News

Lord Harley to take strike-off decision to Court of Appeal

By on
99

He’s appealing on Equality Act grounds

harley

Alan Blacker, aka Lord Harley, has confirmed that he will be filing an appeal with the Court of Appeal against the High Court’s recent decision to uphold his striking off.

In a statement released via his barrister, Blacker said he “is appealing against the decision that the listing of a hearing is exempt from the Equality Act 2010.”

Continuing, the press release — issued by Goldsmith Chambers’ Dr Anton van Dellen — states that Blacker “considers that it is very important that decisions about where hearings are heard should fall within the scope of legislation passed to protect the rights of people with disabilities.”

Last summer, Blacker — who has in the past described the disciplinary proceedings against him as a “witch hunt” — was booted out of the legal profession. After a two-day hearing, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) found that the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) had proven seven out of eight charges against Blacker, including dishonesty. He cited health problems and did not attend proceedings.

At a High Court hearing earlier this month, van Dellen relied on the Equality Act 2010 to argue that the SDT acted beyond its remit when it decided to push on with the original proceedings in Blacker’s absence. Mr Justice Davis rejected this appeal and said the tribunal was justified in its decision to proceed.

Claiming that he has been denied an opportunity to address the “accusations” directly, the new statement adds:

Dr Blacker is grateful to all those who have continued to support him since his striking off, knowing that if were able to answers these accusations in a tribunal, he would be able to answer them directly.

It also reveals that Blacker will appeal against his hefty £86,000 costs order issued at the original disciplinary hearing. It continues:

[Blacker] considers that the manner in which such high costs are awarded against solicitors should be reviewed by the Court of Appeal as it is an important point of principle or practice.

With the release sent to a select group of journalists (not Legal Cheek…), news of Blacker’s latest appeal surfaced on Twitter this morning thanks to top legal affairs journalist Catherine Baksi.


Read the statement in full:

My client is filing an appeal in the Court of Appeal against the recent decision in the High Court. He is appealing against the decision that the listing of a hearing is exempt from the Equality Act 2010. He considers that it is very important that decisions about where hearings are heard should fall within the scope of legislation passed to protect the rights of people with disabilities.

He is also appealing against the costs of £86,000 after a hearing lasting only 2 days. He considers that the manner in which such high costs are awarded against solicitors should be reviewed by the Court of Appeal as it is an important point of principle or practice.

Dr Blacker is grateful to all those who have continued to support him since his striking off, knowing that if were able to answers these accusations in a tribunal, he would be able to answer them directly.


For all the latest commercial awareness info, and advance notification of Legal Cheek’s careers events, sign up to the Legal Cheek Hub here.

Comments are now closed.

99 Comments

Not Amused

Sorry, but at what point is he actually going to pay any of these costs orders against him?

And at what point will the judiciary man up and stop him using the courts until he has paid?

As I limber up to pay my taxes today, I am reminded that it is a fundamental tenant that people should pay their debts.

(33)(4)

Gladiatrix

or even a fundamental tenet

(22)(3)

Percival smythe-Bottomley qc

I’m a fundamental tenant

(9)(0)

Derren Brown

I’m a fundamentalist mentalist.

(2)(0)

Anonymous

Tom,

You must be delighted! Al Blacker, the gift to LC that keeps on giving ….

(7)(0)

Popcorn Ya Us (see what I did there, Russian speakers?)

Happy days are here again!

(0)(0)

Anonymous

At this point it’s obvious that this moron has nothing better to do.

His pretty average and “odd” Barrister is acting pro bono, and is essentially getting paid in publicity and now gets to make a COA appearance.

Blacker lives in council accommodation with no assets the last anyone heard, so it’s impossible to recover the money this shambles will cost from him anyway.

Blacker and his Barrister seem to be just two attention seeking weirdos on a jolly.

Here’s an interesting BBC story about his barrister btw:- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20270746

(22)(9)

almosthippy

I agree with most of what you say but you ruined it by linking that article at the end. His barrister was cleared of something. Big whoop.

Imagine someone accused you of rape. You’re cleared because it didn’t happen, but every time anyone talks about you they mention that you were accused of rape. How would you feel? Pretty fucked off that you were forever branded the person accused of raping someone.

But don’t let facts get in the way of sensationalism and salaciousness.

(37)(2)

anon

If you read the content of the charges and the facts you would not be so supportive – you would be wondering how he was spared…especially as he admits a lot of it but mitigates on the basis of MR for a strict lability crime…….makes for grim reading

(4)(0)

Anonymous

How do you get ‘average’ AND ‘odd’?

(0)(0)

Anonymous

would ‘mediocre’ and ‘odd’ suit you better?

(0)(0)

Goodbye Alan

Oh Alan. You poor deluded fool. All that this will achieve is a further loss of taxpayer’s dosh defending this with no real prospect of enforcing a costs order against Alan. He is an embarrassment to the profession. His posts on LinkedIn of late (often comments to other posts) have been beyond unprofessional and littered with foul language and he has most definitely brought the profession into disrepute.

(18)(0)

Anonymous

Alan “Blab”ker indeed

(8)(0)

Proudboobs

It’s often the case that clients deserve their lawyers and lawyers deserve their clients.

(6)(0)

Walter Mitty

GOOD ON YOU ALAN! TIME TO BRING DOWN THE CORRUPT ELITIST JUDICIAL SYSTEM!

(3)(5)

Anon

Waiting for bumfights on legal cheek comments (ie blacker vs lawbytes folk trading insults) while legal cheek hosts the the whole thing on its comments section for the hundredth time…. wonder how it will end?…. being taunted and taunting back….what could possibly go wrong?

Legal cheek journalists slept through their ethics and basic responsibility class it seems

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

(2)(0)

Anonymous

Total Victorian Freakshow.

(1)(0)

The curious orange

What’s a bumfight?

(6)(0)

Anonymous

Tramps fighting for money & similar.

Lots of DVDs on it circa 2003-2005

(6)(0)

EdwarddeProBono

The Equality Act point is utterly hopeless. Running it is a waste of time and money, so let’s hope that we see an application for a wasted costs order.

Anyway, how can he file an appeal to the CA without getting permission? The High Court did not grant permission (it was not asked to do so), so presumably what has been lodged is merely an application for permission.

(8)(0)

Lord Harley of Fuckwit

When did they change the rules of professional conduct to allow barristers to comment on ongoing cases ?

(4)(1)

NoProbo

Direct access.

This bit is funny:

“Dr Blacker is grateful to all those who have continued to support him since his striking off, knowing that if were able to answers these accusations in a tribunal, he would be able to answer them directly.”

Answer them directly? You mean by producing the degree certificates, etc?

(15)(0)

Anonymous

Oh no, the funny bit is not that he would answer them directly … it’s the bit about ‘all those who have continued to support him’.

(0)(0)

Lord Harley Issacunt

He doesn’t have any evidence which is why he dare not turn up.

(5)(0)

Anonymous

If he’d ever given any credible evidence of a disability, they’d have considered it, but so far as I can tell, he hasn’t. He’s consistently refused to disclose medical information, despite insisting it should be taken into account. How can it be, if it isn’t there?

(5)(0)

Wendy

Alan milks the gutter press.

Ha ha. Brickwallops.

(2)(2)

Margaret Clitherow

Alan is a model tenant.

His rent is always paid on time by housing benefit.

(9)(0)

Goodbye Alan

How is he entitled to housing benefit? If he able to work ‘pro bono’ then surely he is not entitled to income support etc. I profess no knowledge here, but think it is odd.

(9)(0)

Anonymous

he’s not working, is he, he’s “prevented” from doing so by his many and varied health concerns (from a brain tumour to hearing loss to lungs that might fall out if he breathes too hard) and teh evil SRA…

(8)(0)

Robert Stitz

He will lose yet again #loser

(3)(0)

Anonymous

#sad

(0)(1)

Privy Judge

By decree of the Privy Arbital Court Alan Wankbladder is innocent.

(2)(0)

Proudtits

Nothing like a Lord Harley article to get a girls juices flowing.

(5)(1)

Asking for a friend

A better headline might be:

“Barrister milks feeble self-publicity on back of a client with serious personal issues”

(8)(0)

Goodbye Alan

Quite – a bit of digging and there’s your story!

(3)(0)

Wot no Blacker?

Is there a court fee? Who paid it? Or was there a fee exemption?

(3)(0)

Plymouth llb

Hey guys Plymouth llb here: can I get that sweet TC boiii?

(2)(0)

Comments are closed.