|
|
|
Wigs off for UK civil judges, chief justice says
Legal World News |
2007/07/12 15:03
|
The traditional wigs and gowns worn by judges and advocates for 300 years could be scrapped for civil and commercial trials under a review by the Lord Chief Justice.
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, a moderniser who dislikes his own five different costumes, intends to reopen the long-running debate of horse-hair headdress when he takes over as official head of the judiciary next month. The move comes after concerns by the president of the Law Society and the Solicitors’ Association of Higher Court Advocates that they are treated as second-class citizens when it comes to court dress. The 2,000 solicitor-advocates are not allowed to wear wigs and also wear different robes — a simple black gown. Kevin Martin, president of the Law Society, says that for some years solicitor-advocates have argued for parity with barristers: either there are no wigs at all or both kinds of advocate wear the same costume. In a letter to the Lord Chief Justice, he says: “The difference can lead to solicitoradvocates being seen as inferior to barristers. Jurors may form the impression that a non-wigged lawyer is less credible.” The problem is heightened by differences in mode of address: barristers describe each other as “my learned friend” but solicitor-advocates as “my friend”. Solicitors are concerned that the rules could be a breach of competition law. Mr Martin says: “There are instances of clients indicating that they do not mind who the advocate is, as long as they wear a wig.”
While there is backing for reform, the public — and many criminal barristers — support keeping wigs in criminal trials. Any move to scrap wigs might make an exception for criminal trials. Mark Clough, QC, chairman of the Solicitors’ Association of Higher Court Advocates and one of only a handful of solicitor Queen’s Counsel who anomalously wear the same robes as barristers, says: “We have always argued for parity — with or without wigs.”
Lord Phillips favours a simple black gown and faulard or collar. Stephen Hockman, QC, the chairman of the Bar, is also believed to favour reform. |
|
|
|
|
|
Fujimori Wins Legal Round in Extradition Fight
Legal World News |
2007/07/12 09:01
|
A Chilean Supreme Court judge ruled Wednesday that former Peruvian president Alberto Fujimori should not be extradited to Peru to face charges of corruption and human rights abuses. The decision was not final -- lawyers for Peru's government have already announced that they plan to file an appeal to a Supreme Court panel. But the announcement provoked strong reactions in Peru, where Fujimori's 1990-2000 presidency still arouses passions among critics and supporters alike. Peru's government accuses Fujimori of embezzlement, kidnapping and numerous human rights violations during his government's fight against Shining Path rebels. According to the extradition request, Fujimori oversaw military death squads that killed 25 people in two mass murders. He has denied all the charges. "I am very bitter," said Raida Condor, whose son was one of nine students killed in 1992 at the La Cantuta teacher's college in Lima. "I am no longer sure that there can ever be justice. All these years, 15 years of fighting, and they tell us that he is not coming back to stand trial." After his government collapsed in scandal in 2000, Fujimori fled to Japan, the country of his parents' birth. The government there recognized him as a Japanese citizen and protected him from extradition. Fujimori attempted to return to Peru in 2005 to run for president again, but he was arrested in Chile while en route. Peruvian officials formally requested his extradition two months later. A University of Lima poll released Wednesday indicated that two-thirds of Peruvians "do not sympathize" with Fujimori. But those who do -- including legislators who call themselves the Fujimori caucus in Peru's Congress -- quietly celebrated the setback to an extradition attempt that they labeled "political persecution." "I have spoken to the president [Fujimori], and we are very calm," said Rep. Alejandro Aguinaga, spokesman for the caucus and a health minister under Fujimori. "We are taking the process one day at a time, but this is certainly an important moment for us and for justice after years of persecution." Fujimori, 68, who remains under house arrest in Chile, recently announced plans to run for a Senate seat in Japan. In an election scheduled for this month, he is listed as a candidate of the New People's Party, a small conservative opposition group. Fujimori's critics have alleged that this candidacy is an attempt to avoid potential extradition by attaining parliamentary immunity in Japan. But Aguinaga said Fujimori decided to run only because he has been banned from political office in Peru until 2011. Human rights groups quickly expressed disappointment with Wednesday's ruling but said they remain confident of a reversal. Maria McFarland, a senior researcher for the New York-based advocacy group Human Rights Watch and author of a 2005 report that detailed Fujimori's alleged abuses, said the judge ignored key evidence. This, she said, included videotaped testimony that he approved the actions of the death squads and ordered the illegal payment of $15 million to ex-spy chief Vladimir Montesinos. "I think that when this goes to the criminal chamber of the Supreme Court -- if they look at all the evidence -- they'll reach a completely different decision," McFarland said. |
|
|
|
|
|
Pro bono work costs Seattle schools plenty
Headline News |
2007/07/11 15:43
|
For 200 years, Americans have built our democracy with the growth of universal public school education. Public schools are gathering places for democracy. They take in all children, from different walks of life, different families and different backgrounds. One crucial lesson that children learn in public school is that you can get along with different kids. Some may be richer, some poorer, some white, some black, some fast, some slow, some smart and some not so smart, all Americans.
In Washington, we have embraced that notion. But last month, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, set in motion the means to unravel the social compact of integrated public schools. In a case brought by one small group of Seattle parents - Parents Involved in Community Schools - the Supreme Court decided that the best way to remedy racial discrimination in public schools is to not address racial inequities. It endorses a game of pretend - if we pretend that racial discrimination isn't a historical and current fact of life in America, then it isn't!
Seattle has open choice for high schools. While the idea of choice itself resonates with parents, there has to be a formula for deciding who gets into schools that are oversubscribed. Factors for that included, first, if another sibling was already in the chosen school (sibling preference), and then race (if the school is way out of whack with district averages) and proximity to school.
Parents Involved in Community Schools did not like the schools that their kids were slated to attend. So they sued the school district. They didn't sue over sibling preference, or proximity, which they could have done. They chose to sue over the racial integration tie-breaker. This attracted support from the turn-back-the-clock crowd of people who oppose integration. The result is a whole lot more damage to racial integration across the country than the Parents Involved in Community Schools probably anticipated. But who knows - they seem to be happy about the outcome.
So does the law firm of Davis Wright Tremaine (DWT), which took this case for the Parents Involved in Community Schools as pro bono - that is, they didn't charge for their services. Now they intend to request that the Seattle School District pay the bills for their work for re-segregation. They say they will plow this back into more pro bono work, but we don't need any more of this kind of community "service" litigation.
I am surprised DWT is embracing the Supreme Court decision - the firm has a big emphasis on diversity in its partnership and mentoring new minority colleagues. Former Gov. Gary Locke, who knows a lot about discrimination, is one of the partners. DWT states, "We believe that increasing the diversity of our attorneys and staff is central to our ability to fulfill our commitments to our clients and the community. In short, diversity is critical to DWT's long-term success."
After the Supreme Court decision, DWT stated that "School districts around the country should now focus on improving how and what they teach all children." That's nice, but hard to do when you are billing the Seattle School District for over $1 million - money that could go to teaching children. DWT did make a donation of between $5,000 and $10,000 to the Alliance for Education to support the Seattle Schools. Now that appears to be just a figleaf for legal greed.
In fact, if DWT is sincere about improving education across the country, the firm would acknowledge the need for full-day kindergarten, high quality pre-kindergarten, more school days in the year, lower student-teacher ratios, and funding for music, arts and athletics, to start with. It is a lot easier to have true color-blind education when the resources are available for high quality education for all children.
So here's an idea for DWT's next pro bono venture: Lobby the Legislature to meet the constitutional paramount duty of education for all children. They could start by proposing that legal services should no longer be exempt from the sales tax. That new revenue, close to $200 million a year, could be dedicated to the public schools, improving the educational opportunities for all children. That would be true pro bono work. |
|
|
|
|
|
Foley Hoag expands intellectual property group
Law Firm News |
2007/07/11 15:41
|
Foley Hoag LLP announced that well-known patent litigator Donald R. Ware became chair of the firm's expanded Intellectual Property Group and Dana Gordon, a registered patent attorney and scientist, became deputy chair.
