Silk round 2014: 100 promoted to QC but female representation stalls at 18 per cent

  • Print
  • Comments (6)

Readers' comments (6)

  • Well, it had to happen sooner or later. This year, for the first time, someone of a lower call than I was appointed!

    Well done all.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Congratulations to Mr Nick Goodwin QC. A fantastic achievement. For only the second time in nearly 30 years of practice I can proudly boast that "one of my briefs" has been appointed as Queen's Counsel!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I think you mean "lower call than ME"...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • "of a lower call than mine", please ...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • You're all wrong; it's "later call", not "lower".

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Perhaps I've been getting it wrong all my career, which may also explain why I'm not a silk. I've always understood that you deal with this thorny issue in the following terms:

    - she is senior in call to me
    - she is junior in call to me
    - she is X years senior in call to me
    - she is Y years junior in call to me

    "Lower" call could be apt to confuse because if the year of call of the new silk (1994) is lower in number than my year of call (1995) then the barrister in question is in fact senior in call to me. "Higher" call suffers from the same problem but in reverse.

    But then again, on the rare occasion on which I receive instructions, my clerks describe me as being of 19 years' call. On that basis if someone is of "lower" call to me then they would be junior in call to me.

    The problems may be that, first, "call" may be used interchangeably, and depending on the context, to denote both the year of call and the number of years for which a barrister has been called; second, that I don't have anything else to do; third, I haven't considered "later call" at all which possibly renders the entirety of this post even more irrelevant than I had thought; fourth, that we don't have a fused profession.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (6)