Bar plans reporting system for poor performers
Poorly performing barristers will be reported by judges and colleagues to the Bar Council under new proposals drawn up by the body to improve the quality of advocacy at the Bar. A consultation on the measures, which will see underperforming barristers reported to a newly created non-disciplinary body, dubbed the Bar Quality Advisory Panel, was launched by the Bar Council today (10 April).
April 10, 2007 at 12:41 PM
2 minute read
Poorly performing barristers will be reported by judges and colleagues to the Bar Council under new proposals drawn up by the body to improve the quality of advocacy at the Bar.
A consultation on the measures, which will see underperforming barristers reported to a newly created non-disciplinary body, dubbed the Bar Quality Advisory Panel, was launched by the Bar Council today (10 April).
Reported barristers will receive help to improve on their performances and will be encouraged to receive training in any aspects of the law they are not up to date with.
As first reported by Legal Week last year (November) the measures are likely to precede compulsory performance appraisals of barristers.
The Bar Council is also set to introduce a sweeping quality assurance grading system for publicly-funded advocates. The scheme, which will be piloted from October, is likely to be implemented as a four-tier grading system with junior advocates starting at level one and working upwards as they handle increasingly complex cases.
Commenting on the latest proposals, Bar Council chairman Geoffrey Vos QC said: "Quality control is not a threat to our independence [and] it must not become burdensome or disruptive. We are a big profession now [and we] must be able to produce evidence for our oft-repeated assertion that we provide the highest quality advocacy and advice available anywhere."
Bar Standards Board chair Ruth Evans added: "No profession can afford to carry individuals who are sub-standard or who let the profession down. The type of initiatives included in the Bar Council's consultation clearly illustrate the Bar's commitment to continuous improvement and to demonstrating that more can be done."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllApple Subsidiaries in Belgium and France Sued by DRC Over Conflict Minerals
2 minute readBaker McKenzie, Norton Rose & Other Top Litigators Foresee Rise in AI, Data & ESG Disputes
Freshfields Takes on Syria's Brutal Legacy, But Will Victims Ever See Compensation?
5 minute readECJ Ruling Upholds German Ban on Pure Private Equity Investment in Law Firms
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Blake Lively's claims that movie co-star launched smear campaign gets support in publicist's suit
- 2Middle District of Pennsylvania's U.S. Attorney Announces Resignation
- 3Vinson & Elkins: Traditional Energy Practice Meets Energy Transition
- 4After 2024's Regulatory Tsunami, Financial Services Firms Hope Storm Clouds Break
- 5Trailblazing Pennsylvania Judge Sylvia Rambo Dies at 88
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250