The reorganized and expanded IP Group combines several historically strong disciplines in the firm and brings them under one umbrella. The IP Group, comprised of over 80 professionals, includes lawyers, scientists, engineers, medical doctors and other practitioners experienced in patent prosecution, patent litigation, technology transfer, IP due diligence and strategies, copyright and trademark prosecution, and trade secret litigation. "We know our clients want efficiency, responsiveness, and a broad knowledge of cutting-edge technology issues. They want their lawyers to be immersed in their business and industry and to understand all aspects of their intellectual property needs, " said Donald R. Ware, chair of the practice. "Our multi-disciplinary approach allows us to serve our clients in a more powerful and synergistic way." "The breadth and depth of our IP Group allow us to help clients shape an intellectual property strategy to gain a competitive advantage in the marketplace," said deputy chair Dana M. Gordon. "That capability is particularly important in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, areas in which we are deeply rooted." Don, also a former member of the firm's Executive Committee, specializes in biomedical patent litigation including recombinant DNA, monoclonal antibodies, small molecule compounds, drug delivery, molecular diagnostics, research tool patents, and medical devices. He represents some of the world's leading biotechnology companies and academic institutions. Don has been recognized as a leading IP lawyer in Best Lawyers in America®, Chambers USA: the Client's Guide, PLC Which Lawyer? and Global Counsel 3000. He holds his undergraduate degree from Yale University and his law degree from Harvard University. For more information, click here. Dana is a registered patent attorney, handling matters involving organic chemistry, including synthetic organic chemistry, pharmaceuticals, molecular diversity, materials science, biochemistry and molecular biology. His client list includes many of the country's leading academic and private research institutions. Dana holds a Ph.D. in Organic Chemistry from Yale University, and his law degree from Boston College Law School. For more information, click here. Foley Hoag has long been a presence in the IP area, having served clients in the technology and life sciences industries for decades. In 2006, the firm launched its Emerging Enterprise Center, located in the heart of New England's "Technology Corridor" to focus on the unique needs - including intellectual property - of the entrepreneurial community. The IP practice is consistently ranked among top firms by leading publications such as Chambers USA and Legal 500. About Foley Hoag
Foley Hoag provides comprehensive legal services to clients throughout the United States and around the world. We serve a wide range of industries including biopharma, energy and utilities, financial services, manufacturing, and technology. With 250 lawyers located in Boston, Washington, DC, and the Emerging Enterprise Center in Waltham, MA, we provide creative solutions and results-oriented advice in the areas of bankruptcy, restructuring and workouts; corporate finance, mergers and acquisitions, and IPOs; labor and employment; litigation; environmental issues and land use; government strategies; intellectual property; tax, trusts and estates; and white collar and business crimes.
For more information, visit www.foleyhoag.com.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guilty Plea Entered in Gambling Case
Lawyer Blog News |
2007/07/11 14:37
|
A Canadian man who helped create Neteller, a company to process Internet gambling transactions, pleaded guilty yesterday to a federal conspiracy charge, about two weeks after another founder of the company entered a guilty plea. John D. Lefebvre, 55, a Neteller co-founder, entered the plea in Federal District Court in Manhattan, where prosecutors are trying to stop companies that operate overseas from violating United States laws against Web-based gambling. Neteller is based in the Isle of Man. Another co-founder, Stephen Lawrence, previously pleaded guilty to criminal conspiracy. In a plea deal, Mr. Lefebvre agreed to cooperate with prosecutors and testify if necessary. He also agreed to be partly responsible for the $100 million the government is seeking in restitution. Although the conspiracy charge carries a potential prison term of up to five years, cooperation in the case is likely to greatly reduce any potential sentence. The government has said that nearly all of the $5.1 billion in transactions processed in the first half of 2006 involved online gambling, and most of the revenue was generated by American customers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Court annuls EU move on De Beers diamonds trade
Legal World News |
2007/07/11 14:35
|
A top European court on Wednesday struck down a decision by the European Commission which forced diamond producer De Beers to stop buying rough diamonds from Alrosa of Russia, the second-largest producer. "The Court of First Instance annuls the Commission's decision making binding the commitments proposed by De Beers to cease all purchases of rough diamonds from Alrosa," the court said in a statement. The Commission said in February last year it had settled a monopoly abuse case with De Beers, which is 45 percent owned by mining conglomerate Anglo American, after the company agreed to halt the purchase of rough diamonds from Alrosa from 2009. The Commmission said at the time the move would pave the way for more competition in the supply of rough diamonds.
"The Court takes the view in the present case that the complete prohibition of all commercial relations between the two parties with effect from 2009 is manifestly disproportionate," the court said.
The Commission said it would study the ruling carefully. De Beers accounted for about half the world diamond market in 2005. Alrosa extracts nearly a quarter of the world's diamonds.
|
|
|
|
|
Recent Lawyer News Updates |
|
|