Racial discrimination claim against pupillage system dismissed

Readers' comments (4)

• Alex | 5-Apr-2012 12:57 pm

  Absolute rubbish

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Onyidzin | 5-Apr-2012 2:25 pm

  Presumably you mean that the claim, not the judgement, was absolute rubbish, Alex? If so, then I agree with you, based on Mr Iteshi's reported failure to provide hard evidence of discrimination. However, I don't think that the qualification route either for barristers or solicitors is a shining example of fair access, and, frankly, I would have thought that attacking the Oxbridge bias which afflicts (?) the upper reaches of both professions might have been a better horse to flog.

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 5-Apr-2012 2:28 pm

  If the claimant was a good barrister his arguments would have prevailed!he failed thus substantiating why he recieved 150 rejections!

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

• Anonymous | 8-Apr-2012 12:17 pm

  Dear All,
  
   I reckon where there is smoke there is fire, and I would not be surprised as I find the English legal system of pup pillage much more biased than USA. Over the Atlantic, there has been in the past some claims that Ivy League law students had the best placements in the interships for the best law offices in NY, DC and CA and some law offices would accept Harvard law graduates only. So much for that odd American movie depicting a blonde going to Harvard.....
  
  Here in an aristocratic society, where Lords and Duchesses still make lines in the newspapers like in the old times before French Revolution, I would not be totally flabbergasted if racial discrimination in chambers against overseas puppilage is still an unwritten rule. It is like the old common saying of English colonial system sailing the world, Victorian age had so many colonies to usurpate their goods, now that the democracy is upon us they urge not to accept their sudits back in the working class as peers.
  
  Frankly, economically speaking, does not even make sense to have solicitors and barristers classified for UK legal purposes, as it is absolutely anti-democratic plus it ratifies the social structure of exclusion in the English working classes. most commonwealth countries still follow this rule for the absolutely amazement of foreigners.
  
  I have a little sense of respect for people that discriminates for origin forgetting that intellect and intelligence does not follow rules of physical appearance or accent. it is embodied on the DNA, which has no colour or blue print of a regal distinction.
  
  That should have been a claim published for a mea culpa or an investigation on what is going on in the English jurisdiction with the Bar society members and the Lw Society. Indeed in globalized times, I would expect the English legal system with its old fashion Georgian wigs dangling through the City, which reminded me of George Washington hairdos to raise for the challenge to be part of the new millennium.
  
  I have no clue who this claimant was but I am certain of my gut feeling that he had a claim, not very well organized and presented of evidence though, as these rules are unwritten, but some evidence more oral or telephonic exchanges if any was available, those would may have held water. Nonetheless,it seems he needed Perry Mason for this claim. 
  
  Hang on! Perry Mason would not allowed as defence lawyer as he was not a barrister! What a shame.....
  
  :-( for those not informed of the famous show he was the best defence lawyer in TV....just to have a giggle here....)
  
  All the best,
  
  :-)
   I reckon where there is smoke there is fire...

  Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment