SPONSORED SPONSORED BY BY

Principle the

OCTOBER 2017 ISSUE 11 ALLABOUTLAW.CO.UK

For commerical awareness, it's the Principle that counts

The role of the public inquiry

Slater & Gordon split

The vacation scheme process

The into the the Grenfell Grenfell Tower Tower fire fire is is now now in in full The public public inquiry inquiry into full swing and to be successful, it must cover a lot of bases. Through swing - and to be successful, it must cover a lot of bases. Through aa series series of of high high profile profile examples, examples, we we explore explore the the role role that that public public inquiries serve and how, sometimes, they miss the mark. inquiries serve - and how, sometimes, they miss the mark.

The The personal personal injury injury law law firm, firm, which which has has its its main main offices offices in in Australia, recently announced that it would be cutting all ties ties Australia, recently announced that it would be cutting all with with its its UK UK arm. arm. With With this this in in mind, mind, we we look look at at some some of of the the law law firms that have endured similar break-ups. firms that have endured similar break-ups.

The deadline for for vacation vacation schemes schemes is is fast fast approaching. approaching. The January January deadline From sending off the application to turning up for your From sending off the application to turning up for your vacation vacation scheme, take you you through through every every step step of of one one of of the the best best work work scheme, we we take experience opportunities in law. experience opportunities in law.

Page Page 12 12

Page Page 14 14

Page Page 28 28

Going nuclear?

the Principle

A note from the editors

Commercial digest WORDS Becky Kells, Emma Finamore PHOTOS Ivan McClennan, Tony Webster, Jon Chiral, David Holt

Welcome to issue 11 of the Principle, the commercial insight and advice newspaper written by the team behind AllAboutLaw.co.uk. As always, we've taken a close look at a range of topical issues in the world right now, and have examined them from a legal perspective. As you embark on your studies, hopefully these features will provide some context for everyting you're learning as part of your degree. This issue, we examine the nuclear-fuelled tensions between Washington and Pyongyang through a legal lens, and take a look at what happens when a law firm on the scale of Slater and Gordon undergoes a split. There's also a look at notable court cases in football. This term can be a stressful one for aspiring lawyers, so as always we've included a healthy dose of advice to help you stay on top of things. We've broken down the vacation scheme process, from the initial application to what you can expect afterwards. There's also a reminder of the benefits of joining your law society, and getting involved in a pro bono scheme, at this all-too-crucial time. There's all this and more in this issue of the Principle: we hope you enjoy reading our latest legal analysis and that the first term is going well for you. Until next time, enjoy! Emma Finamore and Becky Kells Editors, AllAboutLaw.co.uk

Thank you to our sponsor,

02

SPAIN DECLARES CONTROL OVER CATALONIA AFTER INDEPENDENCE CLAIM BREXIT: EU GIVES Following Catalonia’s declaration of independence from Spain, determined in a secret ballot held by Catalan MPs, Spain has placed the region under direct rule. Catalonia's 135 seat parliament has been dissolved by Spain, and the country has called for new elections to be held. There was little support for Catalan independence from the rest of the world - the European Union, the UK, Germany and the United States supported Madrid, and said they would not recognise Catalonia as an independent nation. As pro-independence protestors continue to refute the decision, Catalonia has been stripped of its autonomy, and many Catalan officials could face criminal charges. A number of those who may face prosecution have relocated to Belgium. Carles Puigdemont, the former leader of Catalonia who has been sacked by Spain, is one individual who is currently in Belgium. He has said that he is not seeking asylum there, and will respect the decisions of snap elections in December regarding Catalan independence.

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

GREEN LIGHT FOR NEGOTIATIONS OF TRADE DEAL On Friday 20 October, the EU agreed that negotiations for a post-Brexit trade deal between the UK and member states could begin. Donald Tusk - the president of the European Council announced via Twitter that the green light had been given. He said: “Brexit conclusions adopted. Leaders green-light internal EU27 preparations for 2nd phase.” This comes after Theresa May stated her optimism that a deal would be made, and that a no-deal situation would not arise. At present, discussions about the financial settlement, Irish border, and citizens’ rights will dominate the Brussels talks. Negotiations of a trade deal could begin as early as December.

ACROSS THE POND: TRUMP’S OWNERSHIP OF HOTELS IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL, SAYS LAWSUIT

0.5%

Issue Eleven

The pound has gained over half a cent against the US dollar to $1.318, largely driven by the Bank of England's raising of interest rates from 0.25% to 0.5% on Thursday 2 November.

AI INCREASINGLY UBER - PROVISIONAL DOING LEGAL WORK APPEAL DATE SET FOR 11 DECEMBER

Artificial intelligence is being embraced by the legal sector, with law firms increasingly factoring new technology projects into their budgets. 65% of Law firms are allocating some of their budget to the purchase of AI products, research by HSBC has revealed. Technology that learns as it carries out a task, rather than simply analysing or sorting according to how it is programmed, could be a worthy asset in the data-heavy legal sector. AI’s functions in the legal sector range from analysing legal contracts and documents, to identifying and correcting editorial and grammatical errors.

President Donald Trump is well known for his simultaneous roles as leader of the free world and business mogul, but a recent lawsuit could expose a clash in his two professions. One of Trump’s business ventures - a chain of luxury international hotels - is patronised by foreign government officials. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (Crew) proposed that this violates the ‘emoluments’ clause of the US Constitution: for Trump to own hotels used by foreign representatives, they say, constitutes as bribery. The District Judge is set to rule on whether the case will proceed within the next 30-60 days.

69.5%

GRENFELL TOWER: “I now call on PLANS FOR members of KENSINGTON & parliament to stand up for the CHELSEA TMO TO DISBAND ARE people of the UK; to forestall what PUT ON HOLD is clearly a

corrupt bargain.” Ciaran McClean, leader of crowdfunded challenge to DUP deal

The percentage of law students who graduated with a 2:1 or higher in 2015/16

AIRBUS- BOMBARDIER DEAL TO SAVE JOBS, BUT A HUGE BLOW TO BOEING Aviation giant Airbus has taken a 50.1% stake in the Bombardier C-Series jet programme. The move comes after a 300% import levy was placed on Bombardier by the United States. It will bring possible good news to Belfast - where the C-Series wings are manufactured - as 1,000 jobs could be saved. The C-Series jet programme has not been without trouble. Boeing accused Bombardier of “absurdly low” prices for the C-Series jets, and the US government consequently ruled that government subsidies granted to Bombardier by Canada and the UK were illegal.

Uber has launched its appeal against Transport for London’s decision not to renew its licence. The hearing has provisionally been set for 11 December, and Hogan Lovells will act on behalf of the ride-hailing service. Uber was stripped of its licence to operate in London in September, with TfL stating that it operated with a “lack of corporate responsibility”. This refers to, amongst other reasons, a failure to adequately vet drivers. Spokespeople for the app have taken an apologetic stance, vowing to “do better”. Until it has exhausted the appeals process with TfL, Uber can continue to operate in London.

Kensington and Chelsea Tenant Management Organisation, which was responsible for the management of Grenfell Tower, has put plans to disband on hold. This followed a letter sent to Grenfell survivors and residents by the TMO, asking them to vote for it to be disbanded in an AGM on Tuesday 17 October. Residents’ lawyers reached out to clients, expressing fear that if the TMO was to disband at this crucial point, it would escape scrutiny in the Grenfell Tower public inquiry. There are “reasonable grounds” for corporate manslaughter charges to be brought against the current TMO. Residents’ lawyers feared that if it were to disband now, charges may not be brought. Residents eventually want to see the TMO dismantled, but have clarified that this should only happen once it has been investigated for its conduct surrounding the Grenfell Tower fire.

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

WESTMINISTER COMES UNDER SCRUTINY FOR SEX HARASSMENT ACCUSATIONS Both major parties have come under scrutiny as a spate of sexual harassment allegations have come to light. Theresa May has called for an independent mediation service to be established to deal with the claims, as more revelations are expected to follow. The sexual harassment claims were voiced following the Harvey Weinstein scandal, which sparked an international chorus of women speaking out about sexual harassment, assault and rape across a variety of professions. MPs brought under scrutiny so far include Stephen Crabb, the former work and pensions secretary; trade minister Mark Garnier; Labour MP Jared O’Mara; and Michael Fallon, defence secretary.

03

the Principle

An uncomfortable truth: youth, race & injustice WORDS Emma Finamore

A report released by the Ministry of Justice this September – Exploratory analysis of 10-17 year olds in the youth secure estate by black and other minority ethnic groups – and the Lammy Review published by David Lammy (MP for Tottenham in London) have revealed how racial bias still runs through the UK criminal justice system, and that it is having a huge impact on young people from non-white backgrounds. For example, approximately nine in every 10,000 young black people in the general population were in youth custody in 2015/16, the highest proportion of any ethnic group. This compares to one in every 10,000 for young people from white ethnic backgrounds. Here we take a look at the key findings in this worrying report.

BAME representation in the criminal justice system compared to general population (Source: The Lammy Review, September 2017)

General population

14% CPS

Police officers 6%

19%

04

Magistrates

Judiciary

Prison officers

11%

7%

6%

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

Issue Eleven Young people in youth secure sectors (Source: Ministry of Justice, September 2017)

96% male 4% female

9/10,000 young black people in the general population were in youth custody in 2015/16

Former finance regulator to give evidence at Lloyds HBOS trial

1/10,000 young white people

en ack m l b 8 20

Of those convicted at Magistrates’ Court for sexual offences, 208 black men and 193 Asian men received custodial sentences for every 100 white men. (Source: The Lammy Review)

as ia n

en m

19 3

te hi w

m en

0 10 51%

Reoffending is particularly high for young black boys,with over half (51%) of the 10-14 age group reoffending within a year...

40%

...compared to 40% for white boys

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

Hector Sants, who headed the former UK financial regulator during the 2008 crisis, has agreed to give evidence in public in a High Court trial about the controversial rescue of HBOS by Lloyds Bank. Sants had been allowed by a High Court judge to give evidence in secret during a £550 million court case where Lloyds and five ex-directors are being sued by Lloyds shareholders. The investors claim they were not made aware of HBOS’ troublng financial position before approving the acquisition. Lloyds and the ex-directors deny these claims. However, Sants has now agreed to give his evidence in public, and is due to testify for a day in December. His evidence is especially important as he was chief executive of the Financial Services Authority (predecessor of the FCA) throughout the 2008 banking crisis. What he says could reveal more about why Lloyds did not walk away from the HBOS deal even as markets deteriorated in October 2008. Sants will also face questions on why he told Lloyds it would still have to raise £7 billion of fresh capital on a standalone basis – even if it backed out of the HBOS deal. The shareholders suing Lloyds claim the £7 billion capital requirement was an attempt by the FSA, the Treasury and the Bank of England to bully Lloyds into completing the HBOS deal. Lloyds denies this. By October 2008, HBOS was reliant on a £10 billion loan from Lloyds as well as emergency support from the Bank of England, the trial has already heard. Neither lines of funding were disclosed in the circular issued to investors who voted on the deal. Tim Tookey, the former finance director of Lloyds, was the first former director to testify to the trial. He told the High Court in late October that Sants and the FSA were keen to have the deal to go through. Tookey said the Lloyds loan did not need to be disclosed to investors and was an “ordinary course of business” interbank loan. However he agreed the loan structure was unusual and said it was “very unusual” that the loan had to be cleared by Sants at the FSA before it was advanced. After leaving the FSA in 2012, Sants joined Barclays in 2013 but left due to stress. He now works part-time for consultancy firm Oliver Wyman.

