header-logo header-logo

02 February 2012
Issue: 7499 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Barristers

Leathley v Bar Standards Board [2012] All ER (D) 110 (Jan)

In the context of a barrister’s appeal from a disciplinary panel to visitors constituting a judge, a lay member, and a barrister, where the lay member’s fees and expenses had been paid by the Bar Standards Board, no fair-minded and informed observer would have concluded that there was a real possibility that the lay visitor sitting on the appeal from the disciplinary panel would have been biased in favour of the board on account of the way in which that visitor had been paid.
 

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Shakespeare Martineau—David Vaughan

Shakespeare Martineau—David Vaughan

Shakespeare Martineau appoints new London office head as firm continues investment in capital

Browne Jacobson—Kevin Moore

Browne Jacobson—Kevin Moore

Browne Jacobson strengthens All-Island life sciences platform with appointment of leading Galway MedTech lawyer

Clarke Willmott—Latitude Law

Clarke Willmott—Latitude Law

National law firm strengthens commercial offering with acquisition of leading immigration practice

NEWS
Mr Justice Nicklin’s decision to order costs on an indemnity basis may be a ‘significant win’ but it’s still ‘far from game, set and match’ for Associated Newspapers, a former costs judge has said
The Law Society RFC Festival of Sport returns next month, bringing together legal and financial services professionals for one of the sector’s largest annual sporting events
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners
back-to-top-scroll