Barrister representing a friend - is this allowed?

Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Pink Lady 22

New Member
Messages
5
just wondering if a barrister who is a close personal friend can represent that person in the wrc without being appointed by a solicitor?
 
I understand that what usually happens in these cases is that the barrister contacts a solicitor who is the formal contact, but doesn't get involved.
 
Pink Lady 22 said:
just wondering if a barrister who is a close personal friend can represent that person in the wrc without being appointed by a solicitor?
Click to expand...
There’s nothing to preclude anyone acting as a representative in the WRC.

I’ve heard of people being represented by their accountants.
 
If a matter is contentious, save for limited stated exceptions, Rule 3.4 of the Bar Code of Conduct (24th July 2023) states that Barristers should not take instructions directly from a client.
 
Johnno75 said:
If a matter is contentious, save for limited stated exceptions, Rule 3.4 of the Bar Code of Conduct (24th July 2023) states that Barristers should not take instructions directly from a client.
Click to expand...
Presumably the barrister in this case is acting in a personal capacity without any reference to the fact that he is a barrister.

The rules of the WRC wouldn’t exclude this and surely he’d know himself whether his professional body of which he is a member would have a view.
 
If you’re a Barrister, you’re bound by the Code, regardless of whether you’re acting in a personal capacity or not. Whilst the WRC rules mightn’t preclude the Barrister from acting, the Code would appear to do so. The Barrister could find themselves being on the receiving end of an investigation by the Legal Services Regulatory Authority if, say, a complaint were lodged against them.
 
Hi Johnno

Am I right in saying that the barrister would ask a friendly solicitor to instruct him and that solicitor would have no part in it other than appearing on the record?

Brendan
 
Yes, that would certainly give the barrister regulatory cover, so long as the client agreed to it.

Whether a solicitor would be happy to do so (perhaps without even being paid), is another matter. That new client presents a “risk” to the solicitor from a legal, regulatory and insurance perspective if things panned out badly at the wrc.
 
Pink Lady 22 said:
If said Barrister has already submitted documents to the wrc on behalf of his ‘friend’ is there a problem?
Click to expand...
Probably not from the WRC’s perspective who won’t likely be aware of any regulatory issue. Yes from the Barrister’s own ethical and regulatory perspective, if he gets found out.
 
Johnno75 said:
Yes, that would certainly give the barrister regulatory cover, so long as the client agreed to it.

Whether a solicitor would be happy to do so (perhaps without even being paid), is another matter. That new client presents a “risk” to the solicitor from a legal, regulatory and insurance perspective if things panned out badly at the wrc.
Click to expand...
Where exactly is the risk? Solicitors take on all sorts of clients all the time, including particularly unsavoury or dubious characters.

If the barrister in the first instance suggests to their client that they go to a solicitor for advice with a view towards onward referral to their chosen barrister, who is then duly appointed in line with procedure, doesn't that resolve it?
 
T McGibney said:
If the barrister in the first instance suggests to their client that they go to a solicitor for advice with a view towards onward referral to their chosen barrister, who is then duly appointed in line with procedure, doesn't that resolve it?
Click to expand...
It probably does but presumably the solicitor wants a piece of the action.

But by now, the OP will have gone from a situation where they had a well-qualified person doing them a favour to one where they have an expensive multi-layered legal team.

You don’t need either a solicitor or a barrister for the WRC and you certainly don’t need both. It was set up to operate as a low-cost alternative to the Employment Appeals Tribunal and other adjudicative bodies that preceded it. It doesn’t operate like regular courts.
 
T McGibney said:
Where exactly is the risk? Solicitors take on all sorts of clients all the time, including particularly unsavoury or dubious characters.

If the barrister in the first instance suggests to their client that they go to a solicitor for advice with a view towards onward referral to their chosen barrister, who is then duly appointed in line with procedure, doesn't that resolve it?
Click to expand...
The risk of being sued for negligence. The risk of a regulatory action being taken on foot of a complaint to the LSRA. The risk of having a claim against your professional indemnity policy.

Any Solicitor worth their salt will assess the appropriateness of issuing any proceedings before agreeing to act for a client in those proceedings.

Any Solicitor willing to put their name to proceedings without any control over how the case is run is inviting trouble.
 
Johnno75 said:
The risk of being sued for negligence. The risk of a regulatory action being taken on foot of a complaint to the LSRA. The risk of having a claim against your professional indemnity policy.

Any Solicitor worth their salt will assess the appropriateness of issuing any proceedings before agreeing to act for a client in those proceedings.

Any Solicitor willing to put their name to proceedings without any control over how the case is run is inviting trouble.
Click to expand...
None of that remotely contradicts a wotd of what I said.
 
Salvadore said:
It probably does but presumably the solicitor wants a piece of the action.

But by now, the OP will have gone from a situation where they had a well-qualified person doing them a favour to one where they have an expensive multi-layered legal team.

You don’t need either a solicitor or a barrister for the WRC and you certainly don’t need both. It was set up to operate as a low-cost alternative to the Employment Appeals Tribunal and other adjudicative bodies that preceded it. It doesn’t operate like regular courts.
Click to expand...
If the person involved in the case is lucky enough to be able to call on a close friend who happens to be a barrister, your concern about them being lumbered with
an expensive multi-layered legal team
Click to expand...
must presumably turn to dust?
 
Last edited:
So if I was to let it be known during the document upload stage that I was aware of the relationship between client & BL & the breach of codes of conduct they wouldn’t be bothered?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top