They were mulling it over at lunch. Two utterly decent straightforward men who saw the writing on the wall and took a job. Good Judges whose sympathies lie with the bar and who know from first hand personal experience the truth about declining fees and morale.
The issue was the day of action and how they would respond to applications for adjournments…
With reluctance, they agreed there can be no special treatment.
Case by case basis.
How could they do otherwise? Judicial oath and all that.
So some applications may succeed because no great harm will be done to others.
Some won’t because the trial is at a stage when it would be unfair to interrupt it.
Which only leaves the decision for individual barristers even more difficult.
Is my case at such an unimportant stage that I can leave it with a clear conscience?
Or should I stay put because I owe it to the punter?
Come to think of it, when does the client NOT matter?
Answers please on a small postcard.
Nigel Pascoe QC