Episode 1 Barristers

For almost 100 years, our justice system has been a hidden world.

Cameras are banned in courts here.

Much of the work goes unreported.

Historically, our knowledge of this world has been based on TV dramas,

artist's impressions and newspaper headlines.

But now, for the first time,

one legal institution has allowed the cameras in.

This is the world of the barristers.

The public want to know what we do,

they're entitled to know what we do.

And we feel we have a responsibility and duty

to therefore inform the public of what it is we actually do

as part of the administration of justice.

For 15 months, we followed barristers as they worked,

gaining an insight into our legal system

and the problems faced in every area of life.

In the nine years that I've been practicing

I recall on occasions at the start there would only have been

in and around 30 cases on the list, and now there's up on 60 per day.

The pylons relate to the fact that these

pylons are sitting on people's land, they're essentially

sitting on peoples land and we've asked NIE to remove them.

With thousands of cases going through the courts every month,

and hundreds of barristers and solicitors,

this series is a snapshot of their world.

This building is the Bar Library in Belfast.

It's where the majority of Northern Ireland's 720 barristers work from.

They all pay a fee to use it as their office.

It's also their professional body with its own code of conduct.

This is the ground floor of the new Bar Library.

This is a working office, it's a working space for the membership.

-Hi, Steven. How's you?

-Not too bad.

The members of the public and solicitors

get as far as the front doors

and other than consultation rooms, they don't get into here.

So this is a first, to have the cameras in here.

A barrister plays a very important role in society.

A barrister's job, first and foremost,

is to represent the client,

to do your level best for every client that you come upon.

It's dedicated commitment, it's hard work,

it's putting in hours well beyond nine to five.

And to the outside world, that probably is not seen

because most people never come in contact with the Bar.

There are two types of lawyer - barristers and solicitors.

Traditionally, if you have a problem, you go to your solicitor.

They bring in barristers if your problem is very complicated.

We come into a case and we bring our expertise

to present the case on behalf of the client.

We are not a solicitor. We perform a different role.

The role of the solicitor is there

and has perhaps built up a very personal relationship,

working relationship, over a number of years

with a family or the client.

That's not our position.

We are there to advise on the law,

we are there as the advocate in the courtroom,

to bring our skills in terms of presenting the client's case.

We are not there to judge anyone.

We are there to be objective and impartial and professional.

And part and parcel of the work of the barrister,

and perhaps one of the qualities of the barrister,

is to ensure objectivity, is to ensure you don't judge people, you don't pre-judge them.

I'm not here to make a decision whether someone's innocent or guilty.

I'm here to represent them.

Sometimes law is simply about how people live their lives.

Family law is rarely publicised, to protect the privacy of children.

Orlagh McGahan is a children's law barrister.

She's handled 1,700 cases in nine years.

I specialise in children's law

and something I've learned over the years is really that

the only thing you need to end up in a children's court is a child.

I think there's a misconception

that people only get embroiled in the law,

and with legal advisors and barristers,

if they've done something wrong.

But there are children's law proceedings,

and they can range very simply from a couple who've broken up and can't agree

who has contact at what time and who the children stay with,

right away along the spectrum to intervention from social services,

and then moving on even further if the concerns are so sufficiently

serious that the children can actually be ordered by the court

to be freed for adoption, and adopted and taken off their parents.

So the spectrum's pretty wide.

Children's law is challenging.

It has to cut through emotions

to find the best solution for the child.

What I enjoy about it particularly

is trying to help people sort out some very basic day to day problems

that they will have with the children,

with their partner, the ex-partner.

There are many other areas of law that are much more academic

and about the legislation

and the nuances and the intricacies of the legislation,

but I'm not particularly that interested

in that kind of academic law.

I like having clients every day, hearing what's going on with them

and seeing how I can help.

Orlagh's working for a parent whose children were taken into care.

Previously, a judge made an order saying when she could see them.

But for some reason, the contact isn't happening.

They've not been able to sort it out,

so now the only option is a barrister and court.

I'm reliably told from Leanne that the judge made

a very particular order in relation to your contact,

-which was to be once a fortnight with the kids.

-Yes.

Right. So, today's me finding out any additional information

over and above what Leanne's given me

for us to put into a statement of evidence to give it to the court.

'This case is formed around an application for contact.

'The individual that I represent'

had her children removed from her and put into foster care.

That was an extremely lengthy proceedings which concluded

in and around a-year-and-a-half ago.

What way was it working? Were you going down to them, or what?

No, they were coming to me.

-How were they coming to you?

-Taxi.

'For parents, there's inevitably a level of contact that they have

'with their children, even though their children are in foster care.

'The judge made a direction

'about what the level of that contact was to be

'and over the intervening 18 months,

'the Trust has changed the level of contact.'

-And when they were leaving they were absolutely fine?

-Yeah.

'It's less often, they seek to make it 90 minutes'

when it was ordered to be three hours.

And they've placed restrictions

on where it can happen and who can be there.

-And has it been supervised since then?

-Mm-hm.

-In your house?

-Yeah.

-They're sitting in your house for three hours?

-Yeah. Yeah.

The consultation was set up specifically for me

to get a more global picture from the client about what she wanted,

because the judge has directed that she file a

statement of evidence about her position.

I will now draft that statement of evidence for her

and it'll be sent to the court, and that will inform the court

and the other parties of what her position is,

so that we all know what's happening in the case

in an effort to try and resolve it.

This is just the start of what is often a long, delicate process.

It's now down to Orlagh and the solicitor to find out why

access isn't happening as ordered and try and get it reinstated.

Frank O'Donoghue is a very senior barrister.

Usually, he spends his days in court

and his evenings preparing for the next case.

He's working on a judicial review.

It's now 11.25 at night.

I've been working on a replying affidavit in this case

which has to be, really, with the solicitor tomorrow morning.

The affidavit has been drafted as a combined effort

between my Junior Counsel, Sean Doran, and myself.

Hi Sean, how are you?

Did you get a look at that?

This is a very, very interesting case.

It's a case with huge ramifications

for the way in which policing is carried out in Northern Ireland.

Frank is representing people who are taking the Chief Constable to court.

The PSNI has rehired ex-RUC officers to do some jobs.

And Frank's clients, one a trade union,

the other a mother of a murdered Belfast man, Raymond McCord Junior,

want that practice stopped.

When he went to school, he just loved aeroplanes.

If he heard of anybody going away on holidays,

he'd have been able to tell you what kind of plane it was.

Used to get the shuttle bus up to the airport on a Saturday

and he would have done that a good lot, he loved doing that.

And that's where his love for the RAF...and that's why he wanted

to hopefully get into it, which he did, and we were so happy for him.

It's just a pity his life was cut so short, you know,

so soon, the way it happened, you know.

In 1997, her son Raymond was beaten to death by a UVF gang.

One was a police informer.

Ten years later, the Police Ombudsman found

there'd been Special Branch collusion during the murder inquiry.

Now Raymond's mum wants to make sure no ex-RUC officers are allowed

anywhere near the re-investigation of her son's murder.

From the very beginning, we knew it was a cover-up. It was proving it.

We knew it was true and it was all denied...

..and we were looked upon as trouble-makers,

and "Don't be...

"Nothing like that could have went on."

It's something for me that I have to do.

People that have children, how can they live with themselves?

There are just over 300 solicitor firms in Northern Ireland.

Ciaran Hampson is based in Londonderry.

His practice handles all sorts of problems.

He specialises in business disputes.

When someone asks you what you do for a living

and you say you're a solicitor,

they assume automatically you're a criminal practitioner.

When you say you do commercial litigation,

they're sort of puzzled as to what it is.

This type of litigation is common.

The Commercial Court is a very busy court.

The Chancery Court are very busy courts,

so it shows that this is ongoing.

One of Ciaran's cases is about electricity pylons.

His clients are taking legal action

against Northern Ireland Electricity.

He's instructed barristers as it's a ground-breaking case.

The pylon cases relate to the power lines -

and now we're not talking power lines as in a wooden pole,

we're talking about the large 110, 275,

the big, big, industrial pylons.

