DOCSLIB.ORG

Advocates Challenge Senior Counsel ‘Members-Only Club’ Rules

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Advocates Challenge Senior Counsel ‘Members-Only Club’ Rules Legalbrief | your legal news hub Saturday 02 October 2021 Advocates challenge senior counsel ‘members-only club’ rules Six Kenyan advocates asked the High Court’s constitutional and human rights division to find that the rules setting out criteria for qualification as a senior counsel should be declared unconstitutional. They also wanted a court order to stop the law society of Kenya from ‘in any way’ considering or recommending any advocate for senior counsel status. They took this step because, they argued, the present rules were discriminatory. By stipulating, among others, that senior counsel status could be conferred only after someone had argued a substantial case in a regional, higher or international court, the rules discriminated against other advocates who did not engage primarily in court work. What about other senior lawyers who chose to go into teaching law, who were in-house counsel or who specialised in conveyancing or other commercial transactions? they asked. These lawyers should be ‘treated equally’ when it came to consideration for senior counsel status, otherwise the system discriminated against them and in favour of those who had chosen to specialise in court work. The application was brought against the Attorney-General and the law society of Kenya, both of which argued that there was no ‘irrationality’ in rules that distinguished between certain groups of lawyers. The rules provided criteria for appointment as senior counsel. As far as the Attorney-General was concerned, they were rational because the privileges attached to senior counsel status were related to court work and would not benefit advocates who did not appear in court. The Attorney-General also complained that the applicants had not explained clearly how the rules were discriminatory. Added to this, the law society said the rules ensured that conferment of senior counsel rank was not arbitrary but there was a standard against which candidates were measured. Explaining why the senior counsel rules were discriminatory, the applicants said all advocates went through the same training before admission but they then specialised in different areas of practice. All the practitioners, in their various areas, should be considered and treated equally when applying for senior counsel status. Why should it be reserved for those involved in court work? If regulations were partial and unequal in the way they operated, they were unreasonable and ultra vires, they argued. Section 17 of the Advocates Act gave the President the right to confer the title of senior counsel to members of the law society of Kenya who showed ‘irreproachable professional conduct’ and who had given ‘exemplary service to the legal and public service’. Associated with this section were special rules explaining who was eligible. One of these rules was that the advocate must have argued a substantive matter in a superior, regional or international court and it was this latter criterion in particular that appeared to have aggrieved the applicants, said Judge Chacha Mwita. The ‘aggrieved’ advocates submitted that while the law opened the way for senior counsel status to be awarded to anyone whose conduct was excellent and who had delivered excellent professional work, the rules wrongly provided that only court work specialists were eligible. This distinction was not made in the law and so it was invalid to restrict conferment only to a certain group. The ‘answer’ seemed to lie in a consideration of the actual privileges conferred by senior counsel status, said the judge. These included having your matter called first, appearing in court wearing special robes, sitting in a part of court specially designated for senior counsel, along with other privileges that the law society decided were appropriate. ‘Simply put, senior counsel will have their cases called out and heard first whenever they appear in court,’ he said. How would the rule be discriminatory when ‘except for those advocates who litigate cases (in) court, the rest would not enjoy any of the privileges in rule 19, even if the rank of senior counsel was conferred on them.’ Then came a comment unlikely to go down well with opponents of the present system: ‘This being a members’ club,’ said the judge, ‘there had to be … reasonable criteria for one to be called to that “Senior Members’ Club.”’ I imagine opponents of the way senior counsel conferments are handled either object to the fact that advocates with senor counsel status behave, in their opinion, as though this was a members-only club or else they are ‘aggrieved’ at being forever kept from membership of this club. For the judge to speak glibly of senior counsel constituting a members’ club will thus rub salt into the wound. In the view of the court, the applicants did not put up convincing reasons to change the present practice. All they had done was to ‘plead inconsistency and leave the matter to the court, merely saying, ‘the rules are inconsistent with section 17 and therefore grant the petition’. No effort was made at all to show how each of the 20 rules … contradicts section 17 of the parent Act for them to be void on account of inconsistency. It is not enough to plead inconsistency or tension between the rules and the Act.’ To succeed, the applicants had to go further and ‘demonstrate how that is so’. They ‘fell short’ of doing so, however. The judge said he came to the ‘irresistible conclusion’ that the petition ‘was not well thought out’, that it was ‘done in a hurry and is unclear’. The petitioners may well be frustrated at losing the case, but their application usefully gives notice to the law society that some of its members are unhappy with the existing situation – and the reasons given by the court for finding against the applicants are such that, in theory at least, a reworked and improved petition on the same issue could be re-launched in the future. Judgment - Carmel Rickard.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ATTORNEY LIST for BELIZE Embassy of the United States of America – Belmopan City, Belize
    ATTORNEY LIST FOR BELIZE Embassy of the United States of America – Belmopan City, Belize Address: 4 Floral Park Road, Belmopan City, Belize Phone: (501) 822 4011 Fax: (501) 822-4050 Duty Officer: (501) 610-5030 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.belize.usembassy.gov The U.S. Embassy Belmopan City, Belize assumes no responsibility or liability for the professional ability or reputation of, or the quality of services provided by, the following persons or firms. Inclusion on this list is in no way an endorsement by the Department of State or the U.S. Embassy Belmopan. Names are listed alphabetically, and the order in which they appear has no other significance. The information in the list on professional credentials, areas of expertise and language ability are provided directly by the lawyers; the Embassy is not in a position to vouch for such information. You may receive additional information about the individuals on the list by contacting the local bar association at 501 223-2030. Name, Address & Contact of Background Areas of Expertise Information of Attorney ARGUELLES, Emil 1993 Marquette University (Milwaukee, WI) - Banking/Financial, Commercial/Business Law, Foreign (Arguelles Company LLC) B.A. Political Science, 1995 University of the Investments, Patents/Trademarks/copyrights, Partner: None West Indies (Barbados & Jamaica) – LLB Law, Intellectual Property, Civil Law, Damages, Collections, Address: Suit 401, The Matalon, 1998 Norman Manley Law School (Jamaica) – Commercial Law, Contracts, Corporations, P.O. Box 1846 CLE. Law, Society of Trust and Estate Aeronautical/Maritime, Foreign Claims, Estates, Taxes, Coney Drive, Belize City, Belize Practitioners (UK-STEP) – TEP, Fluent in English Government Relations, Certified Translator, Court Tel: (501) 223-0858 and Spanish, Serving all locations in Belize Reporter/Stenographer, Notary Public.
    [Show full text]
  • Organisation Mondiale
    ARBITRATION AND MEDIATION CENTER WIPO LIST OF NEUTRALS BIOGRAPHICAL DATA Archibald FINDLAY Chambers Durban South Africa Nationality: South African EDUCATIONAL AND PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS Bachelor of Arts, University of Natal, 1964; Bachelor of Laws, University of Natal, 1967; Master of Laws, University of Natal, 1974; Attorney - Admitted, Supreme Court, 1967; Advocate (Barrister), Appointed, Supreme Court, 1967; Senior Counsel - Appointed, State President, 1981; Called to London Bar (Grays Inn), 1999. LANGUAGES English and Afrikaans PRESENT POSITION Senior advocate (from time to time called upon temporarily to act as a Judge). MEMBERSHIP IN PROFESSIONAL BODIES Chairman, Society of Advocates of Natal, 1995; International Bar Association (IBA); Panelist, Commercial Arbitration & Mediation, Arbitration Foundation of South Africa; Panelist, London Court of International Arbitrations. January 27, 2020 34, chemin des Colombettes, 1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland T +41 22 338 82 47 F +41 22 740 37 00 E [email protected] W www.wipo.int/amc 2 WIPO Profile – A. FINDLAY AREAS OF SPECIALIZATION Intellectual property - copyright, films and videotapes, trademarks; Arbitration - commercial arbitration generally; Commercial litigation. EXPERIENCE IN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Since 1973 has been active as counsel in intellectual property disputes generally, with particular reference to copyright, unfair competition and passing-off. Principally has acted as lead counsel in these matters in litigation, but has on occasion had to draft or settle copyright licensing or assignment contracts and generally to give advice to clients, both in relation to pending litigation in the field of intellectual property, as well as advice in non-litigious circumstances. MAJOR PUBLICATIONS Swift’s Law of Criminal Procedure, 2nd Edition, 1979; Thesis for Master of Laws, Simplification of Proof in Criminal Proceedings.
