Nearly half say they’d quit current role to join a more forward-thinking firm
More than half of lawyers believe “stuffy office traditions” such as strict dress code policies and unnecessarily long meetings need to be ditched by their firms, according to new research.
The research, produced by online job website CV-Library, found that 60% of lawyers are in favour of dropping “outdated” office customs, while almost half (41.4%) claim they’d quit their current role to join a “more modern” firm if it failed to address the problems.
According to researchers, the most hated office tradition among lawyers are the standardised “9-5 working hours” (56.3%), followed by “professional dress codes” (45.7%) and “long meetings” (33.3%). Other office issues flagged by the 120 respondents were “having to work in the office every day” (31.1%), “annual performance reviews” (26.7%), “providing office snacks on your birthday” (23.4%) and set workspaces (19.2%).
“It’s no surprise that the 9-5 working day is viewed as the most outdated tradition. Flexible working in lieu of these traditional working hours is a particularly hot topic right now and is something that candidates should seriously consider when searching for work.”
While 72% of lawyers feel firms need to re-think office traditions, researchers found that just one in five (20.4%) believe it’s up to their bosses to decide if they want to hold onto them or not. Rounding off the list of office norms is “having to call in when sick (instead of texting or emailing)” (15.9%), followed by “employee opinion surveys” (13.6%) and “employee of the month schemes” (11.4%).
Ropes & Gray has become the latest law firm to bump junior lawyer pay, confirming today that salaries for its newly qualified (NQ) associates in London now sit at £120,000 — a rise of 4%.
Previously on £115,000, Legal Cheek’sFirm’s Most List 2019 shows Ropes & Gray’s NQs are now on a pay par with those at fellow US outfits Cleary Gottlieb, Davis Polk and Sidley Austin. The Boston-headquartered outfit confirmed associates may also receive a bonus on top of this hefty six-figure sum.
As things stand, trainee pay sits at £46,000 in year one, rising to £50,000 in year two.
Meanwhile, Ropes & Gray confirmed that it will retain two out of three (67%) of its London trainees, who are due to qualify next month. They will join the firm’s private equity transactions and asset management practices. The firm, which takes on around seven trainees each year, retained 100% of its London rookies (six out of six) last autumn.
Rohan Massey, London training principal partner, said: “We’re proud of our trainee programme, as we are of our highly talented trainees… [They] join a firm that is committed to supporting the development of its lawyers throughout their careers and has a strong track record of promoting its best lawyers to partner.”
Turning to the firm’s performance in our Trainee and Junior Lawyer Survey 2018-19, it notched up A*s for quality of work, partner approachability, perks and office, as well as As for training, peer support, tech and social life.
As we reported last year, the 11-office outfit launched a hybrid trainee recruitment process in a bid to attract top graduate talent irrespective of their background. This sees the firm use elements of two distinct hiring tools, contextual recruitment and CV blind, to create a new ‘best of both’ approach.
A rundown of the corporate outfits leaving rookies hungry for more
They say ‘you are what you eat’ — so in the case of hardworking corporate lawyers, it’s hoped their diets consist of well-rounded, nutritious dishes. But which law firms are keeping their lawyers happy, not hungry?
Legal Cheek asked over 2,000 trainees and junior lawyers to rate their office canteen on a one to ten sliding scale, with one defined as ‘Thank God for Deliveroo’ and ten as ‘The sommelier really knows his stuff’. Today we exclusively reveal which top UK corporate law firms are deemed a fine dining experience.
In alphabetical order, the firms which scooped A* grades are…
Addleshaw Goddard
@emmaklieve (Instagram)
This firm’s A* rated canteen is praised for its “fresh and homemade” offerings and its “incredibly friendly staff”. According to one trainee, it’s “one of the best things” about working at Addleshaw Goddard.
In the Manchester office, trainees can enjoy pancakes every Thursday morning — a “particular favourite,” one rookie tells us. Come lunchtime, lawyers are overwhelmed with choice. For those feeling healthy, “fancy salads” and “daily vegetarian options” are available. Otherwise, associates can tuck into a cheeky portion of “cheesy chips” or skip straight to dessert. We’re also told the firm’s cookies are sublime.
Its subsidised canteens mean AG’s lawyers get more bang for their buck. One respondent reveals, “you can often get a nice hot meal and a drink for under 5 quid”, however, the “portion sizes” can be on the small side.
Offering panoramic views of the City, Bird & Bird’s 11th-floor canteen allows its lawyers to dine in style.
Lawyers can enjoy smooth barista-made coffee (free of course), along with an excellent selection of cooked and non-cooked breakfasts. There’s also a good range of salads and vegetarian food, one spy tells us.
Despite one respondent claiming the canteen is becoming “a bit stingy on portions,” most rated it “generally good”, meaning there’s little reason for Bird & Bird’s lawyers to fly the nest in search of alternatives.
Over in Bristol, Burges Salmon’s on-site restaurant, Glassworks, enjoys heavenly reviews, with one trainee calling it a “god send”.
It serves up a range of hot and cold food throughout the day — all for a reasonable price, one insider explains. “Food is really up to scratch and very tasty”, adds another, with props to the “incredz” chefs who “really go out of their way to make something special”. The firm’s “particularly good cakes” also get a mention.
Despite this, one hungry rookie suggests there can be a “lack of options” in the evening, while another says “it would be better if there was discounted food” after a certain time.
Still, the canteen appears to be Bristol’s next romantic getaway, as one respondent admits: “I would take dates there if I could sneak them through security”.
Clyde & Co’s impressive top floor canteen offers “beautiful” views of the City, insiders tell us.
The firm’s London canteen boasts a “good variety of food”, ranging from “decent to excellent”, and a menu that “changes regularly”. The “amazing pastry chef” gets a special mention, as does the “fun themed days where they bring in street food vendors or have MASSIVE MILKSHAKES”. Apparently the “cake counter is also worth a visit”.
Prices are “getting more expensive”, one associate says, but overall costs are “reasonable” and “good value for money”.
One respondent is disappointed with the 5pm closing time, which “although reflective of most of the firms”, is not much help for those working late. But for those staying for a nightcap, the canteen converts into an exclusive bar at night. Here lawyers can grab a free beer every other Thursday and join the firm’s monthly social, Clyde & Cocktails.
Gowling WLG’s canteen gets a big thumbs-up from its trainees, especially at the firm’s Birmingham HQ.
Even with an extensive menu, it’s the firm’s classic cuisines that our sources rave about. We hear the “legendary” Mars bar cake is worth a try, while a visit to the “particularly impressive” omelette bar is simply a must.
The only criticism of the canteen was its early closing time of 4pm, which according to one lawyer leaves those working later without their evening supper. That aside, this “great” canteen seems well worth a visit.
The canteen at Jones Day’s London office is held in high regard among its lawyer ranks, with one trainee describing it as “consistently good”.
“Breakfast, lunch and dinner are all superb”, with the friendly café staff receiving a special mention. There is also a range of healthy “vegetarian options” on offer, too.
The Ohio-headquartered outfit also treats its London lot to “steaks cooked to order for dinner” — giving lawyers a taste of Midwest American cuisine. As one respondent says: “Turns out corporate hours do have an upside!”. For those hitting the firm’s on-site gym, on-demand steaks act as an ideal post-workout snack.
Having 46 offices in 18 countries is not the only thing K&L Gates can boast about. It also bagged an A* for its London canteen.
“Great food, great variety and great value” is how one trainee describes the US law firm’s cafeteria. Despite the “odd unusual experimental dish”, the K&L Gates’ lawyers appreciate the subsidised prices and look forward to the delicious bacon sandwiches served on Fridays.
Boasting a private terrace overlooking St Paul’s Cathedral, lawyers enjoy impressive views, too, with summer lunches being a particular treat.
Despite its jaw-dropping newly qualified salaries of £143,000, Kirkland & Ellis‘ associates still enjoy a heavily subsidised canteen which provides, according to one trainee, “decent food”.
Located in London’s iconic skyscraper, the Gherkin, the firm’s cafeteria reportedly offers a “good range of options” for lunch and dinner, while the Thursday night buffets are understood to be a big hit. Kirkland takes care of its lawyers who are working late, too, by covering £25 expenditure on their Deliveroo orders. This makes those evenings in the office a whole lot easier, one insider reports.
Bellies full, Kikrland’s lawyers are just a short elevator ride to Iris, the swanky bar at the very top of the Gherkin which offers 360-degree views of the City.
Magic circle giant Linklaters keeps its lawyers coming back for more with its cuisine which apparently “never fails” to satisfy.
The firm’s in-house restaurant, Silks, scores rave reviews for its “cheap”, but “exceptional” food cooked by “Michelin star” worthy chefs. Our survey spies love the “great vegan experimentation”, as well as the “wide variety of food stations, cuisines and seasonal themes”. See the selection for yourself on the canteen’s very own Instagram account.
Although open 24/7, a couple of spies note the “limited dinner options” that they say are “leftovers” from the day. By comparison, one respondent confesses to having “no complaints — even after 3 meals a day”. Overall, it seems Links’ lawyers won’t be turning down this “good quality” food any time soon.
Rounding off the list of nominees is international firm Taylor Wessing. One source tells us the firm’s A* canteen dishes out a range of “superb” hot and cold food.
Offering super-cool views across legal London, especially from the firm’s “stunning” terrace area, generous subsidies mean that the grub is “really good value”, another spy tells us. The canteen also appeals to those burning the midnight oil — with those working late able to enjoy free meals after 8pm.
The firm with the best canteen will be announced at the Legal Cheek Awards 2019 on 21 March at the Cheesegrater in London.
Peruse all of the firms’ new 2018-19 survey scorecards — including training, quality of work, perks and much more — via the Legal Cheek Firms Most List 2018-19.
Darren Grimes, 25, is appealing fine for breaking electoral law in EU referendum
Darren Grimes (Channel 4 News)
A former University of Brighton fashion student has raised over £75,000 to appeal against a fine for breaking electoral law during the EU referendum. Darren Grimes says that he needs the crowdfunding cash to battle it out with the Electoral Commission, which has instructed Fieldfisher and top QC Sir James Eadie.
Grimes, now 25, ran a pro-Brexit social media campaign aimed at young voters during the 2016 vote. But he found himself in hot water after spending hundreds of thousands of pounds in breach of spending limits and without declaring it properly, and hit with a personal £20,000 fine. The Electoral Commission also referred Grimes to the police to investigate possible criminal offences.
In a video posted on Twitter yesterday, Grimes accused the regulator of “spending vast sums on City solicitors and the government’s own QC” in defence of its ruling.
The Electoral Commission confirmed to Legal Cheek that it has engaged international outfit Fieldfisher and Eadie of Blackstone Chambers, saying that “we are obliged to ensure we have representation that can defend the decision-making process that we undertook”. It denied Grimes’s claim that the Government Legal Department is picking up the tab.
Discussing with my solicitor the very real possibility of bankruptcy, at 25, thanks to the Electoral Commission spending vast sums on city solicitors and the Government's own QC – all paid for by the taxpayer. I feel like a beetle under a very large boot.https://t.co/OZY8N7cUk0pic.twitter.com/yUIQHJw0Ie
In his pitch for funding, Grimes complains that “the Commission will have the top QC in the land, will have the top solicitors in the land, and all paid for by you [the taxpayer]”. The ex-fashion and business student now works for the right-wing Institute of Economic Affairs think tank.
The Electoral Commission initially cleared Grimes and other Brexit campaigners over their referendum spending, but re-opened its investigation following media allegations and the threat of legal action. In July 2018, it reported that the official Vote Leave campaign had funnelled money for social media ads through Grimes’s BeLeave organisation in breach of electoral law:
“BeLeave spent more than £675,000 with Aggregate IQ under a common plan with Vote Leave. This spending should have been declared by Vote Leave. It means Vote Leave exceeded its legal spending limit of £7 million by almost £500,000.”
Grimes was found guilty of two breaches of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 and fined £20,000. A crowdfunding campaign to fund an appeal has raised nearly £77,000 to date. The appeal, in the London County Court, is currently scheduled for July 2019.
In a separate High Court case, the Electoral Commission was found to have misunderstood the electoral rules when it initially cleared Grimes and Vote Leave. That litigation was also powered by crowdfunding, with the Good Law Project paying £70,000 to Jessica Simor QC for her work on the case. The Good Law Project confirmed on Tuesday that this case is also set for an appeal hearing in July.
JLD pens open letter to regulator in wake of controversial whistleblower decision
The Junior Lawyers Division (JLD) has called on the regulator to do more to protect “vulnerable” trainees and junior solicitors from “toxic and uncaring” working environments.
In an open letter to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), the JLD expressed deep concerns that rookie lawyers were not being afforded the relevant levels of protection under the regulator’s current approach.
