News

Alan Blacker re-hearing bid fails

By on
87

Controversial solicitor-advocate was booted out of the profession earlier this summer

harley

Alan Blacker has had his application for a fresh hearing rejected by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT).

Following several failed attempts to have the hearing moved to Manchester, Blacker — who sometimes opts for the name Lord Harley of Counsel — was struck-off in July. This came after the SDT found the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) had proven seven out of eight charges against him, including dishonesty.

The Rochdale lawyer, who first hit headlines after an in-court spat with Judge Wynn Morgan, was also slapped with a hefty £86,000 costs order.

Today, during the public part of the re-hearing application, Goldsmith Chambers’ Anton van Dellen, representing Blacker (who wasn’t present), questioned the SDT’s decision not to have the hearing moved to accommodate his client.

But Edward Levey, of Fountain Court Chambers and representing the SRA, stressed the overwhelming evidence against Blacker and the significant costs that would result from another hearing. Citing Blacker’s failure to participate in case management hearings via telephone, Levey warned of the dangers of proceeding on medical evidence not disclosed to the other side.

Having heard a number of further submissions relating to Blacker’s medical evidence in private, the SDT eventually rejected his application. Blacker still has the option to appeal the tribunal’s original strike out decision.

Comments are now closed.

87 Comments

Anonymous

Hopefully he finally gives up now, he is a disgrace to this profession and has tarnished the name of lawyers around this country.

(44)(1)

Anonymous

No chance of that.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

For the sake of this profession I hope he does.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Genuine excitement when Connolly T brings the latest news in this Saga … your next mission is to get an interview with Lord Blacker – could even be a blockbuster news article!

(27)(1)

Anonymous

Great idea. Really

(5)(0)

Anonymous

They’re off !!!!!!!!!!!!

(2)(1)

Excited!!

First Choudary, then Vaz and now Blacker – 3 downfalls of solicitors in the space of 2 hours! A bloody good start!

(21)(0)

Anonymous

Blacker could offer his Mackenzie Friend Pro Bono services to both of them for the small fee of £454/hour.

(20)(0)

Keith Vaz

He’s a bit too chubby for me…..

(15)(2)

Anonymous

little bit of back ground in your story would have been ideal

(0)(26)

Nigel Farage's 2nd chin

Have you been living under a rock for the past two years?

(33)(0)

Anonymous

it is background you cretin!

(1)(0)

Not Amused

Someone needs to start holding the SRA to account.

How was he admitted in the first place?

As far as I can tell, uncovering Blacker has taken the dedicated work of several solicitors and at least £86,000 of their money. If I were a solicitor I would be asking what on earth my ‘independent’ regulator was for – particularly when that regulator *must* have been part of the cause of the problem in the first place.

(31)(0)

Anonymous

Why do you need to be a solicitor to put those questions to the SRA?

(1)(0)

Jonah the Whale

Plus £9112.90 that they asked for today (getting £7500) and best part of £18000 for the hearing before Fraser J (that he ordered £0 of). So the bill now exceeds the famous £111K.

(2)(0)

Not Amused

Why do the Judiciary discount honestly incurred costs?

I mean, I know ‘why’. It is ‘because they can’. But as someone who has watched this behaviour for far too many years than I can count – I think I’m entitled to ask why.

It must be handy if you have a friend who is a judge. I can just imagine going round John Lewis and getting my arbitrary 10 to 20% discount. Goodness what fun they must have.

(3)(0)

Anonymous

How many more losses can he suffer?

He must have a worse record of defeats than Swindon Town did in the premiership. At least they had the delights of Jan Arge Fjortoft to absorb some of the pain.

(14)(0)

Anonymous

Was he the tribute act for Jan Åge Fjørtoft?

(4)(3)

Anonymous

Fail bro. Pedants get no love.

(6)(0)

Lord Harley of Counsel

I have one more spin of the Wheel of Fortune in my appeal from the outrageous decision to strike me off. I have lodged an appeal.

The last spin of the wheel is the most important, in the same way as he who laughs last laughs loudest and longest.

I will be laughing last.

(3)(14)

Excited!!

That’s not the real fake Lord Harley: no spelling mistakes. Please try harder.

(18)(0)

Excited!!

This article has all the whiff of its writer not having actually been at the hearing and trying not to copy other sources too closely.

(4)(7)

Anonymous

What sources are they ?

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Lawbytes, The Gazette etc…

(12)(0)

Lord Counsel, on a Harley

HP, Worcestershire, Hollandaise. The usual.

(12)(0)

Disciplinary hearing (optional)

If you don’t engage with the process don’t bloody moan when you don’t like the result!

(5)(0)

Lord Harley of Counsel

As a great man, I do not need to abide by your trite rules. Conscience is but a word that cowards use, devised at first to keep the strong in awe.

(7)(1)

BroPono

He was prepared to engage by phone, but only if the phone hearing lasted no longer than ten minutes.

Will the appeal under section 49 be in Manchester or London?

(0)(0)

Anonymous

We are appealing.

We will be victorious.

LC and all other gutter press will be forced to publicly apologise.

Cretins

(9)(2)

Anonymous

I’m afraid that you are profoundly un-appealing

(1)(1)

Anonymous

so’s your mum.

(8)(1)

Keith of Kinkel

His Lordship couldn’t make today’s hearing because it was the 25th Anniversary of him passing the Cycling Proficiency test.

(38)(0)

BarryBono

In fairness to Dr van D, reports suggest that he did as good a job as could be expected in the circumstances. It’s just that the circumstances were shit. As we all know, you can’t make bricks with shit. Or something like that.

(8)(0)

Anonymous

With shit, or with a shit ?

(2)(0)

Anonymous

I once made built a hut in Uganda fashioned from Clay and cow shyte.

(1)(1)

Hutman

Did you get a certificate of lawful development (double hons) for it from the University of Lagos?

(3)(1)

Gareth Thomas

Sources? Sources? We’ve all got sources!!

(6)(0)

Anonymous

No longer than 10 minutes on the phone?

Sounds like he once received a hefty bill from Babestation!!

(15)(1)

Excited!!

Trainstation more like.

(9)(0)

NoProbo

Trainstation, more likely.

(2)(0)

Anonymous

Surely the appeal should have been heard by his fellow peers of the realm in the House of Lords, as befits one of his Lordship’s noble and aristocratic lineage?

(4)(0)

Anonymous

Nah, the Privy Arbital Court or bust…

(10)(0)

Anonymous

I think they will appeal – what have they to lose? They will be spending your money for years to come. A bunch of arseholes at the SRA, allow a paedophile to go on working yesterday, close the SRA down and replace the SDT with a proper disciplinary tribunal.

(5)(2)

Squeaky pin-cess!!

This whole thing is ridiculous – TWO YEARS for it to get to this stage and exempted from a TC in 2010 to begin with ????????????

(3)(0)

sue r pipe

Err, he passed everything needed to be solicitor actualy you thicko

(0)(13)

Jonah the Whale

Actually, Alan, that’s one of the mysteries yet to be explained. How DID you do it? And while you’re at it, perhaps you could explain the statement on your part dated 24 October 2010 that is recorded at para 39.5 of the SDT judgment.

(6)(0)

sue r pipe

why do you need it explained can’t you read? god Alan must be laughing at all you dumb twats keep trying you might get a life soon

(0)(8)

I KNOW YOU

hi Alan

Comments are closed.