05

the Principle

Leaving the party early: America & the Paris agreement WORDS Emma Finamore

It took over two decades to finalise, but the Paris agreement has now come into force: the first time governments have agreed to legally binding limits to to global temperature rises. What are the legal issues around the US withdrawing?

06

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

Issue Eleven

T

he Paris agreement on climate change has entered into force, marking the first time that governments have agreed legally binding limits to global temperature rises. The passage of the accord – the fruit of more than two decades of often tortuous international negotiations on combating climate change – was hailed by nations and observers around the world. Under the agreement, all governments that have ratified the accord, which originally included the US, China, India and the EU, now carry an obligation to hold global warming to no more than 2C above pre-industrial levels. That is what scientists regard as the limit of safety, beyond which climate change is likely to become catastrophic and irreversible. The accord was agreed by nearly 200 countries in December 2015, which came into force on 4 November 2016. The agreement commits world leaders to keeping global warming below 2C, seen as the threshold for safety by scientists, and pursuing a tougher target of 1.5C. The carbon emission curbs put forward by countries under Paris are not legally binding but the framework of the accord, which includes a mechanism for periodically cranking those pledges up, is binding. The agreement also has a long-term goal for net zero emissions which would effectively phase out fossil fuels. In June this year, United States President Donald Trump announced that America would cease all participation in the agreement, after abiding by the four-year exit process written into it. In the aftermath of this announcement, opponents have been exaggerating its legal effect of the agreement, while environmentalists play it down. Trump’s supporters contend that staying in the agreement could have weakened the US legal position on climate change, both in terms of international damages suits and domestic regulatory actions. Pointing to Article 4 of the agreement, they argue that a nation may only adjust its contributions to climate control upwards, "with a view to enhancing its level of ambition." "Believe me, we have massive legal liability if we stay in,"

Trump said in June, justifying his decision to take the US out of the agreement. Yet even Trump’s supporters acknowledge that the agreement is voluntary: a ‘contribution’ is not a commitment. It would therefore be absurd to give it a determining effect in any legal forum. Michael Burger directs the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. "‘The Paris agreement doesn't provide a basis for any claim of loss and damage," he told the International Bar Association in August. "Either in an international tribunal or in any domestic court. It expressly doesn't do that." In addition, the Paris agreement would not have affected Trump’s efforts to dismantle former president Obama's Clean Power Plan, as the two are completely independent of each other. Some academics would like to broadly regulate US climate pollution as posing a health danger abroad, under Clean Air Act section 115. That would require other countries to offer reciprocal protection, similar to what will be achieved by the rest of the world standing by the Paris agreement. This might have been one way of the US actually contributing to the agreement, while it was still signed up. However, it would not be accurate to claim that US membership of the Agreement could have formed the legal basis for any action taken under section 115. Burger told the International Bar Association that he doesn’t think a court would "invoke this never before used provision of the Clean Air Act in order to achieve a voluntary, nonbinding target set forth in an international agreement that has no internal enforcement mechanism of its own." He thinks that dropping out of the agreement could in fact heighten US legal risk: the current leading active climate case in the US is Juliana v US, where a group of children are asking an Oregon federal court to mandate carbon regulation under the constitution and public trust doctrine. The children have survived a motion to dismiss, and hope for a trial this autumn. "Where the federal government is absolutely abdicating its responsibility," Burger argues, "US courts are more likely to create a new environmental right, and to find it violated."

“US courts are more likely to create a new environmental right, and to find it violated.” Burger also thinks the UN General Assembly could ask the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion on America’s climate obligations. If Trump aims to reduce international legal risk, taking a position at odds with every UN member state could seem counter-intuitive. Ann Carlson and Sarah Duffy, of UCLA School of Law in Califoria, told the International Bar Association that withdrawal from the Paris agreement might actually help green politics, because it brings Trump’s position into the open. "From a domestic political perspective,’ said Duffy, "it could actually be very good for the environmental community. [Trump’s] administration was rolling back all these things quietly, piecemeal, one by one.... Now they've done something really public that makes [the US] an outlier in the entire world, that has [received a lot] of news coverage. In all that news coverage people are starting to learn about the other things [Trump’s] been doing to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and environmental regulation."

Can you actually ‘own’ a project? From start to finish? As a trainee? Turns out you can, and for many different clients. Being given free rein to run with things is a great way to learn and build confidence – and it is something I was not just allowed but expected to do in my seat in Real Estate. With the opportunity to take on the bigger challenges early on, you’ll find that you benefit from countless unexpected rewards at BLP. Be less predictable – apply at blplaw.com/trainee now.

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

07

the Principle

Decoding the threat WORDS Becky Kells

99 years ago, the German front, World War 1: a deeply unlikely setting for the origins of the tactical encryption system. But even before technological advances brought in computers, the risks associated with sensitive information were still very real: German code-makers were meticulously cataloguing their code strategies in handwritten books, and constantly revising their passcodes.

08

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

Issue Eleven

N

early 100 years later, encrypting systems like this are now fully online – and increasingly, so too are wars and conflicts. Breaches in cybersecurity are occurring the world over – whether it be tensions between the USA and North Korea, or here in the UK, crime is taking on a new dimension and affecting computer systems like never before. It has emerged as a way to extort money by encrypting files, as in the case of the WannaCry scandal – classed as a category two cyber incident by the recentlyestablished National Cybersecurity Centre. But it is also a lucrative way to target big corporate businesses; in particular, the sensitive information they store online. It’s not something to be taken lightly. Ian Levy, a technical director at the NCC, has warned: “Sometime in the next few years we’re going to have our first category one cyber-incident.” An incident on this level would require national government response. So why carry out a cyber-attack? The most obvious answer is, as the internet has advanced, aspects of it have become as relevant as the real world. Just as there are places and territories in the world, so too are there places and territories online. It is as possible to buy a product that exists digitally as it is to buy one which you can hold in your hands. Perhaps most significantly in the case of cyberattacks, there are also now online currencies – such as Bitcoin – which hackers and cybercriminals commonly deal in. In theory, cyber-attacks are risky to anyone and everyone – even if they are not being targeted directly. In a recent attack in America, hackers acquired the names, addresses and social security numbers of 130 million Americans, all by targeting one company’s online database. Having access to these details provided the hackers with the ability to steal the online identities of all of those people, accessing everything from medical records to online banking. This goes some way to explaining why cyber-attacks are riskier on a corporate level than on a personal level: it is standard practice for businesses such as law firms and health organisations to store extremely sensitive information about many of their users. Indeed, it would be hard for them to operate if they did not.

Yet if a cyber-attacker gained access to these databases, the lives of millions would be at risk – not to mention the reputation of the company under attack. This was the case last April when hackers targeted some of the biggest law firms, including Hogan Lovells, Allen & Overy and Freshfields. The firms were breached in order to access information on mergers and acquisitions, to be sold for insider trading. With hackers threatening to hinder the confidential level on which law firms of this size operate, their security measures need to be of the highest quality. When it comes to prosecution, certain measures have been taken to deter cyber-criminals from attacking UK companies. The Computer Misuse Act of 1990 has been amended, which means serious attackers – such as those who target essential infrastructure – can receive life sentences. Previously, the most a cyber-criminal could be sentenced to was 10 years imprisonment. With organisations such as the NHS being targeted – and a lifeor-death element therefore being introduced – it is hard to argue against this increased sentence. Where the law can prosecute, it cannot always prevent. There have been calls for big companies who are storing sensitive data to re-evaluate the importance of what they store, and increase the precautions they are taking. This could include branching out to employ an in-house security team to cater to a firm’s specific needs, as opposed to using off-the-shelf security solutions. When it comes to the relationship between the government and the companies, the former has drawn a hard line: if big businesses do not have adequate security measures in place, they could face huge fines in the region of £17 million. In its National Cyber Security Strategy released last year, the government outlined its vision: to be “secure and resilient” to cyber threats by 2021, and to be “prosperous and confident in the digital world”. The strategy makes specific reference to the prosecution of offenders, as well as scientific and technological developments to improve cyber

“Sometime in the next few years we’re going to have our first category one cyber-incident”

security. But it places equal stress on equipping individuals and corporations with the knowledge and ability to defend themselves against cyber-attacks. This last point acquires further importance when it is considered that two in three of the bosses at Britain’s biggest companies are not trained to deal with a cyber-attack. The threat to cybersecurity on a national and international scale does not exist in parallel to traditional, offline crimes. The two overlap and fuel each other, with many hackers using their technical abilities to cause more devastation. In a world where we are used to hearing about criminals targeting specific groups, it poses a threat to millions of unrelated people, regardless of social or political group. The three-pronged proposal of the government – a collective effort of technical advancements, legal reform and corporate prioritisation – could not have come at a more fitting time.

OPPORTUNITY If you’re one of the handful of graduates who join Bristows LLP as trainee solicitors each year, you’ll be exposed to a world of opportunity right from the start… …opportunity to get involved with top tier work for clients in the most innovative industries. …opportunity to work side-by-side with some of the most respected lawyers in their fields. …opportunity to build your career in an environment where you’ll be stretched but also get plenty of support and encouragement. If we sound like the firm for you and you want to find out more, please visit training.bristows.com.

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

09

the Principle

A dangerous cycle WORDS Becky Kells

Cycling is fast becoming one of the most desirable ways to commute - but what does this mean for other road users? In light of a tragic case that saw a pedestrian killed by a cyclist, Becky Kells explores whether a reform to cycling laws should be implemented.

W

hether you’re not wearing a helmet, having to compete with rush-hour motorists or braving a cycle hire for the first time, cycling can be a daunting way to travel. It’s also increasingly popular – following the lead of cities like Amsterdam, more people than ever are choosing to get to work on two wheels. Cycle use has risen almost every year since 2008, and with 69% of all cycle traffic recorded on urban roads, it’s clear that more cyclists than ever are sharing public thoroughfares with vehicles and pedestrians. Given the dense population and heavy traffic in London, Cambridge and York – three cities which share a significant percentage of British cyclists – one of the most important qualities a cyclist can have is self-awareness. Yet a recent case has offered a different perspective on cycling – one where the cyclist is not in danger, but a danger to those around them. Two years ago, 20-year-old Charlie Alliston rode a fixed-gear bike with no front brakes in a busy area of central London. He collided with Kim Briggs, who had stepped out for her lunch break. She later died from her injuries. Alliston was sentenced to 18 months in a young offenders’ institution for “wanton or furious driving”; a legislative phrase which lacks any reference to cycling, and which seems strange and archaic in the context of this 21st century case. That’s because the law under which Alliston was convicted is from the Victorian era, and was originally introduced in relation to horsedrawn carriages. This legislation is only used when offenders cannot be prosecuted under the Section 1 of the Road Traffic act 1988, which excludes death or injury caused by cycling, but the fact it is used at all exposes a devastating lapse in the updates made to cycling legislation. The case has prompted a review to establish if a new law is needed to protect pedestrians, and prevent deaths such as Kim Briggs’. A comparable law, death by dangerous driving, is due to have its maximum penalty increased from 14 years to life, which makes Alliston’s 18-month sentence seem relatively light. In fact, the archaic law under which he was convicted only allows for custodial sentences not exceeding two years. Meanwhile, dangerous cycling – which falls under the Road Traffic act 1988 – is punishable by a fine of just £2,500. Alliston’s case shares similarities with a dangerous driving scenario: a person in control of a vehicle acts irresponsibly, and as a result someone dies. The only difference, some would argue, is that he was riding a bike rather than driving a car. Although a bike is not motorised and a fraction of the weight

10

69% of all cycle traffic is recorded on urban roads

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

Issue Eleven

Around 59% of noncyclists in Britain feel that it is too dangerous for them to cycle on the roads. (ATT Statistical Release, August 2017).

4% folding/other

30% childrens' bikes

26% classic/hybrid

10% road bikes

30% mountain bikes

Breakdown of cycles sold in the UK. Source: European Bicycle Market & Industry Profile 2016

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

of a car, the consequences can be just as tragic if a collision occurs. And while rarer than fatal incidents caused by motorists, there is a history of cases where cyclists have caused death. In 2009, 20-year-old Darren Hall killed an elderly man while cycling too fast, and in 2015 Darryl Gittoes hit and killed a 73-year-old woman while riding a defective bike with no brakes and a flat tire. Both men were convicted under the “wanton and furious driving” legislation, and both received sentences of 12 months or less. The tragic results of such incidents only make the sentences seem more disproportionate in relation to dangerous driving charges. It also detracts from the seriousness of cycling – a mode of transport which must be treated as responsibly as any other vehicle operation, by cyclists and the law alike. Yet there has been backlash from legislators and cyclist groups, who are arguing that the number of incidents like those aforementioned are rare. The number of people killed by dangerous cycling is certainly disproportionate to those who have died due to dangerous drivers: there are around 400 pedestrians killed on the roads per year, and just one or two of these are struck by cyclists. To properly address the need for legislative change, the bigger picture should perhaps be explored. In 2015, there were two deaths and 96 serious injuries caused by bicycles. Every year, over 100 cyclists are killed and more than 3,000 seriously injured. That’s not to say that every person involved in these incidents was cycling dangerously, but more to highlight that, when it comes to roads being shared by different modes of transport, there is a significant element of risk for everyone. If laws are updated to protect cyclists, who are themselves suffering injury and death, then by extension, pedestrians will enjoy the same legal protection. Following the widespread press coverage of the Charlie Alliston case, and a campaign by Kim Briggs’ widower for stricter penalties for cyclist offences, the government has proposed a review of cycling legislation. Part one of the review will look into the creation of new criminal offences for dangerous and careless cycling. Assessment of this matter should be completed by early 2018. The second phase will examine the wider safety contexts, considering cyclists, pedestrians and motorists alike. In the meantime, cyclists within the capital are aware of the risks, with individuals and groups alike promoting a culture of safety. Kate, 21, from Dalston, said: “It’s got to the point where if I’m cycling around other cyclists, and I’ve forgotten my helmet for whatever reason, I feel ashamed.” Owen, 40, agreed: “I took risks all the time until I had an accident – it was minor, luckily, but it shocked me. Thinking about it though, it shouldn’t take a close shave like that to make you follow the rules.”

11

the Principle

“No stone will be left unturned” The role of the public inquiry WORDS Becky Kells

When the inquiry into the Grenfell Tower fire opened in September, many residents and supporters left the opening with their questions unanswered. This raises one larger question: if it is not for the people primarily affected, what purpose does the public inquiry serve?

I

t is easier to define what a public inquiry is not rather than what it is. David Lammy took to Twitter to stress that the Grenfell inquiry is “not a trial”, while the inquiry chair, Sir Martin MooreBick, reminded the public that it is neither “to punish anyone” nor to “award compensation”. Rather, a public inquiry is launched to establish what caused a disaster, and what could have prevented that disaster from happening. It also differs from an inquest, in which a coroner hears from witnesses and examines evidence to establish the immediate cause of death. A public inquiry is carried out by a governmentappointed leader, and while evidence and witnesses are considered, recommendations are not legally binding in the same way that an inquest is. Criminal charges tend to follow afterwards, and this can lead to a prolonged series of legal investigations. This was the case after the Hillsborough disaster in 1989, when 96 Liverpool football fans lost their lives. The public inquiry into Hillsborough was held from May to August 1989, followed by the first inquest, which ruled the cause of the deaths was accidental. However, this ruling was eventually quashed and a new inquest was held from 2014 to 2016, granting the 96 victims and their families their long-campaigned-for justice. The most recent Hillsborough inquests formed the longest case heard by a jury in British legal history. Taking into account the decades of campaigning to reopen the inquests, the aftermath of the disaster has exceeded 20 years – longer than the lifetime of some of the younger victims – and the legal battles are not yet over. Officials, experts and victims are in agreement that such a prolonged process cannot be repeated in the case of Grenfell. There was significant debate as to whether the Grenfell Tower fire should be subject to a public inquiry or an inquest. But as the

12

charity INQUEST pointed out, the two are not mutually exclusive: “There can be both a public inquiry and an inquest, if for any reason the public inquiry does not deal with all issues of relevance to the purposes of an inquest.” This is one possible consistent role of the public inquiry: a precedent to inquests, and a springboard from which criminal charges become tangible. Moore-Bick has said he would “not shrink from recommending civil or criminal prosecution” in the Grenfell inquiry - hopeful news for campaigners and victims who called for manslaughter charges to be brought. When Theresa May said that “no stone will be left unturned” in the Grenfell inquiry, she highlighted another role. A wellexecuted public inquiry can approach a disaster with more breadth than an inquest, bringing unprecedented factors to light. Yet this does not always happen. There are already concerns about MooreBick’s decision to exclude complex issues - social housing, class neglect, and entrenched inequality in Kensington and Chelsea – from the Grenfell inquiry. Moore-Bick’s scope is limited to two distinct phases: the “start, spread, response to the fire” and “how the building came to be exposed to serious fire”. But a limited scope in any investigation comes with dangers of its own: a constraint was put on the first Hillsborough inquests, when the coroner Dr Stefan Popper decided that he would not consider events after a cut-off time of 3.15pm. This limit left many family members unsatisfied with the outcome of the original inquests. Nor did the initial public inquiry debunk a false claim that Liverpool fans breached the gate to the stadium. Ismet Rawat from the organisation BME Lawyers for Grenfell points out: “This is not a fire that happened in a vacuum. There's a huge context.” Exploring every avenue in a public inquiry can

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

protect others – in this case, the thousands of people living in tower blocks across the UK. But it is difficult to know whether this line of inquiry will be fully pursued under the limited scope. As well as exploring broad issues, a sensitive and honest public enquiry will ideally address the families’ emotional needs, but this again presents problems. Peter Riddell, of the Institute for Government, said that there is a “risk” that “survivors and their families are unlikely to be satisfied…there are grand hopes at a launch, which are then frequently meet with disappointment”. Riddell’s observation helps to explain why, in the Independent Inquiry into child sexual abuse, two survivors’ networks dropped out. One survivor named Dr Frampton said: “[enquiry chairs] are never going to shine a torch in those dark places, for fear they’ll see themselves.” While commenting on the tendency for public inquiries to be chaired by elite public figures – in this inquiry, the very group under investigation for misconduct – Frampton succinctly explains that hearings should be carried out in a way that improves victims’ trust in the system, rather than damaging that trust further. Public inquiries must at once precede criminal investigation, recommend real changes to prevent future disaster, and satisfy survivors’ emotional needs. It is extremely difficult to do all three within a reasonable time frame - after all, disasters are not uniform, and have unique complexities. A Grenfell survivor Joe Delaney told the BBC he entered the inquiry with cautious optimism, but left feeling “more cautious than optimistic”. It remains to be seen whether those affected can put their trust in the Grenfell Tower public inquiry. Yet with successes and failures of historic inquiries and inquests fresh in public memory, hopefully, the Grenfell inquiry can do its difficult job.

Issue Eleven

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

13

the Principle

Return to Aus: Slater & Gordon break off UK operations WORDS Becky Kells

Australian-listed personal injury giant Slater and Gordon (S&G) confirmed this summer that it will break off its UK operations and hand control over to the firm’s senior lenders. Here, we look at why this decision was taken and the processes involved in breaking up a firm.

I

n an announcement to the Australian Stock Exchange (ASE) in August, personal injury solicitors S&G revealed that as part of a recapitalisation deal with its creditors, all UK operations will be placed in a separate holding company called UK HoldCo. The new business will be UK-based and wholly owned by the lenders. S&G’s statement to the ASE said: “The company believes the separation of the UK operations provides the best option to enable both the Australian and UK operations to succeed in their own right and will enable the company to focus its management’s time and resources on the Australian business." According to reports, S&G’s senior lenders have now agreed to provide an additional AU$50 million (£30.7 million) in funding, as part of the deal. It is understood that the firm’s current shareholders will now cease to have any interest in the UK arm. S&G — the first law firm to float on the ASE when it did so in 2007

— entered the UK legal market in 2012 with the £53.8 million takeover of Russell Jones & Walker. Keen to strengthen its UK platform, it made a number of subsequent acquisitions including the professional services arm of Quindell for £637 million in 2015. However disappointing financials blighted the Melbourne-headquartered outfit, which is known in the UK for its television adverts. S&G recorded losses in excess of AU$1 billion in 2015/16 (then £580 million) and AU$546.8 million in 2016/17 (then £335 million). In an attempt to stem its losses, S&G reduced its UK headcount by 20% and closed 18 of its 48 offices. The latest figures available show that gross debt currently sits at AU$780.9 million (£478 million). BLM has sealed the hire of 33 lawyers from S&G, including 11 partners, following a strategic review of the struggling Australian-listed firm’s UK operations. The hires for BLM will see the firm launch a new commercial advisory practice, comprising lawyers based across Manchester and London.

WHY BREAK UP? The vast majority of firms splitting will reform as solo or micro firms. These firms split up for a variety of reasons, including partners reorganising to focus on a different area of practice, a partner passing or other life-changing event, or even a partner dispute.

PROS & CONS There are many benefits for partners who split to start new entities, such as becoming their own bosses and in sole control of the business. On the downside, however, they could be losing a whole set of clients that had previously contributed to the value of your firm. They might also lose expertise in an area of practice. If, for example, one partner specialised in family law and the other in tax law, they would no longer have that diversity to offer their clients.

FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS Firms should ask vendors to bill them immediately for anything that’s due from the old entity: they need to know what their liability is so they know how much money to keep in the old bank account to cover all outstanding bills. This can get complicated: Who will do last billing? What happens when they collect that money? Many firms hire a third-party accountant to handle this for them. Sometimes it makes sense to use the previous firm’s bookkeeper since that person understands the existing set of books and can help smooth the transition without adding to the cost.

14

EMPLOYEES Whether or not employees are moving with the firm, obligations such as pension plans should be considered. A surprising number of firms get hurt because they forget about things like this. If a business is closing its doors rather than transferring employees to the new entities, they could work with a local recruiting company or legal networks to help old staff find new employment.

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

CHALLENGES Every split—for whatever reason—requires re-doing the partnership agreement. Basically, the original partnership is dissolved and then formed into two or more completely new entities. Each new entity should have a written agreement with clear provisions for how financial and other issues will be handled if the new firm or entity dissolves. If a firm is involved in a split, there are a number of things they must get right – from changing their firm name to disbursing trust accounts. As a best practice, authoritative sources should be consulted for help: firms should contact their local bar association to learn the rules of professional conduct for partnership splits, including public and client notification and trust accounts management. It is also a good practice to talk the firm's accountant and/or a legal consulting firm.

Issue Eleven

Summer Vacation Scheme In 2018 we will be holding two vacation schemes, in June and July Our two-week vacation schemes offer students the opportunity to gain a strong insight into life at the firm, as well as providing a solid account of the type of work encountered as a trainee. Our vacation scheme students can select two different practice areas and also take part in wider industry or social events. As part of the vacation scheme, students will also benefit from being assessed for a training contract. Your seats: you will benefit from experiencing two different practice areas, which you will get to choose. You will be given a supervisor in each seat who will provide you with real work and integrate you into the team. We will also provide you with a trainee buddy who you can catch up with at any point and ask any questions you have on an informal level. Sessions: alongside your seats, you will also benefit from attending various workshop sessions to help improve both your legal and business skills. The sessions include a mock employment tribunal and a variety of workshops, including workshops on negotiation, cultural awareness, presentation skills, and business development. The graduate recruitment team will also hold a session to help you best prepare for the training contract assessment. Assessment day: one of the key benefits from securing a vacation scheme with us is that you are guaranteed a place on training contract assessment day. This will be a morning or afternoon session and will involve a case study, informal interview and group exercise, as well as feedback from your supervisors. Socials: throughout your two weeks, you will get to experience the real culture of our firm through informal, relaxed socials alongside our trainees. Socials include cocktailmaking, bowling, dinners and drinks, as well as sports teams and volunteering opportunities. Salary: you will receive a weekly salary of £330 We will be screening on a rolling basis, please therefore apply ahead of the deadline to avoid disappointment. Applications open on 1st November 2017 and close 31st January 2018.

[email protected] www.reedsmith.com/ukgraduates

Reed Smith Graduates

Reed Smith Grads

Reed Smith LLP

SHARE OUR VISION

SHAPE YOUR FUTURE Our goal is simple. We want to create the future leaders of the firm. That means giving you the skills you need to become a successful lawyer, but also the experiences to discover where your true interests lie. Find out more at DLAPIPERGRADUATES.COM

www.dlapiper.com Copyright © 2016 DLA Piper. All rights reserved. | OCT16 | 3168402

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

15

the Principle

Northern Ireland & direct rule WORDS Emma Finamore

A

t the time of writing, Northern Ireland’s government remains in shutdown, with talks ongoing. Here we look at ‘direct rule’ – the system by which Northern Ireland is governed in light of a breakdown of government. Power-sharing collapsed in Northern Ireland in early 2017, ending more than a decade of joint-rule between unionist and nationalist politicians. Sinn Fein’s Martin McGuinness resigned as Deputy First Minister after many disagreements between the parties (the final row came over a botched green energy scheme), and the party failed to nominate a replacement for him, meaning the Northern Ireland Assembly couold no longer continue to govern. In response, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, James Brokenshire, called for fresh elections, in the hope of returning a new government to parliament. So far, this has failed. Northern Ireland has been without a functioning devolved government since January this year, when the coalition led by the two biggest parties, the DUP and Sinn Féin, collapsed. Sinn Féin has since rejected a DUP proposal for an an immediate restoration of the assembly along with a parallel, time-limited process to deal with culture and language. It said the DUP had not addressed the cause of Stormont's collapse. If agreement cannot be reached, James Brokenshire – the Conservative cabinet’s Northern Ireland Secretary – is under a

legal duty to call a fresh election. However, it is understood he is reluctant to do that. The longer the crisis goes on, the more likely is it the government will have to consider some form of direct rule from London. What is ‘direct rule’? Because of its history, Northern Ireland has a special type of government, called power sharing. Political parties representing different sections of the community have to share power, in a mandatory coalition, on matters such as housing, policing, prisons and transport. If they can't agree, Northern Ireland's devolved government breaks down. Direct rule is the mechanism for taking over the functions and powers of the government of Northern Ireland - the Northern Ireland Executive - and giving them to London. Laws affecting Northern Ireland would be passed through the government department run by ministers in London and the Privy Council. Direct rule is not favoured by many because it takes power out of local hands. How is direct rule implemented? In the past, direct rule could be implemented by the government easily, just by triggering section one of the 1998 Northern Ireland Act. However, since the 2006 signing of the St Andrews agreement, which devolved further powers to the Northern Ireland Executive, direct rule can only be implemented if the UK

government passes a law through the UK Parliament. When was the last time direct rule was used? Direct rule was last used between 2002 and 2007, when Tony Blair was the British prime minister. After five years of talks, eventually the DUP and Sinn Féin were able to strike a power-sharing deal in May 2007. Northern Ireland has been ruled directly from London in 33 of the 45 years since 1972, the year when the old Northern Ireland parliament ceased to exist. Could this be a different form of direct rule? There is some speculation, particularly from parties like the Irish nationalist Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP), that there could be a different form of direct rule from the one previously used to rule Northern Ireland. In the St Andrews agreement, the UK government agreed not to implement direct rule without passing a law in the UK Parliament. There is speculation this will be 'limited' direct rule, where civil servants take over responsibility for the day-to-day running while the UK government only passes legislation for important bills, such as the budget for Northern Ireland. Many republicans and nationalists in Northern Ireland are hoping for more input from the Irish government, so called 'green direct rule'. However, recently the British government has ruled out any kind of joint authority.

A law firm built around people

Fieldfisher is a European law firm with market leading practices in many of the world’s most dynamic sectors. We are an exciting, forward-thinking organisation with a particular focus on technology, finance & financial services and energy & natural resources. We have training contract opportunities in our London, Manchester and Birmingham offices.

Fieldfisher

Belgium I China I France I Germany I Italy I Netherlands I UK I US (Silicon Valley) | fieldfisher.com

16

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

@FieldfisherGrad

FieldfisherGraduates

Issue Eleven

e e c m i a g t l s it fu u a u e b J & the

be l il w ide er y s th e th ese d o . e r o ed gu an me m na i F rm rtu his l ga a m fi n Po t t ifu Em S o D R c st k a ut O W e v ain oo ea a h ag e l e b d te tion re w n th i Un l ac He es i . am ega on cas t H g l isb gal s L e n W taki ing le le rt tab o Sp no

WEST HAM UNITED V SPORTING LISBON West Ham United confirmed in September it will be taking legal action against Portuguese side Sporting Lisbon. Both sides have been embroiled in a bitter war of words following the summer transfer window, in which speculation grew surrounding a move for midfielder William Carvalho. In the aftermath of the window closing, Sporting's director claimed an offer was never made by the east London club. The news wasn't welcomed by West Ham, who will now take legal action against the Primeira Liga side. On his personal Twitter account, the London club’s owner's son – David Sullivan Jnr – said: “West Ham are commencing legal proceedings against the communications director of sporting Lisbon as a written offer for the player was made. “To Bruno de Carvalho the president of sporting Lisbon. To say we never made an offer is nonsense and serious libel.” The president of Sporting Lisbon chairman had recently issued a statement on the failed transfer, saying: “I want to give an information that has come out on both sides that I would like to emphasise. “I have always defended Sporting to the last, it is often not easy to reconcile the interests of the club and the athletes, but I always strive to do so, but I liked it here that they had a notion that for William there was not a single proposal. “You could see millions and millions on newspaper covers and televisions, but the fact is that Sporting did not refuse too much or too little because there were no proposals.” The Portuguese club's director Nuno Saraiva also came out with a strongly worded statement, in which he referred to the West Ham co-owner as a "lying parasite".

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

PREMIER LEAGUE V ILLEGAL STREAMING The Premier League has obtained a new High Court order that will make it much harder for people to watch games on so-called Kodi boxes. The order will be in place for the entire 2017/18 season. It allows the Premier League to work with the UK’s internet service providers (ISPs), including Sky, BT and Virgin Media, to quickly block servers that are hosting illegal streams of matches. A similar order was obtained for the final two months of the 2016/17 season, and was described as being “highly effective”. According to the Premier League, those efforts led to more than 5,000 server IP addresses, which had previously been streaming illegal Premier League content, being blocked.

17

the Principle

TUNCAY SANLI V MIDDLESBROUGH FC After leaving Teesside for Fenerbahce in 2009, Tuncay Sanli – a Turkish international – sued Middlesbrough for £544,677. The two High Court actions related to money which – it was claimed – was unpaid during Tuncay’s two years on Teesside. A company representing Tuncay pursued £544,677 for sporting and economic rights and image rights. Sundew Trading Ltd, which has its registered office in Funchal in Madeira, maintained that agreements were made between Boro and Tuncay to pay him £3,544,677 for the rights. It says that £3 million was paid by Boro to the Turkish international, but the balance of £544,677 had never been handed over. Agent Mikel Eiguren Arano also produced a writ against Middlesbrough for £400,000 plus interest, which he claimed was outstanding from money which was owed to him following Tuncay’s move from Fenerbahce to Boro in June, 2007. The Bilbao based agent reputedly received £800,000 of an agreed fee of £1.2 million. Tuncay Sanli won his case.

SHEFFIELD UNITED V WEST HAM Sheffield United sued the Hammers after being relegated in 2007 by Carlos Tevez's goals: there were problems with the Argentine's registration. The Blades settled out of court for about £20 million. West Ham agreed an £18.1million compensation deal with Sheffield United in 2009 over Tevez' role in keeping the London club in the Premier League in 2007 at the expense of United. Under the compensation deal, the payments were staggered until 2013 - the Blades' latest accounts confirm that, and that a loan from Santander bank was taken out in 2010 secured against the payments from West Ham. The Hammers made their final payment to Sheffield United in 2013.

MOHAMED AL FAYED V JEAN TIGANA Fulham owner Al Fayed accused the club’s former manager Tigana of over-paying for players and took him to the High Court. As one of the players in question was the under-perfoming Steve Marlet – who Fulham paid £11.5 million for – some Cottagers fans thought the former Harrods owner had a point. However, the High Court didn't agree and Al Fayed lost the case comprehensively.

BRIAN WELSH V HIBS The former Hibs player pocketed a "substantial sum" in 2008 after claiming an injection from a club doctor ruined his career. He sued Dr Malcolm Morrison for £350,000 at Edinburgh's Court of Session. Both sides settled out of court.

18

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

Issue Eleven

A better balance At Foot Anstey, our award-winning approach to business has helped us build an impressive national and international client base. Our continued growth means our trainees gain exposure to high-profile work with top-quality lawyers. Regular, open communication with your supervisors comes as standard. As does contact with our Managing Partner. All in a working environment that’s both progressive and supportive. Find a better balance. Join us for an exceptional experience and South West quality of life. Now recruiting for training contracts for 2018, 2019 & 2020. Visit www.footansteycareers.com

YOUR GLOBAL SUCCESS GRADUATE RECRUITMENT

Every year we recruit 15 Trainee Solicitors to complete a truly international training contract. With HFW, you will: •

Spend time working on global projects.

•

Work alongside some of the most respected and talented lawyers in their specialist fields.

•

Have the opportunity to complete a six-month secondment in one of our international offices.

If you are excited by the prospect of joining an international industry-focused firm, then please visit www.hfw.com/Graduate-Recruitment to find out more.

ADVERT All about law (265x162mm) October 2017.indd 1

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

02/10/2017 09:48

19

the Principle

The

nuclear loophole: detonation, disarmament & international law WORDS Becky Kells

On 6 August 1945, the first nuclear weapon was deployed, killing thousands, and causing widespread health problems for years to come. Over 70 years later, there is still no international law that directly prohibits nuclear weapons. Becky Kells examines how this legal loophole fuels the fire between Washington and Pyongyang.

20

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

Issue Eleven

O

n 6 October 2017, an international campaign for global disarmament of nuclear weapons won the Nobel Peace Prize. The campaign was recognised by the committee for its ability to "draw attention to the catastrophic humanitarian consequences of any use of nuclear weapons", and for its "ground-breaking efforts to achieve a treaty-based prohibition of such weapons”. Yet the campaign is far from achieving worldwide consensus – the nine states in possession of nuclear weapons boycotted the negotiations for the treaty, and two of said states are currently embroiled in a bitter standoff. At the moment, much of the conflict between Washington and Pyongyang can be traced on Donald Trump’s Twitter feed. With no direct military conflict occurring, these tensions are reminiscent of the Cold War in more ways than one. Not only are they confined to verbal threats and weapons testing behind-the-scenes, they have an inherent nuclear focus. While relations between the USA and North Korea have been tense since the end of the Korean War in 1954, never before have so many nuclear weapons been tested by North Korea than in Kim Jong Un’s time as president. This cumulated on 4 July, when North Korea tested its first nuclear missile capable of reaching US mainland. Washington responded with particularly punishing sanctions, and a promise to devote billions to military spending. Yet there was unease beneath the productivity – warning sirens were set up on Hawaii, and even now discussions remain hostile. But what exactly is the right of either side to detonate their weapons? Is it really as simple as one of the two presidents 'pushing the button'? International law is difficult to implement, given the different cultural and legal perspectives throughout the world. In 1996, the UN handed down an advisory opinion on the “legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons”, which evaluated nuclear weapon use against a historical range of treaties and conventions. The court voted that it "could not conclude definitively whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be lawful or unlawful in an extreme circumstance of self-defence, in which the very survival of a state would be at stake”. So, if a state was to use nuclear weapons as an extreme means of self-defence – a move which could be argued to exist in any war – this particular court could not advise as to whether it is legal or not. The court also made the point that if a country responds with a war action in self defence, it must be proportional to the attack. According to international humanitarian law, states must never make civilians the object of an attack, and so cannot use weapons that are incapable of distinguishing between civilian and military targets. Nuclear weapons – notorious for causing widespread civilian

death in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945 – surely fall into this category. With every other point, the court was able to state that nuclear weapons violated various international humanitarian declarations and conventions – including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), The Hague Convention (1907) and the Geneva Conventions (1949). While some were established prior to nuclear weapons being invented, they contained clauses that predicted the advancement of war technology, so these treaties render any destructive weapons illegal in this context. The loophole through which mass destruction could be realised is, therefore, the self-defence argument. Since 1996, a lot has changed in the world, but little has been done to address this legal gap. There are parts of conventions and international law which do apply to nuclear weapons, but no law specifically deals with the use of them or mentions them explicitly. A call for disarmament in 2011 was backed by the Japanese Red Cross, which referenced the organisation's experience of treating victims in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Yet so-called nuclear states are prone to boycotting any treaties that call for disarmament. While Trump would need congressional approval to launch a nuclear attack, it is unclear exactly where North Korea stands. A visiting New Yorker journalist was told by a North Korean diplomat: “Our Supreme Leader has absolute power to launch a war." This is within the contexts of their respective countries, however – not within the contexts of international law. For either country to use a nuclear weapon in a manner that could cause widespread civilian death, or environmental destruction, would be for that country to breach international humanitarian law. But while in almost every circumstance, the use of nuclear weapons is against one internationally-applicable law or another, the fact that there is no specific law pertaining to nuclear weapons means that their use is still arguably legal. This is why the 1996 advisory court was basically inconclusive, and it is why countries still have, and test, nuclear weapons to this day. It is in the best interests of all countries to comply with international law – the world exists on a global scale, and it becomes much easier for sovereign states to operate when predictability and consensus is in place. International laws provide this. Trump and Kim's volatility is backed up by nuclear weapons – the use of which may be legal in their individual states, but would violate human rights law. As the world navigates a tense nuclear situation, it is clear that there's a pressing need for an international, binding nuclear stance. There's also a philosophical question to ask – when states have the power to use nuclear weapons – be it literally, or as political leverage: do they believe themselves to be above the law?

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

21

the Principle

The student guide to

pro bono WORDS Becky Kells

Ah, pro bono. Two of many, many Latinate words that you’ll hear over the course of your legal career. But pro bono is in a league of its own in terms of importance. It co-exists alongside all of the areas of law, it has its own national week, and even the biggest firms in the legal world are likely to endorse it. The good news is, as a student, so can you.

S

o what is it? Pro bono roughly translates to “for the common good”, so any work done by legal professionals on a voluntary basis is classed as pro bono. From representing individual clients without charging a fee, to working on large-scale charity projects for a not-for-profit organisation, pro bono can take many forms. Pro bono is so important because while the law affects everyone, not everyone can afford a lawyer. Yet they still might find themselves trying to understand a contract, attending court, or facing a criminal sentence. Firms large and small recognise this, and will extend their resources to cover the people who need them. Often a big firm will have aspirational pro bono targets, stating a target number of cases per year. There are many reasons to get involved with pro bono work. Yes, first and foremost, you’ll be helping people who really need legal advice or representation. But any sort of legal experience that you can get as a student is going to work in your favour – if you’ve had a small role in a case, or provided some advice within your capabilities, it will make an excellent talking point at an interview. It could also lead to an experience outside of UK law – a lot of UK universities have links to the Innocence Project in the USA, for example, which works to reopen cases of prisoners on death row.

As a student, however, there are limits to what you can do – after all, you can’t start signing off on huge deals or representing someone in court until you’ve got some letters after your name. In addition, the Pro Bono Protocol – a handy document released by the Law Society that covers all things pro bono – states that nobody should do any pro bono work that exceeds their level of qualification. The whole point is that people get the same experience that they would get as a paying client. So however great it may look for you, the humble law undergraduate, to have represented someone in court, it’s not going to be fair on them as a client if you’ve not completed your training first. When it comes to pro bono, there’s still a lot that you can do, though – so long as you’re supervised, receive the correct training, and complete whatever work you do to a high standard. As a student you could find yourself undertaking legal research, liaising between lawyers and clients, raising money or awareness for a charity, or even putting together your own project. There’s also the chance to get involved on the education side – programmes in schools and local communities will enable you to pass on your hallowed legal knowledge. Just make sure that you’re working under the correct supervision based at where you are in your legal education.

So what can I do?

22

Housing rights

Industrial relations

Innocence Project

Streetlaw

Action against medical accidents

Immigration and asylum

National centre for domestic violence

Citizens Advice Bureau

Legal translation services

Fundraising and charity work

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

Issue Eleven

Pro bono spotlights

Innocence Project WHAT DOES IT DO?

Works internationally to challenge criminal charges. The Innocence Project often helps prisoners facing life sentences or (in the USA) the death penalty, who have exhausted all official appeals.

WHERE IS IT BASED?

Wherever you are, there is likely to be an Innocence Project nearby. Universities often establish their own societies for this kind of work, but there are also clinics and groups set up under the Innocence Project umbrella.

HOW CAN I GET INVOLVED?

First things first – check if your university has an Innocence Project in place, as part of its law society or department. If not, head over to the Innocence Project website to search for local opportunities.

Streetlaw WHAT DOES IT DO?

Streetlaw recognises that a lot of people in society, such as those who are homeless, are unaware of how the law can help them. Streetlaw pro bono movements work with a specific group to educate them about the laws they may find most relevant. For example, some Streetlaw branches work in schools, teaching children and young adults about things like consent and the law. Others work with homeless people, explaining their rights and housing law, so the law becomes helpful rather than a hindrance.

WHERE IS IT BASED?

At a variety of universities. Streetlaw tends to function as part of society, putting students in touch with a local group of people who would benefit from the service.

HOW CAN I GET INVOLVED?

Citizens Advice Bureau WHAT DOES IT DO?

From seeking advice about housing issues, debt problems, or immigration, to being the first port of call for those with a legal problem, citizens advice is one of the most valuable free legal resources in the country. Volunteering with your local Citizens Advice Bureau is a great chance to help people who are navigating the legal system, perhaps for the first time.

WHERE IS IT BASED?

Wherever you go to university, there will be a Citizens Advice Bureau nearby. You can find your local one by going to citizensadvice.co.uk.

HOW CAN I GET INVOLVED?

Either contact your local Citizens Advice Bureau directly, or fill out the enquiry form on the website.

Guardian 300 UKContact Advert_iStock-98328391_PRN.pdf your law department or society to see if they have a Streetlaw programme set up.

1

20/09/17

WHERE BRIGHT MINDS MEET

At Clifford Chance, one of the world’s pre-eminent law firms, we offer expert advice to clients on all aspects of commercial law. With thousands of lawyers working from dozens of offices in over 20 countries, our reputation in the field is formidable. As a trainee your four seat rotations will include time spent in our core areas of Finance, Corporate and Capital Markets, plus one other in either Litigation & Dispute Resolution, Real Estate or Tax, Pensions & Employment. As well as our prestigious Training Contract, there are many ways for you to experience what life is like at Clifford Chance – from our Open Days to Vacation Schemes including Springboard, the bespoke programme for first-year students. Whether you’re a Law or non-Law student, we have opportunities for everyone. To find out more, visit careers.cliffordchance.com/ukgrads @CCGradsUK facebook.com/CliffordChanceGrads careers.cliffordchance.com/ukgrads

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

23

8

the Principle

Brexit update WORDS Emma Finamore

We take a look at key points in Theresa May’s Florence speech, which took place this September.

T

heresa May delivered her third big speech on Brexit in September, which gave clarity in some areas, but not in others. It could have done just enough to unblock the stalled divorce talks, but did not seem to help with discussions in Brussels in October – where the UK’s attempt to persuade European leaders to open talks on a transition period appeared to fail. Downing Street seemed to rule out fresh concessions on the UK’s divorce bill and on the other side Brussels hardened its approach.

THERE WILL BE A 'STATUS QUO' TRANSITION PERIOD Britain wants a transition period aimed at bridging the gap between leaving the EU in March 2019 and beginning the new trading relationship. It’s envisaged that this will last around two years. The EU has long said any transition period must maintain the status quo, meaning Britain will have to abide by EU rules, including the jurisdiction of the European court of justice, and continue to allow free movement. May accepted this, the only difference will be that from 29 March 2019, all new EU arrivals will be registered. This gives the chancellor, Philip Hammond, the gradual exit he has been asking for, to avert a regulatory cliff-edge for UK business. It should also satisfy Brexiters, who can at least feel Britain is at last well and truly on the way out.

CONCESSIONS ON CITIZENS’ RIGHTS After a series of Home Office blunders, the EU27 were looking for strong assurances on citizens’ rights. May offered to write legal protections for EU citizens living in the UK into the actual exit treaty. “I want to incorporate the agreement fully into UK law and make sure British courts can refer directly to it,” she said. This represents a considerable strengthening of the UK’s earlier proposals, which would have allowed MPs to alter EU citizens’ rights. In a further concession, May said she accepted a role for the ECJ in settling rights disputes: “I want UK courts to be able to take into account the judgments of the European Court of Justice with a view to ensuring consistent interpretation.”

DEFENCE

To help secure this transition period, the prime minister offered to pay enough into the EU to ensure no member state will have to stump up more (or receive less) during the current budget round ending in 2020. She did not mention a sum, but it should be about €20 billion (£18 billion). But the EU is looking for far more. It is eyeing a final settlement of €50 billion - €100 billion, so was also looking for assurances that the UK will meet its longer-term unpaid liabilities for EU projects and commitments lasting years beyond Brexit, something Brexiters will find it hard to accept. May was vague, saying only that the UK wanted to “continue working together to promote long-term economic development” and would contribute “our fair share of the costs” in “specific policies and programmes” including science, education, culture and mutual security.

THE IRISH BORDER The EU made it clear it expects Britain to solve the problem of the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic, once the UK leaves the bloc and its customs union. It wanted substance here, but it seemed to get none. “We have both stated explicitly we will not accept physical infrastructure at the border,” May said, but made no new suggestion on how that might actually be made to work.

May made a great deal of the contribution the UK can make to European defence. She said she wanted “a bold new strategic agreement” providing a “comprehensive framework for future security, law enforcement and criminal justice cooperation”. The EU27 will welcome continued defence and security cooperation with the UK, but have repeatedly made clear that they are not willing to see it used as a bargaining chip in Brexit negotiations.

24

BRITAIN WILL PAY SOMETHING

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

REGULATION The EU27 were looking for an indication of what kind of future relationship and single market access the UK wants, a question on which the government has refused to communicate clearly mainly because it is not agreed on this itself. Broadly, the choice is between remaining close to the EU in regulatory terms but at a cost in sovereignty and cash, like Norway or Switzerland; and cutting loose to seek a free trade deal such as that the EU recently struck with Canada, which offers greater freedom but fewer rewards. What the EU will not accept is a bespoke halfway house. Britain cannot have its cake and eat it; Norwaystyle big benefits cannot come at Canada-style low costs. Unfortunately, this is what May said Britain wanted.

Issue Eleven

SIDLE YC A REERS.CO M/EN/EUR OPE /LON DON-OPP OR TUNITE S

Attorney Advertising - Sidley Austin LLP, One South Dearborn, Chicago, IL 60603. +1 312 853 7000. MN-6850 Attorney Advertising - Sidley Austin LLP, One South Dearborn, Chicago, IL 60603. +1 312 853 7000. MN-6546

MN-6850_ChicagoTrip_265x158mm_v2.indd 1

Take the law into your own hands

10/5/17 8:45 AM

with a Pinsent Masons vacation placement We are looking for exceptional individuals who are driven, confident and commercially aware. It is the best way for you to get to know us, and for us to get to know you. If you’re prepared to put yourself forward, to have a say, to learn new things and respond to an ever-changing environment, visit us at www.pinsentmasons.com/graduate to find out how to apply.

facebook.com/PMgrads @PMgrads @pm_grads

www.pinsentmasons.com © Pinsent Masons LLP 2017

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

25

the Principle

To stay or not to stay: trainee retention rates WORDS Becky Kells

With so many of the big law firms taking on trainees, it’s helpful to keep track of how many of these stay on as newly qualified solicitors at that same firm. It goes further than just being a bit nosy – when you’re applying for training contracts, you’ll want a good idea of which firms make permanent offers to the majority of their trainees. Hint: retention stats are also useful to see how many trainees a firm has in any one intake – if you’re looking for a big cohort with lots of people, places like Linklaters and Eversheds Sutherland have high numbers. If you’re after a smaller gang of fellow trainees, places like Ashurst, Bird & Bird and Weil may be worth investigating. So here we are – the vital statistics you need to be aware of this term.

Your career starts now Dechert is a global law firm with more than 900 lawyers in 28 offices around the world. Our trainee solicitors do interesting and challenging work for clients ranging from global high-profile entities to those most in need. Each of our lawyers makes a difference. We offer an open and inclusive culture. You will work alongside some of the brightest minds and most dynamic advocates in their fields. Our diverse and collegial environment cultivates learning, creativity, ambition and a passion for the law.

Make it happen Learn more about how Dechert can introduce you to a world of opportunity at dechert.com/careers

d Ad - London - graduate recruitment - horizontal - 08-17.indd 1

26

8/25/2017 11:44:39 AM

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

Issue Eleven

QUALIFIERS 47

QUALIFIERS 20

QUALIFIERS 18

ACCEPTED 40

ACCEPTED 19

ACCEPTED 15

PERCENTAGE 85%

PERCENTAGE 95%

PERCENTAGE 83%

QUALIFIERS 52

QUALIFIERS 55

QUALIFIERS 41

ACCEPTED 42

ACCEPTED 44

ACCEPTED 27

PERCENTAGE 81%

PERCENTAGE 80%

PERCENTAGE 66%

QUALIFIERS 30

QUALIFIERS 56

QUALIFIERS 91

ACCEPTED 24

ACCEPTED 47

ACCEPTED 67

PERCENTAGE 80%

PERCENTAGE 84%

PERCENTAGE 74%

QUALIFIERS 32

QUALIFIERS 26

QUALIFIERS 10

ACCEPTED 29

ACCEPTED 16

ACCEPTED 5

PERCENTAGE 91%

PERCENTAGE 62%

PERCENTAGE 50%

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

27

the Principle

The vacation scheme process

Uber:

a new beginning, or the beginning of the end?

WORDS Becky Kells

U

ber has appointed a new chairwoman for its UK branch, just one month after being told that its licence to operate in London will not be renewed. Laurel PowersFreeling stepped up to the helm of the ride hailing service, and will bring a number of years’ banking experience to the role: Powers-Freeling has held senior positions at the likes of McKinsey & Co, the Bank of England, and Morgan Stanley. As Uber faces its latest legal challenge, Powers-Freeling could be exactly what it needs: an established businesswoman with an international repertoire of corporate experience. She has been appointed chairwoman at the very time that Uber’s ethics and integrity are being publically questioned, and must confront the twofold challenge of the legal appeals process, and the possible threat it poses to Uber’s reputation. TfL announced on 22 September 2017 that it would not renew Uber’s licence - but for fans of the app, which claims to have five million users in the UK, hope is not yet lost. It has formally declared that it will be appealing TfL’s decision, and has called upon Hogan Lovells to manage the legal challenge to the ban. Until this process has been exhausted, Uber can continue to operate on London’s streets, so it is in its best interests to fight the decision in court. Outside of court, on the public relations side of things, Uber has been apologetic, striking a tone on social media in which it seeks redemption and vows to learn from its mistakes. After the announcement, it appealed to TfL on Twitter, vowing to do better and work with the London transport regulator. So while Uber will most likely challenge the termination of its licence at every turn, in public, it is very much turning over a new leaf. Perhaps the decision to appoint Powers-Freeling could not come at a better time; a new leader ties in with a new, more ethical image for Uber in the UK. Yet some would argue that real change needs to happen before Uber’s future in the capital can be secured. It’s been criticised for not vetting its drivers adequately, and for not properly investigating instances of sexual assault. There was also a case last year in which drivers working for Uber fought to be granted employee status, rather than being self-employed - the latter does not allow workers to take sick pay, or entitle them to a minimum wage. Despite only being in London since 2012 - a mere five years - a future without Uber is a hard thing for many Londoners to comprehend, so easily has the business slotted into the metropolitan culture. If Uber does not survive this legal battle, it will leave a vacuum in the ridehailing industry. Will we see a rise in smaller, similar appbased taxi companies, or a revival of the black cab? For now, Uber - along with its 50,000 drivers and millions of London users - is in limbo. It remains to be seen whether Laurel Powers-Freeling can guide it back to certainty.

28

We take a look at the key points in the vacation scheme application process – between now and spring / summer next year – as well as what the schemes are, why you might want to do one, and where you can find them.

I

f you’re successful enough to land a vacation scheme, you’ll be given a unique chance to make a professional impression on a law firm before you’ve even finished your studies. Many firms have a policy of interviewing all of their vacation scheme students for training contracts, and some firms recruit up to 100% of their trainees from vacation schemes. At AllAboutLaw, we believe that getting yourself a vacation scheme is half the battle to securing a training contract. But there’s a wealth of information about deadlines, dates and application processes for you to wise up on before you can get to that point.

SO WHAT IS IT – AND WHEN SHOULD I START LOOKING? A vacation scheme is law internship that gives prospective trainees a strong grounding in what it’s like to work at a firm. They’re usually open to students in at least their second year of study, but there are first year opportunities out there – check out Nota Bene or AllAboutLaw.co.uk to see firms

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

offering these. The exact breakdown of what you’ll experience varies from firm to firm, but you can expect a mixture of presentations, workshops, shadowing, and introductory training. You’ll more likely than not be doing some legal work for the firm too – and expect to get paid for it! A lot of firms pay their trainees hundreds for placements that last around one or two weeks. If it sounds like the pinnacle of legal work experience, that’s because it is – and places on vacation schemes are highly sought-after. You should go into your application as though you would any other job – prepared, well-versed in what the firm does, and willing to demonstrate your enthusiasm as well as your academic prowess. If you’re already planning your application, good news – you’ve started at the right time. You’ve got the option of applying for winter or spring vacation schemes, which have their deadlines in mid to late October. The big deadline day to be aware of is for the summer vacation schemes – this falls on 31 January, but always check this on AllAboutLaw.co.uk, as it can sometimes vary.

Issue Eleven THE APPLICATION – FROM NOW UNTIL 31 JANUARY Once you’ve figured out which firms to apply to – we recommend keeping this select, so you’re not spreading yourself too thinly – and made a note of their deadlines, it’s time to start applying. Get your application in early, as places tend to fill up – this shouldn’t be a 11pm rush job on 31 January! Firms will request either an application form or a CV and cover letter. Make sure you check the format well in advance so you can either familiarise yourself with the application questions, or tailor your CV and cover letter to the specific firm. Just because the deadline is in late January (a whole Christmas holiday lies between you and it!) does not mean that you’ve got time to dawdle. You should use this time to make your vacation scheme application dazzle. If you’re a first year, even better – hit the books, get your grades up to scratch, and get involved with a good mix of societies and extra-curricular clubs. Anything you do now within a university context – be it holding a committee position, mooting or pro bono within the law society, or even starting your own business initiative – is going to fill out your vacation scheme application. If you’re in second year, take a good look at what you’re up to now – and the experiences you’ve amassed – and make sure you include them all in your application. Once you’ve extolled your amazing experiences and top grades, make sure you check everything fully. Writing about your “amazing werk as tresuror of the law soc” isn’t going to score you any points; editing is your friend.

THE INTERVIEW – 31 JANUARY ONWARDS Once you’ve got everything sent off, all that remains is to await responses. If you get rejections, don’t be disheartened – consider asking for feedback so you can hone your application for next time, and keep on amassing a strong portfolio of law experiences. If you get an interview, great! Time to make sure you thoroughly research the law firm – there is no one-size-fits-all way to behave at a vacation scheme interview, and firms are going to want to see that you know how they conduct business compared to other law firms. It’s also important that you brush up on your commercial awareness – hint, the newspaper you’re reading right now is a good place to start!

THE VACATION SCHEME – EITHER THE EASTER BREAK, OR SUMMER BREAK. After your interview, all that is left is to wait for a response. Again, if it’s not what you want to hear, don’t be disheartened – pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and remember that feedback is everything. If you’re successful, congratulations! Get ready to impress the firm, and look forward to your taste of the world of law.

Did you know that 50% of students who do a vacation scheme end up getting a training contract?

Be part of the 50%

Vacation scheme deadline: 31 January Law jobs, careers & advice. All good. All in one place.

OUR MANIFESTO

1.

RIP UP THE RULE BOOK

If you never go against the grain, always follow the welltrodden path and consistently take the safe option, you could find yourself sleepwalking into a predictable career with a traditional firm. If that’s how you see your future, we wish you every success. But please look away now. If you prefer the bold to the boring, however, and find the prospect of joining a different kind of law firm enticing, we’d love to talk to you. We want to break the mould, rewrite the rules and redefine the legal profession. Your mission could be to build the law firm of the future, today. And to define your career at the same time. Read the full manifesto and find out more at RPC.CO.UK/MANIFESTO

THE LAW CAREER FOR PIONEERS

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

29

the Principle

Solicitors, social media & the SRA

WORDS Becky Kells

Within the past 10 years, social media has taken the world by storm. But how does this fit into careers? If you're going into law, there are certain boundaries that must exist between your work life and online life. For solicitors that blur these boundaries, there are some hard lessons to be learned. 30

I

n 2015 and 2016, Majid Mahmood, who had been a solicitor for 12 years, took to Facebook to exercise what he deemed “freedom of speech”. On both occasions, Mahmood posted graphic and insulting comments of an anti-Semitic nature, and rebutted those who disagreed with him with either apparent indifference, or by swearing at them. Mahmood’s profile also contained information about his job title and place of work at the time - the Luton-based City Law Chambers. Mahmood’s fate from this point onwards serves as a cautionary tale for anyone who is both a social media user and a solicitor. He was brought before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, which deemed that he used a "worrying lack of self-discipline and common sense", and that his posts were "terrible ideas for a solicitor to be promoting". He was fined £25,000 and suspended from practice for 12 months. A few months after Mahmood was issued this fine and ban, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) released a warning about inappropriate emails and social media posts. As well as reminding solicitors of the dangers of public or semi-public social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, the SRA also drew attention to instances where inappropriate emails had circulated internally in firms. Paul Phillip, the chief executor of the SRA, said: “Public confidence in the profession is undermined by offensive or inappropriate communication and the misuse of social media

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

can be a real problem”. The announcement by the SRA marks a move into a different realm for the law sector. As communications increasingly move online, the etiquettes adopted by solicitors are still being shaped. In Mahmood’s case, the misdemeanour is extreme – he made graphic comments pertaining to a particular religious group – but there’s a whole plethora of errors to be made online, ranging from inappropriate language choices to expressions of a discriminatory nature. The reality of online social media profiles is one where a person’s profession is united with anything they say, any pictures they appear in, and any public conversations they have. The internet creates a huge grey area, blurring professionalism and personal expression. But what is it about law as a sector that makes social media such an issue? For one, it’s an industry that thrives on discretion – if a person takes to Twitter to express a controversial barrage of opinions, it doesn’t showcase that their ability to remain unbiased and calm when dealing with sensitive information. The SRA released direction on lawyers using social media in 2016, which reminded of the inherently public nature of sites such as Facebook and Twitter. Not only did the directive remind solicitors of the importance of client confidentiality, it also advised against disclosing locations – such as via geotagging – as it could be used to identify clients.

Issue Eleven

This level of self-censoring may come as a shock to some solicitors and trainee solicitors – for anyone looking to maintain a strict balance between professional and private life, the implication that they should monitor their own internet use could seem quite intrusive. Yet working as a solicitor is a public role, and any individual working in law must inspire public confidence. In some cases – as where discriminatory or threatening language has been used – solicitors have been in breach of the law. At the very least, someone expressing themselves through offensive language on social media is not likely to inspire confidence in clients, who expect discretion and impartiality. Social media is ultimately a mode of self-portrayal, and there are certain standards of how legal professionals should present themselves in public spheres. With the internet increasingly becoming a virtual extension of the public place – as a platform to converse, express personality, and share content – it also becomes another area in which professionals can be scrutinised. The internet also serves to immortalise: a throwaway verbal comment in the privacy of one’s home is easily lost, but a comment made on Twitter can be traced, reported, and ultimately can lead to job loss or a fine. This may seem harsh – especially when using the ‘freedom of speech’ or ‘personal opinion’ argument – but solicitors are required to act with integrity and to behave in "such a way as to maintain the trust that the public places in the provision of legal services". So, when it comes to self-conduct and expression, there is a small part of a solicitor which always has to be on duty. Mahmood is not alone in having to pay out a fine in the thousands. The SRA warning comes off the back of a number of similar offences, which in turn resulted in fines. It may seem that solicitors are being held to an unfairly high standard by their regulator, or it may be a given that solicitors should be discreet in work and out of it. But as a virtual online world expands and consolidates itself, it is clear that there needs to be some guidelines in place for professionals walking the fine line between self-expression and political incorrectness.

ce n e d onfi c c i l ion s s “Pub e rof p e h ned in t i m r de or is un e v i s ffen o y b iate r p o pr n.ˮ inap o i t a nic u m com

Ashfords trainee recruitment 2017 Training Contract and Summer Scheme applications open on the 2nd November 2017 For more information please visit ashfords.co.uk/careers/training

ADVERT_The Principle.indd 1

27/09/2017 10:26:12

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

31

the Principle

Snooping on the snoopers: watchdog will oversee police use of new spying powers WORDS Emma Finamore

Spying powers used by UK police, intelligence agencies and other public authorities will be scrutinised by a newly-created watchdog. Here we look at the methods of surveillance and the various controversies surrounding them.

L

ord Justice Fulford was appointed as the UK’s first Investigatory Powers Commissioner in March. The position was created as part of a strengthened oversight regime in the landmark Investigatory Powers Act, which passed into law last year. The new law builds on changes to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) which were passed by Parliament in March 2015. Supported by the Investigatory Powers Commissioner’s Office (IPCO), Lord Justice Fulford will oversee the use of tactics such as bulk collection of communications data and interception of emails and phone calls. The move brings the oversight regime under one umbrella, after it was previously split between three different bodies. The IPCO will inspect hundreds of public authorities each year, including intelligence services, law enforcement agencies, local authorities and prisons. Specifically, among the

32

organisations overseen are: the government’s monitoring agency GCHQ, MI5, MI6, the National Crime Agency, all police forces, the Serious Fraud Office, and HM Revenue and Customs. A 'double lock' regime will be introduced for the most intrusive techniques, so that warrants issued by a Secretary of State will now require the approval of a senior judge. This measure will be brought into force incrementally over the next year and once it has started, judicial commissioners will consider whether they agree with ministers’ decisions to authorise the use of intrusive investigatory powers. Commissioners will have the power to refuse warrants. Lord Justice Fulford said in August: “From today, and for the first time, investigatory powers will be overseen by a single body applying a consistent, rigorous and independent inspection regime across public authorities. “This is an important milestone as we start to implement the

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

new oversight powers set out in the Investigatory Powers Act.” The Act was drawn up to bring a host of techniques used by security services, police and other authorities into one legal regime. Home Secretary Amber Rudd said the act offers a “worldleading oversight regime”. She added: “In commencing his oversight responsibility, Lord Justice Fulford is playing a vital role in providing the enhanced safeguards we set out in the act.” However, human rights groups and MPs have questioned whether the judicial commissioners – which include inspectors, technical and legal advisers, and scientists on a technology advisory panel – will be given sufficient access to secret information to make their oversight role more than that of a rubber stamp. The human rights group Liberty has launched a crowdfunded legal challenge to the spying powers the act contains. The group

Issue Eleven CONTROVERSIAL NEW SURVEILLANCE METHODS

is asking the public to help fund the legal challenge after more than 206,000 people signed a petition calling for the repeal of the Investigatory Powers Act. The legal challenge has been triggered by a recent ruling by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) that the “general and indiscriminate retention” of email, text and phone records for access by the state security and police is unlawful. Liberty says mass surveillance powers are “replicated and vastly expanded” in the Investigatory Powers Act without any effort to counter the lack of safeguards found unlawful by the ECJ. Martha Spurrier, the director of Liberty, said in a statement earlier this year: “Last year, this government exploited fear and distraction to quietly create the most extreme surveillance regime of any democracy in history. Hundreds of thousands of people have since called for this act’s repeal because they see it for what it is – an unprecedented, unjustified assault on our freedom. “We hope anybody with an interest in defending our democracy, privacy, press freedom, fair trials, protest rights, free speech and the safety and cybersecurity of everyone in the UK will support this crowdfunded challenge, and make 2017 the year we reclaim our rights.”

BULK HACKING – The new legislation empowers police and state agencies to access, control and alter electronic devices, computers, phones and tablets “on an industrial scale”, regardless of whether their owners are suspected of involvement in crime. Liberty says this will leave them vulnerable to further attack by hackers. BULK INTERCEPTION – The new act allows the state to read texts, online messages and emails and listen in on phone calls en masse, without requiring suspicion of criminal activity. Bulk interception has to be authorised by ministerial warrant subject to approval by a judicial commissioner. BULK ACQUISITION OF COMMUNICATIONS DATA AND INTERNET CONNECTION RECORDS – The act requires phone and web companies to hand over 12 months of records of everybody’s emails, phone calls and texts and entire web browsing history to state agencies to store, data-mine and profile. Liberty says these powers could provide a goldmine of valuable personal information for criminal hackers and foreign spies. BULK PERSONAL DATASETS – The new law allows state agencies to acquire and link vast databases held by the public or private sector. Liberty says these can contain details on religion, ethnic origin, sexuality, political leanings and health problems, potentially on the entire population – and are ripe for abuse and discrimination.

APPLY FOR A TRAINING CONTRACT AT

A LEGAL WEEK ‘BEST EMPLOYER’ FOR THE 13TH CONSECUTIVE YEAR BIRMINGHAM | BASINGSTOKE | BELFAST | EDINBURGH | LEEDS | LONDON | MANCHESTER MILTON KEYNES | NORTHAMPTON | NOTTINGHAM | SOUTHAMPTON | THAMES VALLEY

WWW.SHOOSMITHS.CO.UK | WWW.TWITTER.COM/SHOOSMITHSGRADS WWW.FACEBOOK.COM/SHOOSMITHSGRADUATES | WWW.INSTAGRAM.COM/SHOOSMITHSGRADS

LegalWeekBestEmployer-158x265-V1.indd 1

25/08/2017 12:09:48

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

33

the Principle

Law societies: everything you need to know WORDS Becky Kells

You’ve just joined the queue for the fresher’s fair, and have been gifted a free tote bag bearing a questionable slogan, which will become filled with fliers as you shuffle from stand to stand. You’re going to encounter many societies today, but few can offer the breadth of experience of the law society.

IDENTIFY THE DIFFERENT LAW SOCIETIES As you make your way around the fresher’s fair (or peruse the university website from the comfort of your halls), you may notice a number of law-related societies. There is likely to be a main, overarching “law society”, but there could also be a bar society, for students with a keen interest in becoming barristers. There might be a specific society for non-law students who are interested in law, and some universities have an LLM society, for students doing that particular master’s degree. As confusing as all this may seem, you don’t need to worry – nor do you need to sign up for every single law society you come across; just have a good old chat with yourself and figure out what your interests are. If you’re an undergraduate law student, for example, you can rule out the LLM society! The good news is, most university societies offer a trial period – you can attend a society’s initial events for a week or two, and decide after that if you want to become a full member. So if you’re not sure you want to be a barrister, for example, but the thought has crossed your mind, it’s probably worth attending a couple of Bar society meetings to see what they’re about. LEGAL SKILLS DEVELOPMENT As much as essays, seminars and lectures are going to form the foundation of your legal knowledge, there are some things that you just can’t learn from hitting the books. Most law societies will give you the chance to boost your people skills, and begin using your growing legal knowledge in various contexts. Many legal societies will offer mooting. While this is likely to feature in your degree at some point, the more practice you get at this, the better you’ll be when you enter court for the first time. Not only can

34

you write about mooting in law society in any applications further down the line, the confidence and prowess at public speaking you gain from it will shine through at legal interviews! PRO BONO Your law society is likely to be your first chance to get involved with pro bono legal work. Many universities have pro bono initiatives in place – Innocence Projects, law clinics and Streetlaw education schemes are three of the most common. For more on pro bono opportunities, head over to page 22, where we cover pro bono in all its glory. LEADERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES As a first year, it’s unlikely that you’ll be shooting straight to the top of the committee. But societies are a great way to get leadership experience – indeed, many people get their first taste of business responsibility in a society committee role. However excited you may be about this, it’s probably not the best idea to turn up to the first social telling people your aspirations to run the place someday. There’s nothing to stop you from going for traditional roles such as president, and all law societies need treasurers – people who look after the financial side of things. Or you could explore a new role, such as social media officer – a good thing to investigate if you want to apply your creative flair to something law-related! Whatever you’ve set your sights on, joining the law society in first year is a good chance to have a chat with committee members, to find out more about what they do, and also to become well-known within the society.

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

CAREER BOOST If you’ve got your sights set on being a solicitor, it definitely doesn’t hurt to get to grips with the opportunities on offer – and the firms offering them. Law societies will provide strong and valuable links to these firms. Some law societies have their own careers fairs, which obviously will have a tailored legal focus. Not to mention, you’ll be interacting with society members from all year groups – some who may have done vacation schemes, secured training contracts, or done work experience at firms that interest you. NETWORKING Networking is a multi-faceted thing. On one hand, joining a law society is going to put you in touch with likeminded and talented fellow students. It doesn't hurt to get in contact with them early on, as you never know when you might run into them in your professional future. And while your law society is where professional ties are made, it’s also a great opportunity to make friends (aww!). Harriet Jupp, president of the Law Society at the University of Nottingham, said: “Becoming a member of any Law Society is one of the most rewarding things you can do as a student at the University of Nottingham”. She emphasises the importance of using the society to build friendships: “You’ll find it’s the perfect way to get some breathing space from your degree and to spend time with your fellow peers.” There’s nothing quite like studying law, and it can be really helpful to have solid friendships with people who know what it’s like. Mooting, pro bono and careers fairs are highly important – but equally so is having a good group of friends to support you as you navigate the weird and wonderful world of university.

Issue Eleven

The ultimate guide for aspiring lawyers

- Profiles on the top law firms - Insights from respected legal professionals - Advice on applications, interviews and more Download Nota Bene today or grab a copy from your law department www.AllAboutLaw.co.uk/Nota-Bene

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

35

the Principle

0917044 ADVERT The Principle All About Law 265x158.indd 1

36

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

15/09/2017 12:07

Issue Eleven

The AllAboutLawAwards

On Monday 2 October 2017, the annual AllAboutLaw awards took place at the Calvert 22 Foundation in London. Wellattended by partners, trainees and graduate recruiters, the awards recognised the range of talent and opportunity on offer from the top law firms in London and beyond. WORDS Becky Kells

T

he awards were announced by Jack Denton and Paul Harris, the co-founders of AllAboutLaw.co.uk. Jack Denton said: “There are so many factors that go into training lawyers. As always, we are proud to recognise the top law firms for their achievements in providing the best possible experiences for students and trainees. The AllAboutLaw Awards are a great opportunity to identify and support the firms who are getting it right.” The overall winner for the night was Clifford Chance – the firm brought in five awards, including the Top Law Firm for Training Contracts & Vacation Schemes. Farrer & Co also came away with a number of awards, including Best Training Contract. Claire from Farrer & Co said: “At Farrers our trainees are a key part of the future of the firm and so it seems obvious to us that we must recruit carefully and then nurture and invest in them not just while they are training, but also as they progress along their career path. A huge amount of effort goes into the recruitment and training of our trainees and we are delighted that they reported so favourably on their experience.” The awards range from recognising support, training principles and progression, to highlighting the strengths of different types of firm, such as City, US and national firms. The majority of the awards are ranked using personal satisfaction surveys, which are completed by vacation scheme students, trainees and newly qualified solicitors. This way, the results have the most relevant source they possibly can – the people experiencing the vacation schemes and training contracts. Each firm receives two numerical percentage scores – one for training contracts, and one for vacation schemes. Prospective trainees can then compare and contrast the scores of various firms. Representatives from the winning firms came away pleased and proud of their achievements at the Awards. Vicky Widdows, from Akin Gump, said of winning Best Training Contract at a US Firm: “It’s very exciting. We’re very pleased, we’ve got a small programme and we work very hard on it, so it’s lovely to get a piece of recognition.” RPC was also recognised, winning Best Training – Vacation Scheme. A trainee from RPC said: “it’s really great that the firm has been recognised for this, because they put a huge amount of effort into the vacation scheme; all the events that the vacation

A range of recruiters, partners and trainees were on hand to accept awards on behalf of their firms.

scheme students have, such as lunches and networking events, are well attended by everyone from across the firm – NQs all the way up to partners. I think it’s great.” Two awards were judged by an independent student panel – the Best Website award, and the Best Social Media award. AllAboutLaw research 2017 revealed that 80% of students prefer to get their careers advice online. With this in mind, the firms recognised for their use of social media, and the delivery of their websites, are exploring new ways of engaging with prospective employees, while maintaining traditional values of the legal industry. Upon receiving the award for best social media, Shoosmiths said: “Social media is the one of the most effective ways to reaching a wider audience, therefore to win this award is great recognition for us. We aim to connect to students in a way that will be engaging and informative so their opinion really matters. For us to receive such positive results is amazing and we will continue to offer advice, hints and tips to future talent.” The firm also revealed what was important to the team behind their award-winning social media: “Keeping up-to-date with trends and attraction strategies is at the forefront of our planning. We use our social and professional networking platforms to play an effective part of combating the image of a stuffy traditional law firm and instead

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

focuses on relationship management and personal development.” The Diversity & Inclusion award is also arrived at by a different route to most of the Awards – it is judged by the committee of the Junior Lawyer’s division – and was won by Baker McKenzie. The awards are a great opportunity for us to commend the law firms which are doing it right, and to show how the industry is evolving and improving on a year-on-year basis. They are also an invaluable guide for prospective lawyers in choosing their future career paths. We would like to thank the sponsor for this years’ AllAboutLaw Awards – the University of Law – and all the attendees. Until next year!

37

the Principle

Know your market: are you ready to be a lawyer?

Change is afoot in the legal industry. The profession you want to join does not look like it did 10 years ago. As you apply and interview for your first roles in legal, what do you need to know? Here are the top trends. WORDS Kirsten Maslen, Head of Government & Academic, Legal UK&I, Thomson Reuters

1. Demographic and economic change The proportion of lawyers working in-house (i.e. working for a company or other organisation and advising internal clients) is increasing. These lawyers make up a large chunk of law firm clients. The increase in their number and specialisation means they can be more demanding of their law firm advisers, in terms of quality and relevance of advice, but also cost. The dynamic between in-house and private practice changed after the financial crisis: it looks like those changes are here to stay. Law firms are responding by demonstrating their value through an increased focus on customer service, allied to expert knowledge of their clients’ business and market dynamics. Legal advice without context is often of little value to a client. Lawyers must demonstrate their commercial awareness – they must understand the implications of their advice on their clients’ business. 2. Disaggregation and new entrants Legal work can be broken down into specific tasks. Some of those tasks must be done by lawyers, but some can be done by other providers of legal services, or even by machines. Clients need to right-source their legal work, i.e. determine the right person/solution to deliver it. That might mean one of their in-

house lawyers, an external lawyer, a services company, an app, or someone else in their business. To decide the right approach, a piece of legal work is broken down into its constituent parts: we call this disaggregation. New entrants to the market are snapping at the heels of law firms and other legal services providers. They provide a huge array of services designed to carry out specific tasks in the legal workflow. Some of them provide legal process work, for example large-scale document review, using technology. Others provide advanced technical research solutions to save lawyers’ time and clients’ money. 3. Technological change Technological advancement has increased both speed and efficiency. Lawyers used to negotiate contracts by post; now it’s by email, or in online forums and over web-conferencing. Similarly, machine learning has enabled vast stores of data to be read instantly and key data extracted on which the lawyers can advise. As this technology becomes more widespread, lawyers will be less likely to have to spend hours in a room wading through thousands of documents. Instead, the relevant data will be extracted for them, meaning they must add value at a different point in the process. Courts are moving online. Dealing with disputes online should speed up the justice process and also make it more accessible to

claimants of more limited means. The jurisdictions of the High Court in the Rolls Building in London have been digitised, using a system called CE-File, enabling law firms to submit filings online and members of the public to access court documents much more easily. These developments are expected to be rolled out more widely across the UK justice system. Advancements in data analytics enable lawyers and their clients to foresee legal problems before they arise and take action accordingly. Potential litigants should be able to assess their chances of success with far more clarity, as case documents are mined and patterns extracted to predict outcomes, leading to more early settlements. Increased use of blockchains and smart contract technology will mean many contracts will be formed and managed electronically. This reduces the amount of time spent on administration and disputes, because automation requires obligations to be clarified and potential breaches and their consequences to be reflected in the coding at the outset. Change is here These changes are leading to new business models and legal products and services. Successful lawyers will embrace this change and make it work for them.

Why does this matter to you? It is important to understand the industry you are joining, how it works and where you might fit in. You will want to join a firm that is forward-thinking and confident of its place in the future legal services market.

38

When researching firms, think about how they are differentiating themselves from competitors. Are they investing in new technological solutions? How do they see these solutions improving their service to clients?

Knowledge of law as a business, in a law firm or as a support to business, in-house, is crucial to your professional success. Knowledge of the law will always be important, but ensuring you understand how it helps clients achieve their commercial objectives is crucial.

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

Lawyers must have commercial awareness and the digital skills to use the tools that will enable them to give the best advice. Make sure you are developing these while you study, as well as at work.

Issue Eleven

Prepare for practice.

Enhance your legal research and skills with Practical Law’s law school resource centre. This one stop shop for resources makes it easy for users to find exactly what they need. Gain real life insight into the legal profession to help you prepare for a career in law. These resources cover key areas such as how to prepare for a training contract interview, working in-house and advice on pupillage interviews.

Talk to your law school librarian about a Practical Law trial request

AllAboutLaw.co.uk

39

Expect great, get exceptional

We’re an award-winning law firm with a global reach and the world’s best legal practitioners. As one of them, you’ll have the opportunity to work on international deals in a close-knit team of professionals. We’re fast-paced here, so you can expect to be challenged from the start. However, hard work and performance never go unnoticed. If you bring us your creativity and intellectual drive, we’ll offer you an outstanding rewards package and extensive support – at every stage of your career. By choosing Weil you’ll receive the platform you need to reach your full potential. If you’re ready to join our world-class law firm, visit weil.com/ukrecruiting or call 020 7903 1042.

Expect the Exceptional

Vacation scheme placements

15 30

First year opportunities

10

Trainees