Lawyers' immunity challenged
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.GLENDA COOPER
An "outrageous" 200-year-old rule that protects incompetent lawyers from legal challenge should be scrapped, the Consumers Association says today.
If the incompetence of a barrister or other advocate means a client loses a court case or suffers loss, that client has no rights against the advocate who is immune from any negligence claim, says Keith Richards, the Consumers' Association senior lawyer.
"The rule serves little function but to protect lawyers and this leads to cynicism and distrust among the public. The right to redress is a basic consumer principle - the foundation of the legal process."
Next month, the Bar Council will consider a new complaints scheme under which the public can claim up to pounds 2,000 compensation if the barrister was guilty of misconduct or if she or he provided inadequate professional services. However, barristers will still be able to claim immunity from being sued for negligence over presentation of a case.
A Bar Council spokesman said immunity was not to protect lawyers but the legal system. "Barristers are unlike other professionals because they are 50 per cent on the losing side,'' he said.
"By the very nature of it, if someone is in prison for a criminal offence, what have they got to lose by suing the barrister? And if they are successful it calls into question the whole trial."
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments