUTOR
Being a Senior Crown Prosecutor with the CPS means that you will be at the We are looking for lawyers who want to make a real difference and provide
forefront of delivering justice for some of the most complex and challenging MXVWLFHIRUYLFWLPVDQGZLWQHVVHV)URPIUDXGDQGÀUHDUPVWRSXEOLFRUGHU
FDVHVIURPIUDXGDQGÀUHDUPVWRSXEOLFRUGHUDQGFRUSRUDWHPDQVODXJKWHU and corporate manslaughter – the CPS works on all kinds of cases.
In your role you will be able to provide justice for victims and witnesses, you Your role is at the centre of delivering justice and your work will include
will have the chance to have a very real impact on society and the freedom tasks such as advising investigations, preparing for prosecutions and
to use your judgement. Your work will be both challenging and varied in presenting a wide range of cases at magistrates’ court.
nature involving high volumes of casework and advocacy work in serious and
sensitive cases.
'HOLYHULQJMXVWLFHLVDFRPSOH[SXUVXLWZLWKZRUNWKDWLVVRPHWLPHVHPRWLRQDOO\FKDOOHQJLQJZKLFKLVZK\ZHRIIHUDUDQJHRIEHQHÀWVLQFOXGLQJ
ÁH[LEOHZRUNLQJFLYLOVHUYLFHSHQVLRQVFKHPHDFFHVVWRHPSOR\HHVDYLQJVLQFOXGLQJKLJKVWUHHWUHWDLOHURIIHUVDQGGLVFRXQWVDQGGD\VOHDYH
ULVLQJWRGD\VDIWHU\HDUV·VHUYLFH
,I\RXDUHFRPPLWWHGWRSXEOLFVHUYLFHDQGDUHORRNLQJIRUDUROHDWWKHYHU\IRUHIURQWRIGHOLYHULQJMXVWLFHÀQGRXWPRUHDQGDSSO\WRGD\
www.cps.gov.uk/careers-cps

LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021 33

J O BS 020 8049 4000 jobs.lawgazette.co.uk

Are you looking for exciting fast paced environment – where you are in charge of your own workload? Have you always dreamed of being in control of
your own earning capacity?
If the answer to the above questions is yes. Then, To become the lead in NALC’s Auction contracts department is the job you always dreamed of.
$VDTXDOL¿HGSURIHVVLRQDOSURSHUW\ODZ\HU\RX¶OOVSHFLDOLVHLQSURSHUW\ODZDQGDOPRVWHQWLUHO\3URSHUW\$XFWLRQFRQWUDFWVDQGZLOOZRUNRQEHKDOIRIFOLHQWVEX\LQJ
DQGVHOOLQJKRXVHVÀDWVEXVLQHVVSUHPLVHVRUODQGLQ(QJODQGDQG:DOHVDQG6FRWODQG<RX¶OOGHDOZLWKDOOWKHOHJDOPDWWHUVDGPLQLVWUDWLRQRIWKHDXFWLRQFRQWUDFWV
IURPSUHSDUDWLRQIRUWKH$XFWLRQVULJKWWKRXJKWR([FKDQJHRIFRQWUDFWVDQG&RPSOHWLRQ
7KHUROHLQYROYHVSURFHVVLQJDQGDJUHHLQJ$XFWLRQFRQWUDFWVDWDOOOHYHOVLQFOXGLQJOHDVHFRQWUDFWVDUUDQJLQJWUDQVIHUVDQGKDQGOLQJRWKHUGRFXPHQWVWKDWVHOOHUV
PXVWVLJQZKHQSXUFKDVLQJSURSHUW\YLD$XFWLRQ<RX¶OODOVRDGYLVHFOLHQWVRQWKHWHFKQLFDOFRQWHQWRIWKHGRFXPHQWVDQGWKHLU¿QDQFLDOLPSOLFDWLRQV<RXPD\DFW
on behalf of the vendor or the purchaser.
Salary
O :HDUHLGHDOO\VHDUFKLQJIRUDQHZO\TXDOL¿HGFRQYH\DQFHU2XUVDODU\UDQJHZLOOEH…WR…'HSHQGLQJRQH[SHULHQFH
O ,I\RXDOUHDG\KDYHVHQLRUPDQDJHPHQWH[SHULHQFHDQGDUHLQWHUHVWHGLQRXUEUDQGQHZRSSRUWXQLW\IRULPPHGLDWHVWDUW7KHQ\RXFDQH[SHFWWRHDUQEHWZHHQ
 …DQG…ZLWKWKHSRWHQWLDOWRHDUQ…RUPRUHDVDSDUWQHURIRXU1$/&$XFWLRQ/DZEUDQG
<RXUWRWDOHDUQLQJVZLOOQRWEHFDSSHGDQGPD\EHHQKDQFHGE\FRPPLVVLRQSD\PHQWV
Work experience
3UHYLRXVZRUNH[SHULHQFHJDLQHGDWDVROLFLWRU¶VSUDFWLFHSURSHUW\GHYHORSHUVEXLOGLQJVRFLHW\RUEDQNSDUWLFXODUO\LQWKHUROHRIDOHJDOVHFUHWDU\RUFKDUWHUHGOHJDO
H[HFXWLYHFDQEHDGYDQWDJHRXVWKRXJKLVQ¶WHVVHQWLDO
$SURYDEOHPLQLPXPKRXUVSUDFWLFDOH[SHULHQFHLVUHTXLUHGWREHFRQVLGHUHGIRUWKLVUROH
For further details please visit https://nalcauctions.com/join-our-team/ and to apply please submit your CV and cover letter to Chell Willis chell@nalcgroup.co.uk

34 LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021

020 8049 4000 jobs.lawgazette.co.uk J OB S

Junior Solicitor Salary From £36,000

A unique and rewarding opportunity for a Solicitor to join us in
Greenford, West London on a full-time basis.
<RX ZLOO EH MRLQLQJ D ERXWLTXH 3, ¿UP VSHFLDOLVLQJ LQ 57$ ZLWK D
WUHPHQGRXVJURZWKUDWH7KH¿UPKDVDVWURQJDQGHYHULQFUHDVLQJ
QDWLRQZLGHKLJKTXDOLW\FOLHQWEDVHIURPWKHSULYDWHKLUH LQVXUDQFH
LQGXVWULHV$V ZH HPEDUN RQ WKH QH[W SKDVH RI RXU JURZWK SODQ D
YHU\XQLTXHDQGRXWVWDQGLQJRSSRUWXQLW\KDVDULVHQIRU\RXWRMRLQWKH
¿UPDQGKHOSWRVKDSHWKHIXWXUHRIWKHEXVLQHVV
Your role will focus on:
‡ 0DQDJLQJDFDVHORDGRI/LWLJDWHG3HUVRQDO,QMXU\57$FODLPV
‡ $VVLVWLQJZLWK,PPLJUDWLRQ¿OHV
‡ $VVLVWLQJZLWK+RXVLQJ'LVUHSDLUFODLPV
‡ 6XSSRUWLQJVHQLRUVROLFLWRUV
‡ 'HYHORSLQJ &RQWULEXWLQJWRHI¿FLHQWZRUNSUDFWLFHV
‡ 7UDLQLQJ GHYHORSPHQWRIVWDII
7KHVXFFHVVIXOFDQGLGDWHZLOOEH aspects of the operations of the Magistrate’s Court,
‡ 8.TXDOL¿HG
‡ $EOHWRGHPRQVWUDWHPLQLPXP\HDUVROLGH[SHULHQFHLQFODLPDQW
The Jersey Court Service wishes to recruit to the role of
Senior Clerk to the Magistrate’s Court. Applicants must
be educated to degree level in a law-based discipline or
SRVVHVVDOHJDOSURIHVVLRQDOTXDOLèFDWLRQ
Applicants must have: extensive management
H[SHULHQFHDQGRUKROGDPDQDJHULDOTXDOLèFDWLRQ
or membership of an appropriate professional body;
practical experience of the Jersey Court system (or that
of a comparable jurisdiction); sound knowledge of court
procedures.
Responsibilities cover directing and controlling all
Petty Debts Court and the Youth Court. The range of
 3,(/3/57$ work covered includes criminal, youth, civil (claims up
‡ 6HOIPRWLYDWHGDQGSURDFWLYH to £30k), tenancy and enforcement of maintenance. The
‡ :LOOLQJWRGHYHORSH[SHUWLVHLQRWKHUDUHDVRI/DZ Criminal Procedure (Jersey) Law 2018 (which applies to
‡ $JRRGWHDPSOD\HU
the Magistrate’s Court and Youth Court) is based on the
,Q UHWXUQ \RX¶OO EH VXSSRUWHG LQ \RXU WUDLQLQJ DQG GHYHORSPHQW
LQWHUQDO  H[WHUQDO RQ D VDODU\ FRPPHQVXUDWH ZLWK SUHYLRXV Criminal Justice Act 2003.
H[SHULHQFHDVZHOODVDVWDNHLQWKHEXVLQHVVZLWKDQXQULYDOOHGSDWK (QTXLULHVWR$GDP&ODUNH-XGLFLDO*UHɝHURQ
WR\RXUFDUHHUGHYHORSPHQW7KLVLVDRQHRIDNLQGRSSRUWXQLW\
RUDFODUNH#FRXUWVMH
Please submit your CV and covering letter to
recruitment@silveroaksolicitors.com Closing date 14 November 2021.

EAST OF ENGLAND NORTH WEST ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES

FAMILY SOLICITOR (3+PQE), Family PROBATE SOLICITOR - We are

or Children’s Panel Member, Colchester,
Essex. Salary negotiable dependent
on experience. Long established busy
firm, great prospects. Please call Karen
Morovic on 01206 593433 or karen@
johnfowlers.co.uk
LONDON
CONVEYANCING / PROBATE solicitor
required in North London to take over
case work of retiring partner. Salary
negotiable. Flexible working offered. M
Healy: monica.healy@btinternet.com
PRACTICES FOR SALE, MERGERS
seeking an experienced Private
Client Solicitor to work in our long
established, successful & busy Practice.
The role: ideally STEP qualified, or
working towards qualification, and
at least three years PQE. Duties
to include all aspects of private
client work including advising on,
and drafting wills, trusts, probate
applications, administering estates,
powers of attorney & Court of
Protection work. Primarily an office-
based role (Cheadle Hulme, Greater
Manchester), full and part-time
applications are acceptable. Excellent
prospects. Please send CVs to Clive@
Minahan-Hirst.co.uk

Thinking of Selling /
L
Merging / Valuing
A
your Law Practice?
W

M
CONTACT IN CONFIDENCE: SUBSCRIPTIONS
NEVILLE DINSHAW For all subscription
E
LAW MERGERS & ACQUISITIONS enquiries, redirections
R DX 42809 Kingsbury
G and amendments,
E
Tel: 020 8204 3600 Fax: 020 8204 4654 please contact us via
R
email: info@lawmergers.co.uk 020 8049 3890 or
web: www.lawmergers.co.uk gazette-subscriptions@
S
WORLDWIDE CLIENT BASE
QUALITY MANAGEMENT ISO9001 Registered Firm
lawsociety.org.uk

LAW SOCIETY GAZETTE 18 OCTOBER 2021 35

6KDSLQJ\RXUODZȴUPȇV
digital future

With a dedication to customer-focused development and

an unrivalled commitment to innovation LEAP provides
forward-thinking practice management software perfectly
DWWXQHGWRWKHQHHGVRIODZȴUPV

Invest in the best.

Supporting Law Society members to become fully digital.

Discover more at leap.co.uk