The letter, published yesterday, goes on to cite two recent high-profile rulings by the High Court and Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT).
Sovani James, a former junior solicitor at national law firm McMillan Williams, was suspended last year for forging legal documents in a bid to show that a client’s case was progressing. The regulator appealed the decision to the High Court and she was struck off, despite the original tribunal hearing claims that the “toxic and uncaring” firm had adopted a “sudden focus on financial return on employees” and an “aggressive implementation” of billing targets.
The second, and more recent case involved Emily Scott, a trainee solicitor who last month was struck off after she was found to have acted dishonestly in matters concerning client funds. The heavy sanction came despite the fact that Scott was the one to bring the misconduct at the firm to the SRA’s attention. Moreover, the tribunal acknowledged she’d been “deceived, pressured, bullied and manipulated” by a senior lawyer at her former firm.
On this, the JLD said: “In the case of Ms Scott, our concerns have been realised and we therefore now ask the SRA to confirm what protections are afforded to trainee solicitors and junior solicitors who whistleblow in circumstances whereby they may have been pressured into being complicit in actions that breach the SRA Code of Conduct.”
Urging the regulator to take action against law firms that fail to provide “healthy working environments” for young lawyers, the letter continued:
“We would also point out that the sanctions such as the case of Ms James and Ms Scott are likely to deter individuals, particularly junior lawyers who are the most vulnerable in our profession, to disclose wrongdoing, (either by their employer or by themselves) for fear they will be struck off, landed with a heavy costs order and receive negative publicity.”
Junior Lawyer Division committee member, Kayleigh Leonie, will be speaking at the mental health and wellbeing panel session during this year’s Legal Cheek Future of Legal Education and Training Conference on Wednesday 22 May at Kings Place London. Tickets (first release) are available to purchase at the rate of £240 + VAT.
Mayer Brown solicitor apprentice Chris Howes reveals the pros and cons of taking an alternative path to practice
Chris Howes
Former Prime Minister David Cameron said in a speech in March 2013, “There’s no better way to back people’s aspirations than to invest in apprenticeships, to invest in the skills that can make a difference to your careers.”
I began my apprenticeship in September 2018, and am currently five months into the six-year programme. However, my own route into law was relatively unconventional. Since the age of around 14, I wanted to join the Royal Air Force as an intelligence officer and, in September 2017, it seemed as though my dreams had come true, when I was offered a place to begin officer training. You can imagine my dejection when an unfortunate situation in my personal life led to me having to voluntarily withdraw from the RAF and reconsider my future.
Law had always been an area of interest for me, so I looked for work experience opportunities in my local area and was subsequently offered a marketing executive/paralegal job.
In that role I really started to develop a passion for law, and began to look at ways in which I could qualify as a solicitor. At this time, the traditional university route was the only method of qualification that I’d heard of and, having to support both myself and my partner financially, the idea of not being able to work full-time worried me. However, as I researched potential university courses I came across the solicitor apprenticeship programme. It seemed to be the perfect programme for someone in my situation and my applications led to me being taken on at Mayer Brown.
The apprenticeship programme was a great match for the circumstances that I found myself in. But would it be suitable for everyone? Looking at the advantages and disadvantages of the apprenticeship programme will hopefully provide some clarity on the matter.
Advantages
No student debt
Perhaps one of the most obvious advantages — the Apprenticeship Levy means that all of an apprentices tuition fees — including the cost of the qualifying law degree (LLB) and Legal Practice Course (LPC) — are paid for. This is a massive advantage of the apprenticeship route, as I’ll gain a degree, just as someone undertaking the traditional route would, but won’t have the debt that usually comes with it. This could improve access to the profession by appealing to those who are put off by the cost of university tuition.
Earn while you learn
Apprentices are paid throughout their time on the programme and, while the exact amount varies from firm-to-firm, it’s usually very competitive. As in my case, not everyone can afford the financial uncertainty of not having a full time job while at university, which is why an apprenticeship provides a fantastic bridge to profession. It removes the finance barrier.
Five months in, six years sounds like a big commitment! However, when you consider that students taking the traditional route would have to complete a three year LLB, spend another year undertaking the LPC and a further two doing the training contract, you realise that the two routes have very similar timeframes. The main difference is those undertaking the traditional route start their working career at a practice when they start their training contract, whereas we begin working in a law firm on day one! This gives apprentices a wealth of experience of working in different practice areas. In addition to this, the contacts and connections that apprentices will make within their own firm and the wider legal world during the six years, could prove to be invaluable for future opportunities.
Disadvantages
Time management
Working and studying at the same time means that it can sometimes be difficult to fit in much else! The apprenticeship route is very full on, with many hours spent studying outside of working hours. With this in mind, it can sometimes be difficult to balance work with, studying, spending time with loved ones and participating in any hobbies. I for one, have definitely had to cut back on the things that I do in my spare time since starting the apprenticeship!
Missing out on the ‘university experience’
Doing a legal apprenticeship could mean missing out on the experience of going to university full-time. To bridge this gap, consider the activities that you have access to locally or those offered by the firm itself. There are a number of socials organised at Mayer Brown, as is doubtlessly the case at other firms. That said, the intense nature of the apprenticeship programme will limit how much time you have to spend on extra-curricular activities.
Shorter holidays
The university terms for legal apprentices run from September to September, and there’s very little let up in between! Don’t expect the 12-week summer holidays that university students get. Twenty-five days holiday is generally standard as an apprentice.
Like anything, solicitor apprenticeships won’t be for everyone — they are an alternative. The best thing for a would-be solicitor to do is look at the pros and cons and evaluate which route would be best for them personally. The emergence of a second route to qualification can only be a good thing. With any luck it’ll help to strip away any remaining entrance barriers to the profession to ensure that anyone with the drive and desire to succeed can pursue a career in the law.
Chris Howes is the fourth legal apprentice to be taken on by Mayer Brown, and the first ever under the new ‘trailblazer’ scheme.
Magic circle outfit Clifford Chance has confirmed its spring 2019 retention score, revealing that 46 out of its 51 qualifying trainees will be staying put. The firm didn’t reveal the departmental destinations of its soon-to-be associates.
In terms of remuneration, Legal Cheek‘s 2019 Firms Most list shows NQs can receive a salary of up to £91,000 (total compensation), while trainees earn £44,800 in year one, rising to £50,500 in year two.
The firm’s latest retention result follows news earlier this summer that it had become the first magic circle law firm to up its rookie intake since the 2008 financial crash — boosting training contract numbers from 80 to 95, a rise of 19%.
As we reported at the time, five of those additional 15 training spots were courtesy of the firm’s ‘IGNITE’ programme, a training contract scheme specifically tailored towards aspiring lawyers with a passion for tech.
By way of comparison, fellow magic circle players Freshfields and Slaughter and May currently offer 80 and 85 training contracts, respectively, while Allen & Overy takes on around 90 trainees annually. Linklaters tops the TC table with 100.
Elsewhere in the world of magic circle retention scores, both Allen & Overy and Slaughter and May confirmed results of 83% (39 out of 47) and 97% (34 out of 35) earlier this year.
It came shortly after the barrister went public with City solicitor’s ‘sexist’ LinkedIn message
MeToo pioneer barrister Charlotte Proudman has revealed she once received a letter on “judicial headed note paper” explaining how her head of chambers needed to give her bottom a “good spank”. The “handwritten” missive came in the wake of her decision to go public with a “sexist” LinkedIn message from a law firm partner.
Writing in the Telegraph (£), Proudman reveals further examples of the shocking sexism she and others have encountered, including one that occurred on her first day back at work after the “media storm”.
Proudman recalls finding a “handwritten letter on judicial headed note paper” which “rattled on” about her “incompetence to practice” and how her “stance on sexism had brought the profession into disrepute”. The letter, which appeared in her pigeon hole at chambers, concluded:
“PS. I shall tell Mike (Michael Mansfield QC) to give your bottom a good spank the next time I see him!”
Proudman became a household name in 2015 after she tweeted a screenshot of a message from Alexander Carter-Silk, in which he said she was “stunning”. At the time, her actions — which pre-dated the now well-supported MeToo movement — were criticised by some, with the Daily Mail going as far as labelling her a “feminazi”.
“Joanna Hardy has been widely praised for speaking up, by colleagues and the media — I did not receive the same support. Fortunately, times have changed in the wake of the MeToo movement. Women have supported other women in sharing their stories. They have created a cultural shift, whereby once ‘acceptable’ forms of insidious sexism and abuse are now being challenged.”
Saying she’s yet to see “meaningful change”, Proudman reveals she is a member of several WhatsApp groups where women in law share their “daily experiences of sexism”. In one example, Proudman recalls an incident that occurred only this week where a female barrister described how a male senior barrister had groped her in court. In another, she explains how “a solicitor at a magic circle law firm” once described a young female trainee as being “too ugly to rape”.
Rounding off her article, Proudman argues that “tangible change” will only occur when there is gender parity where power is really held — “within the judiciary and Queen’s Counsel”. This, she adds, will only be achieved by implementing quotas for women in the workplace.
Official statistics show that around a quarter of senior judges (High Court and Court of Appeal) are female, while women account for just 16% of QCs.
A London law firm is looking to tap into the highly lucrative legal weed scene through the launch of what is understood to be the UK’s first dedicated cannabis law department.
Unveiling its brand new weed wing, Mackrell Turner Garrett said it’s looking to follow in the footsteps of law firms over in the US who have reportedly hit the jackpot by focusing on the needs of the rapidly growing cannabis industry.
The West London outfit’s decision to branch out is the brainchild of Robert Jappie, a senior associate at the firm who has a strong interest in drug policy reform due to his previous experience in criminal defence work. Now the firm’s head of cannabis law, Jappie said:
“Despite the UK being one of the biggest producers and worldwide exporters of cannabis, it was still prohibited medicinally and recreationally (at that time). However, the investigations revealed that there was a burgeoning CBD industry already in existence in the UK and that positive noises were coming out of the industry regarding medicinal cannabis.”
While it remains illegal for recreational use in the UK, a recent change in the law allows doctors to prescribe cannabis-derived medicinal products in limited circumstances. Cannabis oil (CBD), however, is legal, provided it doesn’t contain Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the main psychoactive compound in cannabis which remains a controlled substance under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.
This tentative step towards the legalisation has led to some rather interesting products hitting our shelves, including this CBD-based hummus which is currently available at a supermarket in yes, you guessed it, Shoreditch, East London.
The City’s big players are taking the weed sector seriously, too. Last month, magic circle player Allen & Overy launched a cannabis newsletter, promising prospective clients “a practitioner insight on the legal and regulatory developments in the Cannabis sector worldwide.”
Since hanging up her wig and gown 15 years ago, Anitra Hussain spends half her time teaching civil litigation and judicial review at The University of Law (ULaw). In the other half, the former barrister presides over human rights and tort claims as a deputy district judge. Her duty now is to ensure parties receive their “very important right” to a fair trial. Contrasting the role with her time as a barrister, Hussain identifies a shift in perspective:
“A barrister must argue unilaterally that their client’s right has been breached. But a judge has to consider not only if the right has been breached, but if there is a good reason for doing so. Human rights aren’t absolute — they have limits.”
A common dilemma is where a child’s safety is at risk and whether their parents’ right to family life can be justly interfered with by child protection authorities. Hussain enjoys the challenge: “I prefer being the decision maker because I know my decisions are fair and I generally make the right decision.”
Anitra Hussain
Reflecting, Hussain identifies her sense of “justice, fairness and equality” as the driving force behind her “very satisfying career” in human rights law. Rights to speak freely, to privacy and to family life not being enforced represents a basic failure of society, she adds.
Hussain recalls a time where bringing forward a human rights claim was a convoluted, drawn-out process. Before 1998, the UK’s system of rights protection was limited, leaving the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as the only line of defence. Where there was an alleged breach, Hussain’s generation of barristers had no choice but to appear before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. “The average case in Strasbourg could take up to three years to come to a resolution,” Hussain reveals.
This all changed following the 1998 Human Rights Act (HRA), which incorporated all the rights contained in the ECHR into UK law. Remedies for a breach of ECHR rights can now be found in UK courts — without the need to go to Strasbourg.
But what does this mean for today’s human rights lawyers? According to Hussain, greater opportunities to practice human rights law. “Since the HRA was passed, human rights issues aren’t limited to the individual case, but instead can be practised domestically. Whether it be housing, education, employment, a child arrangement case — human rights are now in every element of social law,” Hussain explains.
The flipside is that there is now greater competition for pupillages in human rights. “Fewer people practised back then and people expect more of you now,” Hussain concedes. Although, she adds, the same barriers to entry exist as they did 30 years ago: you always needed good qualifications and experience.
For law students this means excelling particularly in public law and judicial review. Judicial review is important, Hussain explains, because human rights issues usually stem from a public body’s mistake. For example, a government’s decision to cap housing benefits could violate the right to “peaceful enjoyment” of your home (Protocol 1 of the HRA). “If you want to be known as a human rights expert, this the avenue to take,” Hussain tell us.
Hussain also stresses the value of postgraduate study. After undergrad studies at the London School of Economics, Hussain went on to the University of Oxford where she completed a masters in international human rights. “Human rights have expanded to include not just domestic law, but also international treaties,” she explains. Whether it be international conventions on eliminating discrimination against women or setting out the rights of children, according to Hussain, “as a judge you have to take into account all of these separate issues.”
When it comes to gaining practical experience, aspiring human rights lawyers need to be proactive. Hussain points first to university pro bono schemes, where students will can advise and even represent litigants in person. Failing this, candidates should seek experience off campus. “Find out who your local charity is — any kind of charity that offers human rights advice — and give them your time. They need good volunteers that can give correct advice.” For those wanting to become the next globe-trotting Amal Clooney, international work experience will go a long way, whether it’s an internship at the United Nations or humanitarian voluntary relief work.
Looking ahead, Hussain believes the impact of Brexit on human rights law to be fairly minimal. Although UK citizens may lose EU rights to freedom of movement and residence, Hussain stresses our core civil rights are guaranteed by the HRA. An upheaval of the HRA for a British Bill of Rights that does not refer to the ECHR is also unlikely, she adds. While UK law makers may enjoy more discretion to do things “with more flair” post-Brexit, they are still bound to ensure that “fairness prevails.”
Anitra Hussain will be speaking alongside lawyers from Leigh Day, Hodge Jones & Allen, Cornerstone Barristers and Doughty Street Chambers at Wednesday’s human rights-themed careers event at ULaw Bloomsbury in London. You can apply to attend the event, which is free, now.
Stunned bride-to-be’s family and friends acted as the jury
Credit: Brandon Dinetz/SWNS
A loved-up lawyer asked his girlfriend to marry him after creating an elaborate fake trial. Taking proposals to a whole new level, Brandon Dinetz, a criminal defence lawyer from Palm Beach, Florida, spent five months planning an imaginary drink driving case featuring a real judge, a fictional defendant and seventeen of his girlfriend’s family and friends to act as the jury.
His wife-to-be (she said yes!), Jen Lettman, also a lawyer, was sitting in the public gallery of Palm Beach County Courthouse earlier this month to hear what she believed was Dinetz’s opening statement in the case. Addressing the court, an unsuspecting Lettman began to cry when her boyfriend declared his love for her in a sweet statement.
Speaking to SWNS, she said:
“He and I had always talked about getting married and we knew we were going to be together but I didn’t think we would get married any time soon. When we worked together we would regularly watch each other’s opening statements and critique each other, so it wasn’t unusual for me to be in the courtroom with him.”
“I ugly-cried throughout the whole thing. I don’t remember a lot, but luckily it was caught on camera,” the civil litigation specialist added.
Commenting on his successful proposal, Dinetz told the website: “The judge came out and as usual she asked if the state and the defence were ready to proceed and we said ‘Yes we are’. Then she said, ‘bring in the jury’. All of our friends and family started to come in and I think when Jen saw her sister and my dad she immediately knew. My back was to her but I could hear her start to cry. When she said ‘yes’ there was a huge cheer from the jury.”
As the fake trial drew to close, the judge reportedly told the future groom: “Mr Dinetz you have been sentenced to life”.
Dinetz’s staged trial follows the engagement efforts of London based lawyer Chris Jeanes, who popped the question to his girlfriend Casey Kinchella, an associate at Ashurst, as their flight to Bali suffered a mid-air emergency. Fearing the worst, the O’Melveny & Myers transactional specialist was forced to bring his proposal forward. The couple reconfirmed their engagement once safely on the terra firma.
Together they cut through the hype to pinpoint five key ways that future lawyers need to be thinking about the technological developments shaking up law and business.
1. Clients’ businesses
As a corporate lawyer, the most important aspect of the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’ sweeping society is what it means for the companies you advise. “It’s important to keep up with developments and be able to constantly show clients that you understand the technological upheaval they are facing,” says Womble Bond Dickinson’s Alistair Walton, a partner in the firm’s commercial property team. Walton is currently advising a host of big name retail clients, such as New Look, as they re-orient their businesses in a bid to deal with the online ‘Amazon effect’ sweeping the sector.
While legal expertise is paramount, the wider commercial and strategic expertise of lawyers is also valued, notes fellow Womble Bond Dickinson solicitors Katherine Crowley and Imogen Armstrong, who spoke alongside Walton at the Legal Cheek event, hosted at the transatlantic firm’s Southampton office.
“If you take the Big Four accountancy firms they are not just accountants but consultants, and law is going that way as lawyers assume a dual role as business consultants and trusted advisors,” says practice development manager Crowley.
2. The law
While some new technology can be effectively governed by existing law, other more disruptive changes require legislation to be applied in a different way. Sometimes new rules are even required. “The law can be quite slow to catch up with technology — and as we are now seeing with social media, it can lag behind and require social pressure in order to change and keep it,” says commercial law solicitor Armstrong.
A high-profile example of new law created in response to technological change is GDPR. “Since coming in last year it has focused people’s minds about the way they treat data, and as a lawyer it’s exciting to be at the forefront of legal developments,” she added.
3. Lawtech
The legal profession doesn’t exist in a bubble. The same forces that are shaking up wider society are also impacting on the way lawyers work. Indeed, the term lawtech is becoming increasingly well-known as tech innovators turn their attention to law firms.
As one of the key individuals at Womble Bond Dickinson responsible for embedding new artificial intelligence-driven products such as Kira Systems into the firm, Crowley is well-positioned to judge the fast-moving lawtech scene.
“Tech doesn’t make mistakes, get grumpy or need caffeine, but it’s not a 100% win. At some things I’m better than Kira. We need to work together,” she says.
Crowley — a former magic circle lawyer who actively sought out a new tech-led challenge in her career — reckons that lawtech presents a particularly good opportunity for midsize international law firms like Womble Bond Dickinson “to grab a bigger slice of the legal cake”. In the past, lacking the manpower of the biggest global firms they may have missed out on certain large-scale transactions or cases. Now, with sophisticated use of cutting edge software to drastically reduce the need for grunt work, they can compete more effectively than ever before.
Agile working may sound less exciting than AI, but it could well prove to have a more profound effect on the legal profession than any other change arising from technology. Having begun his career when the internet was at a much earlier stage, Walton has observed a major shift in working practices. A few years ago everyone came into the office everyday, now “I don’t know where half my team is,” he quips.
Laptops, iPhone and slick IT systems enable Womble Bond Dickinson lawyers to flit between its offices; a case in point is Crowley — after speaking at the Legal Cheek event in Southampton, she was heading up to the firm’s office in Leeds and then planning to work down in Plymouth for two days at the beginning of next week before returning to her base in London. Agile working is also helping more lawyers with young families to progress their careers while not being in the office all of the time.
5. Positive mindset
More than anything else, tech presents an opportunity for future lawyers. “If you have a mindset that is open to working in different ways, can spot opportunities, try out new things, and accept that you sometimes might fail, then this is a great time to be entering the profession,” says Crowley.
Agreeing, Walton gives the example of Sam Dixon, a Womble Bond Dickinson managing associate who learnt in detail about a particular lawtech product the firm is using, developed his own coding ability, and “wrote a programme for it that has revolutionised the way it works for us” — and boosted his career in the process.
Expect many similar stories of enterprising lawyers improving the way their firms work in the future.
Dana Denis-Smith argues ‘self-regulation doesn’t work’
Dana Denis-Smith
Amid a growing frustration over the ineffectiveness of gender targets, a magic circle lawyer turned legal entrepreneur has called for the introduction quotas to help boost the number of women at both equity partner and senior management level.
Dana Denis-Smith, who worked at Linklaters for two years, said the “rigid and inflexible structures” in many City law firms are the main barrier hindering women’s progress to partnership. Denis-Smith, founder of The First 100 Years, a celebratory campaign charting the journey of women in law since 1919, continued:
“What we now need is to see equal numbers of men and women in leadership positions, receiving the same remuneration. Women are still not sufficiently represented at equity level, amongst QCs or in the judiciary and when they are, they are not paid as much as their male counterparts. We should be demanding equal representation and pay.”
Suggesting that much of the problem was structural, Denis-Smith continued: “I would like to see an end to the ‘salaried partner’ position that is so often where senior women find themselves — promoted to partner but without the voting power conferred by being in the equity, giving firms the cover of higher female partner numbers. When women are not adequately represented at the top things do not change.”
With this in mind, Denis-Smith, who launched Obelisk in 2010, an alternative legal service provider boasting over 1,500 freelance lawyers, said she had “come to the belief that quotas are necessary”, adding: “Self-regulation doesn’t work and will only take us so far.”
In 2016, researchers found that 62% of female lawyers felt their gender had hindered their progress at reaching the top positions within the legal profession — this compared to just 16% of male lawyers. However, 47% of those questioned felt that quotas — whether enforced or voluntary — would be “ineffective” in addressing gender equality across the top City firms.
When it comes to business, a London-centric mindset may have you believe that the world ends where the M25 motorway finishes. But for James Sutherland, a partner at independent UK law firm Burges Salmon, which is headquartered in Bristol, there are strong incentives for practising outside the capital. A big draw for the firm is its high quality of work, true independence and culture.
Allied to that is an enticing lifestyle. Having previously lived in London, Sutherland found that to enjoy the City, you either need “masses of money or masses of time”. He adds:
“Unfortunately, working in London often means these are mutually exclusive. If you have lots of money from a good job, you’re unlikely to have time to enjoy it — and vice versa.”
Contrastingly, Bristol enjoys the “perfect balance”. Sutherland describes the city as being big enough to offer enough culture to keep inhabitants entertained, but small enough to be navigable and commuter-friendly. It’s for these reasons that Sutherland, who joined the firm just over a decade ago, finds Bristol to be “a very difficult city to leave”.
With agile working on the rise, Sutherland can even enjoy the best of both Burges Salmon’s worlds. Whether he’s busy in the Bristol HQ, the firm’s London office or during the train journey in between, modern working practices mean that the litigation specialist can stay connected.
Sutherland, who studied history and economics at the University of Oxford, pursued law after seeing how varied the profession was — offering little danger of eventually getting bored. After completing a Graduate Diploma in Law (GDL) and the Legal Practice Course (LPC), courtesy of the University of Law (then known as the College of Law), Sutherland moved to Bristol — not a million miles away from his home town of Sidmouth, also in the South West.
Now as a partner, Sutherland works in dispute resolution and litigation, specialising in real estate and property insolvency. It’s here that his undergrad skills come in handy. While experience churning through endless history books prepared him for due diligence exercises, economic theory came in handy when unpicking clauses in commercial contracts and understanding the business consequences of the options available to his clients — setting an example to all would-be solicitors without a law degree.
Having worked as a property litigator since qualifying, Sutherland enjoys working with real, physical assets — as opposed to primarily working with non-tangible assets such as debt and other financial assets. Whether it be office blocks or a person’s home, disputes are often grounded in peoples’ lives and livelihoods, which he says, keeps the work “more real, more human”.
Sutherland’s practice often involves advising on disputes over development agreements. One high-profile battle pitted the local football team against Sainsbury’s, after the supermarket pulled out of a £30 million project to buy the Bristol Rovers’ stadium site. Acting for the Rovers, Sutherland recalls the case as very challenging and complex, with Sainsbury’s taking it all the way to the Court of Appeal.
Sutherland identifies an “international flavour” to his practice in light of increased investment from international property buyers, which ties in with Burges Salmon’s international strategy as one of only a few truly independent law firms in the UK, delivering international work for its clients. Renewable power generation sites, he says, have become “tradeable commodities” with domestic and international investors buying up sites in anticipation of future revenue streams.
Interestingly, the real estate market could be an area that might benefit from the Brexit uncertainty, at least in the short term. A weak pound — the value of sterling has drastically fallen since the 2016 Brexit referendum vote — has attracted international investors to buy up discounted UK real estate assets and may continue to do so if there are further falls in sterling.
While this serves as a potentially positive aspect of Brexit in the short term, negative implications for the real estate market can, too, be identified. These largely stem from fears of a slowdown in the market or even a recession, which the UK would struggle to avoid if it crashes out of the EU without an agreement in relation to its future trading relationship. “If everyone is making money in a commercial relationship, people are more likely to perform their contractual obligations,” Sutherland explains. But where the “economy goes into reverse”, maintaining the status quo under an agreement often becomes too expensive or the asset drops in value — weakening the incentive for parties to perform obligations which might be perceived as onerous. During these hard times, Sutherland adds, there’s “less money floating around” for those in disputes to make a deal, which results in heated cases as neither party can afford to lose.
