News

Alan Blacker LOSES High Court strike-off appeal

By on
161

Self-styled Lord Harley was booted out of the profession last year

HC

Alan Blacker, aka Lord Harley, has lost a High Court appeal against his striking off.

Appearing before Mr Justice Davis in Court 18 of the High Court this morning, Blacker — who wasn’t in attendance — was represented pro bono by Goldsmith Chambers’ Dr Anton van Dellen.

According to chat forum LawBytes — a site that was born out of a Blacker-related Legal Cheek comments thread — a large part of this morning’s proceedings was spent dealing with the ex-solicitor advocate’s medical evidence.

One of the forum’s more prolific posters known only as “administrator” was in attendance. He revealed that Blacker was, once again, unwilling “to have his medical condition put into the public domain” and therefore wanted part of the hearing conducted in private. Having heard various arguments, Davis dismissed the request.

Relying on the the Equality Act 2010, van Dellen then argued that the Solicitor’s Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) acted beyond its remit when it decided to push on with original proceedings in Blacker’s absence. Unfortunately, for Blacker anyway, Davis stated that the SDT was justified in its decision to proceed and rejected the appeal.

Blacker was also appealing against the original costs order of £86,000 and the further £7,500 relating to his failed re-hearing. This too was rejected by the judge. Adding insult to injury, the SRA then applied for an additional £15,000 for Blacker’s latest legal challenge. If agreed this will take his final bill to more than £100,000.

Legal Cheek first reported that Blacker was appealing the SDT’s decision to boot him out of the profession earlier this month.

legal

While it seems Blacker didn’t want to go down without a fight, today’s result means his striking off order still stands. This was made last July following a two-day hearing at the SDT, at which the tribunal found the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) had proven seven out of eight charges against him. These included dishonesty, failure to comply with insurance and account regulations, and making “inaccurate and misleading” statements about his academic qualifications and professional memberships.

Blacker — who was once described as “like something out of Harry Potter” by a top Welsh judge — still labels himself as “Pro bono Senior counsel” on his LinkedIn profile.

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

161 Comments

Wendy

You sure did play a blinder Alan.

How, exactly ?

(13)(0)

Popcorn Millionaire

Popcorn!!!!

Getcha popcorn here!!!!

(4)(0)

Adam

OK LEGAL CHEEK ,RATHER THANN JUST REPORTING WHATEVER IS ON LAWBYTES, WHY NOT ASK THE LORD HARLEY FOR ANN INTERVIEW TO TELL HIS SIDE OF THE STORY???

PERHAPS A VIDEO INTERVIEW SO HE CAN TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT THE CASE WITHOUT HIS WORDS BEING TWISTED?!??

CALL TODAY!!!

(6)(4)

Whiter

The only utterance Mr. Blacker would likely make is ‘Baa Baa’; he does not answer his phone to the press, SRA or the court and, anyway, he is eating tea 24 hours per day which kind of precludes him engaging in any sort of conversation.

(8)(0)

David Frost

Which number should I call? You list the JAFLAS number 08436941945 and your personal mobile 07981527693 on public websites. I’d prefer to avoid excessive mobile charges if at all possible. Many thanks.

(5)(1)

Anonymous

Yes, Ann

(0)(0)

Anonymous

EEE EEEEE EEEEEEEEH!!!!

(1)(0)

Bob Woodward

Why would they? Blacker has always slagged off LC, and says he doesn’t talk to the ‘gutter press’.

(1)(0)

Care4lawyers

This is Alan. Unfortunately Alan has had a hard time of if of late. He convinced himself that he was actually a Solicitor Advocate, with a plethora of qualifications, honours and titles.

Sadly, Alan found himself on the wrong end of a judicial bollocking because he looked like something out of Harry Potter. He lost his practising certificate, and lots of nasty people on the internet called him a liar, a charlatan and a fraud.

But it’s not Alan’s fault that he is mad. He was driven this way by a horrible little-known disability called “being Northern”.

For just £3 a month, you can help Alan live free of the torment of pretending to be a lawyer. Just look at what £3 can buy Alan:

– Four pack of economy lager to dull the mental anguish of not really being a Lord.

– Slap up fish supper for two from the Rochdale Fryer that will feed Alan for a whole hour.

– Plastic Thomas the Tank Engine for Alan to play with.

– A three bedroomed house in Rochdale.

Please give generously and help get Alan back onto his knees.

Thank you.

(10)(4)

Yorkie and proud

Whilst I’m not Alan, and I do not sympathise with any of his shenanigans, I too dwell north of the Watford gap you soft southern twerp… Alan does not suffer from being northern, there is no such disability. He is however unfortunately for him, from Lancashire.

(3)(2)

Anonymous

Ignore this Care4 wanker. He’s a public schoolboy retard from Tunbridge Wells.

(4)(2)

Phil McPipe

Not sure he is~ most of his/her other “ads” are mocking the privileged and entitled….

(0)(1)

Colonyoscopy

FISH-TROUSERS ELEPHANT!!!

(0)(0)

Proudboobs

Didn’t see that coming.

(10)(0)

Anonymous

His barrister is an interesting chap isn’t he:- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20270746

(5)(1)

redplanet

If you mean in relation to the crime he was found not guilty of, the most interesting aspect is that he admitted to poor judgement. Asked on the stand why he had changed his mind and agreed to meet, he is reported to have said: “It was clearly a terrible decision of mine. It’s not the worst decision I’ve ever made, but it ranks up there with some of the worst decisions I’ve ever made.” He is interesting because he’s switched from a highly acclaimed medical career to, well, spending his free time dragging out a hopeless case like Blacker. I can understand that he might think the law an interesting application of neuroscience, but Blacker? Is poor judgement a pattern? Why would anyone want to draw attention to that? Blacker is a fantasist, but van Dellen is an actual barrister, for Goldsmith’s no less. What was he thinking?

(13)(3)

Anonymous

You clearly don’t understand the cab rank rule

(3)(10)

Sandman

cab rank rule doesn’t apply to a pro bono case. You’re entitled to refuse a brief if the client isn’t paying. Similarly, you are entitled to reject a brief for a hopeless appeal.

(20)(0)

Anonymous

Wasn’t a proper doctor was he? His cv suggests he left proper medicine to take up management roles with the ambulance service.

Possibly not a proper barrister either.

(1)(1)

redplanet

Who? Van Dellen? He’s a “proper doctor” in the both senses of the word, he qualified as a medical doctor in Johannesburg in the 1990s, worked as a medic in the Dept of Neurophysiology, then became a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford where he qualified as an academic doctor via his DPhil thesis “Cortical transplantation and manipulation in studies of development and disease” which is clearly listed in the library catalogue. No doubt whatsoever about his bona fides. Might be a shit barrister though, I’ve no idea.

(1)(0)

BobProno

It emerged during the hearing that Harley claims to suffer from “positional vertigo” (symptoms: an inability to distinguish one’s arse from one’s elbow and calling oneself a lord when one is not) and “conductive hearing loss” (symptom: talk to the hand).

(31)(1)

Sue R Pipe

Fair play to Dr vD, he made sure Blacker was properly represented so Blacker can’t say he didn’t get a fair crack of the whip.

(26)(1)

Stevie Wonder

Well, I didn’t see that one coming.

(23)(3)

Anonymous

What kind of sick person downvotes this?

(1)(12)

Anonymous

No doubt it was Blacker him self

(0)(0)

Blacker will rise again

Stfu arsepipe, Alan is innocenttt!!!!!

(2)(7)

Anonymous

Not sure why I’m questioning LC’s excellent headlines (going heavy on the sarcasm here), but why is ‘loses’ in capitals? It’s not exactly like this is a shocking outcome!

(6)(0)

Blacker Commando

I won u idiot

(2)(3)

John smith

“Be careful what you write on the internet”

And

“Actually it’s Lord Harley”

The two parting comments when I met Alan Blacker. The first was a prophecy, the second total cobblers.

Up your’s Alan. You are not a British eccentric, you’re a bully who picked the wrong person to fight in a Crown Court Judge.

(37)(0)

Sovereign citizen

The British law is a fiction, I’m a free man of the Land, this sentencing is a FRAUD!!!!!

(3)(0)

Anonymous

Yeah and today I am a Jedi Warrior!

(2)(0)

Adam

Who even are you just some random anonymous lawbytes warrior , are we all just supposed to beleive you’re version of what happened huh completely unco-oberated you know they’re are laws against slander right? That’s what this is you arsehole, complete slandering but you’re to thick to realise that aren’t you?

(1)(21)

Anonymous

I have corrected your myriad errors.

“Who even are you just some random anonymous lawbytes warrior , are we all just supposed to BELIEVE YOUR version of what happened huh completely UNCORROBORATED you know THERE are laws against slander right? That’s what this is you arsehole, complete slandering but you’re TOO thick to realise that aren’t you?”

ur welcum.

(12)(1)

Anonymous

You are Alan’s “amanuensis” and I claim my five pounds.

(8)(0)

Anonymous

Also it’s libel, not slander, since it’s written.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Not fully corrected. I think it should read

“Who even are you? Just some random anonymous lawbytes warrior, are we all just supposed to BELIEVE YOUR version of what happened, huh? Completely UNCORROBORATED. You know THERE are laws against slander right? That’s what this is you arsehole, complete slandering but you’re TOO thick to realise that, aren’t you?”

(3)(1)

TheAcresofFour

For the avoidance of doubt, this Adam is not me.

Alex, you really need to introduce a username system to stop spoofing….

(0)(0)

TheAcresofFour

Although that would probably take away some of the fun…

(2)(0)

John smith

Alan,

It’s in writing so it’s libel.

You know who I am, sue me. Level playing field this time.

I’m not bitter though, I’ll even help you fix the JAFLAS accounts so they are right.

(2)(0)

Anonymous

So as Alan, with all his maladies’ doesn’t confuses it with WINS?

(3)(0)

DaveKafka

Best bit was when it emerged that Harley offered the SRA’s counsel a lift to the station after the Manchester hearing in Blacker v Law Society [2016] EWHC 947 (QB). Presumably, the offer was declined: you don’t want to be driven by someone with positional vertigo and conductive hearing loss, after all.

(9)(0)

Alan Clough

Not to mention the brain tumour he claimed to have (no joke, he really did claim this)

(5)(1)

John smith

He claimed that they day I faced him in County Court!

The judge that day advised he didn’t like seeing important Solicitor’s time being wasted or ethics questioned.

Hope that County Court judge now feels a complete tit.

(10)(0)

Adam

If only you knew what you were even talking about…..

(1)(8)

Adam

Where’s the evidence for that assertion then moron?

(0)(11)

The_Voice_Of_Reason

As far as I recall, it was in a reply posted on the Law Society Gazette website, wherein the author claimed to be ” severely disabled with a heart condition, brain tumour, pleural issues on his right lung and arthritis”. Perhaps you might like to verify this with the 37th Earl of Dubln himself

(2)(0)
(3)(0)

Adam

Hahaha, posts on a website aren’t evidence retards, keep trying an you might only be as thick as warm custard

(0)(10)

The_Voice_Of_Reason

Let me explain this

very

slowly.

1. A poster said “Not to mention the brain tumour he claimed to have”

2. You asked for evidence for that “assertion”.

3. You were therefore requesting an independent source for the claim. You were not requesting that the assertion be proved beyond reasonable doubt, merely querying whether evidence existed.

4. It does. You can read it. It has not been challenged in the two years since publication.

Over to you.

(8)(0)

Anonymous

………. [silence]

If the last redoubt of a fantasist is to claim a myriad of complex illnesses, their defeat is as above

Abbey Dale

All judges will now know for certain that Blacker is a grade A, 24 carat arsehole.

Now for the trains.

(6)(0)

Peggy Clitherow

Those SRA costs in full:

£93,000 (trial)
£9,000 (rehearing application)
£15,000 (appeal)
plus costs of judicial review application before Warby J
plus costs of Blacker v Law Society
plus fees of adjudicator in relevant FOI matters
plus fees of solicitors instructed to deal with fall-out from FOI matters

That’s somewhere between £120,000 and £150,000, all of which comes out of practising certificate fees. Now, remind me how the SRA came to admit this bloke in the first place…

(22)(0)

Anonymous

Costs of Blacker v Law Society were almost £18,000. Judge refused to award Law Society any part of the amount.

(0)(0)

Adam

Are you thick, the costs of the JR are not born by the law society actually , keyboard lawyer.

(0)(10)

Apple

Blacker v Law Society wasn’t a JR application, it was an application for an injunction and damages. The costs of defending that case were about £18,000, being the amount which the Law Society/SRA paid to their lawyers. The judge refused to order Blacker to pay any part of those costs, so they were borne by the Law Society/SRA.

(4)(0)

Not a proper lawyer

Hi Alan, we always know when you post because of your use of grammar! “are not born” should read “are not borne”. Your legal drafting must be hilarious. How is the pro bono legal work coming along? At least you now have more time to devote to your model train. Do you have any more video clips we can enjoy?

(5)(0)

Not Alan Blacker

I shall return as a fee charging McKenzie Friend and you will all fear my immense legal ability!!!!

(7)(0)

Anonymous

Yes m’Lud

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Teaming up with Lord Grayson?

(1)(0)

Anonymous

He’d be a shoo in if Congress rejects Trump’s Attorney- General nominee –

(1)(1)

Anonymous

Alan Blacker is the person Trump would be if he hadn’t been born into money.

(5)(0)

Roy Orbison

It’s over, it’s over, it’s oooooover!

(5)(0)

Anonymous

He will be back, in some guise or another. Banker, reverend, military man, lawyer, paramedic, author, expert on trailer-haulage. With a CV and connections like that, you don’t just disappear – another career opportunity will be just around the corner…

(4)(0)

Anonymous

LC should offer him something …

(4)(0)

Anonymous

Have read up on Dr Van Dellen. It’s like he’s the person that Blacker wants to be. This whole things just gets more weird by the minute.

(3)(0)

Anonymous

Maybe it’s even weirder: maybe VanD wants to be Alan Blacker. Why else give up your medical career and become a lawyer? Has anyone ever seen VanD and Blacker in the same room at the same time?

(9)(0)

Conspiracy Theory

They weren’t even in the same room for the hearing. Blacker failed to show up…or did he?

(2)(0)

Anonymous

The merits of the man himself aside, £86,000 for a two-day hearing is outrageous.

(4)(7)

Mothra

Looking forward to a pissed-up Blacker stumbling round this thread like an ineffective Godzilla.

(18)(0)

Allan

Stfu u putz

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Bang on the money Mothra

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Not wanting to encourage the lad, but couldn’t he return to the profession under his FILEX guise? I don’t believe they brought disciplinary proceedings against him. Surely he could just renew his membership with FILEX as he is currently off the register. He has the (scraped pass) LLB and appears to have been admitted to FILEX previously before cross-qualifying to the solicitor’s roll.

That is of course on the basis he was accurate with his qualifications submitted to CILEX.

I hope this loophole is not available because it would make a mockery of all of this.

(5)(0)

Anonymous

I reckon ILEX have some sort of suitability test. Getting struck off the roll is not going to help one pass that test.

(2)(0)

redplanet

He’d struggle with the code of conduct, which includes:

“2. Maintain high standards of professional and personal conduct and
justify public trust in you, your profession and the provision of legal
services.
3. Behave with honesty and integrity.
4. Comply with your legal and regulatory obligations and deal with your regulators and ombudsmen openly, promptly and co-operatively.”

Doesn’t actually specify “don’t call a high court judge a moron on the internet” but I think that would be a black mark.

(1)(0)

Adam

The prolific poster on lawbytes has actually committed a contempt of court by revealing information he heard in court on the internet, hah, admistrator you are in trouble that is A CRIMINAL offence haha you’ll see this will be taken further, not so smart now are you you jumped up prick.

(0)(32)

Anonymous

Alan! At last!!

(16)(0)

Anonymous

He was in open court without reporting restrictions in place. Good luck with your complaint.

(37)(0)

Anonymous

Erm, revealing information heard in court via the internet is contempt? Maybe in the Privy Arbital Court, but not elsewhere.

(17)(0)

Robert Stitz

What are you prattling on about Blacker.

Anything said in open court can be published unless there is a court order prohibiting it.

You lost. Accept it with grace. Learn dignity. And stop lying.

You haven’t a clue what you are talking about, as has been obvious to everyone else.

(18)(0)

Adam

Awww, still sore are we, salt on that chip?

(0)(11)

Robert Stitz

Read your comments Blacker. You are sore.

You are the son of a loom tattler, not a lord. You scared an LLB pass, not a doctorate or Masters. You live in a council flat, not an ancestral home.

You are the one who lies, invents and fakes.

You were the one struck off, branded dishonest and today told by Davis J that your judgment is crap and you were the author of your own misfortune for not turning up.

You have have enough chips to start a takeaway fish and chip shop to stock it for years.

(13)(0)

Adam

Ahh, is that sue r pipe?? Hi wanker!

(0)(6)

Bingo

No, sue r pipe is your alias Alan.

Have you been at the turps again ?

(4)(0)

Sew my pants

No turps you putz, just the truth.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

I AM A LORD!!!

I AM A LORD!!!

I AM! I AM! I AM!!!!!!!!!!!!

YOU JUST CAN’T TAKE IT BECAUSE YOUR ALL JEALOUS!!!

(1)(0)

He's not a proper lawyer

Alan, I am very surprised that the law relating to contempt of court is apparently not one of the 23 areas of law in which you claim to have expertise. I have a serious offer to make as I think you will be a hilarious after-dinner speaker. Payment in free beer. Get that Legal Cheek interview sorted now! When Tom is away, you and Katie can do a double act video on the topical legal issues of the week. The viewing figures for LC will be huge – you can do it wearing your medals and ribbons!

(6)(0)

Rob Stephens

No one is sore Alan.

We flushed you out of the profession. Like an oversized turd.

(2)(0)

Adam

More talcum power for your butthurt? Still sore… awww didums

(2)(4)

Bingo

Bye bye Blacker.

Gone gone gone.

(1)(0)

Adam

Predict the future can you? Arse still sore as well huh?

(0)(4)

Anonymous

Hear hear well said, Blacker actually has many avenues outside of being a solicitor open to him if he still wants to practice law.

(0)(3)

Bingo

Alan Blacker had it right up the arse today. It hurt.

(1)(1)

Tired

Can we stop publishing stories about Blacker so these semi-literate exchanges in the comments section can come to an end. I don’t know who all these jokers are but its really pathetic what gets said.

(7)(2)

Anonymous

You missed the apostrophe out of “it’s”, which rather detracts from your comment.

(7)(4)

Tired

Yeah you’re right. A dropped apostrophe is exactly on a par with some of the other comments here. You’ve got me. Well done kid.

(3)(2)

Anonymous

You mean the comments posted by Blacker or one of his mates?

(0)(0)

Yehuda Schekelberg

Heh look at this dumb putz.

(0)(0)

Petit Boudin Blanc

Aw Alan. You brought this on yourself, you could have backed off at each and every stage and reduced the impact on yourself but you elected not to. Judging by your abysmal knowledge of the law, it would seem that you just kept giving yourself dreadful advice: a heady cocktail of arrogance and incompetence. Well it’s too late now, you will be pursued for over 100,000 quid in costs and whatever clever things you think you might have done with your assets will cut no ice with those who will come after you. You need to get some proper advice from professionals about that as the potential consequences of buggering about now are even more parlous than you imagine.

(11)(0)

Adam

Zzzzzzzzzz…. are you going to get a life any time soon?

(0)(5)

you know me alan

You have not got a life Alan if you had you would not be on here

(2)(0)

Anonymous

When is Alan’s client due to be released from prison? Must be quite soon.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Next Month that will be when half of the 5 years will have been served

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Blacker is clearly a liar but equally as troubling is the SRA’s thirst for using a sledgehammer to crack a nut in all of this to try and deflect attention from their failing to adequately validate his application.

(6)(0)

Boon Probo

Members of the public spoonfed the evidence to the SRA, which should have prosecuted much sooner. The SRA refuses to answer questions about the circumstances in which it admitted him and awarded him higher rights of audience.

(6)(0)

Anonymous

With the SRA’s processes and procedures so obviously flawed there have to be quite a few other dodgy solicitors on the roll who have avoided scrutiny because they aren’t daft enough to pitch up in fancy dress. What is the SRA doing to improve its detection of the duds before they cause damage to the public?

(6)(0)

Anonymous

Its main concern is to avoid answering questions where doing so might show it in a poor light.

(3)(0)

More Bonio than ProBono

He’s describing himself as a Jurist now on LinkedIn

(2)(0)

Anonymous

Ha!

(1)(0)

Another anon

Not a regulated/protected title, I suppose.

(0)(0)

Judge Lionel Nutmeg

The SRA deserve to face the music for being hoodwinked into admitting this bizarro, unqualified man in the first place. They must be delighted that the weirdness and the bullshit CV has deflected attention from them.

As for Mr Blacker, I wonder if, deep down, he quietly regrets festooning himself with his stupid ribbons and medals, and allowing himself to be interviewed and photographed by the press. Perhaps if he’d just turned up in regulation attire and merely been incompetent in Cardiff, as opposed to incompetent and very conspicuous, whether he would still be quietly and happily walting away.

(14)(0)

Justinian

He knows that competence is beyond him, so he craves conspicuousness. That’s precisely why he wore the ribbons and called himself Lord Harley in the first place. No one wants a walt who actually knows what he’s doing.

(3)(0)

Anonymouse

It’s not clear that he actually was that incompetent in Cardiff.

(0)(2)

Gazette

I doubt he can spell it let alone know what it means.

Maybe he has done jury service.

(1)(0)

Robert Kardashian

Should’ve hired me. I’d have gotten him off.

Just look at OJ. Stops using me on the account of my death and goes to prison.

I haven’t been back for a while. How’s Kim doing? I hope she’s keeping our family’s good name up.

(4)(1)

Anonymous

Sure, Robby; she wants to follow in your footsteps. Maybe give her a reference?

(0)(0)

Justinian

Please, Robert, no one wants to picture you getting Alan Blacker off. Even if you’re wearing that glove.

(2)(0)

Robert Kardashian

I’ll refer it to Thomas Arthur Meserau Jr. He doesn’t mind filthy cases.

No more kids called Jordan though. Even he didn’t feel safe at the Neverland ranch.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Back to the country pad Margaret Clitoroe Court in fine Rochdale then

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Once again, a further public hearing where Blacker refused to disclose:

1. Proof of his qualifications; and
2. Acceptable medical evidence.

All of this despite his pre-hearing comments about how he was going to win.

As he was represented by Counsel, again, there can be no sympathy for him.

He’s like the bloke who expects to win the lottery but refuses to buy a ticket.

(7)(0)

Adam

Shouldn’t have to prove anything ,presumption of INNOCENCE???????

(0)(3)

Anonymous

Yes, but if you want to rely on defences or to challenge the other side’s case you need to adduce your own evidence….

(1)(0)

Anonymous

“Shouldn’t have to prove anything ,presumption of INNOCENCE???????”

Son, it was Blacker’s appeal. The burden was on him.

(1)(0)

Mozart of the Courtroom

Does the Learned Society of Boilerplate Pressers know of his Lordship’s sticky end…?

And what of the Royal Society of Trainspotters?

Will he be subjected to rigorous probing by these bodies?

(6)(0)

Anonymous

I doubt that anyone wants to get that close to his sticky end. Apart from Kardashian, who seems quite into the idea.

(0)(0)

Robert Kardashian

Merely making a shit point that some lawyers have represented dubious clients over the years.

It’s almost like jurisprudence allows a defence or something.

(0)(0)

Every Loser Wins

Will there be another appeal, or has he woken up to reality and realised he will never win ?

(1)(0)

Another anon

Van Dellen appeared to accept that there are no further avenues of appeal. These were appeals and there is no second appeal.

(1)(0)

Adam

He DID win ,idiot!!!

Its the spin that two bit websites put on stories like this that will end them up on the end of SLANDER actions!!!!!!!!

(2)(9)

Anonymous

Please explain how Mr Blacker won. My understanding is that the court ruled against him and disallowed his appeal. You appear to have been there and so can obviously tell me what did in fact happen.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

The difference between slander and libel… Slander is the SPOKEN defamation of a character. Libel is what an Australian sticks to his suitcase when he goes on holiday.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Will the SQE and the changes in access to the profession render unto us a SRA failing to scrutinise more Blackers, or fewer?

(2)(0)

Adam

It’s “more Blacker’s or less”.

Idiot…

(0)(7)

Anonymous

No it isn’t you grammatically challenged person

(3)(0)

Anonymous

Possibly open season; he may simply be a man ahead of his time. Including his adventurous garb.

(1)(1)

Anonymous

I don’t quite follow how the question works but it seems there’s some risk of this idea of an open access SQE (at least the first bit of it) potentially permitting more of these people in? I accept I might have misunderstood the proposals.

Whole sorry episode just leaves me aghast at how this Blacker person got this far. Perhaps he could manifest some very broad outcomes, which seems to be all that is required any more.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Blacker got in because the SRA don’t check applications to the roll (or higher rights applications) The SRA accept what’s on the application and let the employers of new solicitors check their qualifications. But Alan never applied for a job (not successfully anyway) so no-one checked. He’s taken a pass ordinary law degree, a pgdip and Kaplin A, exaggerated and embellished, popped the application in the post and got on the roll and was given higher rights a few DAYS later…..

(7)(0)

Incognito

I presume that ‘Adam’ = Alan Blacker?

While it’s entirely proper that he has been struck off, and he has brought all the associated opprobrium on himself, he doesn’t strike me as entirely compos mentis. He doesn’t seem to have a particularly strong grasp of reality, either. Am I being unduly cynical to fear that this will ultimately end in a criminal prosecution, and imprisonment, for either continued legally-related misrepresentation, or some other self-aggrandising, and similarly-futile wheeze?

(2)(0)

Anonymous

He is a nutter. First Class double honours. Summa cum laude.

(8)(0)

Rochdale Cowboy

I doubt Adam = Blacker. Just someone stirring things up, Trumpenkrieg-style.

(0)(0)

Proudboobs

Lord Harley of Counsel, the motion picture?

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Why did VanD think that there is no further appeal? SDT cases have ended up in the CA before now. Obviously, he would need permission, but he didn’t ask for it.

(0)(0)

Bob Woodward

(4)(0)

Anonymous

Diddums.

(0)(0)

Anonymous

What does it say?

(0)(0)

Anonymous

The Lord Harley KGCSt.J. DPhil.
The Lord Harley KGCSt.J. DPhil.
Jurist & Pro Bono Senior Counsel in civil and criminal proceedings with Grade A and Grade 4 accreditation. (Highest)
2h
Quality judge – takes two hours to decide if the papers were lodged in time despite court acknowledgement they were- makes wrong decision then goes ahead anyway. Waste of three hours of court time. Disregards equality law entirely and is deaf to the ramifications for all disabled litigants. What a moron.
3 Likes

(2)(0)

Mothra

Not that Alan’s salty about losing yet again.

(1)(0)

Jeff Lampert

As someone who has experienced the frustration over courts and judges previously, I feel for him here.

(0)(2)

Wendy

Reporting on the internet what happened in a court room.

Yesterday Blacker said it was contempt of court.

(6)(0)

Anonymous

Classic Blacker – focussing on unfairness to him and disability.

Doesn’t deflect from the fact he failed to keep proper accounts and lied about his qualifications. That is the real problem.

(5)(0)

Boon Probo

The accurate bit is “waste of three hours of court time”. I was there and can confirm that it was indeed a waste of the court’s time.

(5)(0)

Robert Stitz

Put some more salt on those chips on your shoulder Blacker.

You lost. Ha ha ha.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Perhaps he would prefer vinegar?

(1)(1)

Rory

I think Blacker has a point about the judge’s approach on this one actually.

(0)(1)

Boon Probo

Really? And what is that point?

(0)(0)

Pro Baboon

That the judge got a procedural point wrong.

Nothing about the merits of his own case, though.

Smoke and mirrors…

(0)(0)

Bo Praboon

Blacker is a chump, not a chimp.

(0)(0)

Bro Babu

I’m half African and half Indian.

(0)(1)

GuytheGorilla

You may well be, but you still don’t speak as many languages as Blacker.

Anyway, if the judge made a procedural error, why isn’t Blacker appealing?

(0)(0)

Anonymous

Mr Blacker’s Counsel has a fairly colourful past himself…http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20209833

(1)(0)

Oui Madam

I’m he will get a job as a consultant at Irwin Mitchell or something.

(1)(0)

Anonymous

Irwin Mitchell? Can’t he just go back to Slater & Gordon?

(0)(0)

Comments are closed.