    [Show full text]
  • [email protected]
    Editor Volume 32, number 3 • December 2019 Franny Rabkin [email protected] Editorial committee Frank Snyckers SC (chair) advocateIphephabhuku labameli basemajajini baseNingizimu Afrika Mushahida Adhikari Johan Brand SC Dzhenala ya dzangano la vhaadivokati vha Afrika Tshipembe Mark Euijen SC Die Suid-Afrikaanse Balietydskrif • The South African Bar Journal Marilena Maddison Kgatisobaka ya boadfokata ya Africa-Borwa Sandhya Mahabeer SC Jenali ya magwetha ya vaavanyisi van Afrika-Dzonga Jean Meiring Lwandile Sisilana Thandisa Tyuthuza Craig Watt-Pringle SC (ex officio – GCB chair) FROM THE EDITOR BAR REPRESENTATIVES once read (on the pages of this very publication, many years Cape: Patrick Mackenzie before I became its editor) an article by Judge Owen Rogers, then Free State: Jacyn Mitchley I Grahamstown: Thomas Miller Rogers SC, about why we should do away with the institution of silk. Johannesburg: Kutlwano Motla It was so well argued that, by the end, I was utterly and KwaZulu-Natal: Carol Sibiya, Sarah Pudifin-Jones and Nooreen Nursoo completely convinced that silk should go. Yet I also knew, utterly Namibia: Esi Chase and completely, that if I were ever to come to bar, I would really, Northern Cape: Albert Eillert really want silk. North West: John Stander Polokwane: Nathi Gaisa I have thought about this a few times over the years, mostly because every Port Elizabeth: Morné Olivier time Rogers J has come before the Judicial Service Commission, he has been Pretoria: John Holland-Müter Mthatha: Vusi Msiwa grilled, sometimes unfairly and a bit aggressively, about his views on this score – invariably by one or other of the silks sitting on the commission at the time.
    [Show full text]
  • Senior Counsel Protocol Essential
    SENIOR COUNSEL PROTOCOL The principles governing the selection, and appointment, of those to be designated as Senior Counsel by the President of the Bar Association are as follows: 1. The designation as Senior Counsel of certain practising barristers by the President of the Bar Association, in accordance with the following principles and under the following system, is intended to serve the public interest. 2. The designation of Senior Counsel provides a public identification of barristers whose standing and achievements justify an expectation, on the part of those who may need their services, as well as on the part of the judiciary and the public, that they can provide outstanding services as independent barristers of the private bar, for the good of the administration of justice. 3. Appointment as Senior Counsel should be restricted to Local Practising Barristers, Ordinary Members Class A, with acknowledgment of the importance of the work performed by way of giving advice as well as appearing in or sitting on courts and other tribunals and conducting or appearing in alternative dispute resolution, including arbitrations and mediations. ESSENTIAL CRITERIA 4. The system for the designation of Senior Counsel must be administered so as to restrict appointment to those counsel whose achievement of the qualities set out below displays, and foreshadows their ability to provide exceptional service as advocates and advisers in the administration of justice. 5. The qualities required to a high degree before appointment as Senior Counsel are: 1 a. learning: Senior Counsel must be learned in the law so as to provide sound guidance to their clients and to assist in the judicial interpretation and development of the law.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Members of the Commonwealth Secretariat Arbitral Tribunal
    Current members of the Commonwealth Secretariat Arbitral Tribunal Mr Arthur Faerua (Vanuatu), member, 1 June 2012 - 31/5/2016; 1/6/2016 Education 2010, University of South Pacific, Emalus Campus, Vanuatu Vanuatu mediation Practise Course • Skills in Conducting Mediation and Dispute Resolution • Certified by Supreme Court Vanuatu as an accredited Mediator 2004, University of South Pacific, Emalus Campus, Vanuatu Graduate Certificate in Tertiary Teaching (GCTT) • Skills in Delivery and Learning in a tertiary environment • Student-Oriented Learning for Pacific students 1997 – 1998, University of Waikato, New Zealand Masters of Law (LLM) • International Trade Law • Focus on Pacific Constitutions and economic development September - December 1996, University of Waikato, New Zealand Professional