The Bar Standards Board (BSB) has maintained a suspension to online bar exams implemented earlier this year following “clear evidence of cheating”.
The change in policy, initially only applicable in Pakistan and Bangladesh after allegations of malpractice, was made universal in May.
Now, “having consulted with various stakeholders and having received clear evidence of cheating”, the BSB confirmed online exams will remain suspended “for the foreseeable future”.
The 2024 Law Schools Most List
Budding barristers are now required to complete written exams “only by pen and paper and only at the training providers’ invigilated examination halls”. Overseas exams must follow the same format and be completed at British Council venues (or others approved by the BSB).
Addressing potential accessibility issues, a written statement by the BSB noted:
“This decision does not affect the provision of reasonable adjustments for students whose needs are specified in documented learning agreements with their providers stipulating that adjustments are necessary. The decision also does not affect the ability of students who have not previously needed a learning agreement to work with their provider to implement one.”
At the time of implementing the suspension, the BSB stated that they understood the benefits of a more flexible approach, but nevertheless “cannot compromise on the integrity of the exams.”
The post BSB maintains ban on online exams following ‘clear evidence of cheating’ appeared first on Legal Cheek.
Boris Johnson has labelled the prime minister a “stooge” in an interview for Nadine Dorries’ new book The Plot, which is released today.
Dorries has also suggested that the secretive cabal she has identified in her new book is “grooming” Kemi Badenoch to be a future party leader.
Referring to Dougie Smith, a No 10 insider and husband of Johnson’s former policy chief Munira Mirza, she said: “He’s already … grooming the person to take over from Rishi Sunak”.
Pressed on who that person was, Dorries added: “Kemi Badenoch”.
Asked on TalkTV if the prime minister is in danger of facing a leadership challenge, Dorries said Sunak “doesn’t realise he’s been totally played and totally used”.
She said: “I’m sure Rishi is a very good and honourable person. But he was very politically naive. … The thing about Rishi is he’s like a boy band member on auto tune, isn’t he? He’s got the looks, he’s got the suit, he’s got the background, he’s got the money, he fits all the demographic. But he was very politically naive”.
“And these people have just captured him”, she added.
On Kemi Badenoch, Dorries also quotes a source saying: “[Michael Gove] has been a big part of the plan to nuke Boris forever, and here he was in no way benefiting from all of his plotting and meddling.
“He’s also been building up Kemi Badenoch as the next leader of the Conservative Party, because that was part of the plan and it still is. He’s been mentoring Kemi for a long time, possibly, originally, at Dougie’s behest.”
Dorries’ book, The Plot: the Political Assassination of Boris Johnson, finally released on Thursday, describes a secret Conservative clique called “the movement” which includes among its members cabinet member Michael Gove, former adviser Dominic Cummings, and Dougie Smith.
Dorries also interviewed former prime minister Boris Johnson for her book. He told his long-term ally: “I heard that Cummings has said he started to plot to get rid of me in January 2020. … The plot was always to get Rishi in. I just couldn’t see it at the time. It’s like this Manchurian candidate, their stooge.”
He added: “People still feel hacked off. They voted for change in 2019 and they are drifting back to Labour in those Brexit seats because they’re not seeing a changed government. Nothing to rally behind, nothing; we are just drifting into defeat”
“The whole thing needs a massive kick in the pants … unless we grip it, the results of the local elections will be repeated at a general election, and Starmer will be a complete disaster … I feel a massive, massive sense of frustration that we had an eighty-seat majority. We had a fantastic agenda. We could have kept the whole thing going.”
Johnson is also quoted as saying: “We just aren’t doing enough to fix our energy supply problems, we aren’t doing enough to build nuclear reactors. HS2 has become a total joke. Levelling up has been all but forgotten. What’s happening to gigabit broadband? I don’t hear and don’t know what’s happening to all the infrastructure stuff. We hear nothing on skills.
“The whole social care reform has been junked and so much work went into that. Leave Brexit to one side, there was a massive agenda we had as a government to transform the country, and it doesn’t seem to be happening in any form of articulated way. I’m particularly concerned that there’s no grand economic strategy for growth. Why? Where is the vision for the country?”
US giant Milbank has upped its newly qualified (NQ) salaries across the globe — including London, the firm has confirmed to Legal Cheek — to a new market-leading high of $225,000.
While the conversion rate for British rookies is undisclosed, at today’s exchange rate, this figure works out at a whopping £183,409. No law firm pays more at that level anywhere in the world.
The move follows a 5% boost up to $215k last year and a double rise in 2021, when the New York-headquartered firm made headlines taking salaries from $190k to $200k, and then $200k up to $205k.
With Vinson & Elkins, Akin, Kirkland & Ellis, and Latham & Watkins all subsequently catching up to this figure, the latest move puts Milbank firmly back at the top of the salary charts. The next closest firm in London, according to Legal Cheek figures, is currently Vinson on just under £174,000.
For those looking forward to filling their pockets, however, be warned, it doesn’t come easy. Milbank, which has 200 lawyers in London, takes on only seven trainee solicitors a year, and is expecting 12 hour+ days, with an average finish time of 9:29pm according to Legal Cheek data.
The 2024 Legal Cheek Firms Most List
The post Milbank ups newly qualified lawyer salaries to market-leading record high appeared first on Legal Cheek.
The people of Gaza are facing one of the worst humanitarian crises in living memory. At the time of writing we have seen over 10,000 Palestinians killed, over 1.5 million displaced and airstrikes continue to destroy homes, schools, and healthcare facilities.
One of Christian Aid’s medical partners in Gaza explained: “We are worried that hospitals will stop operating because of a shortage of fuel. We don’t know if hospitals have the fuel to keep going for days or hours.”
The same partner goes on to urge the international community to “pressure Israel to allow water, fuel and medication to enter Gaza and to allow medical teams to enter and to keep them protected so they can treat injured people.”
Despite this, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rejected calls for a ceasefire in Gaza, saying “this is a time for war.” Was it not Albert Einstein who is reported to have once said “insanity is making the same mistakes and expecting different results?” What we are seeing in this war between Israel and Hamas and Israel is just that.
It has become increasingly clear that the political leadership, both Israeli and Palestinian, are incapable of breaking this cycle of violence. But it is also increasingly clear that the international community is repeating the same mistakes too.
That is why Christian Aid, alongside over 20 church leaders and Christian organisations, is calling for an immediate ceasefire. We have also called for the immediate and unconditional release of all Israeli hostages, and for the International Criminal Court to carry out an independent investigation into all alleged war crimes to ensure accountability too.
But while so many faith leaders and so much of civil society has been able to coalesce around these calls for a ceasefire, it is to our shock that it is a step too far for both the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition.
As defined by the UN, a ceasefire is a suspension that usually allows parties to engage in dialogue, including the possibility of reaching a permanent political settlement. A humanitarian pause, the case made by the leaders of the UK’s two largest parties, is defined only as a short break of hostilities negotiated purely to enable aid to get through to affected people.
The difference is night and day.
A humanitarian pause falls far short of what’s needed to aid civilians in Gaza, and lay the groundwork for talks on a durable and just peace. That is the certainty a ceasefire can bring, and it is the moral responsibility of international leaders to press for it.
Christian Aid’s partners have been able to conduct the most extraordinary community led response in the most extreme conditions. They are providing mobile medical and psychological care, cash transfers to people displaced in Khan Younis, and supporting the small Christian community sheltering in Saint Porphyrius church.
But many of our partners are displaced themselves, their offices and equipment damaged by airstrikes, and the conditions limiting their ability to move and provide support to the people most in need. And don’t forget, trucks with aid are only arriving in just double digits a day compared to an average of 500 truckloads every working day before this increase in hostilities.
That is why our partners have been clear with us. To respond at scale, they need unfettered humanitarian access with water and electricity reconnected, not a sticking-plaster solution. Only a full ceasefire will enable our partners and other humanitarian actors to deliver aid safely and effectively.
So, the political leadership of the UK and the political leader of the Israeli and Palestinian people face a similar challenge. Will they continue to make the same mistakes and expect different results, or will they finally step down a new path?
It is time we acknowledged the collective failure of the international community to effectively engage with any meaningful peace process and commit to work ceaselessly from now on to address the root causes of the violence. Ultimately, the cycle of violence will not end, and innocent people will continue to pay the price, until Palestinians and Israelis are treated as equals and the occupation of Gaza, and the West Bank is ended.
Lawyers on the lookout for new laws as Lord Chancellor bows before monarch in historical ceremony
Charles, in full regalia, gave his first ‘King’s Speech’ as part of the state opening of parliament yesterday.
The speech, drafted by the UK’s prime minister but delivered by the new King, contained proposals that will keep lawyers busy for months to come covering the climate, education, sentencing changes, and further bans on the sale of tobacco and vape marketing.
The annual ceremony, which marks the beginning of the new school year for our legislators, sees the monarch setting out the government’s final legislative agenda before the next general election.
Alex Chalk, the current Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary, had a role to play in the ceremony, physically handing over the Speech to the King which Chalk took out of a posh pouch. He also had the job of collecting it from HRH afterwards.
The 2024 Legal Cheek Firms Most List
Key proposals for lawyers and their clients cover areas such as driverless cars, data protection and digital markets.
The Government intends to design a legal framework for autonomous vehicles. As it put it in its briefing published after the ceremony, the aim is: “to unlock a ‘transport revolution’ by enabling the safe deployment of self-driving vehicles.”
One item that only got the briefest of nods from the King in his Speech but that will spark joy in the hearts of many data protection lawyers and their clients is a possible Data Protection and Digital Information Bill which, according to the Government, will “allow businesses to protect personal data in more proportionate and practical ways than under the EU’s GDPR”.
And watch out Elon and others, because a proposed Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill is going to “grant new powers to the Competition and Markets Authority to address the far-reaching power of a small number of tech companies.”
Elsewhere, the King did not even mention a new Arbitration Bill which will garner significant attention in legal services. Following a review by the Law Commission, and described by the Bar Council as ‘modest’, changes to the way arbitrations are run will be introduced. The aim is to keep England-based arbitrations a popular option for disputing parties rather than going to other centres such as Singapore or Dubai where rules have also been updated recently.
Sports lawyers in the UK could also see their work increase as a result of the establishment of a new football regulator.
Both the Law Society and the Bar Council expressed disappointment that the Government’s proposals did not include investment in the justice system. Nick Emmerson, President of the Law Society, said: “The long delays faced by victims and defendants in our courts are simply unacceptable and there was nothing in this speech to seriously address the crisis. The entire criminal justice system is fracturing.”
Nick Vineall KC, Chair of the Bar Council, made the point that the “ambitious parliamentary agenda” will have implications for courts:
“The court system has suffered over a decade of underfunding and legal aid cuts have denied many people effective access to justice. Additional funding is urgently required both to ensure that the courts and justice system can adequately function and to enable the delivery of the draft legislation announced [in the King’s Speech].”
It is the first time we have had a ‘King’s’ speech in 70 years, with King George VI delivering the last one in 1950.
The post Parliament opens with first King’s Speech for 70 years appeared first on Legal Cheek.
Theresa May has said the “best long-term decision” the government can make is on climate change because action is integral to the “long-term future” of the UK.
Speaking in the debate on the King’s Speech yesterday, the former prime minister suggested the government was not being sufficiently “strong in ambition” to meet the 2050 net zero target.
She explained: “It’s no good waking up on January 1 2045 and saying we’ve got five years to do something.”
The King’s Speech contained plans to have licences for oil and gas projects in the North Sea awarded annually.
There have recently been questions raised about the government’s ability to meet its 2050 net zero target, with its climate advisers warning the UK risks falling behind without much faster action.
In its latest progress report, the Committee on Climate Change (CCC) said the “expansion of fossil fuel production is not in line with net zero“.
But ministers insisted new projects would have to meet net zero targets and claimed the policy would “bolster energy security”.
Rebuking the prime minister yesterday, May said: “I think in relation to the King’s Speech, and the government’s programme on climate change and environmental degradation, the government is missing an opportunity.
“What we need to do now is press the accelerator on the transition to a green economy not try to draw back, and I fear that despite the fact that the King’s Speech says ministers will seek to attract record levels of investment in renewable energy sources, that that is not sufficiently strong in ambition from the government to make sure that they are making that transition quickly enough to ensure that we reach net zero in 2050.
“It’s no good waking up on January 1 2045 and saying we’ve got five years to do something. Let’s do it now because that will be even more costly for members of the public.”
May said she was worried about the Government “giving some mixed messages to investors”.
She told the commons: “They need to have the confidence to invest in our transition to a green economy and we need to show that the government is pressing the accelerator on that, because the best long-term decision that we can make is about climate change because the long-term future of this country and of the people of this country depend on us dealing with climate change and environmental degradation.
“So I want the government to press the accelerator, not to roll backwards.”
She also reminded MPs it was her government that legislated for a net zero emissions target by 2050.
She said: “I welcome the long-term ambition that the government has expressed, its need to take long-term decisions.
“Because good government is not about grabbing short-term decisions to get a headline, it is about doing what is in the national interest and in the longer-term future interest of this country.
“But on that point, I was rather surprised recently when I received an email in the name of the Prime Minister sent out I think by the Conservative Party, where it said the following: from net zero to HS2, smoking to education, we are going to tackle the challenges that other politicians have been afraid to even talk about.
“Now since I read that I’ve been racking my brains as to which prime minister it was [who] put net zero in 2050 into legislation? Answers on a postcard please.”
A Magic Circle lawfluencer has broken down the financial side of his two busy careers.
In a new video, Clifford Chance associate Liam Porritt has detailed much he earns as a lawyer and as a YouTuber with close to 250,000 subscribers.
With the caveat that all figures are pre-tax and do not include expenses, the newly qualified lawyer confirms that he earns close to £3,000 a week from his firm, with an additional £1,500 each week coming from his various social media side hustles.
The 2024 Legal Cheek Firms Most List
With this side work alone, Porritt is bringing in an additional £70,000 a year, which The Legal Cheek Firms Most List 2024 shows is the NQ salary at a number of top regional law firms.
Adding his £125,000 base salary (not including bonuses) onto this, even the US giants don’t come close, with the highest NQ salaries revealed yesterday to sit just above the £170,000 mark.
Check out the full video below…
The post Magic Circle lawyer reveals how much they earn as a YouTube influencer appeared first on Legal Cheek.
Steve Barclay has become the latest senior Conservative to distance himself from the home secretary’s claim that rough sleeping is sometimes a “lifestyle choice”.
Suella Braverman claimed that rough sleeping in a tent is a “lifestyle choice” in a tweet over the weekend.
The comments came as she appeared to confirm reports that plans were being made to see charities fined for handing out tents. It was reported that the proposal had been pitched for inclusion in the King’s Speech.
Braverman tweeted on Saturday: “We cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice.”
Asked this morning for his reaction to the home secretary’s remarks, health secretary Steve Barclay said: “We need to get the number of rough sleepers down and that’s what we’re doing. It’s down by a third and there’s complex issues.
“If there’s accommodation available I think it’s important we understand why that’s not being used, but often there’s complex reasons why people are rough sleeping”
On Monday, prime minister Rishi Sunak declined an offer to repeat Suella Braverman’s claim that homelessness is sometimes a lifestyle choice.
Asked by broadcasters if the language was “offensive”, Sunak said: “I don’t want anyone to sleep rough on our streets.
“That’s why the government is investing £2bn over the next few years to tackle homelessness and rough sleeping. I’m pleased that the number of people sleeping rough is down by a third since the peak, but of course there is more to do.” He declined an offer to repeat her comments.
Earlier on Monday, energy security and net zero secretary Claire Coutinho said she “wouldn’t necessarily use” Braverman’s language.
She told Times Radio: “Before I came to parliament I did a lot of work in social justice. I actually worked with people who were homeless, and I think the reasons that people get into that position are complex and very varied, so I wouldn’t necessarily use the language of ‘lifestyle choice’”.
On Tuesday, justice secretary Alex Chalk was pressed on the comments. He told Sky News he would take a “take a different approach”.
“There’s often a very significant context, which will be mental health issues, substance abuse problems, relationship breakdown, loss of a job and so on. And so I do think that that needs to be weighed in the balance.”
He added: “We shouldn’t do anything which entrenches people’s rough sleeping. Because if you do that, effectively you’re condemning and consigning people to poorer health outcomes and I’m afraid, in some cases, even shorter life expectancy”.
King Charles III today outlined the 21 pieces of legislation that prime minister Rishi Sunak will focus on before the next UK general election.
Among the new announcements were legislation to encourage North Sea oil drilling, tougher sentencing for serious criminals and bills designed to show support for Israel.
A day of pomp and ceremony will now give way to weeks and months of intense political attacks as Sunak and Labour leader Keir Starmer seek to hone their pitches to the electorate.
Relive the key moments of the State Opening of Parliament, from its time-honoured traditions — some innocuous and others arcane — to the pointed political jousting…
Before she could enter the House of Commons to “summons” MPs to hear the Speech from the Throne, Black Rod had the chamber doors slammed in her face.
Black Rod is a senior officer in the House of Lords, responsible for controlling access to and maintaining order within the House and its precincts. In full, her title is Lady Usher of the Black Rod.
As is tradition, the doors were slammed to symbolise the commons’ independence from the monarchy.
Sarah Clarke, who was appointed as Black Rod in 2017, then entered the commons after banging on the door.
Next, she addressed the chamber, inviting MPs to join peers in the House of Lords.
“Mr Speaker, the King commands this honourable House to attend His Majesty immediately in the House of Peers”, she said.
Charles III delivers the ‘Speech from the Throne’
After the Speaker led MPs into the House of Lords — to which they departed two-by-two, giving plenty of opportunity for idle chit-chat — they stopped before the “bar of the house”, a line beyond which they may not venture.
The boundary means only a few dozen MPs can actually squeeze into the Lords chamber.
