Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Can a barrister found not guilty continue to practice?

  • 03-01-2025 07:02PM
    #1
    mondeoman72
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,066 ✭✭✭


    I had a discussion with a barrister about this recently and am interested in the thinking behind it. They told me his career is over, but I dont understand it. Not wanting to go into did do/should have/ shouldnt have.

    A barrister who is also a law lecturer is charged with serious crimes. He is found not guilty. Is his career over? or can he continue as he was as he was is his now innocent? Accordingly, I cannot see why he cannot continue his job?

    Can you please explain what thinking is happening here.

    Thanks all



Comments

  • #2
    Victor
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,746 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Legally or administratively, I would think there are few, if any, impediments.

    However, clients want their case to be about them / the case, not about their barrister and it might be difficulty in keeping things separate. Gossips will gossip.



  • #3
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 43,365 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    So can a barrister who has been deemed to have done nothing unlawful be prevented from working?

    He was charged as you say but he was also found not guilty!



  • #4
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,715 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    He can't be prevented from working. But nobody can be compelled to give him work.

    Barristers are self-employed. They are instructed, case-by-case, by solicitors. Every time a solicitor has a case that requires the involvement of a barrister he is free to instruct whichever barrister he wishes. No barrister has a right to be instructed in relation to any particular case. I think the suggestion being made here is that solicitors may be reluctant to instruct Phelan — they have to act in the best interests of their client, and it may not be in the client's interest for the case to become, as Victor says, "about the barrister". Other barristers, with a professional competence and reputation on a par with Phelan, but without the public notoriety, will be available.

    I think the view that his career is over may be a bit overblown. He still has his academic career, obviously. Plus, barristers do plently of opinion and advisory work in cases that are not going to court; there's no particular reason why solicitors would be reluctant to instruct Phelan in relation to work of that kind.



  • #5
    Claw Hammer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,868 ✭✭✭Claw Hammer


    On a formal level there is no restriction on his practice. In reality, he has not appeared in court since the incident. Arising from that alone he is no longer current with instructing solicitors. Any cases he was involved in before the incident will have gone of to another barrister and finished off and any new similar cases will have gone to other barristers.

    He will have to build a new practice from scratch with the murder trial in the background. As for advisory work, the areas he practiced in do not lend themselves to giving advices only. Immigration law is no foal no fee as immigrants have no money and advices are generally about the prospects of success in Judicial Review with fees only being received in the event of a successful Judicial Review.
    It is different in areas such as land or probate where there is money available to pay for opinion. These are minority areas where solicitors only seek opinions from barristers who have a high level of skill and experience in the area.



Advertisement