header-logo header-logo

09 April 2025
Issue: 8112 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Criminal , Discrimination
printer mail-detail

Bad behaviour on the bench

Judicial bullying and poor conduct appear to be increasing, according to Criminal Bar Association (CBA) research.

Analysis published this week of the CBA national survey, which concluded in March, found 45% of criminal barristers called in the past decade have experienced judicial bullying, an increase of 10% on those called in the previous decade, and 9% more than those called in 1995–2004.

In total, 61.5% of the Criminal Bar say they have experienced bullying or harassment from a judge, and 42% cite judicial behaviour as one of their main work stressors.

However, most barristers do not complain—of the 14% who did, only 1.7% contacted the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office, while 3% raised the issue with presiding or resident judges and 6% did so within chambers or to circuit leaders.

CBA chair Mary Prior KC, outlining the survey results, said: ‘There was a concern that much of the poor conduct came from the same judges whose behaviour was well-known but that nothing seemed to change.

‘The perception was the formal complaint mechanisms were ineffective and that making a complaint about a judge would be harmful to career progression.’

Moreover, one in three criminal barristers has personally experienced bullying, harassment or discrimination from colleagues. The CBA research found the numbers of barristers subjected to poor behaviour has remained much the same in the past three decades—between 44% and 47% from 1995 to 2024. Black practitioners, in particular, are highly likely to have faced poor behaviour (79%), and Asian practitioners are very likely (55%).

Other sources of frustration included late delivery of prisoners—more than half described this as ‘routine’, and one quarter said it happens ‘often’—and logging on to the Common Platform: 43% frequently, and a further 43% occasionally, have problems logging on. Three-quarters have experienced cases not appearing on the list.

Issue: 8112 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Criminal , Discrimination
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Wedlake Bell—Rebecca Christie

Firm welcomes partner with specialist expertise in family and art law

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Birketts—Álvaro Aznar

Dual-qualified partner joins international private client team

NEWS
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

back-to-top-scroll