header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
30 October 2008
Issue: 7343 / Categories: Opinion , In-House , Profession
printer mail-detail

Mixed doubles

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Andrew Fulton looks at how the right pairing can serve aces for clients

The Scottish Faculty of Advocates dropped its rule against “mixed doubles” representation last month. This was a prohibition on an independent advocate accepting instructions to appear with an employed solicitor advocate on behalf of the same client. The ban had been in place since 1993 and had provoked concern about restrictive practices. The Office of Fair Trading has welcomed its removal.

There is no prohibition on “mixed doubles” in England. Indeed, Denton Wilde Sapte’s advocacy group has been successfully using this model for many years. As well as appearing in their own right, our advocates are frequently led by top QCs from the commercial Bar. The Scottish Bar is now belatedly acknowledging what we have known for some time, namely that the “mixed doubles” combination can offer clients the best of all worlds. An in-house junior stays far closer both to the client and to the daily ebb and flow of a case than a barrister in chambers. The selection of an external leader

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

Read All
Sponsored by
NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll