Give us another Chance, say disgruntled associates

Halloween seems to have come early for Clifford Chance, as their ghouls and demons came tumbling out of the closet and onto the front pages last weekend.

The soon-to-be-notorious memo e-mailed to partners by six associates in the firm's New York office was described as 'a 13-page suicide note' (The Times, 26 October), copies of which are now 'multiplying like a virulent strain of bacteria on the electronic ether'.

In it, the lawyers decided to tell their partners 'exactly where the firm is going wrong' - namely that 'the link between salaries and the number of hours billed to clients encourages padding of hours, inefficient work, repetition of tasks and other problems'.

As The Times succinctly said, 'Who would have thought it?'

Perhaps most poignantly, the associates also requested 'more comfortable chairs, free shoe shines, and plates and utensils so people working late can avoid eating out of containers' (Financial Times, 26 October).

The beleaguered firm is now 'mounting a charm offensive' and 'eating humble pie' (Sunday Telegraph, 27 October), aiming to 'limit the damage and prevent mass defections by companies angry at claims that lawyers were encouraged to pad billable hours' (The Sunday Times, 27 October).

Back in Westminster, voices of protest are being raised against the government's proposed Mental Health Bill.

The Independent on Sunday reported how Prime Minister Tony Blair 'has privately told ministers and senior Labour MPs that he has grave concerns about proposed mental health laws described as Draconian by campaigners' (27 October).

Mr Blair apparently told MPs earlier this month that 'mistakes had been made in drafting the Mental Health Bill and that more time was needed to rethink the reforms'.

Opponents to the Bill, including the Law Society, are concerned about 'plans to compel people with dangerous personality disorders to be detained indefinitely when they have committed no crime'.

Claiming that this would turn 'doctors into jailers' (The Guardian, 24 October), campaigners are urging the government to pass mental health legislation 'fit for the 21st century'.

Last week's ruling in the Bruce Grobbelaar libel case pointed up the hazard of conditional fee agreements (CFAs), The Guardian reported this week (29 October), revealing that his lawyers took the case to the House of Lords on a CFA.

The Lords reinstated the High Court jury's verdict that the Sun newspaper had libelled him by claiming he took 'bungs' for match fixing.

But they ruled that it had been proved Mr Grobbelaar had accepted bribes, awarding him damages of 1, rather than the jury's 85,000.

The problem this caused was whether it constituted a 'win' for the purposes of the CFA.

Both sides could claim victory, the paper noted, and so everyone is waiting for the Lords to rule on costs.

'His lawyers will be sweating,' it said.

Noting the greater use of CFAs in libel, the paper turned to Tory MP Edward Garnier QC: 'I always shudder when I get a CFA,' he said.

'I'd rather not do them, but for some people it's the only way they'll get legal assistance...

The trouble is so many things are unpredictable in any action.'

And which government introduced CFAs? Why, it was Mr Garnier's, and a government he was a member of, no less.

Victoria MacCallum