Struck off Lord Harley badges himself ‘Pro bono senior counsel’ on LinkedIn

Exclusive: SRA has received complaint and is considering “next steps”

harley

A spokesperson for the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has confirmed to Legal Cheek it is looking into a new complaint made about Alan Blacker, aka Lord Harley.

The controversial former ‘solicitor-advocate’ was struck off last year following a two-day hearing at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT). The SDT found the SRA had proven seven out of eight charges made against Blacker, some of which concerned “inaccurate and misleading” statements he had made about his academic qualifications and professional memberships.

Blacker was brought to the SRA’s attention in part because of his eccentric LinkedIn page. Still live, the page contains a number of bold claims. For example, he professes to be a Transactional Analysis Psychoanalytical Psychologist; a Fellow of the Zoological Society of London; a Licensed Boiler Examiner; and a Stanford University graduate, among many (many) other things.

lead1

Though it states he was solicitor-advocate only until July 2016 (when he was struck off), notably his LinkedIn profile still claims the following: he is a Full Member of the Industrial Law Society; a Senior trial and appeal Counsel Civil Grade A (highest) Criminal Level 4 (highest); a member of the American Bar Association; a Legal Advisor and Secretary at Action for Pakistan; a Lawyer Member at Lawyers Without Borders; a Volunteer Lawyer at the Society of Asian Lawyers; and a Full Member of the Solicitor Advocates Association of Higher Rights Advocates. His LinkedIn headline is ‘Pro bono Senior counsel in civil and criminal proceedings with Grade A and Grade 4 accreditation. (Highest)’.

When the Legal Cheek team contacted the SRA about this, we were told the matter has been reported to the regulator and it is looking into it. Though the precise nature of the report cannot be disclosed, a spokesperson said:

We are aware of this particular issue and are gathering all the relevant information before deciding on next steps.

Blacker continues to use his LinkedIn profile frequently. Just last week he left the following comments on a criminal law barrister’s post about the art of advocacy:

harley-linkedin1 harley-linkedin2

Blacker did not respond to Legal Cheek’s request for comment.

For all the latest news, features, events and jobs, sign up to Legal Cheek’s weekly newsletter here.

77 Comments

Chris Grayling's Bald Head

I don’t think I’ve ever come across a more delusional individual, words can’t even express how ridiculous this guy is.

(30)(2)
Chris Grayling's Bald Head

Whilst I’m no fan, Donald Trump is actually going to become president like he said he would. Blacker has never been a Lord, or a lawyer, or successful.

(22)(2)
CharleyFarley

You mean he was on the roll for six years. The question is: how did he get there?

(0)(0)
Trumpenkrieg

Where is the delusion? He said he was going to be president and he did it. Judging objectively, the deluded are those smarmy smug shitlibs who wrote him off as a joke, and who are now having to eat their words as the vibrant utopia they wanted to foist upon Heritage America is being torn down before their very eyes.

(2)(18)
Anonymous

Yes, you are the first person I would turn to for an objective opinion on this.

(4)(1)
Trumpenkrieg

“Here’s how Bernie can still win” is not delusional?

Recounts are not delusional?

Stirring up rogue electors is not delusional?

“Muh Russia hacked the election but we can’t show you the evidence” is not delusional?

Get the fuck out.

(6)(9)
A

Trump has many dangerous policies , including not believe in vaccinations and his denial of global warming. His VP believe in electrocuting gay children until they’re straight or commit suicide. This is scary? Nah, I’m delusional.

(2)(0)
Anonymous

His linkedin comments are ridiculous. He has only acted in one criminal trial anyone can trace, and his client suffered greatly and the court was most displeased with him. He has never prosecuted anything ever.

Linkedin should be approached to ban this guys account.

This post has been moderated because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(14)(1)
Anonymous

There is a field day awaiting here – withdraw those redundancy notices, delay reducing your fees to attract regulatory work from the SRA, for Lord Harley, the bounty, has slipped through the net.

