header-logo header-logo

29 July 2022
Issue: 7989 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-detail

Barristers risking it all with tweets

The formidable legal Twitterati has come under the watchful eye of regulators concerned about the reputation of the profession

The Bar Standards Board (BSB) last week launched interim social media guidance as well as a three-month consultation on proposed new social media guidance and regulation of non-professional conduct. It wants to clarify the boundaries when regulating conduct in a barrister’s private life.

The BSB said regulation must address conduct in the barrister’s private life that might have an impact on the public’s confidence in them as professional barristers, but also balance barristers’ human rights against the public interest in preserving public confidence.

In terms of revising its social media guidance, its draft guidance suggests it is unlikely to be concerned about political views or comments criticising political figures as these ‘sit at the top of the hierarchy of free speech values’. The use of foul language is unlikely to be a breach.

Examples that would be of concern include ‘making comments which are of an indecent, obscene, or menacing character or which are gratuitously abusive’ or ‘making comments that are critical of judges or the judiciary beyond what is “discreet, honest and dignified”’.

It provides case studies of conduct that could diminish public trust, such as deliberately misgendering a transgender woman in several tweets and threatening them, or sending ‘seriously offensive private messages on LinkedIn’ to a person the barrister has connected with but does not know offline.

Mark Fenhalls QC, chair of the Bar Council, said: ‘We know from our own ethical enquiries service that issues relating to social media and barristers’ private lives can be difficult to navigate.

‘We have long argued that the Bar needed more clarity from the regulator on where the balance lies.’

The consultations, which can be found here, close on 20 October 2022 at 5pm.

Issue: 7989 / Categories: Legal News , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll