Rogering in Chambers and the naming and shaming of lawyers……

While there is no provision, as yet, for continuing personal development (CPD) points to cover the activity  pictured left, it is good to see the legal profession attracting this type of publicity in The Secret Diary of a Call Girl…soon to be on our screens.  The Sun, inevitably, carried the story with the caption…”Billie Piper takes down her briefs”.

On the other hand, on a more serious note, Neil Rose, writing in The Guardian, suggests…

Why lawyers who fall foul of the legal watchdog should be named

The Guardian: Despite arguments for anonymity, telling the public which lawyers have been found to be at fault will help the profession

I have a feeling that The Legal Ombudsman may be biting off a lot of chewable litigation if he does decide to name and shame lawyers.  The Law Society, not surprisingly, is against the idea of lawyers being named when customers complain.  Mind you…. it could provide a fair bit of work for other lawyers do act for the lawyers being complained about?

Neil Rose states that 15-20,000 complaints are likely to flood through The Legal Ombudsman’s door this year. I suspect the naming and shaming issue – despite the value of transparency – may give Legal Ombudsman, Adam Sampson…pause for considerable thought?

10 thoughts on “Rogering in Chambers and the naming and shaming of lawyers……

  1. Given that the Ombudsman aims to resolve breakdowns in client relationships naming will simply mean that we are back to the “no admission of any fault, no compromise” mantra that is pretty much already made compulsory if you carry professional indemnity insurance.
    Naming is just one more disincentive for commercial lawyers to stay within the regulatory regime. See the discussion we are trying to foster about that on the Solo blog

  2. Well, a generation ago a woman who tried to buy a flat was, for sure, either as plain as a pikestaff or else hit on by her solicitor – they seemed in those days to regard it as a perk of the job.

    I wonder how much has changed…

  3. Yes it could provide a fair bit of work for other lawyers who act for the lawyers being complained about, and then when they mess up for other lawyers acting for the lawyers who were acting for the original lawyers being complained about…and so on…and so on… into a parallel universe of a truly self supporting legal profession! Pop will eat itself? No, the law will!

    I need to lie down.

  4. The rabbit’s lips are sealed as to the who and the where of what follows…

    A certain then senior clerk was boasting of his sexual conquests around the Temple to one of his barristers (now a Judge). The barrister expressed some amused scepticism. The senior clerk replied…

    ‘You can laugh, Sir. The last one I ‘ad was on your desk…’

    Ask me over a glass of vin rouge, Charon (soon!)

  5. Would the LEO really publish names of lawyers who were purely the subject of a complaint or would it wait and only publish names of those lawyers who were found guilty?

    It would seem unfair to name lawyers who have not been proven to have done anything wrong. But then again, we name defendants in trials and online judgments before they’re proven innocent, as and when they are…….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>