The indefatiguable Lord Harley was last in court doing a Crown Court trail for Dangerous Driving. He was criticized by the Judge at the end of the case for his attire, (but not for his conduct of the case). The Lord – unwisely in the writer’s opinion – riposted and the story got picked up by the Gazette which – perhaps unwittingly at the time – gave the Lord a favourable narrative.

Following which, it came to pass, that a number of misdemeanours in the Lord’s Rochdale practice and Linked In account were pursued with the aim – I think this will be admitted – of having him struck off the Roll of Solicitors for misleading the public and failing to file his accounts properly.

Whereas in two of the most recent striking off Cases the solicitor concerned has paid approximately £10,000 (Bolton case) and £3800 (Hull), the field day in relation to this matter yielded around £90, 000 costs in total.

It is clear from his Linked In pages, which are even now being scrutinized, that Lord Harley has not lost his confidence in giving legal advice. He has styled himself “Pro Bono senior counsel” and, to the wrath of one or more of those who took exception to him last time, he intends to give legal advice – for free – again. What is gut wrenching for the observers is that he is claiming to have held the highest grade rankings in civil and criminal advocacy, and so, it is likely that he will, once again, attract the sort of work for which he was never criticized in the first place.

The indignation is running at fever pitch. Someone has to try and be very clever with the rules because he is not holding himself out as a solicitor, he has not said that he is a barrister either. He has also spelt counsel with a small c which makes life awkward for the regulators. If he is free and helpful, the public will want to use him.

“Shall I contact him and see if he will re draft his Linked In page along these lines [ document provided] by agreement” said one comprehensive school educated regulator (in pretend, not really)

“No. I want this to be a full field day. Instruct Counsel for starters. We want to be litigious on this one and apply attrition” Came the reply from the privately educated more senior regulator (in pretend, not really)

Look out for a crowdfunding entry from the Lord !! He is getting £1000s of worth of publicity and if he gives himself a bigger push than Linked in, he may become the proletariat’s protest pro bono lawyer of choice.

(4)(44)
Steamy Rob

His work is pisspoor. Thick as two short planks and rough as a badgers arsehole.

A liar and a cheat.

(16)(2)
Leave him alone, guys

He’s clearly not well. I appreciate he can’t be permitted to mislead the public and it needs to be dealt with but this is further evidence that the poor guy’s generally one sandwich short of a picnic and/or has had a breakdown.

(25)(2)
Anonymous

I completely agree with this. It’s so unkind to publicly pick apart the details of this vulnerable person’s delusions. Clearly he must be prevented from holding himself out as the provider of legal services of any kind, and it is right that the regulator is dealing with his claims. But the continued mockery is not necessary.

(19)(2)
redplanet

Both the SRA and the SDT told me no appeal had been lodged. He had 21 days to appeal against the striking off in July, but instead he asked for a rehearing. That request was thrown out, so he was still bound by the original 21 days. If any high court papers were served, the regulator ought to have known about it by the time I placed an FOI request in September.

(5)(0)
redplanet

It is true that they are not bound by FOI legislation, however they are bound to equivalent transparency by their own rules.

On September 13 The Head of Case Management at the SDT wrote “The Tribunal has not received any papers pertaining to an appeal under CPR rule 52.4(2) from Mr Blacker.”

On September 23 I received a response to my Freedom of Information request from the Senior Records and Information Officer at the SRA, who wrote “No appeal has been lodged.”

It is difficult to understand why papers would not have been served by those dates, and if they had, why those named individuals (I haven’t named them here but their titles are correct) would lie, if only because stating that an appeal was in the works would prevent them having to deal with irritants like me.

You could of course provide me with the case number Alan. I can take that to the Administrative Court Office and ask them when it’s likely to be heard, and whether you were granted a hearing in Manchester. We’d all love you to do that, it’s about time your wig and robes got an airing.

