barrister question

S

sunrock

Guest
A friend of mine has engaged a solicitor to compel a party to an agreement to fulfil his obligations.

The solicitor thinks my friend has a good case and has engaged a barrister with all the details for over a year now.

When my friend questioned his solicitor about the delay , the solicitor said the barrister was very busy with other cases and other barristers were not as good.

This is a fairly straight forward dispute and it seems to me any barrister would be able to prepare it for court. It seems like the solicitor is dragging his heels and while my friend doesn`t want to confront his solicitor he is getting very impatient.

Any advise would be welcome
 
Fire the solicitor and get a better one? Or instruct the solicitor to get a different barrister, i.e. one who's "not as good".
 
there is no reason for any barrister to be too busy as most cases are basic enough to prepair most of the time in my most polite way is get rid i had a case where they ran over time and then the case couldn't be tried solicitor said it was the barrister's fault and he couldn't be touched so get your friend to get his act together and drive on with his business no mates in law
 


Happens all the time. The best barristers get majority of briefs and can be difficult to get papers from. However once you see them in action in court you will see why your solicitor wanted that particular barrister. Most of the experienced barristers are very competent but there are always a few top class ones in each circuit who are just amazing on their feet.
 
Barristers who are amazing on their feet are not always very good at the paper work. Over time they can get lazy and may not prioritise your solicitor especially if brief is not run of the mill or something which barrister finds interesting.

Is your solicitor prepared to chase up the barrister?
 

Surely a case should be decided on its merits, and not by the quality of the advocate?
 
Padraigb said:
Surely a case should be decided on its merits, and not by the quality of the advocate?
Click to expand...

A lot of cases are not black and white - they are somewhere in the middle with all kinds of shades of grey. This is often the reason that cases do not settle- that and one or other party being downright thick!

In tricky cases, a good advocate can make an enormous difference. However, in this case, a year is an unconscionably long time for counsel to have papers and as a client and a solicitor , I would be insisting on either the paperwork being produced pronto or the paperwork moving to someone else. A primary concern would be that if the plaintiff is successful that the defendant , in todays climate, may well have folded.

mf
 
Padraigb said:
Surely a case should be decided on its merits, and not by the quality of the advocate?
Click to expand...

Not as often as it should be and this fact is borne out by the number of well-paid barristers there are in terms of the profession a whole - not a lot, by all accounts.

A lot of the case rests on how it is presented and how your barrister controls your testimony through proper preparation beforehand, to prevent you scuppering your own case by improper mouthings before a judge.

Cases can be won or lost on good preparation alone and that is usually down to the barrister and his strategy for winning the case.

I have witnessed [sic] huge differences between barristers in terms of the quality of performance both in case preparation and performance in court.

Sometimes the case turns on a point of law, not the preponderance of the evidence before the court.

If your team is aware of this and the other side isn't, you'll win the case.

I have seen cases seeking court orders thrown out because the prosecutions case wasn't specific enough - it should neve have gone to trial in that condition, and that was prepared by a county state solicitors office.

I have seen witnesses shoot themselves down by a pithy comment they theyselves have passed and the judge picked up on as encapsulating the principle of law before the court, nothing to do with the Counsel in the case on either side.

I have also seen witnesses destroy themselves in front of a judge with their attitude to the questioning Counsel.

I have seen witnesses lie through their teeth to comply with a point of law which was not anticipated by the other side.

But stacking up your side with a good barrister ensures you will at least have a good day out and even on a difficult case may end up losing significantly less than you might otherwise have done.
 
extopia said:
Yes... but waiting a year?
Click to expand...

What was the old saying?

"The Wheels Of Justice Grind Slow, But They Grind Exceeding Fine."

<chuckle>

Seriously, if yer maun is worth waiting to get, you'll be well-rewarded in terms of the result.

And no, a year isn't long in the legal scheme of things, particilarly in the High Court.

However notwithstanding all I have said above, many solicitors are terrible men altogether.

God-complexes and delusions of granduer can inspire a detachment from the concerns of others that has to be experienced to be believed.

Failing this, simple incompetence can be the culprit.

You should checek your solicitor is a good guy if you haven't alread done so.

See if he is rated on http://www.rate-your-solicitor.com/ or try to find out if he has been the subject of disciplinary proceedings by the Incorporated Law Society.

Failing that, you could ask a question of or through another solicitors practice to see if they could get to the Barrister and confront him/her with it.
 
A year is too long. Part of a solicitor's job is to hassle the barrister to get the pleadings back as soon as possible. Pleadings get done in order of how much the solicitor insists on getting them back.

Obviously they can't be overly-demanding, otherwise the brief will be sent back, but regular reminders get results.

Counsel has forgotten about this case and the solicitor hasn't been following them enough. (Which happens all the time.)

You'll have to wait a while for a first draft, a month at the very least, but a year is way in excess of what is reasonable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register