Scotland’s Lord Justice Clerk Lord Gill publishes his two year long Civil Courts Review. FORTY YEARS after McKenzie Friends were first introduced in England & Wales, the long awaited Civil Courts Review, undertaken by the Lord Justice Clerk, Lord Gill, has finally ended the decades long discrimination against Scottish court users, by recommending the introduction of McKenzie Friends to Scotland as well as a whole range of much needed improvements for Scots access to justice, including the introduction of simplified court procedures, more advice on legal rights, increased use of mediation, and finally and end to the infamous exclusion of Class Action litigation in Scotland’s antiquated civil courts system.
Lord Gill’s Civil Courts Review finally recommends the implementation of McKenzie Friends for Scotland. After a long hard battle fought by petitioners to the Scottish Parliament, law reformers,and consumer organisations throughout the UK who joined in campaigning for the introduction of McKenzie Friends in Scotland, Lord Gill's report finally recommends their implementation, stating : “If the court considers that it would be helpful in any case, a person without a right of audience (a ‘McKenzie friend’) should be permitted to address the court on behalf of a party litigant. The court should have discretion to refuse to allow any particular person to act as a McKenzie friend on grounds relating to character or conduct and to withdraw a permission to at as such at any time. The rules of court should specify the role to be played by such persons and should provide that they are not entitled to remuneration.”
Australian Barrister, Ian Hanger QC supported McKenzie Friends for Scotland. Lord Gill's recommendations on McKenzie Friends appear to be greatly influenced by a Holyrood public Petition Petition 1247, raised by Mr Stewart MacKenzie, which saw fantastic support from consumer organisations such as Which? and Consumer Focus Scotland, who both campaigned to bring McKenzie Friends to Scotland. However, insiders at Holyrood and from the legal profession point to Ian Hanger's invaluable and timely letter to the Scottish Parliament's petitions committee as 'having sealed the deal' on McKenzie Friends coming to Scotland. Ian Hanger QC wrote in his letter : “In Australia, most of our courts have the power to permit a non-qualified person to, in effect, represent a litigant. A McKenzie Friend does not have a right to address the court. That right is confined to quietly assisting the unrepresented litigant. The Australian experience has been that it has worked successfully. … I cannot see that the floodgates would be opened by permitting, in appropriate cases, the presence of the McKenzie Friend to help the unrepresented litigant. In some cases you will get a brilliant law student who will provide enormous assistance to the Court .. I would urge the Parliament to permit the appearance of the McKenzie Friend."
McKenzie Friend petitioner, Mr Stewart MacKenzie, when asked for reaction on Lord Gill's recommendations on McKenzie Friends, said : "I am delighted the people of Scotland are to be finally made equal with the people of England & Wales, after forty long years of inequality in the Scottish courts system."
I can also exclusively reveal that Scotland's Court of Session is liable to see a quick test of Lord Gill's McKenzie Friend recommendations later this week. On the basis of Lord Gill's positive approach to the introduction of McKenzie Friends in Scotland, this Friday will see a test of the judiciary's resolve over the McKenzie Friend issue, where a request is to be made to judges to allow a party litigant the use of a McKenzie Friend in a long running civil case.
A legal insider said today : "On the basis of Lord Gill's unequivocal support for the issue of McKenzie Friends in Scotland, the court should now move on the Lord Justice Clerk's recommendations and allow the use of McKenzie Friends."
He continued : "I welcome the news there is to be a test case this week for the use of a McKenzie Friend at the Court of Session. This request, coming on the back of the Civil Courts Review and much support from individuals & consumer organisations for assistance in the court will be an interesting challenge of the court's resolve on the McKenzie Friend issue. I wish the party litigant all the best in his request."
A consumer affairs insider however claimed that while Lord Gill's recommendations on McKenzie Friends were very welcome, there would be greater benefit to all court users if substantive rules and obligations were placed upon the courts by legislative means, to ensure the public had full & proper rights as per the application and use of McKenzie Friends in Scotland's courts.
She said : "There is no getting away from the fact that Scotland has missed out on McKenzie Friends for some forty years. I think that fact speaks for itself in that the courts and legal profession have resisted their use, on grounds of doing lawyers out of profits rather than worrying about the quality or availability of legal representation to those who seek it."
"I think consumers rights, and indeed the law itself would be greatly enhanced if a legislative approach was taken to the McKenzie Friends question, going one step further than the English courts, and making it an unequivocal right for a litigant to be able to request and receive the assistance of a McKenzie Friend, if so desired."
Consumer Focus Scotland welcomed Civil Court Review recommendations. Martyn Evans, Director of Consumer Focus Scotland, commented “This review sets out a bold range of challenging but pragmatic recommendations. It gives a clear and prominent voice to the interests of citizens as users of our civil justice system. The prize set out by Lord Gill is a civil justice system fit for the 21st century. There is bound to be a great deal of debate over his proposals. We hope the interests of individual users of the civil justice system are given due consideration and weight in that debate alongside the interests of judges, lawyers and business.”
Examples of recommendations from Lord Gill’s Civil Courts Review that will increase access to justice include:
* introducing a new more user friendly simplified procedure for cases involving lower monetary value and housing matters, designed with unrepresented court users in mind.
* Promoting increased public legal education about legal rights and responsibilities and where to go for help.
* The extension of in-court advice services throughout Scotland.
* The introduction of ‘McKenzie friends’ to assist unrepresented parties in court.
* Encouraging parties to consider the use of mediation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution.
* The introduction of a procedure for multi-party (class) actions in Scotland.
You can download the report in pdf format, from the Scottish Courts Website at the following links :
Civil Courts Review
The Report of the Scottish Civil Courts Review was launched today Wednesday, 30 September 2009 and is available to download below:
- Volume 1 Chapter 1 - 9 (Covers McKenzie Friends, procedures, advice etc, 2.99Mb)
- Volume 2 Chapter 10 - 15 (Covers mainly the issue of Class (multi party) actions etc, 2.16Mb)
- Synopsis (215Kb)
Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has proved resistant to reforming laws such as rights of audience & representation, which benefit the legal profession itself. Certainly, I am very happy to see the long overdue proposals to reform civil law in Scotland, but now the issue of bringing McKenzie Friends to Scotland rests with the Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill and the Scottish Government, who have so far, proved thoroughly resistive to bringing reforms into Scots Law to make us equal with our English cousins.
Law Society of Scotland & Faculty of Advocates remain resistant to McKenzie Friends. There is also the question of opposition from the Law Society of Scotland and the Faculty of Advocates, who both opposed the McKenzie Friends petition at the Scottish Parliament, mostly because allowing McKenzie Friends into Scottish courts would introduce individuals who will most probably be outwith the influence and control of the legal profession. I reported on the legal profession’s opposition to the introduction of McKenzie Friends in Scotland, in two earlier articles, here : 'Control Freaks' at Law Society say “No” to McKenzie Friends as Holyrood submission signals resistance to Lord Gill's civil justice review & here : Legal profession ‘afraid of losing profits & control of access to justice’ as Faculty of Advocates protest against McKenzie Friends for Scotland
Such a welcome move of bringing in fresh blood to Scotland’s courts, who are motivated to assist litigants in a professional & capable manner, and who don't have a Law Society leash attached round their necks, will be of considerable help & benefit to all users of Scotland’s courts.
57 comments:
Praise be to God, at last someone within the ranks of the legal profession speaking sense!
However, while there is no shame in being a slow learner, you can bet your bottom dollar that Lord Gill's proposals will find their way in to the laps of McAskill and his cronies in the Law Society, who will of course do everything and anything to dilute, obstruct and delay his eminently sensible proposals.
Answer? WRITE TO YOUR MSP NOW expressing your support for Lord Gill's recommendations!
Good.About time Scotland was brought out of the dark ages but I can see you have an uphill battle with MacAskill and his pals in the legal cloth.They will be too afraid of losing their takings to free Mckenzie Friends !
40 years ! Better late than never but will someone own up just why Scotland has been made to WAIT so long for McKenzie friends ?
Mr McKenzie said "I am delighted the people of Scotland are to be finally made equal with the people of England & Wales, after forty long years of inequality in the Scottish courts system."
We are delighted too Mr McKenzie, because the Law Society cannot keep controlling clients access to justice , especially when they and the SLCC are negative on treating clients fairly. Persistence pays off and this is the result of years of work because the people of Scotland had no legal rights without a lawyer.
Having been stung by a lawyer myself I would opt for a McKenzie friend all the time, got to be safer, and I do not need to complain to Eileen Masterman or Lorna Jack, who I am convinced would act like Douglas Mill, protecting crooked lawyers. Great result, although Mr MacAskill, the SLCC/Law Society, and the Faculty of Advocates will be furious.
Finally thanks Mr Hanger for your support on this most important issue.
Large backhanders ensured McKenzie Friend never came to Scotland.
Very interesting..........not least Lord Gill's support for CLASS ACTIONS - and without provisos.
Send your letters and emails of support to Petition 1234 now!
Managed to download it now reading.
Is this a case of a Judge using 1000000000 words where 100 will do ?
We already know justice is f*cked in Scotland but will anything REALLY be done about it ?
Congratulations Peter thats quite a victory for common sense and your campaigns.
Keep up the good work !
I agree with the consumer person that legislation will have to come because the courts have already waited 40 years for giving help to people who cant get lawyers.
Well let us hear from Mr Kenny MacAskill now, give clients their human rights and dignity, or resign and get a job at the Law Society.
SCOTLAND AGAINST CROOKED LAWYERS.
20th May - Legal Aid Chief DOUGLAS HAGGARTY was arrested in public toilets at the St Enoch Centre, Glasgow, along with a teenage rent boy. The Procurator Fiscal initially instigated summary court proceedings against this pervert - but for reasons still unknown - the PF capitulated and offered the beast a 'direct measure' instead. This usually means a paltry fine (60 pounds or so) or a letter of warning about future conduct, on the basis that the perpetrator admits his guilt. So Haggarty will no doubt be extremely grateful to his brother lawyers at COPFS (Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Office) for saving his sick behind from the the humiliation and serious consequences of a formal criminal court hearing.
The Beast of St Enoch now joins a long list of lawyers who've been protected from the consequences of serious criminal misconduct. Examples of cases where the Crown was instrumental in Defeating the Ends of Justice include: Senior Procurator Fiscal STUART MACFARLANE, who was charged with indecency AND police assault after being caught with a prostitute in Glasgow city centre. The Crown dropped the case because MacFarlane claimed to be suffering from a 'mental illness' (common criminals take note and see how successful that ploy is). Another case involved TOM MURRAY, a notoriously crooked lawyer, who was protected from prosecution at the High Court on serious fraud charges. So will the Law Society now step in and prosecute Haggarty for bringing the profession into disrepute?
===================================
GOOD EVENING LORD GILL. I JUST WANT TO ASK YOU WHAT MESSAGE DOES THIS SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES SEND OUT TO THE PUBLIC.
THE CROWN OFFICE & PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE DROP CHARGES, LAWYERS LOOKING AFTER LAWYERS AGAIN.
LORD GILL, PLEASE NOTE THIS IS NOT A JUSTICE SYSTEM, THESE PEOPLE ARE DEMONSTRATING THE SAME PROFESSIONAL BIAS, AS KENNETH PRITCHARD, DOUGLAS MILL OR PHILLIP YELLAND. THIS SELF REGULATION IS A MOCKERY OF JUSTICE, HOW CAN THE LEGAL SYSTEM BUILD CREDIBILITY WITH THE PUBLIC WHEN THIS HAPPENS REGULARLY?
Is it really for the court to decide if a McKenzie Friend can be paid or not ?
Are lawyers so afraid of losing their business they have to get the courts to do their dirty work of keeping out the competition ?
From the Daily Record....
"A PERVERT lawyer who filmed female colleagues on the loo was spared jail yesterday after a controversial sheriff branded his actions "clumsy". Peter Fitzpatrick used a video camera hidden in a pile of cardboard boxes to spy on the ladies toilet.
But Stirling sheriff Margaret Gimblett told Fitzpatrick his offence sounded like "a cry for help". And she added: "Any lady with her wits about her would have noticed one of the boxes had been tampered with."
She gave the 49-year-old three years' probation, ordered him to go to group work sessions and put him on the sex offenders' register.
The dad-of-two grinned as he was sentenced. His punishment provoked fury from Mid-Scotland & Fife Tory MSP Liz Smith.
She said: "This man has committed a reprehensible offence and the public will be astonished by the suggestion that his victims were somehow at fault for not being more aware of the circumstances around them. How is that an excuse for his actions? It could be interpreted as a damning indictment of women when they are blamed for not being more vigilant in an environment where they should be secure."
The court had heard the camera was pointing straight at the loo in the Stirling office of Muirhead Buchanan, where Fitzpatrick was a partner.
Gill seems to want everyone to go to the Sheriff Courts but that will only work if the Sheriffs are brought into the 21st Century.As things currently stand it wont work in my opinion.
Anonymous said...
I hope little Penman is sitting there in his little office proud of all the trouble he caused us!
3:09 PM
To the lawyer who left the above statement.
I hate Penman and he was not my lawyer, in fact I hate all lawyers, a criminal gang out to line their wallets because The Law Society will cover the corruption up.
Writing to the Law Society or Commission is futile, clients will use bundles of stamps and reams of paper and get nowhere. Bypass all of them with a McKenzie friend.
Lawyers are a scourge, evil calculating self protecting criminals. Avoid them like the plague.
Examples of recommendations from Lord Gill’s Civil Courts Review that will increase access to justice include:
* introducing a new more user friendly simplified procedure for cases involving lower monetary value and housing matters, designed with unrepresented court users in mind. (GOOD).
* Promoting increased public legal education about legal rights and responsibilities and where to go for help. (DOES THIS ALSO APPLY TO LAWYERS WHO HAVE RUINED CLIENTS, WHERE DO WE GO IF WE WANT TO TAKE A LAWYER TO COURT FOR DAMAGES LORD GILL? WHEN LAWYERS REPUTATIONS CAN BE RUINED CLIENTS HAVE NO LEGAL RIGHTS, THEY ARE SOLICITOR BARRED)
.
* The extension of in-court advice services throughout Scotland.
* The introduction of ‘McKenzie friends’ to assist unrepresented parties in court. (GOOD).
* Encouraging parties to consider the use of mediation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution. (GOOD).
* The introduction of a procedure for multi-party (class) actions in Scotland. (GOOD).
The Law Society of Scotland & Faculty of Advocates remain resistant to McKenzie Friends.
There is also the question of opposition from the Law Society of Scotland and the Faculty of Advocates, who both opposed the McKenzie Friends petition at the Scottish Parliament, mostly because allowing McKenzie Friends into Scottish courts would introduce individuals who will most probably be outwith the influence and control of the legal profession.
-----------------------------------
I think it is of paramount importance McKenzie friends are out of the control of the legal profession simply because people cannot trust lawyers.
It is the failure of the Law Society of Scotland to regulate it's bad membership, that has caused the widespread public distrust of lawyers. The latter should take legal action against the Penman's in the profession to clean it up. I tell every lawyer in Scotland now, I will never trust another lawyer if I live to be one hundred years old, and that cannot be rectified.
I am very happy to see the long overdue proposals to reform civil law in Scotland, but now the issue of bringing McKenzie Friends to Scotland rests with the Justice Secretary, Kenny MacAskill and the Scottish Government, who have so far, proved thoroughly resistive to bringing reforms into Scots Law to make us equal with our English cousins.
I agree Peter and if these people will not move on this, we will have to go to the European Court of Justice for the infringement of our human rights.
It does strike me that there is no good reason for not allowing Mackenzie Friends some payment, even if only to cover expenses, but perhaps Lord Gill is referring to payment from the public purse and nothing else?
Donald Dewar is a great lawyer because he is deceased. RIP Donald.
The matter of payment clearly needs to be addressed - and quickly.
Is Lord Gill referring only to the public purse when he suggests no Mackenzie Friend can receive payment, or is he really suggesting that a private citizen who has honestly earned and paid tax on income must not be allowed to spend a penny of it on gaining assistance from a mackenzie friend?
If the latter, this amounts to taxation without representation - something the Faculty of Advocates complained about I recall when the SLCC was being discussed - and must be open to challenge on several levels, not least the Human Rights Act.
I realise many of you think this review is a good thing but I think most of the proposals will never see the light of day.Just another talking shop because it will be left to politicians to hammer out whats to be done and we all know where that will end up.
The judge says at least 5 years for his recommendations to be workable if that !!
What the hell is wrong with you guys over there ? Is it a Scottish thing to bend over and take it up the ass from lawyers ?
Hi Peter, I have just been reading about Client H in one of your articles, no wonder SACL call the legal establishment the mafia.
“If the court considers that it would be helpful in any case, a person without a right of audience (a ‘McKenzie friend’) should be permitted to address the court on behalf of a party litigant.
Lord Gill, "If the court considers" in other words a McKenzie friend is not an automatic right, it has to be agreed by the court, clever clause to prevent a party litigant using a McKenzie friend. Please clarify?
