Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

The decision is less than honest.

Clearly the Learnard judge forgets that he is Clark would have consulted with the Learnard judge (when he was a mere lowly barrister/QC) as to the number of hours that he had spent on a particular matter and then applied a given rate.

Is he now saying that the rate quoted by news Clark was dishonest? It would appear to be so. Clearly there are people of different abilities who take different amounts of time to assess the particular problem and come up with a solution, but nevertheless their hourly rate must be respected.

Unfortunately, former barristers seem to think that they are in a league of their own and that solicitors are nincompoops, not worth thinking time. Time for them to reconsider, after all it was the solicitors who gave them their instructions and they had to spend a great deal of time before they got to the stage where they could give proper instructions and then to prepare the instructions. Is that time were nothing? How otherwise would it be calculated. Maybe the Learnard (?) Judge would care to comment.

How many times did solicitors give them a clue as to the possible pleading?

Share bleeding prejudice/envy.

Your details

Cancel