header-logo header-logo

Counsel of perfection

16 August 2007 / Richard Harrison
Issue: 7286 / Categories: Opinion , Procedure & practice , Profession
printer mail-detail

Richard Harrison suggests ways in which barristers can ensure repeat instructions from solicitors

Despite the rise of the solicitor advocate and the emergence of the advocacy department in some larger litigation firms, it remains my view that the best resource for a client engaged in the litigation process is an appropriately constituted team of solicitors and barristers. This article is not about my reasons for that view, but about how members of the Bar can ensure that they cross a solicitor’s radar more than once. It provides practical tips on how to get on with instructing solicitors.

Disclaimer time: any clerks to whose attention this is drawn and who know me will have had their barristers instructed by me or my firm on a repeat basis. Therefore those barristers will probably have passed the tests suggested.

INITIAL INSTRUCTIONS AND CONFERENCE

One of the obvious arguments for instructing counsel is specialist expertise. Another, just as important, is objectivity. However, the instruction of an external specialist should not prevent solicitor and counsel being seen by

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

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll