Tag: advocacy

Civil Advocacy – Making Applications

Posted on by T. Maxwell-Harrison

Making applications to the civil courts has been the staple of advocacy training within my civil skills units. I have also managed an application or two in criminal law but nowhere near the level of civil. Welcome to my journey into law page and thanks for stopping to read this post.

Today was a civil skills session involving the application for something known as a Norwich Pharmacal order, the name of which is derived from the case of Norwich Pharmacal Co v Customs and Excise Commissioners (1974) AC 133. To those unfamiliar with how to read such a case title, you have the year of judgment in brackets, AC means the case was heard in the Court of Appeal and is number 133.

The Norwich Pharmacal Order, herein referred to as “the order”, is used by an applicant when they want a party to disclose the name or details of another party or of a document. Such relief could be needed where the applicant is seeking the correct party to sue where they do not know their details. Mitsui & Co Ltd v Nexen Petroleum UK Ltd (2005) EWHC 625 (Ch); (2005) 3 All E.R 511 ChD at (21) summarised the three pre-requisites of the order. I won’t go into that test here, but might refer to it.

Other applications made in civil advocacy sessions include, *application to set aside default judgment, application for interim application, today application for the Norwich Pharmacal. I may have missed out one or two but they are the ones completed which I can recall. All of them seemed daunting but in reality I performed better than anticipated. In fact the civil advocacy unit has been a strong point for me. Today the students I was with (online still, remember?) and I were told that we were all very competent. This is quite the achievement. Grading is from competent to outstanding so to be in the middle, knowing what I am doing is really rewarding and I know that my work is correct.

Civil advocacy takes place in civil courts, like the County Court, the High Court and Court of Appeal. Such applications are the bread and butter of newer barristers and I suspect most students will be well versed in them by now. Next week is the civil advocacy mock assessment. In fact next week is rather busy with mock assessments. My aim is to just take it slow and prepare as much as I have been doing, if not more.

The Civil Procedure Rules (“The White Book”) is what is used by civil barristers and students. It allows them to follow the legal rules for making applications to the court, such as whether they can bring such an application, the surrounding tests and the required case law, if required. There is also the need to research case law using other sources, but the information is readily available from one, which is a bonus. Given that we were all very competent today, I am sure that there is nothing to worry about and that I will pass my mock assessment. The only issue is that we cannot possibly know what the assessment will be on, only that we have some time to prepare for it in advance!

I can see why people get confused about the legal system, and I am studying it in considerable depth and some of it is still quite muddling to myself. Granted, there are some lovely online students and the civil advocacy tutor (online) has been great. I will have to go back to campus soon though because otherwise I will feel like I am letting myself down and there really is no better practice than face to face.

I hope you understand more about a civil application to the court. To summarise, a barrister / advocate can make an application to the court on behalf of the Applicant, not always the claimant but can be, which requires the court to consider it in line with the appropriate CPR rules.

Criminal advocacy 101

Posted on by T. Maxwell-Harrison

Journey into law.

The continuing quest to enter the profession of the noble and historic barrister. I’ve been blessed to be able to sit in this warm apartment with my heating. I am blessed to be able to buy ready made meals, drinks and ‘accessories’ on will. Not everyone has those blessings or opportunities. A significant population of the world does not have access to clean water, nor do they get 3 meals a day… they may go hungry for days because they can’t afford food or there simply isn’t any available. Many live in unsanitary conditions and have to live in shacks. They are at the knife point of various drug and trafficking gangs and a lot will be killed before they reach their 20th birthday.

When you conjure up an image of justice in your mind, do you automatically picture a 1st world country court? Perhaps you envision a revolution, a crown court trial, a mother receiving restitution for the wrongly gained, or a child being reunited with their lost parents. Subjective, arguably, is the perception of justice. Not so fast, you see there is a definition and it goes like this ( according to – https://www.thefreedictionary.com/justice):

1) The quality of being just; fairness: in the interest of justice, we should treat everyone the same

2.a.) The principle of moral rightness; decency. b) Conformity to moral rightness in action or attitude; righteousness: argues for the justice of his cause.

3.a) The attainment of what is just, especially that which is fair, moral, right, merited, or in accordance with law: my client has not received justice in this hearing.

So we seek to maintain a just, fair society which is morally correct and any breach of that is to treat people differently and to breach the law. Of course, nowadays treating people differently has indeed become a criminal offence in some cases. You couldn’t now in the 21st century get away with homophobic or racist remarks. But, merely 50 years ago and indeed not even that long, people were saying these things more often. I personally don’t think there has been much of a change, but there is the fear now that one is breaching the law if they were to make such a ‘remark.’ Civilised society has become a bubble wrapped and tightly controlled arena, with the big cats with the money influencing huge policy makers and government. Private investment into new technologies and advertising has seen the general population brainwashed by morality propaganda. I’m not justifying those racist or homophobic remarks, or anything else that would breach protected characteristics according to the Equality Act 2010. Some of those include age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage or civil partnership and pregnancy or maternity. But, rather, I am saying that morality doesn’t need to be enforced, it is learned and one can choose to obey or not to obey. The latter will see you (if caught) being persecuted by the state or private corporation. The former will also do the same, rendering you a slave to the idea that somehow those individuals are ‘targeted’ and ‘victims.’ If you cry wolf that doesn’t mean you care what happens to the victims.

Trying to control what people think and telling them how to behave is a sure fire way to provoke even the most docile of humans. Why? Because we have autonomy and freedom of thought. You can tell a group not to discuss the elephant in the room, but at the end of the day, it’s there and they will discuss it. Criminal justice has been spiraling downwards for a number of years. Legal aid cuts, fewer pupillage spaces and a general lack of money at the bar drives people away from this extremely tiring job. Criminal barristers spend more time working than they are paid for. If society wants a just and accepting place for all, then instead of stoking the fires of inequality, hatred and fear, instead focus on improving the structure already in place and provide Just and moral outcomes within the criminal justice system, adjust the propaganda machine accordingly. We don’t want people in prison based on their opinions of society, we want people to be able to live freely and without fear.

Thanks for reading. Namaste and peace be with you.