header-logo header-logo

15 October 2025
Issue: 8135 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , International
printer mail-detail

Legal bodies decry dangerous climate for lawyers

The Bars, Faculty of Advocates and law societies of England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland have come together to accuse politicians of putting lawyers at risk through their use of ‘irresponsible and dangerous’ language

In a joint statement issued this week, six professional bodies which collectively represent 250,000 lawyers expressed grave concern about a climate of increasing hostility to lawyers and judges. They warned that ‘legal professionals have been vilified and targeted simply for doing their job… lawyers represent their clients without fear or favour.

‘Politicians have a responsibility to respect the role of judges in upholding the rule of law and interpreting legislation that has been agreed by parliament. Unlike politicians, members of the judiciary are expected to be strictly impartial when considering how the law should be applied. Lawyers must abide by their professional ethics code and ensure that people facing life changing legal problems get a fair hearing.

‘Politically motivated attacks on the legal profession… weaken public trust and confidence in the rule of law and erode the very foundations of justice that underpin fairness and democracy,’ the statement reads.

‘Barristers, solicitors and judges have been subjected to violence, death threats and rape threats. Some have faced threats to their family members. We have repeatedly seen law firms and offices be set upon by protestors. We are deeply disturbed by this rising tide of intimidation targeting those who serve our justice system and uphold democratic principles.’

The statement doesn’t name individuals but takes aim at the tendency of some politicians to identify lawyers with their clients’ causes—a practice that has been used by several politicians. At Conservative Party conference this month, shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick, holding a judge’s wig as a prop, decried judges ‘who’ve spent their careers fighting to keep illegal immigrants in this country’.

In February, the Lady Chief Justice, Baroness Carr expressed concern after both Prime Minister Keir Starmer and leader of the opposition Kemi Badenoch said they disagreed with a judge’s immigration ruling. In the US, meanwhile, President Trump’s administration targeted law firms which worked for his opponents with executive orders and clearance restrictions, later striking a deal to rescind these in return for pro bono work.

Issue: 8135 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , International
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

DWF—David Abbott & Claire Keat

DWF—David Abbott & Claire Keat

Senior appointments in insurance services and commercial services announced

Clyde & Co—Nick Roberts

Clyde & Co—Nick Roberts

Aviation disputes practice strengthened by London partner hire

Ellisons—Marion Knocker

Ellisons—Marion Knocker

Residential property lawyer promoted to partnership

NEWS
he abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
back-to-top-scroll