507 / 736
Group
(1)
(2)
SUMMARY
No. of Time Units
22
25
Time cost factor per unit
s. d.
12/2
6/1
Time value
£13
5 10
7 12
1
£20 17 11
Schedule 2 factors (consider
complexity,
skill, documents,
place, value and importance)
FEE TO
BE
CHARGED
DISBURSEMENTS
TOTAL BILL
£32
0
0
31 10
0
£63 10
0
MISCELLANEOUS
LEGAL
NEWS
1—Protest Halts Court as Chancellor is Sworn In
Lord Hailsham (Mr. Quintin Hogg), had J ust been
sworn in as Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, in
the High Court, when a man in
the public benches
jumped to his feet in protest about the law of the land
and the way, he claimed, it is wrongly administered.
It was an unexpected interruption, which brought
the court to silence just as
if someone had made a
mistake and "dropped a brick" in what is normally a
quiet, traditional and formal ceremony.
But there, in the public benches, stood Mr. Leonard
Rose, 61, in a casual sports jacket, trousers and open-
neck shirt.
He faced the new Lord Chancellor in his traditional
robes of office — which his father, a previous Lord
Chancellor, had worn before him — with Lord Parker,
Lord Chief Justice, Lord Denning, Master of the Rolls,
and Sir Jocelyn Simon, President of the Divorce and
Admiralt" Division, in their full regalia of robes and
full-bottomed wigs, sitting on his left and right.
Surrounding them on the Bench in a tight cluster,
similarly clad in full regalia, were 10 Appeal Court
judges and judges from other divisions, in their ordinary
robes, a total force of 30-strong.
But Mr. Rose, talking; over the heads of 60 bewieged
and robed senior and junior counsel sitting immediately
in
front of him,
carried on
talking
to
the Lord
Chancellor.
He legally raised his voice in court immediate!" the
new Lord Chancellor had taken his oath of High Office
and,
in it, promised
to "do right to all manner of
people."
Mr. Rose, a former Essex countv councillor and a
chartered surveyor, took his cue when the new Lord
Chancellor asked if
there were any "motions" before
the court.
He got up and put 13 "motions." Thev included a
plea for reforming the law, and urged that in general it
should be brought up
to date and shed
its "archaic
practices."
Mr. Rose
also
called
for
lav magistrates
to
be
appointed without political influence; for solicitors
to
be able to conduct cases in any court; and for lonerer
working hours for Hieh Court Judges—so that justice
could HP "needed im for the litigant and persons await
ing trial and the hearing of appeals.
The Lord Chancellor ^eard him in silence. But at
the end of Mr. Rose's uninterrupted pleas he told him
that matters raised were not for
the courts but for
Parliament.
Although a rare interruption at the swearing in of
a new Lord Chancellor, the action of Mr. Rose was
not the first of its kind.
When Lord Jowitt was sworn in as Lord Chancellor
a man in on the public benches raised a similar issue
before him. Lord Jowitt directed then that the issue
raised, concerning private litigation, should be heard
by a single judge immediately, and it was.
There have been other similar incidents in the past
in the High Court, at the swearing in of new judges
and on
the traditional opening ceremony of the new
High Court legal term.
Outside the court Mr. Rose, of Harwich, Essex,
admitted that he had been "thrown out" of council
meetings when he was a member of Essex County
Council.
Of his intervention, he said: "I thought that today
was the time to bring the matter up before the public."
2—Judge Defends Suspects' Right to Keep Silent
A suspect's right to refuse to answer police questions
or to give evidence at his trial was staunchly defended
by Mr. Justice McKenna, a High Court judge since
1961.
In an address to the annual Meeting of Justice in
London he crossed swords with lawvers, including Lord
Parker, the Lord Chief Justice, who have recently been
urging the abolition of the rule that police must give
warnings
to
suspects
that they are not obliged
to
answer questions.
Referring to Lord Parker's remarks at a recent Parlia
mentary Press Gallery Lunch. Mr. Justice McKenna
said he was "surprised" Lord Parker believed that "this
small change
in our arrangements would have any
worthwhile effect on the statistics of crime."
In his view, the citizens protection in questioning by
the police needed strengthening. Far from abolishing the
caution, he would require the police to tell the suspect
of his rieht to be legally advised.
This meant that if the suspect did decide to waive
his privilege of not incriminating himself, he would do
ro freeh' and with understanding.
Mr. Justice MacKenna said that under the present
system it would be surprising if the rules for the police
taking statements from suspects were not often broken.
Temptations on the police were too great.
A new rule that the accused's answers or statements
should not be admissable unless
repeated before a
magistrate would be a safeguard against onnression and
false evidence. But he honed this would be introduced
53