As an example, Sutherland points to the European Medicines Authority (EMA), which until recently was embroiled in a court battle with Canary Wharf, its landlord. The medicines regulator, which is being moved from London to Amsterdam, argued that Brexit is an unforeseen, frustrating event, and should allow it to pull out of its £500 million office lease. However, the High Court ruled this week in favour of Canary Wharf, meaning EMA is still bound to its lease, which has 21 years left to run.
Overall, a post-Brexit recession could see a buoyant market for litigation and disputes resolution — typically regarded as counter-cyclical practices. Until then, Burges Salmon is contingency planning as far as possible, advising clients on the ‘what if’ commercial scenarios. The difficulty here, Sutherland notes, is navigating the unknown. “You can see that investors are freezing up and are delaying making decisions, because the playing field could change overnight.”
For aspiring lawyers hoping to specialise in real estate and insolvency, Sutherland recommends making that preference clear during your training contract. Trainees are often exposed to these areas during their seats and have plenty of opportunities to specialise, he says. Until then, taking an interest in the real estate market, understanding how it works and scrubbing up on land law won’t go amiss.
A Coventry University law graduate has been promoted to partner at her solicitors’ firm — less than a year after finishing her last lecture.
Natalie Foster will be taking a cut of the profits at North Yorkshire Law, which has offices in Scarborough, Whitby and York, from April 2019. She graduated with a Law and Practice BA just last summer. Before that she worked as a business manager for Barclays, specialising in commercial lending for Barclays for seven years, later taking time out to have children.
In 2016, during the second year of her law degree, Foster began working part-time at North Yorkshire Law, securing work as an assistant before moving into paralegal work in the commercial department. The Scarborough native became a fee earner immediately after graduating.
The new partner is set to qualify as a Chartered Legal Executive later in the year. This route doesn’t involve a conventional training contract and allows people with previous experience to qualify as a lawyer more quickly, but generally specialising in a particular field and without becoming a solicitor or barrister. Foster already manages a team of nine, including three qualified solicitors.
‘As humble as I am, very early on in my career I realised I was the best’
Every now and again LinkedIn throws up a nugget of gold. In a welcome break from the tedious motivational quotes and the seemingly endless stream of skills endorsements, this latest example is courtesy of Altaf Hussain, who describes himself as “England’s Leading International Lawyer”.
Addressing his fellow professionals, Hussain, who works at Birmingham-based law firm Addison Aaron, boldly declares: “As humble as I am, very early on in my career I realised I was the best”. Building on his strong start, he warns his peers: “Matching me is impossible, beating me is unheard of, I’ll blow the trumpet out of anyone.”
The post, embedded in full below, continues: “Feeling motivated and super confident, I know the judge will be impressed when I deliver my arguments in the Courts on Monday in England.”
Unfortunately, Hussain’s outstanding piece of self-promotion was met with a mixture of amusement and criticism by those on Twitter.
Criminal lawyer Matthew Bogunovich questioned whether or not the post was actually a “spoof”, while another user wrote: “This is LinkedIn all over. General bragging, passive aggressive inspirational posts and recruitment.” Sam Elliott, a barrister at One Pump Court, added: “I’m sure any judges seeing posts like this would be *really impressed*”.
Embrace the change but don’t get distracted by it, say a panel of top City lawyers
Left to right: Julie Manson, Nick Finlayson-Brown, Roy Pearce, Andrew Block (Ralph Goodchild attended the session via Skype)
What do you think will change the legal profession most over the next decade? This question was put to an audience of students in a poll during last week’s Legal Cheek‘Inside Track’ commercial awareness event with BPP University Law School in Cambridge.
Could it be competition from the Big Four? Or THAT ‘B-word’ and the rise of populist politics? Perhaps it’s the new solicitor super-exam that will shake up the profession? How about flexible working arrangements or even new Generation Z priorities? Not quite. Technology got the winning vote with a whopping 53% of students backing the so-called digital revolution.
But before we swap boardrooms for webinars, what did the panel of City lawyers make of the result? On hand to discuss all-things-tech, one of the central themes of the evening, was Roy Pearce, a corporate finance partner at Baker McKenzie; Andrew Block, a pensions partner at Mayer Brown; Nick Finlayson-Brown, a real estate partner at Mills & Reeve; and Ralph Goodchild, an associate in the construction and international arbitration group at White & Case. They were joined by Julie Manson, lecturer and lead designer at BPP University Law School. Together, they considered the impact of technology on their respective practice areas and gave their views on what this change means for lawyers of the future.
Kicking off the discussion, which took place in BPP University Law School’s Cambridge campus, was Mills & Reeve’s Finlayson-Brown. How have artificial intelligence (AI) tools transformed his practice? “A lot of law firms are using artificial intelligence. My team certainly use it for due diligence when checking lease portfolios, while the litigation team use it for e-disclosure… our clients are aware of the benefits and seeing a reduction in price as a result,” he said. It seems AI-based legal solutions are growing in popularity among corporate firms. The IT team at Mills & Reeve is integral to the pitch process for client work, said Cambridge office head Finlayson-Brown. “They’re involved in nine out of ten pitches,” he told the audience.
Baker McKenzie’s Pearce, who joined the firm’s Central Asia team in the mid 90s before moving to its London arm, noted a similar experience. “Corporate finance is very document intensive. We do a lot of due diligence and that involves trawling through thousands of documents. We can use AI to save us spending a week in a room sifting through 500 near-identical contracts.”
Manson explained that BPP University Law School is embracing tech, too. Her team has been designing programmes and developing apps that will deliver learning to tech-savvy millennials, when and how they want to access it.
In a testament to tech, White & Case’s Goodchild joined the panel via Skype after being unexpectedly held up on a project he was working on in the Middle East. He shared an example of innovation across the firm’s multiple offices:
“I remember arriving at 11pm at White & Cases’ Istanbul office. I walked through the door, switched my laptop on and a message appeared essentially saying: ‘Ralph, welcome to Istanbul’ — everything just seemed to work so seamlessly.”
We’ve seen all manner of ‘rise of the robot lawyers’ headlines, but the panel agreed we can’t do away with human lawyers just yet. Mayer Brown partner Block sought to temper the hype: “People go to lawyers for a solution to a problem and lawyers apply their judgement to solve that problem. AI helps lawyers do that but there is no substitute for the human lawyer — you can look at a textbook and understand what the law is. Clients come to lawyers because they want their judgement, their understanding and their experience.”
