QC body: this year's silk round to miss this year
The relaunched QC body is unlikely to finalise its new appointment round this year in a development that will raise questions about the future of the silks system.
October 17, 2007 at 11:02 PM
2 minute read
The relaunched QC body is unlikely to finalise its new appointment round this year in a development that will raise questions about the future of the silks system.
The body responsible for assessing and handing out the rank said this week that the second round of QC awards was unlikely to be announced before January – 18 months after the first batch of silks were unveiled under the revamped kitemark.
The QC selection panel, which was set up in 2005 as an independent body to replace the Government in handing out the award, said delays to the current round were partly due to changes to the entry criteria to streamline the application process.
QC appointment secretariat David Watts said: "The hope was that it could be done within 12 months but in practice it became clear this was not achievable."
It has also become uncertain whether the award will return to its traditional annual cycle, as Watts told Legal Week it is possible that the panel will make further changes to the system. Areas likely to be looked at by the nine-member body, which is chaired by Sir Duncan Nichol, are costs and the reference process.
Signs that the relaunched silk award is struggling to maintain its predecessor's place as an established part of the legal calendar have raised questions over the model's future. The panel had already decided to raise application costs substantially after a shortfall in applications in its first year of operation.
Herbert Smith advocacy head Murray Rosen QC (pictured) said: "We have had years of disruption. The system clearly had to be changed but after five years or so there are a lot of individuals whose careers have been put on hold to some extent. The right balance needs to be struck."
Watts responded: "Both panel and applicants will want a new QC process as soon as possible, but I am sure they will understand that everyone is working to make the process as good as it can be."
This content has been archived.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
© 2025 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 AllAfrican Law Firm Under Investigation Over ‘AI-Generated’ Case References
3 minute readX-odus: Why Germany’s Federal Court of Justice and Others Are Leaving X
HSF Defends Bayer on Roundup Class Action as Litigation Comes to an End in Australia
2 minute readNorton Rose Sues South Africa Government Over 'Unreasonable' Ethnicity Score System
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Dismisses Defamation Suit by New York Philharmonic Oboist Accused of Sexual Misconduct
- 2California Court Denies Apple's Motion to Strike Allegations in Gender Bias Class Action
- 3US DOJ Threatens to Prosecute Local Officials Who Don't Aid Immigration Enforcement
- 4Kirkland Is Entering a New Market. Will Its Rates Get a Warm Welcome?
- 5African Law Firm Investigated Over ‘AI-Generated’ Case References
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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