The Lord Chancellor and justice secretary, Alex Chalk, then walked to the Lords’ golden throne where the King is seated, presenting him with the speech written by the government.
King Charles III read the speech deadpan, offering no sign that he dissented from any aspect of the government’s new legislative agenda.
In total, the King’s Speech, divided under three headers — “strengthening society,” “growing the economy” and “keeping people safe, saw 21 new bills announced.
King Charles III began: “It is mindful of the legacy of service and devotion to this country set by My beloved Mother, The late Queen, that I deliver this, the first King’s Speech in over 70 years”
His Majesty continued: “My Government’s priority is to make the difficult but necessary long-term decisions to change this country for the better”.
Full list of the announced bills
King’s Speech 2023: Full list of bills
MPs return to Commons as King’s Speech debate begins
MPs returned to the House of Commons at 2.30 pm to begin the debate over the King’s Speech.
The Debate on the Address normally lasts for five to six days, and the motion is phrased as: “An Humble Address” to His Majesty thanking him for his gracious speech.
The task of moving the motion is regarded as an honour and is given to two government backbenchers. They are typically a contrasting pair with different constituencies, one a relative newcomer and the other a long-serving Member.
Sir Robert Goodwill, who is standing down at the next election, proposed the “Loyal Address”. Siobhan Baillie, only an MP since 2019, acted as the seconder.
As is convention, their speeches were not contentious and contained both humour and flattering references to their constituencies.
But then it was the turn of the Leader of the Opposition who, after observing convention and congratulating the proposer and seconder of the Loyal Address, turned to the substance of the King’s Speech.
Keir Starmer declared: “Today’s address shows just how ridiculous that posturing is because what we have before us is a plan for more of the same”.
He added that the government’s plan to grant new North Sea oil and gas licences every year is “wrong”.
“They are wrong about clean energy. It is cheaper, it is British and it can give us real security from tyrants like Putin”, he said.
Rishi Sunak responded by declaring the King’s Speech will “deliver change”.
The prime minister said: “And above all this, King’s Speech delivers change. Change in our economy. Change in our society. Change in our communities. It takes long term decisions for a brighter future. And I commend it to this House”.
A Conservative peer has said her party has a “problem” with handling allegations of bullying and sexual misconduct.
Baroness Warsi, who served as co-chair of the Conservative Party from 2010 to 2012, said there was “rot at the heart” of the party and that it had failed to respond to and support victims.
She told Times Radio: “I think [the party] does have a problem.
“Whether it’s bullying, whether it’s allegations of racism and now allegations of sexual misconduct, the party for years and years has simply failed to deal with responding to victims appropriately in all of those areas”.
She added: “And I really hope, rather than just batting this away again, that the party takes a long, hard look at itself”.
“We cannot be the party of government which governs in this country more than any other political party and still have this rot at the heart of us, whether that’s racism, whether that’s bullying, whether that’s sexual misconduct.”
According to The Mail on Sunday, the newspaper which is serialising the former culture secretary Nadine Dorries’ book on the recent history of the Conservative Party, Sir Jake Berry, a former party chairman himself, told the police that an internal “failure” to act on allegations had allowed the unnamed MP to “continue to offend”.
The prime minister Rishi Sunak said yesterday: “These are very serious, anonymous allegations. It may be that they allude to something that is already the subject of a live police investigation, so I hope you understand it wouldn’t be right for me to comment on that further specifically.
“More broadly the Conservative Party has robust independent complaint procedures in place, but I would say to anybody who has information or evidence about any criminal acts to of course talk to police, that’s the right course of action.”
Asked on Sunday about payments to an alleged victim on Times Radio, Dowden insisted it was not “something that crossed my desk as chairman of the Conservative Party”, although he acknowledged: “It may be the case. I’m not denying that it could be the case that those payments were made”.
Dowden also denied recognising claims in Dorries’ book that there are “30 bad” MPs “out there” at any given time.
Speaking to Sky News yesterday, Baroness Warsi also called home secretary Suella Braverman “dangerous and divisive”, arguing that some of her colleagues in government “project as patriots but are indeed arsonists”.
Warsi took issue with Braverman’s take on the demonstrations due to take place around Armistice Day and Remembrance Sunday. Braverman has labelled such demonstrations as “hate marches”.
Warsi accused Braverman of making this “a political issue to embolden the far right”.
She said: “She’d been briefed by the Met of what the route of the march was going to be, and the fact that they didn’t have concerns at this stage, she has now made this a live political issue because that’s the way she operates, right?
“She fights culture wars. She doesn’t fix things, she breaks things.”