Goodchild, who is typically based in White & Cases’ London office, agreed. “AI can never substitute your relationship with a client. The reason why I’m out here with my client in the Middle East is because he wanted a familiar face, a trusted advisor, and that’s so important in the legal services industry.”
Offering the legal education perspective was former Norton Rose Fulbright learning and development manager Manson, who said:
“There’s no substitute for knowing the law. When you come to law school — don’t be distracted by tech. It’s important to have a thorough understanding of case and statutory law and how this will impact your future clients. The tech will help in your delivery of that and of course, some understanding of how that will work in practice will be useful to you as a student and then as a trainee.”
BPP addresses this knowledge gap in the design of its Legal Practice Course (LPC). Aspiring solicitors are taught the principles of law and legal practice, as well as how to understand how tech can be used in modern law firms, with its new legal innovation and design module. This helps them prepare for the conversations they will have with clients, explained Manson.
So it seems lawtech is here to stay. But what role will trainees of the future fulfil?
“They won’t be out of a job, rather they’ll be doing a better job,” emphasised Pearce. “AI is a piece of kit — it automates rote tasks. Trainees can then spend their time analysing the output of a review which is what they should be doing instead of spending 12-hours crunching through documents.”
But does this mean the next generation of lawyers will miss out on the opportunity to cut their teeth on basic legal tasks?
“For AI to work you need to understand what you’re dealing with. AI may take away the grunt work, but that’s often how a trainee will understand the basics,” said Finlayson-Brown, who spent six months sitting in a basement going through 1,100 property deeds as a trainee. “It was incredibly boring but I learnt more about leases that is still with me today,” he quipped.
Pearce pointed to the annotation of prospectuses in finance which is “a repetitive, rule-based task involving tick boxes and checklists that can be outsourced”. But, he noted, much unlike his generation of lawyers, trainees coming through the ranks will not have the experience of getting to grips with the rules. “Law firms do need to make sure that in this drive towards automation trainees don’t miss out on basic knowledge,” he warned.
The London office of Chicago-headquartered outfit Sidley Austin has boosted newly qualified (NQ) lawyer salaries by 8%.
This means that the firm’s twelve or so NQs annually will now enjoy a salary of £130,000, up from an already rather impressive £120,000. Trainees at the 20-office-outfit currently receive £47,000 in year one, rising to £51,500 in year two.
Legal Cheek‘s 2019 Firms Most List shows that today’s money move puts Sidley Austin’s NQs on an earning par with their opposite numbers over at fellow US player Weil Gotshal.
Cold hard cash aside, Sidley Austin is perhaps most famous for being the law firm that brought Barack and Michelle Obama together. The power couple met at the firm’s Chicago office where the former US President was a vac schemer and Michelle a junior associate and his supervisor.
So what’s life like as a lawyer in Sidley Austin’s London office? In our Trainee and Junior Lawyer Survey 2018-19, the firm scored As for quality of work and perks, but could only secure Bs for training, peer support and partner approachability.
Fiona Onasanya released from prison this morning after serving a third of her three-month jail sentence for perverting the course of justice
MP Fiona Onasanya
A disgraced junior lawyer turned MP who was jailed for perverting the course of justice will not have her three-month sentence extended after the Attorney General decided against referring her case to the Court of Appeal.
Commercial property law specialist Fiona Onasanya was jailed last month after she was found guilty of lying to police about who was driving her vehicle when it was clocked by a speed camera in Thorney, near Peterborough, on 24 July 2017. The former Eversheds (now Eversheds Sutherland) lawyer was handed a three-month custodial sentence earlier this year following a retrial.
In the days following the conviction, the Attorney General’s office received a complaint that the sentence was too lenient. Now, following a review, the complaint has not been upheld. A spokesperson for the Attorney General’s office said:
“After careful consideration, the solicitor general has concluded that he could not refer this case to the Court of Appeal.”
The Attorney General’s decision came just hours before the 35-year-old — who was expelled by the Labour party but continues to sit as the independent MP for Peterborough — was released from prison after serving one month of her sentence.
During her trial, the court heard how Onasanya had schemed with her brother, Festus Onasanya, to deceive police by claiming a former tenant, Alek Antipow, was driving her vehicle at the time of the incident. Subsequent inquiries by police revealed Antipow was at home with his parents in Russia at the time.
Onasanya’s brother, Festus Onasanya, was jailed for ten months after he pleaded guilty to three counts of perverting the course of justice.
A law lecturer locked in a two-year legal battle over a £60 parking ticket plans to take action against the city council that fined him, and hopes the generosity of others will fund the judicial review.
Andrew Newell, a lecturer in law, business and hospitality at Edinburgh College, woke one February morning in 2017, to find the charge slapped on the windscreen of his Vauxhall Vectra. He had allegedly parked on the pavement outside his Pilrig Heights flat in Edinburgh.
The livid law lecturer disputed the charge, arguing he had parked on a different patch of tarmac to the pavement (pictured below). He even submitted photos which, he said, proved the area where he left his car shared the same ‘brick design’ as parking bays — as opposed to the ‘dark tarmac’ pavements. Edinburgh city council upheld the fine, which was subsequently reviewed and stayed by the Parking and Bus Lane Tribunal for Scotland. Newell then forked out the £60 fine.
via Andrew Newell
Two failed appeals later, and after selling the car in question, the determined lecturer now plans to bring a judicial review.
Newell set up a crowdfunding page a fortnight ago in an attempt to raise £15,000 to cover the costs for the action. So far, the 33-year-old Edinburgh Napier law grad, has only mustered £180.
“With parking in Edinburgh becoming the most expensive in Scotland and the parking enforcement officers issuing Penalty Charge notices with unbridled enthusiasm, I feel it is time to review the appeals procedure to ensure a fair and impartial hearing is provided to the public,” he writes.
Newell, who describes himself as “a very focused, driven, extravert who is determined to achieve the high goals I personally set,” on his LinkedIn, is optimistic about raising the cash required. “I’m sure there are other people in Edinburgh who’ve been in a similar position,” he told Edinburgh Evening News. “Hopefully they’ll contribute.”
A spokesperson for the city council said: “We are satisfied that the parking ticket was issued correctly and two separate independent appeals have fully vindicated this.”
@emmaklieve (Instagram)
Credit: Brandon Dinetz/SWNS
