header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

The cab rank rule: To kill a mockingbird

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
28 May 2021 / John Gould
Issue: 7934 / Categories: Opinion , Profession , International justice , Legal services
printer mail-detail
49933
Lawyers must not be drawn into choosing cases based on their beliefs… or even worse, their prejudices, says John Gould

A lawyer’s willingness to represent a pariah was once acknowledged as the paradigm of professional honour and integrity. It is a trope which has made heroes of fictional lawyers, from Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird to James B Donovan in Bridge of Spies. Perhaps now, however, times are changing, and lawyers fall to be judged not by their own character and skill, but by the clients they come to represent. A lawyer who chooses not to turn away a controversial client may find themselves vilified and their reputation damaged by a very public association with their client.

Guns for hire?

Earlier this year, the respected Queen’s Counsel, David Perry (pictured), found himself under an intense media spotlight for accepting instructions from the Department of Justice of Hong Kong to represent them in the prosecution of nine pro-democracy activists for unlawful assembly under

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
Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Myers & Co—Jen Goodwin

Head of corporate promoted to director

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Boies Schiller Flexner—Lindsay Reimschussel

Firm strengthens international arbitration team with key London hire

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

Corker Binning—Priya Dave

FCA contentious financial regulation lawyer joins the team as of counsel

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Making Big Tech pay for digital addiction
Social media giants should face tortious liability for the psychological harms their platforms inflict, argues Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers in this week’s NLJ
NLJ this week: Leaseholders stuck in limbo
The Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024—once heralded as a breakthrough—has instead plunged leaseholders into confusion, warns Shabnam Ali-Khan of Russell-Cooke in this week’s NLJ
NLJ this week: When a trial period becomes a ‘reasonable adjustment’
The Employment Appeal Tribunal has now confirmed that offering a disabled employee a trial period in an alternative role can itself be a 'reasonable adjustment' under the Equality Act 2010: in this week's NLJ, Charles Pigott of Mills & Reeve analyses the evolving case law
NLJ this week: Ignore covenants at your peril
Caroline Shea KC and Richard Miller of Falcon Chambers examine the growing judicial focus on 'cynical breach' in restrictive covenant cases, in this week's issue of NLJ
NLJ this week: Courts caught in a ‘hierarchy of privacy’
Ian Gascoigne of LexisNexis dissects the uneasy balance between open justice and confidentiality in England’s civil courts, in this week's NLJ. From public hearings to super-injunctions, he identifies five tiers of privacy—from fully open proceedings to entirely secret ones—showing how a patchwork of exceptions has evolved without clear design
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll