Mr Bates vs The Post Office

[Bonefish Blues]

I think he's being very lawyerly.

[LimmerickLad]

Bonefish Blues said:

I think he's being very lawyerly.

I would say he's being very evasive and has no intention on offering anything to "assist" the Enquiry unless it's dragged out of him.

[balise]

I thought the KC's interrogation was good. Simple questions are always good.

[Maxdecel]

Questioned outside the inquiry too Bad timing. - https://www.itv.com/news/2024-04-24/former-post-of...
Wasn't aware of the BED's apart from the ones SS told him about.

[Camoradi]

So we are led to believe by these witnesses that not a single one of them individually did anything wrong, the combined effect of which was the biggest miscarriage of justice in UK legal history.

They should prosecute them all as a single entity on the basis of joint enterprise.

[LimmerickLad]

Camoradi said:

So we are led to believe by these witnesses that not a single one of them individually did anything wrong, the combined effect of which was the biggest miscarriage of justice in UK legal history.

They should prosecute them all as a single entity on the basis of joint enterprise.

I always thought a solicitor's responsibility is to the Courts and / or their professional registrations and not their clients.......does this principle apply to the in-house company solicitors as well?

[OMITN]

LimmerickLad said:

I always thought a solicitor's responsibility is to the Courts and / or their professional registrations and not their clients.......does this principle apply to the in-house company solicitors as well?

It does. All solicitors’ primary responsibility is to the Court. Then to their clients/employers.

I’m the GC of a large business. It is much harder to maintain that professional separation when you work in-house. I know of at least one GC who has resigned because of this conflict and many of us wrestle with this. In fact in private companies and many listed organisations the GC is also the company secretary (they have separate responsibilities/duties)

This has been a huge failure of corporate governance - the most significant in my 20 years of qualification - and something all in-house lawyers must learn from.

It is never wrong to do the right thing but the pressure in that environment - because it clearly came from the chair all the way down - must have been immense.

[Maxdecel]

OMITN said:

It does. All solicitors’ primary responsibility is to the Court. Then to their clients/employers.

I’m the GC of a large business. It is much harder to maintain that professional separation when you work in-house. I know of at least one GC who has resigned because of this conflict and many of us wrestle with this. In fact in private companies and many listed organisations the GC is also the company secretary (they have separate responsibilities/duties)

This has been a huge failure of corporate governance - the most significant in my 20 years of qualification - and something all in-house lawyers must learn from.

It is never wrong to do the right thing but the pressure in that environment - because it clearly came from the chair all the way down - must have been immense.

It did ! https://www.bbc.co.uk/articles/cm541z38dz9o
But she's sorry so all's well !

[MesoForm]

LimmerickLad said:

I always thought a solicitor's responsibility is to the Courts and / or their professional registrations and not their clients.......does this principle apply to the in-house company solicitors as well?

Yup, one of them in the past few days was forced out because of her duty to the court

https://open.substack.com/pub/richardmoorhead/p/he...

Edit - Sorry, that was the wrong link (my wife is an in-house lawyer and keeps sending me links!), the one above is about disclosure. This one is about the solicitor’s duty

https://open.substack.com/pub/richardmoorhead/p/pu...

Edited by MesoForm on Wednesday 24th April 18:56

[OMITN]

MesoForm said:

LimmerickLad said:

I always thought a solicitor's responsibility is to the Courts and / or their professional registrations and not their clients.......does this principle apply to the in-house company solicitors as well?

Yup, one of them in the past few days was forced out because of her duty to the court

https://open.substack.com/pub/richardmoorhead/p/he...

Edit - Sorry, that was the wrong link (my wife is an in-house lawyer and keeps sending me links!), the one above is about disclosure. This one is about the solicitor’s duty

https://open.substack.com/pub/richardmoorhead/p/pu...

Edited by MesoForm on Wednesday 24th April 18:56

Susan Crichton was the GC at the time. The full note - that Vennells wrote down! - shows that she had no concept that this is an essential requirement of any lawyer.

But what is also telling is:
1. The chair wanted it managed like the civil service would have done.
2. The directors were operating under (among other things) the Companies Act 2006, which codified a significant number of directors’ duties. I can’t see that they were expressly following this - Vennells in particular looks weak here
3. Alwen Lyons was then (and is still now) the company secretary - clearly they were failing to guide the board on the execution of its duties.

[alangla]

This story might be of interest, particularly the parallels between the issues in this case and the issues the inquiry is experiencing https://news.stv.tv/west-central/judge-surprised-a...

[balise]

alangla said:

This story might be of interest, particularly the parallels between the issues in this case and the issues the inquiry is experiencing https://news.stv.tv/west-central/judge-surprised-a...

They’re still doing it. It’s hard to believe that so far into the inquiry they haven’t changed their behaviours.

Interesting that chairman Alice Perkins is also Mrs Jack Straw.

[FiF]

balise said:

alangla said:

This story might be of interest, particularly the parallels between the issues in this case and the issues the inquiry is experiencing https://news.stv.tv/west-central/judge-surprised-a...

They’re still doing it. It’s hard to believe that so far into the inquiry they haven’t changed their behaviours.

Interesting that chairman Alice Perkins is also Mrs Jack Straw.

That's the thing that utterly baffles me, the continuation of the behaviour. Lessons learned = Zero.

[Wills2]

balise said:

alangla said:

This story might be of interest, particularly the parallels between the issues in this case and the issues the inquiry is experiencing https://news.stv.tv/west-central/judge-surprised-a...

They’re still doing it. It’s hard to believe that so far into the inquiry they haven’t changed their behaviours.

Interesting that chairman Alice Perkins is also Mrs Jack Straw.

The PO is just a diseased flee bitten dog that needs to be put down, as for Perkins being Mrs Straw well there you go it's all an incestuous merry go round for the political class, utterly rotten.

[Castrol for a knave]

Wills2 said:

balise said:

alangla said:

This story might be of interest, particularly the parallels between the issues in this case and the issues the inquiry is experiencing https://news.stv.tv/west-central/judge-surprised-a...

They’re still doing it. It’s hard to believe that so far into the inquiry they haven’t changed their behaviours.

Interesting that chairman Alice Perkins is also Mrs Jack Straw.

The PO is just a diseased flee bitten dog that needs to be put down, as for Perkins being Mrs Straw well there you go it's all an incestuous merry go round for the political class, utterly rotten.

I meet people like her regularly.

Same trajectory, no boundaries, poor decision making, bugger all commercial acumen, try to frame your engagement so they can throw you under the bus and think you went to school just to eat your lunch.

They bks up eventually and thebturn up as a senior hire at the National Trust, NHS Trust or whatever. Grab a few nice non-exec. appointments, an OBE and retire happy.

Hate to say it, but women seem to be the most toxic and slopey shouldered at this..

[Mercdriver]

After the statement of the ex chief lawyer of POL stating that Vennels instructed staff to continue convictions despite her knowing they were on shaky ground with Horizon there can be no doubt that Vennels should be imprisoned for a long time.

She should not be given easy number like prison chaplain either.

[LimmerickLad]

Wills2 said:

balise said:

alangla said:

This story might be of interest, particularly the parallels between the issues in this case and the issues the inquiry is experiencing https://news.stv.tv/west-central/judge-surprised-a...

They’re still doing it. It’s hard to believe that so far into the inquiry they haven’t changed their behaviours.

Interesting that chairman Alice Perkins is also Mrs Jack Straw.

The PO is just a diseased flee bitten dog that needs to be put down, as for Perkins being Mrs Straw well there you go it's all an incestuous merry go round for the political class, utterly rotten.

Certainly does seem that way.

Let's just hope thr SRA / Courts have the balls to bring some of them to account.............oh and Vennells gets 25 yrs in prison.

Edited by LimmerickLad on Wednesday 24th April 22:30

Edited by LimmerickLad on Wednesday 24th April 22:31

[Flumpo]

Quite surprised itv have said the tv show actually made a loss and they can’t go on creating content like this at a loss:

https://apple.news/AdiLIH7VQQpWW0yb-BLYs0Q

[eliot]

Flumpo said:

Quite surprised itv have said the tv show actually made a loss and they can’t go on creating content like this at a loss:

https://apple.news/AdiLIH7VQQpWW0yb-BLYs0Q

that’s surprising.
I was thinking we need a followup, probably with a nice graphic showing the timeline, who reported to who, who did what etc.
Hopefully a youtuber will do it instead or itv work out how to makr programmes for less money.

[hidetheelephants]

Flumpo said:

Quite surprised itv have said the tv show actually made a loss and they can’t go on creating content like this at a loss:

https://apple.news/AdiLIH7VQQpWW0yb-BLYs0Q

How the chuff do you get 13.5m pairs of eyeballs on your product and not make money?