Year 3, week 30: professional misconduct guidelines

There was a big discussion going on in the pub on Friday evening about the new sentencing guidelines for professional misconduct that have been issued by the Bar Standards Board (here).
“Never needed guidelines before you know. Not when we regulated ourselves.” It was HeadofChambers.
“Just kind of looked after your own you mean?” snorted BusyBody.
“I wouldn’t mock, my dear,” he replied. “You might be grateful for that kind of help some day.”
“I do wonder if you had anything to do with their drafting though. I mean, a reprimand and a low level fine for drink driving,” she said, making reference to HeadofChambers’ notorious past misdemeanour.
“That’s a bit below the belt for a Friday evening,” said TheBusker, trying to smooth things over.
“Don’t worry,” said HeadofChambers. “I can look after myself, even at my great old age.  I have to say that I was rather surprised at the sanction for drug possession of any class whatsoever being merely a reprimand and fine. Though perhaps that’s to appease a few at the more junior end of our illustrious profession?” he smiled mischievously at BusyBody.
“I see there’s an offence of ‘holding out’ said OldSmoothie. “Not something I’ve ever known you to be guilty of,” he said turning to TheVamp.
She laughed and replied with: “That’s nothing. I’m just glad they finally recognised ‘late withdrawal’ as an act of professional misconduct.” She paused before turning to TheCreep who was fag-ending just behind her and added: “Hey MrCreepyWeepy. I’d consider late withdrawal to be a seriously inadequate professional service. Wouldn’t you agree?”

April 20, 2009 · Tim Kevan · One Comment
Posted in: Uncategorized

One Response

  1. Gemma Blair - April 20, 2009

    Goodness, BabyB. Wouldn’t want you up before a tribunal! How many times can they disbar you???