I understand Barrett is already impugning the JCIO’s integrity in The Other Place. Doubtless because he has now realised that his complaint is hopeless and is seeking to deflect from the idiocy of making the complaint in the first place.
Replies
Is he still practising? Impugning the JCIO on social media strikes me as a high risk activity if he is.
sep 1, 2025, 8:56 am • 5 0 • view
It doesn’t matter if he is practicing or not - if be remains an unregistered barrister then I believe he is still subject to the code of conduct.
sep 1, 2025, 1:39 pm • 4 0 • view
I think that’s right. I also thought it was an interesting piece of information for a different reason - it seems to show that he has chosen to earn a crust through means other than providing legal services. Some might say that this is a significant moment in the context of consumer protection.
sep 1, 2025, 1:49 pm • 1 0 • view
Yes, unregistered barristers are still subject to BSB regulation (although with a high bar for Article 10 freedom to criticise the judiciary). Without a practising certificate his lawyerly work must be limited and I imagine he generates income from his substack and social media instead
sep 1, 2025, 2:17 pm • 1 0 • view
I find Barrett’s attack on Bean (disclosure - I don’t know the latter personally) very concerning, because it’s really a broader attack on the judicial status quo: the structures of appointment, listing, conduct investigation all in the firing line for a largely legally illiterate audience
sep 1, 2025, 2:27 pm • 1 0 • view
Even with a growing and receptive audience Barrett is an inconsequential figure, but if his attack is taken up by Jenrick or other politicians, then it becomes more serious. At what point then, if ever, does Barrett’s conduct in all this risk “gravely damaging” the judiciary?
sep 1, 2025, 2:34 pm • 0 0 • view
Indeed: but for his conduct, would others, who are more consequential than Barrett, act to damage the judiciary? He’s an arsonist in the house of democracy.
sep 1, 2025, 2:39 pm • 2 0 • view
An excellent metaphor which I hope you won’t mind me plagiarising. All of this (as with his Southport postings last year) is being said in the proximity of threats of violent protest and disorder and is potentially inflammatory to it. That is very concerning
sep 1, 2025, 2:44 pm • 2 0 • view
No need to plagiarise - I hereby grant you an irrevocable, non-exclusive license to use as you please!
sep 1, 2025, 2:46 pm • 1 0 • view
Many thanks!
sep 1, 2025, 2:47 pm • 1 0 • view
He is just begging to be cancelled by the hive of woke that is the Standards Board
sep 1, 2025, 1:49 pm • 2 0 • view
I’ve no doubt that he would seek to present any disciplinary process as unjust martyrdom by a flawed institution (and of course he wouldn’t be the first barrister to do so either)
sep 1, 2025, 2:29 pm • 1 0 • view
Indeed. And we should bear in mind that (even if a complaint about him were to be made now), the BSB would take at least a year to get anywhere with it. It’s an unsuitably slow process when it is used to deal with the fast-paced world of legal rage baiting on social media.
sep 1, 2025, 2:32 pm • 1 0 • view
I think @legalmusings.bsky.social has written that he is no longer practising. I understand he now has a role with “Lawyers for Borders”.
sep 1, 2025, 8:58 am • 7 0 • view
That is also my understanding. He isn’t currently on the barristers’ register, and he has clearly been associating himself with “Lawyers for Borders” on his social media account, using “we” to speak of them, and urging local authorities to apply for these injunctions
sep 1, 2025, 9:03 am • 2 0 • view
Lawyers for Borders? Do they have particularly strong views on the use of nasturtiums or perhaps general bedding plants?
sep 1, 2025, 9:09 am • 13 0 • view
It’s the sister association of Médicins avec Frontieres, that well known charity of medical professionals who are keen to not travel beyond their respective arrondissements. AGMs have been a particular challenge for them.
sep 1, 2025, 9:12 am • 2 0 • view
No, they are a ginger group which advises and assists local authorities in seeking planning law injunctions to close migrant hotels in their area. They were initially successful in the Epping case, then unsuccessful, but have made an impact on headlines. Not unlike many other lawfare-mongers
sep 1, 2025, 9:12 am • 2 0 • view
Not for the first time I prefer my version of reality….
sep 1, 2025, 9:14 am • 1 0 • view
Well, it’s a more benign vision, but unfortunately not reality. I don’t want to see Barrett as a Reform government’s Attorney General
sep 1, 2025, 9:16 am • 0 0 • view
In the second sentence you can lose Barrett as the apostrophe s and AG….
sep 1, 2025, 9:18 am • 1 0 • view
Sure, but my point is that other people do. People with strong views, and people with votes. He engages that audience and it trusts and likes him. Legal Twitter/X/Bluesky largely doesn’t engage that audience, and it doesn’t trust or like us/them either
sep 1, 2025, 9:22 am • 1 0 • view
The 33% who like fascism ain’t ever going to listen to the likes of us
sep 1, 2025, 9:24 am • 0 0 • view
I knew a garden designer who thought Cerastium tomentosum is a crime (Latin name coz it's lawyers)
sep 1, 2025, 9:14 am • 2 0 • view
TBF that stuff is a war crime.
sep 1, 2025, 9:16 am • 1 0 • view
Doesn't appear to be on the register
sep 1, 2025, 8:59 am • 4 0 • view
Not on the register but unregistered barristers are still subject to the jurisdiction of the BSB and bound by relevant core duties. Though I don’t think his conduct in criticising the judiciary yet meets the demanding test articulated by the tribunal in the Proudman case
sep 1, 2025, 10:03 am • 3 0 • view
(I know, I am one!)
sep 1, 2025, 10:06 am • 4 0 • view