header-logo header-logo

23 June 2017
Issue: 7751 / Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

‘I can see you’

Q Since counsel are no longer required to be robed in open court before a district judge, is it right for a district judge to insist on a solicitor being robed in the same circumstances, either when the other party is represented by counsel or no counsel is involved?

A In fact, Bar Council guidance is that counsel need only robe before a district judge on a committal or winding up petition hearing (which are odd bedfellows). Who should be robed is within the control of the court but if counsel is unrobed we consider it would be unprincipled for the judge to direct the solicitor to be robed. If the solicitor is the only advocate then a requirement for the solicitor to robe (but not be wigged) would be unobjectionable provided that the judge is robed. However, robing by a district judge and the advocates before them is becoming increasingly unfashionable, except for committals.

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

Carpmaels & Ransford—Kevin Cordina

Carpmaels & Ransford—Kevin Cordina

Firm adds former Simmons Simmons patent head to engineering and tech team

ACTAPS—Sally Goodger

ACTAPS—Sally Goodger

Freeths strengthens its voice in national disputes with ACTAPS committee appointment

Pillsbury—Matthew Sperry

Pillsbury—Matthew Sperry

Pillsbury expands private client and family office platform with Cadwalader partner hire

NEWS
Some employment law controversies never disappear—they merely lie dormant
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming legal practice, but its successful adoption depends as much on culture as technology
The fallout from Lord Mandelson’s appointment and dismissal as UK ambassador to Washington raises profound questions about constitutional governance, accountability and political appointments
Pastries may be in the firing line while kebabs escape scrutiny, but the reality is far more nuanced
The Supreme Court’s decision in Dillon highlights a central tension in modern public law: rights may be recognised without being fully realised
back-to-top-scroll