Legal Studies Admission as Barrister & Solicitor in the High Court of New Zealand 1992-1995, University of Waikato, New Zealand Bachelor of Laws (LLB) International Trade & Commercial Law Short-Term Trainings & Instructionals November 2008, Commodities Branch, Division on International Trade in Good and Services & Commodities, UNCTAD & Vanuatu National Codex Committee 1 National Capacity Building Workshop on Commodities- related Trade and Development, Poverty Reduction, Food Safety Standards and Quality Requirements, and Food Laws and Technical Regulations Trade & Food Safety Standards March 2005, WHO/FAO Training Course on the Management of Codex Contact Point and the National Codex System Capacity Building in Codex, Food Regulation and International
    [Show full text]
  • Irish Law Journals and the Emergence of the Irish State, 1916–22 Thomas Mohr
    Irish Law Journals and the Emergence of the Irish State, 1916–22 Thomas Mohr Journal of European Periodical Studies, 3.1 (Summer 2018) ISSN 2506-6587 Content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Licence The Journal of European Periodical Studies is hosted by Ghent University Website: ojs.ugent.be/jeps To cite this article: ‘Irish Law Journals and the Emergence of the Irish State, 1916–22’, Journal of European Periodical Studies, 3.1 (Summer 2018), 29–48 Irish Law Journals and the Emergence of the Irish State, 1916–22 Thomas Mohr University College Dublin [email protected] ABSTRACT This article assesses the value of Irish law journals as historical sources for the transition between 1916 and 1922 that saw most of the island of Ireland leave the United Kingdom. It presents these law journals as sources that have not always received the attention that they deserve from historians and political scientists. The article also uses these sources to examine the response of the Irish legal professions to the six years of revolution and upheaval. This response is interesting because the legal professions and their journals spanned the traditional nationalist/unionist divide in Irish politics. The most important source is a journal called the Irish Law Times and Solicitors’ Journal (now known as simply the Irish Law Times) although other journals of lesser significance are also considered. KEYWORDS Law journal; Irish Law Times; legal professions; 1916 rising; civil war; 1921 Treaty; partition; Irish Free State; Northern Ireland 29 Irish Law Journals and the Emergence of the Irish State, 1916–22 Introduction The purpose of this article is to assess the value of law journals as sources for a critical period of transition in modern Irish history.
    [Show full text]
  • Senior Counsel Protocol Essential Criteria
    SENIOR COUNSEL PROTOCOL The principles governing the selection, and appointment, of those to be designated as Senior Counsel by the President of the Bar Association are as follows: 1. The designation as Senior Counsel of certain practising barristers by the President of the Bar Association, in accordance with the following principles and under the following system, is intended to serve the public interest in the administration of justice in the ACT. 2. The designation of Senior Counsel provides a public identification of barristers whose standing and achievements justify an expectation, on the part of those who may need their services, as well as on the part of the judiciary and the public, that they provide outstanding services as independent barristers. 3. Appointment as Senior Counsel should be restricted to Local Practising Barristers, Ordinary Members Class A, with acknowledgment of the importance of the work performed by way of giving advice as well as appearing in or sitting on courts and other tribunals and conducting or appearing in alternative dispute resolution processes, including arbitrations and mediations. ESSENTIAL CRITERIA 4. The system for the designation of Senior Counsel must be administered so as to restrict appointment to those counsel whose achievement of the qualities set out below displays, and foreshadows, their ability to provide exceptional service as advocates and advisers in the administration of justice. 5. The qualities required to a high degree before appointment as Senior Counsel are: a. learning: Senior Counsel must be learned in the law so as to provide sound guidance to their clients and to assist in the judicial interpretation, application, and development of the law.
