Report comment

I sincerely hope that those advising the three individuals not only will advise concerning appeals to the Supreme Court but also concerning claims against their former employers.

If a PSV driver was required, by his/her employer, to drive for 18 hours a day and, as a result, made a serious error of judgement that resulted in a crash with the loss of lives of passengers, would the outcome solely be a prosecution of the driver - with no consideration of action against the employer whose behaviour was the ultimate cause of the crash and loss of life? I very much doubt it. Action against the employer would, I believe, be inevitable. Otherwise there would be a public outcry and a media campaign 'for justice'.

So why should a solicitor, in similar employment circumstances to the PSV driver but who may not even have caused any consequential loss, let alone loss of life, be treated so differently? Both the PSV driver and the solicitor are in positions of responsibility. But their probable treatment - and that of their employers - is likely to be poles apart.

It's a strange world in which we live today. I doubt that this decision will result in a public outcry and even less that there will be a media campaign 'for justice' for the three individuals. Me, I'm glad I never aspired to a career as a PSV driver and that I've ceased to be a practising solicitor.