ABSTRACT
In Arthur JS Hall & Co v Simons (2000), the House of Lords made a bold change in this area of law. It imposed a duty of care upon courtroom advocates that had not been previously supported in law.
Lawyers are, for the general public, the most central and prominent part of the English legal system. They are, arguably, to the legal system what doctors are to the health system. For many decades, a debate has grown about why a patient injured by the negligence of a surgeon in the operating theatre can sue for damages, whereas a litigant whose case is lost because of the negligence of his advocate cannot sue. It all seemed very unfair. Even the most glaringly obvious courtroom negligence was protected against legal action by a special advocates’ immunity. The claim that this protection was made by lawyers (and judges who were lawyers) for lawyers was difficult to refute. In this House of Lords’ decision, the historic immunity has been abolished in respect of both barristers and solicitor-advocates (of whom there are now over 1,000 with higher courts’ rights of audience) and for both civil and criminal proceedings.
