header-logo header-logo

12 January 2017
Issue: 7730 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

New silks announced

Celebrations were taking place around chambers today as 113 lawyers received news they are to be appointed Queen’s Counsel.

This year’s crop of silks include 31 women (out of 56 who applied), 16 black and minority ethnic (BAME) applicants (of 37 who applied), and 20 applicants above the age of 50.

A total of 254 lawyers submitted applications. In the 2015-2016 round, 237 applicants applied and 107 were successful.

Congratulating the successful applicants, Helen Pitcher, Chairman of the Selection Panel, said: The selection process is exceptionally thorough.

“The application form itself is comprehensive and time consuming; we then collect confidential assessments from judges, fellow advocates and professional clients, who give freely of their time to provide evidence about an applicant’s demonstration of the competencies. Those with sufficient evidence of excellence are interviewed by one legal and one lay member of the Panel. 

“The Selection Panel as a whole then considers all the evidence and makes a collective decision as to which applicants should be recommended for appointment.”

Six of the new QCs are solicitors, the highest number appointed in one round so far. They are: Jonathan Taylor, partner at Bird & Bird; Adam Johnson, partner at Herbert Smith Freehills; Benjamin Juratowitch, partner at Freshfields (the second partner to take silk); John Savage, partner at King & Spalding (the third QC in the office); David Kavanagh, partner at Skaddens; and Michael Young, partner at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan. Some 13 solicitors applied.

Liz Truss, the Lord Chancellor, said: “The number of women and BAME candidates applying and being successful is moving in the right direction.

“There is more to be done, but my message is clear—when you widen the pool of talent from which lawyers and judges are drawn, you make the justice system stronger.”

The new Queen's Counsel will formally become silks on 13 February at the swearing-in ceremony.

Issue: 7730 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Chief information officer appointment strengthens technology leadership

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Firm strengthens Wilmslow team with two solicitor appointments

DWF—Ian Plumley

DWF—Ian Plumley

Londoninsurance and reinsurance practice announces partner appointment

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll