Court Dress III
March 8, 2008 by Ruthie
Ruthie thanks regular readers for their patience whilst she continues through a lengthy trial in a location with intermittent internet access. VM is also currently occupied with weightier matters than dress shopping.
Ruthie finds herself as the only woman and the only solicitor-advocate in her current trial. Following the recent changes in court dress Ruthie is now resplendent in her wig, courtesy of the kind generosity of VM, but marked out as a solicitor-advocate by her gown which is identical to the usher. Ruthie is convinced that wig wearing does achieve parity of status in front of the the people who really count during the trial, namely the jury and the defendants, but the difference in her gown does not pass un-noticed by members of the bar who can on occassions be overcome by the aroma of cash whenever passing within a couple of metres of a solicitor.
Ruthie would prefer that her dealings with her fellow advocates were not potentially coloured by her status as a solicitor. One method of avoiding this would be by introducing complete parity of dress. Whilst her fellow advocates would eventually discover her status, it would avoid scenes in the robing room resembling starving sharks circling fresh meat.
Darling, that is all very well but you’ll be pretending you are a lawyer next.
Oh come on Ruthie - do oyu want to pretend you are a barrister? Why not be proud that youre a solicitor?
I am very proud to be a solicitor, and delighted that since the rules have changed to allow solicitor-advocates into the higher courts I can do the advocacy that I love.
(Incidentally I was called to the Bar, but never practised as a barrister.)
[...] Ruthie, of Ruthie’s Law, busy with a four week trial, has posted about Court Dress. Happy with her wig, she now wants a barrister’s gown… but only to…. “avoid scenes in the robing room resembling starving sharks circling fresh meat.” Story [...]
Just keep telling yourself that they are just jealous that a Solicitor-Advocate can earn more than a Barrister.
Why do solicitor advocates want to wear the same robes as a barrister? Answer - they want to pretend they are barristers.
That is unfair - unjust.
If that were to be allowed (and P will not allow it) - then where is the demarcation? Okay Ruthie might be a good advocate and she should rejoice in her profession and status; but to want the same style garb as us - is pushing it too far.
Solicitors have enough priviliges of their own without trying to steal our clothes.
The barrister’s robe is a mark of the Bar - why covet it?
Get your bleedin’ own robes…….perhaps a mauve one?
I do think the current compromise in allowing solicitors to wear wigs whilst retaining their gowns is probably the fairest to both professions, however ulimately I think that people doing the same job should be goverend by the same set of professional rules and wear the same kit. I suspect that will be a few years in coming though.
Oh - what nonsense. The Barristers robes tell the world that this person has undergone the training of the Bar - with an emphasis on advocacy. After all that is what we are specifically trained to do.
It cannot be fair that any acknowledgment of this special training (and calling from on high) is suddenly obliterated by some misguided belief that we should all look the same. Why pretend…that we are all equal.
P will not allow it.
You will never nick our gear….get your own robe.
Ruthie, why can’t you convert to the Bar?
Convert to the Bar? What a total cop-out. I am amazed that the Bar allows solicitors just to fill in a form and then let them in.
Some of us had to do the BVC - utter fools that we were
Hi Ruthie
I’m a trainee solicitor in Milton Keynes. I’m just doing my Higher Rights course at the moment - and its awesome. Really enjoying it - can’t wait to get on and do some proper advocacy.
Any tips for being a good solicitor-advocate??
I’ve got to put a portfolio together of advocacy to receive my accreditation. Unfortunately there isn’t anyone in my firm who does any advocacy. I am currently working in an Employment department and my supervisor does the advocacy at few Employment Tribunals. I don’t this is the best experience.
I want to qualify into Commercial Litigation.
Any tips or advice??
On another point, the Law Society (so I hear) is abandoning the Higher Rights program at the end of this year. All solicitors will therefore have rights of Audience in all courts. I can’t understand the logic behind this? Surely solicitor-advocates require some level of accreditation and training??
I just wondered what your thoughts were.
Thanks for your help
Tom
Mr P, I wonder what your opinion is on the legal executives!
Hey Tom
How dare you suggest that solicitors require some level of accreditation and training. Training on Advocacy?
Good Grief man - that’s a bit much isnt it? I mean - the law is only a game - don’t take it that seriously. Any old arse can stand up in a wig and an usher’s gown and spout the first thing that comes in to their minds.
Training?
Are you having a laugh Tom??
Oh Ek…it’s Ekatrina aka Android - her with Classic FM in the background; whilst we were rocking to Hendrix - she was swooning to Medlsesome.
Nothing wrong with L Execs
Dear Tom,
if you want to qualify into commercial litigation I wonder how much use you will make of your higher rights, although you will probably make lots of money which should mitigate your loss.
It sounds as though you are going to have difficulties finding someone to adequately supervise your portfolio at your own firm. My advice is to make some enquiries as to other solicitor advocates practising in your locality then diplomatically approach your current supervisor with a view to getting some appropriate supervision from a solicitor-advocate in another firm.
You can get details of solicitor advocates from the Solicitors Association of Higher Court Advocates http://www.sahca.org/
I would offer to supervise you myself but if you are good looking VM may get jealous.
It does worry me slightly that solicitors are now automatically getting their higher rights without additional training. I would say that market forces should sort the wheat from the chaff, but LSC funding has skewed the market place such that solicitor advocates are being used in some very serious cases above their competence simply because it makes more commercial sense for firms to use their own in house advocates.
Mr. P: I’m curious. If you truly are a barrister, what is your area of speciality?
Ruthie - my area of speciality? Now that would be telling.
Why so curious?
I have just jacked it all into become a chimney sweep
Because the way you write suggests to me that - gasp - you may in fact not be a barrister at all.
Ah Ruthie - there are thousands of barristers - do they all “write” the same?
Hmmm….yes I think they do.
Mr P is not a barrister - he is a chimney sweep - I thought I told you that!