Mid defence case my Jnr Counsel has become Sen Counsel and cant continue with case.

McCrack said:
... A Barrister with at least a few years experience can pick up a Brief, read it, consult with the solicitor and run the matter competently.
Click to expand...

If that is so, why is it that some barristers have large practices and command high fees, while others struggle to make a living? And why does the Bar Council institutionalise a distinction between run-of-the-mill advocates (BLs) and superior advocates (SCs)?
 

It's like any self-employed person, the cream will rise and consequestly command higher charges for experience/expertise.

The distinction (I don't think institutional is the correct description) is there as a recognition for particular eminence a Barrister has, it's a ranking so to speak.
 
Right, so I guess from your answer there is no reason from the client's perspective for this change. It is really all about money - the barrister can make more from other clients on SC cases, so he/she drops their old clients like a hot snot.

This would completely unacceptable in any other profession, and the only reason it happens in the legal world is because clients let it happen.

McCrack said:
Believe it or not (I'm sure you won't by the way) the numbers of BL that take silk each year are tiny. It's very competitive and difficult to become a Senior Counsel.
Click to expand...
About 15-25 most years - right? Not quite 'tiny' in my book.

McCrack said:
The client does not set out the conditions of a Brief so no you will not tell your solicitor on what terms he/she will instruct Counsel. You will also only pay legal fees if you are an unsuccessful party or costs awarded against you.
Click to expand...
I know we're going to get into panto territory here, but believe me 'Oh yes I will'. I will find a solicitor who will follow my instructions, and they will find a barrister that will meet my requirements. But of course, it's not just solicitors that engage barristers these days, so I can go through other professionals too.
 
McCrack said:
It's like any self-employed person, the cream will rise and consequestly command higher charges for experience/expertise.
Click to expand...

Which undermines your suggestion that a substitute barrister is as good a bet as the one originally briefed.

The distinction (I don't think institutional is the correct description) is there as a recognition for particular eminence a Barrister has, it's a ranking so to speak.
Click to expand...

Of course institutionalised is the correct description. The Bar Council has a system in place to tell everybody that some Barristers have higher professional standing than others, a system that is reflected in the way courts operate and in the fees charged.

I truly wish that your point was valid. In my view, the chances of a person's success in any court action should not be dependent on the skill or status of an advocate, but on the merits of the case.
 

I explained you the reasons. Whether you choose to accept/agree is your business. From a clients perspective or indeed a defendants perspective it is of great importance that the right Counsel is choosen. By that I mean it would be unsuitable for a Senior to run a Circuit Court matter because his/her professioanl fees would not be commensurate with the level expected or indeed what would tax before a Taxing Master so no it's not in any of the litigants interests that a Barrister who has taken silk continue with an inferior court (District and Circuit Court) matter.

I believe there are at least 3,000 practising Barristers in this State. 15-25 of those 3,000 becoming Senior Counsel in a year is tiny in my book.

If you came into my office what that attitude I will very quickly show you the door. Actually thinking you can walk into a solicitor' office and tell him/her how to run a case is comical.
 

We are talking about a Circuit Court matter. If a BL becomes a Senior another BL of recognised competence can take over...some people here cant seem to grasp this. Solicitors know what Counsel are good, they know who to istruct in a given situation.

You call it institutional, I call it distinction. Same as ranking in the Gardai, schools, offices. Different people, different experience, different ranks.
 

So how many clients would each of those 15-25 JCs bet working with at any one time?

But you're right, I don't think we would end up working together. If I came across any professional so arrogant as to be deciding what is in my best interests without having an open discussion with me on the merits of the issue, then I'd be out the door very quickly too. Perhaps you've made assumptions about what is in my best interests. Perhaps I may want to bear the financial risk of the increased fees when I weigh this against the risk of changing barrister? Perhaps I may want a committment from the barrister up-front to continue the case at the JC rate, as a condition of taking the case? I really, really don't want professional to decide what is in my best interests. I want them to advise me on the pros and cons of the various options and let me decide.
 

I really couldnt guestimate that.

I never said I would not listen to a client, quite the opposite in fact. You stated that you would find a solicitor that would follow your instructions. Solicitors take instruction from clients but they do not follow orders as to how to conduct a case which is what you seem to have said. A solicitor is responsible for running a file, not the client.

Its just unrealistic to insist on a newly appointed Senior continuing with a Circuit Court matter for reasons I and others have explained. When the matter is ultimatly disposed of and fees are being negotiated, the losing party (usually insurers) will not pay SC fees for a Circuit Court matter. This is the reality. They wont tax. Who is going to make upo the shortfall? Do/can you understand this?
 

You might have missed the point I made above, i.e. "Perhaps I may want to bear the financial risk of the increased fees when I weigh this against the risk of changing barrister? "

I would certainly understand this if my solicitor had an open discussion with me on this matter. The OP's solicitor certainly failed to have this discussion.
 

If you are the Plaintiff i.e. suing (which most individual clients are) costs are going to be borne by the Defendant/s assuming you are successful. It makes no sense to continue insisting on a newly elevated Senior to continue the matter even if you put money on account yourself to make up the shortfall just for the sake of having the same Barrister see the case through. Sure you can ask but at the end of the day the newly elevated Senior will be carving out his/her Superior Court Briefs and the Circuit Court matters will be a all but distant memory.

Discussion leads to understanding. Agreed. Hence this thread.
Whether the OP solicitor failed to have this discussion yet I don't know. I'll let the OP confrim that.
 
McCrack said:
If you are the Plaintiff i.e. suing (which most individual clients are) costs are going to be borne by the Defendant/s assuming you are successful.
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand this. And if I am unsuccessful, I will pay the cost. So it is my risk to bear.

Just to be clear, I won't be 'asking' the barrister at the time of his promotion. I'll be ensuring that this is agreed up front, before he takes the brief in the first place.

And I'll be aiming to get agreement that he'll continue the case at his JC rates. The free market will decide whether I get a positive or negative response to that. If I get a negative response, it is a pretty good indication of an uncompetitive market.


McCrack said:
Discussion leads to understanding. Agreed. Hence this thread.
Whether the OP solicitor failed to have this discussion yet I don't know. I'll let the OP confrim that.
Click to expand...

Indeed, discussion is important, and it is pretty clear to me that the OP's solicitor had no discussion with their client about the possibility of changing barrister. Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that my view is imposed on every client/barrister in Ireland for the rest of time. I'm suggesting that solicitors educate their clients on the issues around engaging a barrister, and reach agreement up front about the terms of that engagement.
 
Complainer, what happens if your prospective barrister becomes a Judge?

In a previous post on another thread, I posted the Barrister's Code of Conduct. It outlines the rules of practice which a barrister must follow including those in relation to taking instructions and receiving payment for a case.

As many other posters have told you, case may take many years to come to court. It is not realistic to expect the same barrister to be there for the whole of the case. Nothing in this world is a certainty, and it is not an indication of an uncompetitive market if you get a negative response to your request. What happens if your barrister dies? Are you going to expect a ghostly apparition in court?

As McCrack explained when a barrister takes silk (they do indeed wear a silk gown) it acts as a barrier to taking work in the lower courts (Circuit and District).
 
Dachshund said:
Complainer, what happens if your prospective barrister becomes a Judge?
Click to expand...
Do many people go from Junior Counsel to Judge?

Dachshund said:
As McCrack explained when a barrister takes silk (they do indeed wear a silk gown) it acts as a barrier to taking work in the lower courts (Circuit and District).
Click to expand...
The only barrier that McCrack explained was the barrister's income.
 
Complainer, I know and know of several judges who were so appointed while practising as junior barristers.

I have been dealing with barristers on bahalf of clients for 40+ years. For a variety of reasons a barrister may not be able to continue to act in a particular case. The brief is handed over with the solicitor's agreement and usually without any detriment to the client.

A barrister on becoming an SC concentrates on HIgh Court practice and for logistical and other reasons would not normally be attending the Circuit Court.

The solicitor recommends to the client a barrister suitable for the particular type of case, and where known, the judge likely to be trying it. I doubt if any barrister would commit him/herself to stay in the case after becoming a Senior. I would not relish working with a barrister who was compelled to stay in the case.
 
nuac said:
The brief is handed over with the solicitor's agreement and usually without any detriment to the client.
Click to expand...
Would it be worthwhile getting the client's (you know, the person who is paying the bill for both the solicitor and the barrister) agreement too?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register