The scotsman is full of this stuff today but somehow I get the feeling most of it is just talk
I meant to add to my comment "actions speak louder than words" so lets have some action sooner than later on this review !
Be interesting to hear what the court says on Friday about McKenzie Friends.Good luck to whoever is asking
"Such a welcome move of bringing in fresh blood to Scotland’s courts, who are motivated to assist litigants in a professional & capable manner, and who don't have a Law Society leash attached round their necks, will be of considerable help & benefit to all users of Scotland’s courts."
Never a truer word was said !
I liked your take on the Law Society control freaks.
Doubtless their dirty tricks brigade will be working overtime now to make sure we never see half of what Gill said yesterday.
Keep up the pressure !
Congrats on getting McKenzie Friends through Peter.
Ian Hanger deserves a big thank you also !
If a lawyer ruins a client, that ruined client warns others about that law firm", and the Law Society of Scotland's protection of lawyers. Slowly the reputation for poor legal service grows, and like a pheonix from the ashes, Peter's site, Scotland Against Crooked Lawyers, Name and Shame Scotland, Solicitors from hell, these people spread the word on the internet, to friends and other clients. I think they are doing a wonderful job.
Organisations change from the top downwards, not the other way around, but the Law Society will always protect it's members and they do not give a S**t about clients. The suicides caused by the society protecting lawyers and the Master Policy prove that fact.
As Peter highlighted, about the Law Society investigative committees, clients and their families are not important but lawyers and their families are.
There is not one lawyer in Scotland worthy of trust.
Clients can produce written evidence to the Law Society, and the investigative committee know it condemns their lawyer, but the lawyers career is more important than the client. This culture also ensures the Master Policy is protected, and the underwriters are safe from paying damages.
The lawyers on the Investigative committees of the Law Society of Scotland receive bonuses, from the underwriters Royal & Sun Alliance to ensure the clients evidence is overlooked, and the lawyer and RSA are protected to the hilt. RSA paying bonuses saves them paying millions of pounds damages to lawyers victims. It is a portection racket where the client has no chance of a fair hearing never mind compensation. It is all about money and reputations, but this has backfired as a result of decades of clients being abused by lawyers, RSA and the infamous Law Society of Scotland. From the lack of documentation provided to Dr Melville it should be renamed The Lawyer Protection Society of Scotland, because that is all it does.
A terrorist organisation would never be allowed to investigate their own members activities. But lawyers investigate complaints from clients about the clients lawyer. The Suicides caused by the Law Society of Scotland prove they are psychological terrorists. To readers who do not know, a farmer who had his life ruined by a lawyer attempted to claim damages from the Master Policy. Phillip Yelland the client relations officer of the Law Society told the farmer to go to a law firm who would sue the farmer's original lawyer. Yelland did not tell the farmer the law firm he sent him to represented the Legal Defence Union, which exists to stop claims against lawyers and the Master Policy. They did not help the farmer and after many meetings that farmer was so depressed he killed himself with a shotgun.
Now the plot thickens, because if the farmers family want to sue Yelland, they will need medical reports that state the treatment by the Law Society, Yelland etc had drove the farmer to kill himself.
That would never happen because, the Consultant Psychiatrists are also insured by Royal & Sun Alliance. The doctors will not want their insurers paying massive damages for this criminal abuse.
These so called professionals love Royal Sun Alliance and each other so much that money is of paramount importance and life is not. I believe many doctors and lawyers will have shares in RSA. The farmer had no one to turn to, he stood along against a group of legalised criminals. What they are doing is evil but it is legal because none of them will do anything about it.
The reality is this, Scotland's ten thousand lawyers will torture clients to the grave before one of them will stand up and shout, enough is enough, this must stop. How they sleep at night is beyond me.
Anonymous said...
I liked your take on the Law Society control freaks.
Doubtless their dirty tricks brigade will be working overtime now to make sure we never see half of what Gill said yesterday.
Keep up the pressure !
10:56 AM
Yes I agree those postings are fantastic on just how crooked the Law Society and Faculty of Advocates are towards any changes to help ordinary people like us.
MacAskill must be taken to the European Court of Human Rights for allowing Phillip Yelland free reign to crush clients so bad they take their own lives. If I was the farmer Yelland would have went with me.
Sorry to disagree with most but I dont see a lot in this review we dont already know and this 5 year thing I dont like.Why are reforms always 5 or 10 years away ? We know we will never get them so why not just come out and say it ?
I am delighted many lawyers are paying five grand for their diploma in legal practice, and then losing their jobs. The fewer lawyers the better.
Anonymous said...
Philip Yelland, director of standards at the Law Society of Scotland, said the "vast majority" of solicitors adhered to high professional standards.
Yes Phillip, high professional standards of covering each others backs, Yelland is a master of Criminals.
What with Trump chucking people out their homes and lawyers raping clients daughters I dont see any justice in Scotland EVER
This is the twisted society we live in where somebody can come along and throw people off their properties so dont expect any justice ever !
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/north_east/8283140.stm
Bid to block Trump buy-out fails
Councillors have rejected a call to rule out using compulsory purchase orders to move people from where Donald Trump plans his £1bn golf resort.
The homes and land of four people are being targeted as part of the US tycoon's plans for Menie.
Aberdeenshire Council decided it was inappropriate to reject the use of CPOs completely without a full report.
Angry Menie homeowner David Milne said the council decision was "a disgrace" and was based on "cowardice".
Mr Milne, who bought his home 17 years ago, told the meeting: "I am here to ask you to support the motion that this council will not use its powers of compulsory purchase in support of a commercial leisure development, to throw Aberdeenshire residents out of their homes and off their land.
"I don't know how many of you have even tried to imagine what it is like not knowing if your home will be your own for much longer, not knowing if the next birthday or Christmas will be the last in your own house.
This is splattered across a double page in today's Scotsman.I think I will side with the critics - at least half of what is recommended by the judge (and I'm sure he did his review very sincerely) will never come to fruition.
Also this move of everything to the Sheriff Courts I dont like.Is that to sidestep anyone who wants a jury ?
I dont think this is the great thing everyone says it is and I kind of wondered if the Scotsman lot were labouring to make us believe it all because if you look at the Herald they pulled the review apart and didnt rate it much.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/crime-courts/judge-proposes-new-court-in-radical-shake-up-of-scottish-justice-system-1.923121
Hello Peter, are these criminals insured by Royalsunalliance too?
The Medical and Dental Defence Union of Scotland (MDDUS) is a medical and dental defence organisation offering access to professional indemnity and expert medico-legal and dento-legal advice for doctors, dentists and other healthcare professionals throughout the UK.
A mutual organisation run by fellow professionals, MDDUS has been protecting its medical and dental members for over 100 years. With a team of highly qualified and experienced staff, we are confident that MDDUS delivers the finest service at very competitive rates.
Whatever your need, MDDUS is here to help.
MDDUS WEBSITE
News - September 2009
Doctors reported to GMC up 30 per cent
25 September 2009
The number doctors reported monthly to the GMC is up 30% on last year.
A number of possible reasons have been suggested including a clamp down on poorly performing doctors in advance of revalidation.
“The referrals are coming mainly from the NHS and they are not trivial,” said GMC chairman Professor Peter Rubin. “It's likely to be a precursor to the introduction of revalidation. Employers are beginning to take stock”.
The increase is leading to delays in GMC investigations and hearings. The GMC it has missed its own targets of six months for investigations to be completed and nine months for hearings to be concluded.
----------------------------------
People need doctors when they are sick but this profession are as crooked as the lawyers.
THE LEGAL DEFENCE UNION OF SCOTLAND
Introduction
The Legal Defence Union (LDU) exists for the specific purpose of promoting and protecting the welfare of solicitors in Scotland.
It is committed to protecting the interests of all solicitors in Scotland, whether engaged in court, conveyancing or commercial work, in town or country, and in all areas of activity.
At a wider level, the LDU aims to promote the interests and defence of solicitors in Parliament, in the media and to the general public.
-----------------------------------
Hello Peter, are these criminals insured by Royalsunalliance?
Chairman's Statement
Lawyers have always prided themselves on their commitment to helping clients from all levels of society, whatever their circumstances or their problems.
The Legal Profession has been perhaps a little slow in providing an independent advice agency for its own members.
Lawyers sometimes need lawyers! It is good professionalism to take advice.
We are committed to the idea of prompt, friendly, confidential and skilled advice to all solicitors in Scotland.
James A. McCann, Chairman
Legal Defence Union
-----------------------------------
Good evening Mr McCann, Your statement
"Lawyers sometimes need lawyers! It is good professionalism to take advice".
Clients who have been ruined by lawyers have no one to give them advice, no help, just a bent legal system that protects lawyer criminals. Royalsunallinace will be looking after you too. Scotland has a legal mafia.
"Once you realise that you can have a dishonest doctor and a malevolent doctor, then it is obvious that under our system that doctor can get away with murder".
Dame Janet Smith, who chaired the Shipman inquiry.
The Law Society can get away with murder too Janet.
Post the damn thing so we can all read it and yes you are right it looks like a nono for most of us !
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/crime-courts/judge-proposes-new-court-in-radical-shake-up-of-scottish-justice-system-1.923121
Judge proposes new court in radical shake-up of Scottish justice system
Lucy Adams
Published on 30 Sep 2009
Radical changes to the country’s civil justice system – including the introduction of specialist judges and a new sheriff appeal court – have been proposed in the biggest shake-up of its kind in modern times.
Lord Gill, the Lord Justice Clerk who led the two-year review commissioned by the former Scottish Executive, said the current system was failing and that in some cases the delays were "scandalous".
The report published yesterday, which spans almost 700 pages, recommends major modernisation including procedural business and hearings taking place via e-mail, and the use of telephone and video conferencing.
Lord Gill, the second most senior judge in Scotland, warned the reforms would only work if properly resourced.
He called for an end to part-time and temporary sheriffs and for a proper "hierarchy" of structures, with the introduction of new district judges to hear summary criminal cases and smaller civil claims.
Under the proposals, the Court of Session, which he said had "become a playpen for certain frivolous and irresponsible party litigants", would deal with only the most serious litigation and major appeals with wider ramifications.
The review also allows for the introduction of "McKenzie friends" – lay representatives currently used in England and Wales to assist unrepresented parties in court.
Lord Gill revealed plans to tackle the "prolonged and excessive" delays that are common in Scotland’s civil courts.
The review contains proposals for the early disclosure of documents and the greater use of witness statements instead of oral evidence.
The document also proposes that there should be an online register of cases where the judgment has taken more than three months to deliver. The judge or sheriff would be required to outline and regularly update the reasons for delays to such cases.
Lord Gill said: "We recognise that in many cases delay is caused by judges and sheriffs themselves."
Another "major proposal" relates to the establishment of a Civil Justice Council for Scotland. The body would be charged with overseeing the working of the system, as part of a continual review of the country’s civil justice system.
The Law Society of Scotland, Faculty of Advocates and politicians including Bill Aitken, the Tory justice spokesman, welcomed the "very interesting" report, which will be debated in Holyrood next Thursday.
Martyn Evans, Director of Consumer Focus Scotland, said: "This review sets out a bold range of challenging but pragmatic recommendations."
The Scottish Trades Union Congress (STUC), however, voiced its concern.
General Secretary Grahame Smith said: "These proposals amount to a major upheaval of the civil justice system. In aiming to fix a range of things within the system which are not broken, the review seems likely to involve additional and unnecessary costs, the brunt of which we can only assume will be borne by those seeking justice in the first place."
Will Lord Gill's recommendations become reality. Now we need action, politicians what are you waiting for?
The Cambridge Online Dictionary states
Regulate : to control something, especially by making it work in a particular way.
Lord Gill this is why the Law Society of Scotland are infamous, it controls client complaints in a way that exonerates the lawyer.
How can the public respect a profession that demand respect in court, and laugh at the public if they get ruined by a member of your profession. In my opinion the legal establishment do not understand the word justice. Self regulators self protect to the point of the client killing themselves.
What does it feel like Lord Gill to be above the law?
A client complaining to the Law Society of Scotland is like a man who has fell into the sea. There are people who can save him, but they use their oars to push him under the water, instead of throwing him a life jacket.
Rest in peace client, you will die before we the Law Society of Scotland allow you a fair hearing.
The top three corrupt professional regulatory bodies in Scotland today, are :
1. The Law Society of Scotland
2. The Faculty of Advocates
3. The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland.
Do not trust any of these bastards. The first two protested against Mckenzie friends.
"let's rip off the old people ! - after all - he said it ! - the famous Austin Lafferty" !
This man used to give advice to viewers in Scotland at lunchtime, a man who wants to rob old people.
How many holidays have you had to the Bahamas, Austin from the proceeds of ripping off old people, what a criminal you are.
Lawyers are scumbags
An excellent posting as always Mr Cherbi and your writing gets my vote over the newspapers !
As others have already said congratulations with the McKenzie Friend success and keep pushing the justice agenda against these thug lawyers !
Anonymous said...
From the Daily Record....
"A PERVERT lawyer who filmed female colleagues on the loo was spared jail yesterday after a controversial sheriff branded his actions "clumsy". Peter Fitzpatrick used a video camera hidden in a pile of cardboard boxes to spy on the ladies toilet.
But Stirling sheriff Margaret Gimblett told Fitzpatrick his offence sounded like "a cry for help". (YES SHERIFF GIMBLETT, COMPASSION FOR THE LAWYER PERVERT IS ALWAYS THE ORDER OF THE DAY, ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF LAWYERS LOOKING AFTER LAWYERS, IT HAPPENS ALL OF THE TIME) And she added: "Any lady with her wits about her would have noticed one of the boxes had been tampered with."
AYE MARGARET, WOMEN AUTOMATICALLY THINK, SOME PERV WILL LEAVE A CAMERA IN THE TOILET TO WATCH THEM, CLEARLY MARGARET GIMBLETT NEEDS HELP OR PERHAPS AS A LAWYER HER COLLEAGUES LEFT CAMERAS IN THE LADIES TOILET OF THE LAW FIRM SHE WORKED IN, THAT IS HOW SHE KNOWS, THIS SHERIFF IS A ZOOMER.
The Law Society of Scotland hit the streets first in this public relations war .. with the formation of a Pursuers Panel .. which consists of several firms of lawyers who can take on negligence claims against other lawyers.
Like you Peter I talked to a member of the Persuers Panel about a lawyer from Ross Harper Solicitors in Glasgow. They refused to help me, and the Persuers Panel, and Ross Harper are all insured by Royal Sun Alliance, so how can the Persuers Panel lawyers get damages from Ross Harpers insurers. They would sting their own insurers. This is propaganda by the Law Society, it has nothing to do with lawyers from the Persures Panel obtaining justice for lawyers victims.
So people of Scotland if any of you want to approach the Persuers Panel to sue your original solicitor, forget it, you have no chance. The loyalties between lawyers are tenacious, these supercilious twits, look at clients as untermenschen, (subhumans) there is only one thing that lawyers are interested in clients for and that is Money. Lawyers have a lot in common with the Nazi's. It is fortunate they do not have brownshirts, like Hitler's Nazis in the 1930's.
The swastika should be hoisted above the Law Society of Scotland.
"A PERVERT lawyer who filmed female colleagues on the loo was spared jail yesterday after a controversial sheriff branded his actions "clumsy". Peter Fitzpatrick used a video camera hidden in a pile of cardboard boxes to spy on the ladies toilet.
But Stirling sheriff Margaret Gimblett told Fitzpatrick his offence sounded like "a cry for help". And she added: "Any lady with her wits about her would have noticed one of the boxes had been tampered with."
She gave the 49-year-old three years' probation, ordered him to go to group work sessions and put him on the sex offenders' register.
The dad-of-two grinned as he was sentenced. His punishment provoked fury from Mid-Scotland & Fife Tory MSP Liz Smith.
LIZ SMITH IS CORRECT, BUT I GO FURTHER, THE SHERIFF NEEDS PSYCHIATRIC HELP, THESE PEOPLE WHO SIT ON THE BENCH HAVE LOST TOUCH WITH REALITY.
SO WOMEN OF SCOTLAND, IF YOU ARE FILMED ON THE TOILET, IN THIS SHERIFF'S OPINION IT IS YOUR FAULT BECAUSE YOU DID NOT HAVE YOUR WITS ABOUT YOU. WOMEN MUST NOW LOOK FOR HIDDEN CAMERAS IN TOILETS. IF A MAN WHO IS NOT A LAWYER DOES THIS, WILL IT BE A CRY FOR HELP? I WONDER WHAT WOMAN THINK OF THIS SHERIFF'S OPINION?
Gill's review is full of things he knows himself will never be implemented.
Take McKenzie Friend - the judge doesnt even recognise it as a Human Rights matter (which it is in England & Wales).
Most of the remainder of his report seems to be aimed at generating business for solicitors rather than giving people the access to justice you are talking about here.
Missed opportunity if you ask me but I'm sure others will say the whole thing was tailored to suit the legal profession and in time they will be proved correct.
Post a Comment