Category: Metro

Seven seek support

The chair of the City of London Law Society (CLLS) has appealed to law firms and lawyers across the country to help seven aspiring solicitors left in limbo following the collapse of formerly listed law firm RBG Holdings.

Passmore, a former partner at Simmons & Simmons, shared that a trainee approached him seeking a new firm after the high-profile winding down of RBG. At the same time, the trainee explained they were also reaching out on behalf of six future trainees, set to start in 2025 and 2026, who are now without a training spot.

RGB owned two law firms, Rosenblatt and Memery Crystal. The former was mostly bought out, while the latter was wound down, with its partners moving to other firms.

Addressing his LinkedIn connections, Passmore said:

“These people are inevitably worried about rebuilding their futures in this hugely competitive market. I can remember the thrill of getting that magic letter telling me I had secured my articles/training contract, but I cannot imagine what it must be like to have that opportunity taken away before it has even begun.”

“So dare I ask: are there any law firms out there — whether or not CLLS members — who might just somehow be able to look to see if you can do something to help?” he continues. “Please let me know at the CLLS if you think you can.”

In addition to seeking new homes for the trainees, Passmore also appeared to question whether others could be doing more. “It surprises me that our regulators don’t get involved in these situations to pressure the businesses concerned to do more,” he wrote in the comments section below his original post.

This point was echoed by former Clifford Chance managing partner and SRA board member, Tony Williams. “One downside of the LLP and ABS is that no lawyer in the business feels that they have a personal responsibility to sort their staff out,” he responded.

Law firms able to offer assistance to trainees are encouraged to contact the CLLS directly.

Appeal follows latest exam results

A popular lawfluencer has urged law firms to reconsider before severing ties with future trainees who fail the SQE, highlighting ongoing “glitches” in the new qualification process and urging firms to give students “the benefit of the doubt”.

The appeal, posted to LinkedIn today by medical and cosmetic injury solicitor Chrissie Wolfe, argues that the “hard” exam is meant to replace a training contract, not supplement it, and that requiring students to do both effectively tests their competence twice. “You can afford to give them some leeway,” she writes.

“There are still a number of glitches with various aspects of the process meaning that many students aren’t being taught the proper content for the exams, provided the correct conditions for taking the exams or afforded equal opportunity of passing,” Wolfe continues. “It’s still a new system, give the students the benefit of the doubt”.

Wolfe, who regularly shares legal career advice on Instagram and TikTok, emphasises that “humility breeds loyalty and the more you support your candidates, the more they will support you back”.

The lawyer’s post follows a recent Legal Cheek Career Conundrum featuring a student whose training contract offer was revoked after failing SQE1 on the first attempt — despite having mitigating circumstances.

The post sparked plenty of comments, with advice ranging from appealing to the SRA to have the attempt struck out to publicly calling out the firm.

Ruth Ellis was executed in 1955

London law firm Mishcon de Reya is pursuing a posthumous pardon for Ruth Ellis, the last woman to be hanged in the UK.

Ellis, aged just 28, was convicted in 1955 of murdering her former lover, racing driver David Blakely. Her execution by hanging at Holloway Prison sparked national debate — and has continued to do so for decades. Now, her grandson Stephen Beard is hoping that new evidence not presented at her trial could finally clear her name.

Mishcon’s partner and head of politics and law, Katy Colton, is leading the case.

“Securing a posthumous pardon for Ruth Ellis is not just about correcting a historical wrong,” she said, “it is about acknowledging the systemic failures that led to her unjust conviction and execution.”

Although pardons do not erase a conviction, they are a formal recognition that the original verdict was flawed. Under the Royal Prerogative of Mercy, the King has the power to grant a pardon, typically following a recommendation from the Ministry of Justice.

The legal team at Mishcon is reviewing Ellis’s original trial alongside new claims that evidence was missed — including her allegedly abusive relationship with Blakely, and the role of another man, Desmond Cussen, in supplying the weapon used in the killing. Her family argue that these factors could have significantly affected the outcome of her trial, which lasted just two days and resulted in a guilty verdict after only 15 minutes of jury deliberation.

There’s also pre-existing link between Mishcon and the case. The firm’s founder, Lord Victor Mishcon, attempted to intervene on Ellis’s behalf in 1955, after her conviction but before her execution. Managing partner James Libson called the firm’s renewed involvement “an opportunity to continue Lord Mishcon’s work” and “right a wrong”.

He added: “Mishcon de Reya has always been driven by a socially conscious spirit… I very much hope we can help [the family] achieve justice for her.”

The renewed push for a pardon comes as Ellis’s life is back in the spotlight, with the ITV drama A Cruel Love: The Ruth Ellis Story drawing fresh attention to the case.

Anju Suneja, a partner and EDI board representative at the firm, said Ellis’s story still resonates today. “Women like Ruth who pressed for careers, independent financial security, and a different place in society often paid a severe price,” she said. “Ruth’s story continues to be relevant — particularly as domestic violence rises and hard-won freedoms are under threat around the world.”

Mishcon is currently working on the case pro bono, while the family has launched a crowdfunding campaign to support further legal costs.

If successful, the pardon would represent one of the most significant posthumous acknowledgements of injustice in British legal history.

Unforeseen critic

US courtroom star Judge Judy has waded into Britain’s row over controversial new sentencing guidelines — branding the changes “a mistake” and declaring the justice system “broken”.

Appearing on Good Morning Britain last week, the famously no-nonsense TV judge, who previously served as a Manhattan family court judge, was asked about new guidance for English and Welsh courts that advises judges to consider an offender’s ethnicity before deciding whether to send them to prison.

Judge Judy has intervened in the row over new sentencing guidance in England and Wales. It says a defendant's ethnicity should be considered by the courts when deciding whether to send them to prison.

The Justice Secretary believes it creates a "two-tier" system and wants it… pic.twitter.com/BIvTChJqgR

— Good Morning Britain (@GMB) March 13, 2025

The guidelines, issued by the independent Sentencing Council and set to come into force in April, place greater emphasis on pre-sentence reports for certain groups, including people from ethnic minority or faith backgrounds. These reports are designed to offer judges more information about an offender’s background, potentially influencing sentencing decisions.

But Judge Judy—real name Judy Sheindlin, a US-qualified lawyer—wasn’t having it. In an interview on the ITV breakfast show, she said: “It’s a mistake. Sometimes well intentions people create bad law. I don’t know how those criteria you mentioned have anything to do with rehabilitation — I would be furious if I didn’t fit one of those criteria.”

She went on to say the current justice system is “broken”, and that making it “look more compassionate”, won’t solve the problem.

Her comments come as the UK government scrambles to respond to mounting criticism from the opposition benches. Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick has branded the guidance a “two-tier system” and is calling for the law to be changed so ministers can overrule the Sentencing Council.

Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood has publicly distanced herself from the guidance. “There will never be a two-tier sentencing approach under my watch,” Mahmood insisted, promising to write to the council to express her “displeasure”.

Meanwhile, the Sentencing Council has defended its approach, arguing it helps judges understand and address the disadvantages certain groups face in the justice system. Statistics show that offenders from ethnic minority backgrounds consistently receive longer custodial sentences than white offenders for similar crimes.

Still, critics argue the changes could undermine the principle of equal treatment before the law — and Judge Judy appears to agree.

Breached SRA principles

An ex-BNP Paribas lawyer has been ordered to pay £31,000 after a disciplinary tribunal found he nicknamed colleagues “the Idiot”, “Pol Pot”, “Jabba the Hutt”, and more.

Benedict Foster, former head of legal for BNP Paribas London’s debt and equity team, faced the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) over his use of “inappropriate, unprofessional and/or offensive nicknames,” which breached SRA principles. The tribunal fined him £15,000 and ordered an additional £16,000 in costs.

Besides the nicknames, Foster was also found to have used “offensive and/or inappropriate language” around the office. This included “c*nts”, “Looks like a bunch of c*ck”, “what the f*ck is this?” and “asking if another individual is autistic”.

The nicknaming emerged during an exit interview, reporting that Foster had called a French colleague “Mad Paul”, used “Hu She” for an Asian female colleague, and named another French co-worker “Biriyani”. Foster also admitted to calling others “the Idiot”, “the Twittering Fool”, “Pol Pot”, and “Jabba the Hutt” while at BNP Paribas from December 2020 to September 2021.

Foster, who trained at Linklaters before moving in-house to the French bank, had been investigated internally following the exit interview report. The bank passed its findings to the regulator in March 2022 and Foster left that month. According to his LinkedIn profile, Foster has been “retired” since then.

Foster denied that the moniker “Mad Paul” referred to his colleague’s qualities as a lawyer, explaining instead that the nickname stemmed from his colleague’s “slightly cavalier approach to timekeeping, attendance at the office and his interpersonal skill”.

Foster admitted that even if his colleagues “shared his humour” that was no excuse. The tribunal determined that Foster had not upheld the standards expected of solicitors, had failed to act with integrity, and did not promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.

At his hearing, Foster’s barrister noted the remarks were made during the Covid pandemic, which was a “very stressful time” worsened by working from home with a new IT system.

The barrister said his client “wishes to apologise” because he “never intended any offence” and that “there was never any racist intent whatsoever”.

10 to 15 from September 2027

The London office of US law firm Gibson Dunn will increase its trainee numbers by 50%, from 10 to 15.

The uplift in TC positions will come into effect in September 2027 as the firm looks grow its presence in the City. It established its London base in 1979 and is now home to over 150 lawyers.

The Legal Cheek Firms Most 2025 List indicates that this increase will bring the firm’s trainee intake broadly in line with fellow US firms Kirkland & Ellis, Ropes & Gray and Weil Gotshal.

A spokesperson for Gibson Dunn said:

“We are increasing our trainee intake to 15 per year for our September 2027 intake. This reflects the growth of our London office, and our commitment to developing home-grown talent across practices. Our trainees will continue to receive opportunities and hands-on experience across a wide range of practices, and through client and international secondments.”

Gibson Dunn’s current cohort of trainees are among the best-paid in the City, earning £125,000 over the course of their training contract and a market-leading £180,000 upon qualification.

US President attacks BigLaw diversity initiatives as ‘discriminatory’

US President Donald Trump has stepped up his attacks on some of the country’s leading law firms with a new executive order targeting what his administration describes as their “discriminatory” summer vacation scheme programmes.

In a recent executive order, filed several days ago, Trump targeted the Washington-based law firm Perkins Coie, revoking security clearances for its lawyers and staff while also prompting a review of its government contracts.

As part of the order, Trump also launched a wider review into whether large law firms reserve certain positions such as summer associate spots — similar to summer vac schemes in the UK — for individuals of “preferred races”. It will also investigate whether firms discriminate in lawyer promotions, client access, or participation in events, training and travel.

It went on to outline several allegations against the firm, including claims that its representation of Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential race resulted in “a false ‘dossier’ designed to steal an election”. It also accused the firm of “racially discriminating” against its own lawyers and staff.

The firm said it would challenge the order which is described as “patently unlawful”.

The move comes part of wider efforts by the Trump to clamp down on what he describes as “illegal and immoral” diversity and inclusion initiatives which were promoted under his predecessor Joe Biden.

The orders states: “The Attorney General, in coordination with the Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and in consultation with State Attorneys General as appropriate, shall investigate the practices of large law firms… who do business with Federal entities for compliance with race-based and sex-based non-discrimination laws and take any additional actions the Attorney General deems appropriate in light of the evidence uncovered.”

Perkins Coie isn’t the only BigLaw outfit to be on the receiving end of one of Trump’s exec orders.

Last month, lawyers from Covington & Burling who provided pro bono legal support to Jack Smith, the former US special counsel overseeing Trump’s criminal prosecutions, had their security clearances revoked. Additionally, any government contracts held by the firm are now under review as part of the order.

Follows SRA and LSB bosses quitting roles

Kathryn Stone OBE, chair of the Bar Standards Board (BSB), will step down from her role later this summer to join the Police, Fire and Rescue Inspectorate.

In January 2018, Stone joined the bar regulator as board member, stating she did so with “enormous respect for the barrister profession”. She rose to Chair in the summer of 2022.

Though not a lawyer herself, the vice-chair Andrew Mitchell KC noted she worked to “advance and protect the public interest and the interests of consumers”.

In a leaving statement, said:

“The work of the BSB by its diverse staff is vital to promote high standards, equality and access to justice. As I reflect on my time here, I do so with an increased respect for the profession and the role of its regulator.”

Mitchell KC stated the “board will miss her greatly” and praised “her hard work and wisdom” in a “period of considerable activity, challenge and ongoing reform” by deploying a “potent mix of approachability and charm, with steely determination and resolve.”

Mark Neale, Director General of the BSB, added that Stone “brought the Board together behind an ambitious programme of reform” to build “enduring relationships…inside and outside the barrister profession”.

Stone will join HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services, an independent body that evaluates the effectiveness and efficiency of police forces and fire services.

Stone’s departure comes just weeks after the announcement that the chief executive of the Solicitors Regulation Authority will step down later this year, while the chair of the Legal Services Board resigned, citing personal reasons.

All nine

Shoosmiths has recorded a 100% trainee retention rate this spring, with all nine of its March 2025 qualifiers staying on as newly qualified (NQ) solicitors at the firm.

The NQs will be based across Shoosmiths’ UK offices, with London, Manchester, Thames Valley, and Birmingham among the locations welcoming fresh talent. Real estate and dispute resolution & litigation are the most popular practice areas this round, with two qualifiers joining each. The remaining qualifiers are spread across corporate, commercial, banking, employment, construction, and pensions.

A spokesperson for Shoosmiths said:

“This 100% retention rate reflects our commitment to developing and supporting our trainees throughout their journey at Shoosmiths. Through enhanced training programmes, proactive career development support, and a focus on inclusive management styles, we ensure that our trainees gain the skills, confidence, and opportunities needed to transition seamlessly into newly qualified roles within the firm.”

Shoosmiths joins Addleshaw Goddard in achieving a 100% retention rate this spring, with the latter keeping all 11 of its newly qualified solicitors. Meanwhile, Hogan Lovells recorded a 78% retention rate, with 18 out of 23 trainees staying on.