Good Law Project suing the EHRC and Bridget Phillipson - letter before action

He did have to apologise when criticised by a judge for a tweet about the murder of Brianna Ghey when he said the perpetrators were motivated by transphobia. He also wrongly disclosed a witness statement from an action re PPE when this evidence wasn't being relied on in breach of the rules. This isn't lawyerly behaviour.

I'm certain there were complaints about Suella Braverman calling judges unelected and unaccountable when she was Attorney General. Surely JoMo is going further than this. She sailed close to the wind but I'm really not sure if she was being taken to task as a member of the bar or due to the fact she had responsibility for the Judiciary in her capacity as AG.
I would dearly love to see him taken down a peg.

he took a small break earlier to libel one of the SC judges.

So the 'wisest lawyer he knows' is slandering a Supreme Court judge (or all 5 of them considering the judgment was unanimous ) and the bestest ever human rights lawyers in the whole wide world told him a case that had been accepted and was being argued in the Supreme Court...wasn't arguable

I'm beginning to think that all these 'top lawyers' he's conversing with are actually just his teddy bears and dollies, sat in a circle at Jolly's tea parties telling him what he wants to hear. Fucking crackpot.

Sooner or later, some barrister or professor or politician or charity CEO or union general secretary will have to be made an example of, pour encourager les autres.

Maybe there are just too many prominent people who've breached public standards to deal with thoroughly. But then you have to look at people like Jolyon who really seem to be taking the piss.

I agree. But this particular topic seems to come with no accountability of any kind. The Nolan principles for example have been repeatedly breached with no kind of professional come back.

If Jolyon were a football coach and his team lost a crucial game and he took to social media to speculate that the ref was bent, there would be consequences.

Just saying.

I’m not sure how this is within the code of conduct for a KC, even if not practising.

Surely the main thing you don’t do is malign judges like this.

I have to say I absolutely loved this!!!

Wow!!!! Just unbelievable and I've now watched it 3 times ... like really???

And of course my "be kind" friends are swallowing the line No trans voices were heard hook line and sinker... and are then surprised that a judge didn't know better when I explain it. (Never heard of the value of PR - this is one thing the TRAs are exceptionally good at....)

This is their last hurrah.....

DrudgeJedd · Today 13:28
GLP bluesky video
Jolyon & co are projecting massive transwomen onto the front of the Supreme Court.
Brace yourself before clicking the link 😁
Oh my goodness me, I am lost for words.

Well, that wasn’t a very good idea.

I'm sure Jolyon knows his stuff when it comes to tax law, but I'm guessing defamation is one of the areas that he hasn't paid much attention to over the years.

Libelling a judge should be a pretty big deal, and I'm not sure Jolyon can get off the hook by saying he's just repeating what he was told by an eminent lawyer who goes to another school.

That's incredibly inappropriate. And also just plain stupid.

JoMo's "The wisest lawyer I know"

Maybe we should all complain to the bar council

Oh! This is interesting…… 👀

I wonder if there are grounds to argue this?

I really wish that judge would sue JoMo. Right now, he seems to think he can say whatever he likes, regardless of what the truth actually is.

Hmm.

For example, you can make a report about barristers who may be:

behaving in a way which is likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public places in them or in the profession – for example if they are bullying or harassing someone or using racist, sexist, or otherwise seriously offensive language either in person or on social media. But do remember that, like everyone else, barristers have human rights which include the right to freedom of expression.

https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/for-the-public/reporting-concerns.html

Yeah, I think being honest and upfront is the most important thing. I've never even had a practising certificate, but sometimes colleagues find out I have a law degree and ask me things about wills or power of attorney or similar. I don't mind sharing what I know, but I always tell them to get proper advice from a real lawyer.

Maybe this is why I'm allergic to lawyers telling people what they want to hear. There are a few of them who do this in the trans space. I think they'd serve the trans community better by telling them when their legal position is weak.

He's spent most of today on bluesky shroud-waving about child suicide, he took a small break earlier to libel one of the SC judges.
Does he have no normal friends left now?

It's really struck me since the SC judgment that I haven't seen or heard from anyone who is able to provide a coherent definition of what trans even means.

People are howling vociferously that trans rights are supposedly being taken away but they cannot even tell us what trans means.

Which leaves me wondering what actually is the purpose of the GRA and what has all this suffering been for?

That's similar to the rules for solicitors if you are not holding a current practicing certificate.

IANAL, but the Bar Standards Board has specific guidance for unregistered barristers, who are qualified but don't hold a current practising certificate. They can still offer certain legal services, just as long as they don't misrepresent what they are allowed to offer. They're also still members of the profession and expected to abide by its standards of conduct.

Unregistered-Barristers.pdf

Oh gosh, how are we 3 years on and people are still arguing this nonsense that if a boy says he's a girl suddenly those words have magical powers and ordinary safeguarding gets jettisoned?

How did such abject nonsense ever get so much traction?

Nokes: Okay, so if there was a child that self-identified as transgender in a dormitory with your children, would that give you any cause for concern?

Badenoch: Are you saying if a biological male child was in a dormitory with biological females, but said he was a girl, would I be comfortable with that?

Nokes: Yeah.

Badenoch: No.

The Scottish Government can not appeal the decision of the Supreme Court.

Because they are not an affected person.

Gosh that really does undermine their case that they are women doesn’t it? It’s not quite the statement they think it is…

I didn't know he was no longer a practicing barrister. Is he just a business proprietor of the GLP now?