Barristers are generally adept at remaining statuesque while their opponents put forward their case, though it was not unheard of for an eye-roll or two to creep in during remote hearings in lockdown.

But a judgment emerging from Ontario, Canada, suggests that not every advocate has quite managed the poker face.

During the hearing of application for enforcement of an arbitral award, Mr Justice Chang noted that counsel for the applicant indulged in – among other things - eye rolling, head shaking, grunting, snickering, guffawing and loud muttering.

‘This behaviour culminated,’ the judge went on, ‘in one of them leaning back in his chair, throwing both hands in the air and laughing in a gleeful moment of triumph during a particularly engaging exchange between opposing counsel and the bench.

‘Apparently, applicant’s counsel felt that he had scored some major point during my questioning of the respondent’s counsel and wanted to ensure that everyone else was aware of that victory.’

The judge noted that when this conduct was addressed in court, the ‘once-exultant’ counsel apologised before intermittently repeating this behaviour for the rest of the hearing.

While acknowledging that human emotions can take over in the heat of the battle, the judge’s summary of counsel’s approach was brutal.

‘It has long been a tradition and requirement of etiquette in our courts that counsel refer to their counterpart as their “friend”,’ he added ‘While most counsel use this appellation, painfully few appear to understand that the fundamental intention underlying its use is to remind counsel of their duty to treat opposing counsel with professionalism, courtesy, respect and civility.

‘All counsel would be well advised to always keep this top of mind, lest the already threadbare state of professionalism and civility between them deteriorate into the irremediable.’

Topics