    [Show full text]
  • The Institution of Senior Counsel
    The Institution of Senior Counsel Those appointed Senior Counsel in and for the State of Victoria join a tradition which traces its roots back to the reign of Elizabeth 1, who in 1597 bestowed on Sir Francis Bacon the title “Queen’s Counsel Extraordinary” (without letters patent) giving him precedence at the Bar over the Serjeants1. In 1604 James I granted Bacon a patent of appointment. James I appointed another King’s Counsel, Charles I appointed nine and Charles II appointed thirty- one2. The creation of the office of King’s Counsel facilitated the development of the common law through the provision of representation of the very highest order in both the King’s courts and in the Court of Common Pleas as the reach of those courts extended throughout England and Wales. There was a presumption that when in court King’s Counsel were engaged for the Crown, so they were accorded rights of pre-audience and in 1670 professional precedence over the Serjeants3. This was the beginning of the rise of the office of King’s Counsel as the most able lawyers called upon to lead the growing profession sought silk rather than the coif4. In appointing an average of nine King’s Counsel a year William IV institutionalized the office. Following William IV’s death in 1837, the recognition of the most able barristers as leaders of their profession by appointment as Queen’s Counsel was confirmed by Queen Victoria, who elevated approximately 12 barristers per year to that rank. This growth in the numbers of Queen’s Counsel ended the rule that only Serjeants be appointed judges of the Court of Common Pleas.
    [Show full text]
  • Role of Senior Advocate and Restriction Imposed on Them Under Advocate Act, 1961
    ISSN 2455-4782 ROLE OF SENIOR ADVOCATE AND RESTRICTION IMPOSED ON THEM UNDER ADVOCATE ACT, 1961 Authored by: Vaibhavi Chaturvedi* * BBA. L.L.B (H) 9th SEM ABSTRACT An elite rule India's courts. It wears extravagant robes and bills premium expenses. In any case, disputants want it, junior legal advisors endure it, and judges regard it. It is the rule of Senior Advocates. That elite rule shall continue, India's Supreme Court recently decided. But key changes are taking place as presently, advocates seeking to a raised status have an open, systematic way to it as mentioned in the advocate act as well as Supreme Court rules. This research analyzes a thriving group of elite litigators that we call "senior advocates", who practice under the watchful eye of the Indian Supreme Court and high courts. In the Indian legal system, the engulf judges decided with little help, the multiplicity of precedent, and by the centrality of oral presentation, the aptitudes and the reputational capital of these lawyers empowers them to play a focal, rewarding, and remarkable job. Indeed, it is often the senior advocate as much as the judges who lead and propel forward the Indian judiciary system. The research focuses on the journey of senior advocate from the British era as the barrister until the present time as the senior advocate defines under sec. 16 of advocate act, 1961. Keywords: Elite rule, Extravagant robes, Premium expenses, and senior advocate.. 13 | P a g e JOURNAL ON CONTEMPORARY ISSUES OF LAW [JCIL] VOLUME 5 ISSUE 10 ISSN 2455-4782 INTRODUCTION An observer of the lawful scene in contemporary India rapidly ends up mindful of the nearness of a stratum of legitimate hotshots—advocates based at the Supreme Court and in the High Courts who are especially sought after and broadly known.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court Action No. 88 of 2020 – Tracy Ann Nicholas
    SUPREME COURT OF BELIZE A.D., 2020 ACTION NO.: 88 OF 2020 (TRACY ANN NICHOLAS_HANSON APPLICANT ( BETWEEN ( AND ( (GEORGE HERBERT HANSON RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE SONYA YOUNG Decision Date: 18th February, 2021 Appearances: Mrs. Robertha Magnus- Usher, Counsel for Petitioner/Respondent Ms. Darinka Munoz, Counsel for Respondent/Applicant KEYWORDS: Matrimonial - Divorce - Procedure - Leave to File Rejoinder - Is the Absence of a Rejoinder an Admission to Matters in Reply - Leave After Pleadings Closed - Is a Rejoinder Necessary - New and Important Matters in Reply. DECISION [1.] This decision concerns an Application for leave to file a rejoinder in divorce proceedings. The Petitioner, by her petition, sought a divorce on the ground of Page 1 of 17 adultery and also asked for custody of and maintenance for the child. As far as allegations go, it stated at paragraph 7 and 8: “7. That since the celebration of the marriage the Respondent has committed Adultery with several women including SHIRLEY ELIZABETH JACOBS who resides in Punta Gorda Town, Toledo District, Belize. 8. That on 28th day of March, 2019 the Respondent moved out of the matrimonial home, (without informing the Petitioner) taking his personal belongings and since that date the parties have not lived together as husband and wife.” [2.] The Respondent's answer was not a bare denial of the charge. It comprised three (3) pages and discussed the Petitioner’s behavior, his own behavior, their employment history, marriage counseling sessions they attended, his relationship with their daughter and his eventual departure from their matrimonial home on the 28th March, 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • Sg in the North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria (Republic of South Africa)
    /SG IN THE NORTH GAUTENG HIGH COURT, PRETORIA (REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA) DATE: 09 FEBRUARY 2012 CASE NO: 20879/2011 DELETE WHICHEVER IS NOT APPLICABLE (1} REPORTABLE: YES/^f (2) OF INTEREST TO OTHERS JUDGES: Yg^/NO (3) REVISED 12 BATE' In the matter between: URMILLA ROSHNEE DEVI MAN SINGH Applicant AND PRESIDENT OF REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA First Respondent MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT Second Respondent GENERAL COUNCIL OF THE BAR OF SOUTH AFRICA Third Respondent JOHANNESBURG SOCIETY OF ADVOCATES Fourth Respondent INDEPENDENT ASSOCIATION OF ADVOCATES OF SOUTH AFRICA Fifth Respondent LAW SOCIETY OF SOUTH AFRICA Sixth Respondent JUDGMENT PHATUD1, J INTRODUCTION [1] The applicant, an admitted practising advocate and a member of the Johannesburg Society of Advocates (JSA) seeks an order 'declaring that the first respondent has no power in terms of [section] 84(2)(k) of the Constitution [of the Republic of South Africa (Act 108 of 1996)] or otherwise to confer the status of senior counsel on practising advocates ...''The applicant further seeks 'costs against the President (first respondent) and the Minister (second respondent) only She does not 'regard it appropriate to seek costs against the professional bodies cited as other respondents2 in this application, even if they should choose to oppose the application.' 3 1 Notice of Motion page 2 2 The third - sixth respondents 3 FA para 11 pay 10 3 [2] All respondents, save the sixth, oppose the application. The sixth respondent (LSSA) places on recorded their attitude towards the issue of senior counsel status which is a kernnel of this application.
    [Show full text]
  • The Transition from Queen's Counsel to Senior Counsel
    "Learned in the Law" - The Transition from Queen's Counsel to Senior Counsel Between November 1992 and November 1993 the New South Wales Bar developed its own system of recognising eminent counsel from among its junior ranks to be acknowledged as worthy of appointment to the Inner Bar following the demise of the system whereby the Governor, on the advice of the Executive Council, appointed Queen's Counsel in and for the State ofNew South Wales. This change was brought about by the decision of the New South Wales Government in late 1992 that the Executive Council would no longer participate in a system of appointment Queen's Counsel. In this article Ruth McColl traces the steps which led to the evolution of the new system. "Greetings - less than 10 years' standing at the Bar, tender to the We, confiding in your knowledge, experience, prudence, Attorney-General all available information as to the ability and integrity do, with the advice of the Executive professional qualities and eminence of such applicant. 116 Council of our Colony of New South Wales by these presents nominate, constitute and appoint you the said John Fletcher By the time of the decision by the Government in Hargrave to be one of Our Counsel learned in the law for Our November 1992 that the Executive Council would no longer said Colony for and during Our pleasure to take rank precedence participate in the appointment of Queen's Counsel, the latter and preaudience in all Our Courts of Justice next after Alfred rule had been further modified so that the range of people who James Peter Leetwyche Esquire and you are to discharge the the President of the Council consulted included not only trust hereby reposed in you with a due respect to all Our rights Councillors but a wide variety of members of the Bar and and prerogatives and the good of Our Subjects according to Judges of the Federal Court, the Family Court, the Supreme law -" and District Courts in New South Wales as well as the Magistrates sitting in the Local Courts.
    [Show full text]