(5)(0)
lazypartner

Presumably he is applying to vary the usual time limits? This will be on the grounds that argle bargle bargle

(0)(0)
Wendy's mate

A grade A nutter who couldn’t make it in the job proper so going back to the vanity work.

A total faker.

(10)(1)
Robert Stitz

The most brilliant lawyer who ever lived. A genius.

They’re all jealous of him.

(3)(6)
Lord Hackenabush of Harley Upon the Liffey

Surely once struck off his regulator, the SRA, has no jurisdiction. Only if he commits a criminal offence will the state have jurisdiction. So the Mozart of the Court room playeth on.

(2)(2)
Bingo

By describing himself as counsel, he is holding himself out as a barrister. A criminal offence.

(8)(0)
Lord Hackenabush of Harley Upon the River Ouse

Counsel with a small c? Bingo?

(0)(1)
Lord Hackenabush of Harley Swirling Over The Clyde

He taunts the state with a virtuoso display, of cunning , rapid wit and reparté. The Scarlet Pimpernel of counsel.

(4)(4)
Bob Probo

The (comically slow/inept) SRA can think about getting an injunction. There is already a precedent: Law Society v Dixit Shah [2014] EWHC 3482 (Ch). It’s on bailii, if the SRA would like to (re)read it.

The use of “senior counsel” may interest or engage the BSB, so perhaps a joint application is called for.

(6)(0)
Anonymous

The BSB of Ireland perhaps… The term has no official status in England…

(0)(2)
Anonymous

No prison cell is strong enough to hold the Harls and all his qualifications!!!!!

MwhHahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!

(4)(1)
NegativeInfinityPQE

Fun fact: The Hindu name Dixit is pronounced Dick-Shit.

(2)(0)
Anonymous

What a coincidence – that’s exactly how a lot of people pronounce “Harley”.

(4)(0)
Gazette

About time the AG got involved to stop this clown. He may however be a bit busy.

(3)(0)
Bob Probo

The Gazette is reporting that he is appealing the strike-off.

(1)(0)
suer pipe

he didn’t get a fair hearing and thats very clear. its fair and right that he is able to air his many grievances. I have confidence that the high court is staffed with judges of sufficient intelligance to be able to understand this case. I am not sure that the others did.

(4)(17)
Jonty

No shes not she just knows more about these things than you do clearly

(1)(9)
DaveKafka

He did get a fair hearing, he just didn’t bother to turn up to it. I was there, as were many others, and it was fair (if unduly expensive).

(12)(0)
Pro Boner

Don’t take the bait. suer pipe believes the exact opposite and is just trying to get a rise out of you.

(0)(0)
Wendy's mate

He proclaimed he was off on holiday instead of going to the SDT.

At least the circle of his friends will be widened by a High Court Judge.

(1)(0)
Anonymous

Yes, it’s been listed at the Privy Arbital Court in Rochdale.

(13)(0)
DaveKafka

Looks like the hearing is in London. Manc Admin have nothing in the list for 17th. So, Harley will not be there in person.

(0)(0)
sue r pipe

what’s wrong with using senior counsel to describe himself eh??…. dont know what you’re talking about theres no wrong with this and, you morons are all just jealous cause youll never practice as such,. hahaha that chip must be going downwell with that humble pie.,

(0)(11)
Robert Stitz

Half a dozen small claims and a couple of parking ticket appeals hardly justifies the description of senior counsel.

You have lost all the way down the line.

This post has been moderated because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(7)(0)
Anonymous

And a Crown Court jury trial ,don’t forget!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

isn’t that enough to melan me Seniot counsel?????

(0)(4)
Anonymous

jury trials are most solem and grave affairs- they don’t just give them to any old lawyers ,you know!!!!!!!

(0)(2)
Anonymous

This post has been removed because it breached Legal Cheek’s comments policy.

(6)(0)
Robert Stitz

Alan Blacker, King of the Parking Tickets.

Mozart of the small claims court.

(10)(0)
Harley watch

For all the (deserved) derision the fake Lord Harley suffers here and elsewhere, let’s not forget that the SRA and the Law Society have a lot to answer for. How much we don’t know, thanks to their wholly-unfit-for-purpose charade otherwise known as their FOI Code.

(3)(1)
sue r pipe

why are all you losers still posting just goes to show you have no lives, Alan is getting more exposure than most qcs and you just cant handle it can you.?

(0)(4)
Wendy

He is too thick to realise that the exposure is uncomplimentary. This time next week he will still be struck off and dishonest.

(1)(0)
Alan Backstabber

If people posting on here are losers then that includes Alan Blacker #loser

(0)(0)
Anonymous

Overview:

– Background of organisations according to CV that we all know has its issues. Pretty unclear back story including alleged bank manager in his teens.
– Pass in LLB at local college affiliated with a D-rate uni. Lowest grade possible.
– Couple of legal assistant/paralegal type roles.
– ILEX. Possibly FILEX.
– Application to SRA (questions about its contents) for admission to role.
– Higher rights (questions also about this).
– A small number of court appearances. These include 2 for the chap that got jailed, one to do with inheritance, Parking Wars, uncontested appeal.
– Letter to guy regarding a small claim mentioned on a forum with copy of letter attached.
– *THAT* day in Cardiff.
– Failure in complaints about newspapers to their regulator who reported on the Harry Potter incident.
– Struck off by SDT after a succession of failed hearings. Including the one he represented himself and failed to mention the key case, American Cyanamid, for injunctive relief and also sought “deliver up” of items that he did not own!
– Failed appeal using someone who is definitely entitled to call himself Counsel.
– JAFLAS members leaving the sinking ship. £63 in bank account based on most recent accounts at Companies House.
– Now on to next Tuesday.

Think pretty much everything has been covered…

(11)(0)
Anonymous

In fairness to him, the American Cyanamid point was a bad one. He was applying for a final injunction, not an interlocutory one.

(0)(5)
Anonymous

I doubt you know better than Mr Justice Fraser who stated in his judgment:

“13.Turning to the substantive issues on the application by Dr Blacker, it is well known that the grant of an interim injunction is governed by the principles in the case of American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd [1975] ACT 396, 408. This authority was not cited to the court by Dr Blacker, but he accepted its principles and it is common ground that they apply to this case. Essentially, there is a two stage test, which is (1) is there a serious issue to be tried; and if so (2) to assess the balance of convenience. Within that second stage of the test is consideration of whether damages are an adequate remedy. ”

“24.In my judgment, there is no serious issue to be tried and there can be no question of where the balance of convenience would lie at the second stage of the test in American Cyanamid. It is therefore unnecessary to consider the second stage point. However, I note that no undertaking in damages has been proffered by Dr Blacker either in his written evidence or in his submissions before me, nor any explanation provided as to why no such undertaking was available. Ordinarily, that would be fatal to any application for injunctive relief in any event. “

(8)(0)
Anonymous

Having seen the Claim Form and the Society’s Defence (as well as reading the judgment), it’s clear that Harley failed to point out at the hearing that he was asking for a final injunction, not an interim one, so the judge’s confusion was understandable. It was originally listed for an hour, which was changed to half a day. If it had been an application for an interlocutory injunction, there wouldn’t have been a seven-month delay between the issuing of the Claim Form and the hearing. But, of course, I know nothing.

(1)(4)
Anonymous

It was Blacker that erred then, not the Judge. If Blacker set out his stall incorrectly then it is not up to the Court to correct him; particularly where he is supposedly a solicitor.

(6)(0)
Wendy

Not just any old solicitor, but Senior Counsel with grade 4 everything (larged).

(1)(0)
Anonymous

Senior pro counsel who is an expert on 23 areas of law but uses junior pro bono counsel to represent him. Good him to see him giving the junior bar a chance (albeit a chance to take a kicking).

(4)(0)

Comments are closed.