Prosecution was 'political game' to attack human rights - Day

Leigh Day senior partner Martyn Day has suggested his prosecution by the Solicitors Regulation Authority was part of a 'bigger picture of a political game' aimed at muzzling human rights defenders.

Day, along with his firm and solicitors Sapna Malik and Anna Crowther, was cleared earlier this month of 19 allegations brought by the SRA. The tribunal was the longest of its kind, lasting seven weeks, and is estimated to have cost at least £9m.

During the hearing, correspondence between the SRA and the government was disclosed, including letters exchanged between defence secretary Sir Michael Fallon and SRA's chief executive. Day says the extent to which the government influenced the prosecution was unclear, but he maintains there was a 'very strong political element' to the case.

'We always felt very strongly that the Ministry of Defence in particular, but all the way up to the prime minister, him and then herself, they had a very big political battle to fight attacking the Human Rights Act, attacking human rights lawyers and we were the right people at the right time as far as they were concerned, said Day. 'This all became a part of that bigger picture of a political game.'

Day, in his first interview since the verdict, admitted that the firm made mistakes in failing to spot the significance of documents, and he stressed it will be more cautious in future, without affecting the nature of the work it does. The firm will also review the training and guidance given to lawyers in relation to document handling.

He thanked colleagues in the profession for their messages of goodwill and said there was a sense of the wider importance of the case.

'I have had messages not just from human rights lawyers in the UK but abroad: people saying they would be really worried that the atmosphere is changing about lawyers operating in the human rights field internationally and that they have been delighted that we have been able to successfully bat off these allegations,' the 60-year-old added. 'I think it has been seen as being a major case not just in this country but internationally.'

The SRA has said it will consider whether to appeal the tribunal decision once the written judgment is published in August. The issue of costs will also be considered after that date.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Prosecution was 'political game' to attack human rights - Day

All aboard: firms win coveted spots on £50m rail panel

Eight firms have secured coveted spots on the government's £50m panel contract for specialist advice on modernisation projects including Crossrail and High Speed 2. 

Addleshaw Goddard, Ashurst, DLA Piper UK and Eversheds Sutherland (International) have been appointed as tier 1 suppliers. The tier's work will involve advice on major, long term transactions such as rail franchise competitions and other highly complex projects where the supplier 'will need to devote considerable resource' to the project over a multiyear period of time or where the instructions relate to particularly complex issues, the tender document states.

Linklaters, Norton Rose Fulbright, Osborne Clarke and Stephenson Harwood have been appointed as tier 2 suppliers. Tier 2 work will involve advice on less complex and resource intensive transactions such as instructions relating to less complex contractual changes.

Paul Hirst, head of Addleshaw Goddard's head of transport, said the firm's appointment was a 'huge accolade for our rail and wider transport team. We're looking forward to continuing to work closely with the department on a fascinating pipeline of rail infrastructure and rolling stock projects, and the ongoing programme of franchise competitions'.

The three-year contract has an optional 12-month extension. Crown Commercial Service says the deal is expected to save 0.75% over three years. Rates have been assessed as part of the tender process. Hourly rates include an upfront discount. Daily and monthly rates are also available at reduced costs.

The panel was developed to address specific requirements for the Department for Transport. It is one of four panels replacing an existing legal services framework.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

All aboard: firms win coveted spots on £50m rail panel

Queen's speech: Lidington says prison legislation not needed

In his first public statement since taking up the post of justice secretary, David Lidington has tried to head off concern about the dropping of prison reform from the government's legislative programme. The Ministry of Justice published an open letter today claiming that ‘essential’ changes already under way to make prisons places of ‘safety and reform’.

‘Prisons have been going through a particularly turbulent time and we need to create calm and ordered environments for that effective rehabilitation,’ Lidington stated. He said it is his priority to reform offenders and support ex-offenders – including by offering education, training and support to help prisoners find employment when they leave.

Prison reform was a key element of the Prisons and Courts Bill, abandoned in the run up to the general election. Peter Clarke, HM chief inspector of prisons, said the bill enjoyed broad parliamentary support and had made real progress. Its absence from today's Queen’s speech was a ’missed opportunity’, Clarke said, adding: ’We will continue to report the harsh reality of what we find in our prisons – all too many of which are dangerous for prisoners and staff alike.’

Peter Dawson, director of the Prison Reform Trust, said: ’The decision puts even more pressure on the new justice secretary [David Lidington] to find ways to stop our chronic overuse of prison so that this hardest pressed of public services can start to repair the damage his predecessors have inflicted upon it.’

