EXCLUSIVE: Drug Possession Pupil Barrister Henry Mostyn Is Rejected For Tenancy

By |

In May, 4 New Square chambers opted not to sack one its pupils, Henry Mostyn, after he was caught by police with cocaine and ecstasy while queuing outside a Shoreditch nightclub.

Some admired 4 New Square's liberalism. Others questioned whether Mostyn had been made a special case of by virtue of his high profile father, High Court judge Sir Nicholas Mostyn QC.

Meanwhile, there were murmurings that Mostyn had merely been given a stay of execution and that 4 New Square was not planning to keep him on when he finished his pupillage in the summer.

Well, those murmurings proved right...

Last Thursday, 4 New Square welcomed Mostyn’s fellow pupil, Michael Ryan, as a new tenant at the set. But no mention was made of the fate of Mostyn himself, whose profile remains on 4 New Square’s website. This morning, though, the chambers’ chief practice manager, Lizzy Stewart, confirmed that Mostyn hadn’t been kept on.

Eton and Oxford-educated Mostyn could be in for a difficult time if he perseveres with a career at the Bar.

As Richard Todd QC put it while defending Mostyn at his May Bar Standards Board (BSB) disciplinary hearing: "The caution [given by the police to Mostyn when he was caught with the drugs] itself has an impact - it will have a bearing on future applications, whether for [crown court] recorder or Queen’s Counsel."

Todd added: "It is going to have an impact on visas and a very lucrative line of work - working overseas...Mr Mostyn wants to work in the commercial work and it may well be he’ll have to forget about that."

4 thoughts on “EXCLUSIVE: Drug Possession Pupil Barrister Henry Mostyn Is Rejected For Tenancy

  1. hmostyn [spoof]

    Conrad,

    Laugh all you want, but when I attend elite east end establishments (as I will have much more time to do now), I always bring my bag of macaroons with me. That way, when the cops come, I can just dump my cocaine in there, and let them try to sort out which is which. I used to hope this would make it inadmissible as evidence as it had been tampered with.

    I was wrong unfortunately, but then I'm not a criminal barrister. Or any barrister now LOL!

    Comment
  2. Pingback: GDL Route ‘Made Me a Damn Sight More Rounded Than If I Had Read An LLB’ | Legal Cheek

  3. Pingback: Law Review Weekly #4 Part 2: Has Lord Sumption developed a taste for generalising? « Charon QC

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>