Lidington said the Ministry of Justice is on course to recruit 2,500 prison officers by December 2018 and that up to 10,000 new prison places would be created through a £1.3 billion investment. He added that testing for psychoactive substances had been introduced across the estate and that more than 300 dogs had been trained to detect banned substances. Meanwhile the MoJ is working with the police to catch and convict criminals who use drones to smuggle contraband into prisons and working with mobile operators to tackle illicit use of phones.

‘We know where the problems lie in our prisons, and we know what is needed to fix them. We are continuing with, and building on, these reforms to ensure prisons are safe and secure and are able to transform the lives of those sent to custody by our courts,’ Lidington wrote.

But Dawson said the money earmarked for new prisons should be spent ‘on measures that would make them unnecessary’.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Queen's speech: Lidington says prison legislation not needed

Queen's speech: Society hails 'positive' elements

Today’s Queen’s speech has set out a comprehensive agenda with much that will be received positively by the solicitor profession, the Law Society of England and Wales said.

Prominent in the government’s agenda is a package of measures to make the legal changes needed for Brexit.

’Unravelling and redefining ties and laws made over the past 40 years, while providing as much certainty to individuals and businesses as is possible is a task of real complexity,’ said Robert Bourns, Law Society president. ’The government’s focus on providing this certainty is welcomed, and we hope the series of bills announced today will allow parliament to work through these issues carefully, and give them the scrutiny they deserve.’

The prominence given to a renewed focus on protecting the rights of the most vulnerable was also welcomed. 'Our laws must be accessible to the most vulnerable in our society, and it was pleasing to see that the government will give this attention in the coming parliamentary session,’ said Bourns. 'A significant focus on combating modern slavery, both at home and abroad; law changes to protect victims of domestic violence; and updating our employment law to reflect modern working practices are all important steps which can help those who need it most.’

He added: ’The UK is a world leader in promoting human rights, and the government’s commitment actively to enhance this commitment and ensure our rights are there for all of us is to be applauded.’

Government plans to continue with reforms to modernise the court system and reduce personal injury claims met with a more guarded response.

’Continued progress towards the careful modernisation of our courts system is to be welcomed, although care will need to be taken to ensure that justice is not diluted as it is modernised,’ said Bourns.

However, the Society was disappointed at the government’s decision to revive ‘misguided’ reforms to whiplash injury claims. Bourns said: ’It will be a clear injustice if the government persists with denying essential legal advice to those injured through no fault of their own - if the government is truly committed to targeting fraudulent claims, it should do just that.’

He concluded: ’The Law Society looks forward to working with the government to represent the views and offer the expertise of the solicitor profession as it advance an ambitious agenda for the next two years.’

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Queen's speech: Society hails 'positive' elements

Queen's speech: Society hails 'positive element'

Today’s Queen’s speech has set out a comprehensive agenda with much that will be received positively by the solicitor profession, the Law Society of England and Wales said.

Prominent in the government’s agenda is a package of measures to make the legal changes needed for Brexit.

’Unravelling and redefining ties and laws made over the past 40 years, while providing as much certainty to individuals and businesses as is possible is a task of real complexity,’ said Robert Bourns, Law Society president. ’The government’s focus on providing this certainty is welcomed, and we hope the series of bills announced today will allow parliament to work through these issues carefully, and give them the scrutiny they deserve.’

The prominence given to a renewed focus on protecting the rights of the most vulnerable was also welcomed. 'Our laws must be accessible to the most vulnerable in our society, and it was pleasing to see that the government will give this attention in the coming parliamentary session,’ said Bourns. 'A significant focus on combating modern slavery, both at home and abroad; law changes to protect victims of domestic violence; and updating our employment law to reflect modern working practices are all important steps which can help those who need it most.’

He added: ’The UK is a world leader in promoting human rights, and the government’s commitment actively to enhance this commitment and ensure our rights are there for all of us is to be applauded.’

Government plans to continue with reforms to modernise the court system and reduce personal injury claims met with a more guarded response.

’Continued progress towards the careful modernisation of our courts system is to be welcomed, although care will need to be taken to ensure that justice is not diluted as it is modernised,’ said Bourns.

However, the Society was disappointed at the government’s decision to revive ‘misguided’ reforms to whiplash injury claims. Bourns said: ’It will be a clear injustice if the government persists with denying essential legal advice to those injured through no fault of their own - if the government is truly committed to targeting fraudulent claims, it should do just that.’

He concluded: ’The Law Society looks forward to working with the government to represent the views and offer the expertise of the solicitor profession as it advance an ambitious agenda for the next two years.’

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Queen's speech: Society hails 'positive element'

Costs: Appeal court backs Merrix stance on budget status

An approved budget cannot be re-opened by a costs judge at detailed assessment unless there is ‘good reason’ to do so, the Court of Appeal held today in a much-awaited ruling in Harrison v University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust.

In a unanimous ruling, the Court of Appeal expressly backed the reasoning of Carr J in the Merrix case on the same issue, which received a mixed response from the legal and costs professions in February.

Lord Justice Davis said the ‘good reason’ provision was a valuable safeguard, and ‘goes a considerable way to meeting [barrister for the paying party] Mr Hutton’s doom-laden predictions of detailed assessments becoming mere rubber stamps of case management orders, and of injustice for paying parties.’

The judge added that it was better not to give ‘generalised’ guidance as to what would amount to good reason, as this could ‘safely’ be left to costs judges in individual cases.

On a second point, the Court of Appeal adopted a different approach in relation to costs that were already incurred before the date of the budget. It said incurred costs should be subject to detailed assessment in the normal way, without an extra requirement of good reason before a costs judge can depart from the amount put forward at the relevant costs management hearing.

Davis LJ said: ‘The costs incurred before the date of the budget were never agreed in this case. Nor were they ever “approved” by the costs management order… Accordingly such incurred costs are to be the subject of detailed assessment in the usual way, without any added requirement of “good reason” for departure from the approved budget.’

Costs expert Professor Dominic Regan told the Gazette it was no surprise that the ‘elegant’ judgment of Carr J in Merrix was unanimously affirmed. ‘But the paying party can take satisfaction from the fact that they have the right to a detailed assessment of costs already incurred,’ he said. Regan added: ‘The timing of this ruling is perfect, in that it provides Sir Rupert Jackson with an opportunity to comment on it, if he wishes, in his report [on the extension of fixed recoverable costs] next month.’

Lady Justice Black and Sir Terence Etherton MR agreed with the judgment of Davis LJ.

Kevin Latham of King’s Chambers acted for the claimant Jacqueline Harrison; Alexander Hutton QC of Hailsham Chambers and Roger Mallalieu of 4 New Square acted for the defendant.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Costs: Appeal court backs Merrix stance on budget status

Court of Appeal backs Merrix stance on budget status

An approved budget cannot be re-opened by a costs judge at detailed assessment unless there is ‘good reason’ to do so, the Court of Appeal held today in a much-awaited ruling in Harrison v University Hospitals Coventry & Warwickshire NHS Trust.

In a unanimous ruling, the Court of Appeal expressly backed the reasoning of Carr J in the Merrix case on the same issue, which received a mixed response from the legal and costs professions in February.

Lord Justice Davis said the ‘good reason’ provision was a valuable safeguard, and ‘goes a considerable way to meeting [barrister for the paying party] Mr Hutton’s doom-laden predictions of detailed assessments becoming mere rubber stamps of case management orders, and of injustice for paying parties.’

The judge added that it was better not to give ‘generalised’ guidance as to what would amount to good reason, as this could ‘safely’ be left to costs judges in individual cases.

On a second point, the Court of Appeal adopted a different approach in relation to costs that were already incurred before the date of the budget. It said incurred costs should be subject to detailed assessment in the normal way, without an extra requirement of good reason before a costs judge can depart from the amount put forward at the relevant costs management hearing.

Davis LJ said: ‘The costs incurred before the date of the budget were never agreed in this case. Nor were they ever “approved” by the costs management order… Accordingly such incurred costs are to be the subject of detailed assessment in the usual way, without any added requirement of “good reason” for departure from the approved budget.’

Costs expert Professor Dominic Regan told the Gazette it was no surprise that the ‘elegant’ judgment of Carr J in Merrix was unanimously affirmed. ‘But the paying party can take satisfaction from the fact that they have the right to a detailed assessment of costs already incurred,’ he said. Regan added: ‘The timing of this ruling is perfect, in that it provides Sir Rupert Jackson with an opportunity to comment on it, if he wishes, in his report [on the extension of fixed recoverable costs] next month.’

Lady Justice Black and Sir Terence Etherton MR agreed with the judgment of Davis LJ.

Kevin Latham of King’s Chambers acted for the claimant Jacqueline Harrison; Alexander Hutton QC of Hailsham Chambers and Roger Mallalieu of 4 New Square acted for the defendant.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Court of Appeal backs Merrix stance on budget status