My partner won't like the fact

that I've printed on letterhead by accident!

'When people ask you what the cases are about,

'they generally think it's to do with

'some sort of personal injury aspect and it's not, it's to do with

'the fact that these pylons are sitting on people's land.

'And they're essentially sitting on people's land

'and we've asked NIE to remove them.'

What has to happen then is

the process goes to the Department of Enterprise,

and they determine by a wayleave hearing

whether the power line can stay or not.

If the power line can be determined to be retained,

then the only avenue that the landowner has

is to pursue by way of compensation.

One, two, three, four, five elastics...

As you take the thing on,

you actually find out what's happening in other jurisdictions.

In England and Wales, a lot of these actually

don't go to the tribunal because a lot of the electricity companies

settle it directly themselves and come up with an agreed valuation.

I think part of the issue is,

in Northern Ireland this is the first one,

so really, it's unknown territory for a lot of people.

One of Ciaran's clients is Huw Williams,

an agent representing several home and landowners.

He's experienced, as he's already settled

thousands of similar cases in England and Wales.

Northern Ireland Electricity, across most of their network,

only hold these big power-lines under temporary rights,

which are known as wayleave agreements.

Those wayleave agreements allow the landowners to terminate them,

and once the landowner terminates the wayleave agreement,

it forces NIE to pursue permanent rights via the government

and these are compulsory permanent rights.

The government will always grant those rights

because it's deemed to be in the interests of the country

to maintain the big infrastructure that's here,

but as soon as those permanent rights are granted,

the landowners are entitled to pursue compensation

for the loss of value that's suffered by their homes,

as a result of this equipment being placed on or over their land.

Typically in England and Wales,

if you had a house with a line this size crossing your land,

you could be looking at something

between 5 and 6% of the value of your house.

This is the first time the law is being tested in Northern Ireland.

It's not a given that our law will follow English law.

It's down to Lands Tribunal in Belfast to make the decision.

Progress has been very slow at the Lands Tribunal so far.

I think, in part, due to the fact that it IS the first case,

and that's thrown up some legal issues, but also,

there's generally a reluctance on Northern Ireland Electricity's part

to get that first case into court.

The case is very complicated.

The Lands Tribunal will have to hear

all the legal arguments and expert reports.

It's going to be a lengthy process.

Judicial reviews allow individuals or organisations

to get a judge to check how a public body has made a decision.

Viv Harty is a Belfast solicitor

working on the challenge to the re-hiring of ex-RUC officers.

Viv's client is NIPSA

and he's preparing its argument in a document called an affidavit.

It contains crucial information for the judge.

It's vital the lawyers get it right.

So, I'm checking one of the paragraphs.

We originally thought that the Deputy Chief Constable

had made this statement at a Public Accounts Committee,

but in fact, she made it at a Policing Board meeting.

In this type of case, where we rely upon affidavits only

and people actually aren't giving oral evidence,

you cannot get yourself bogged down in any sort of a factual dispute.

I think if you'd made some mistakes in the affidavit of a factual nature,

I think your case would be so badly undermined

that you probably wouldn't get a second chance.

We're signing the affidavit.

Brian Campfield, who is the deponent,

the person who is making the affidavit,

he is now swearing this affidavit

in front of a person who is an Officer of the Court,

Mr Gerry McManus, who is an independent solicitor

who has come in to witness Brian Campfield

swearing this affidavit, which is in effect his evidence in the court.

NIPSA is a trade union representing civilian staff working for the PSNI.

They're worried they're losing jobs to police officers

who retired under the Patton pay-offs.

Resource might want those contracts.

'We could count on one hand the number of judicial reviews

'which we've taken over the last 20 years.'

That'll put the cat in among the pigeons.

'The only way workers are able to take judicial reviews'

is if their funds are used by their union

because individuals couldn't afford to do this.

It was worth 100 million when it was awarded the last time.

'In this particular case, we believe the Chief Constable

'doesn't have the authority'

to outsource the types of roles which are included in this contract.

That was advertised in January and awarded in September.

These are up in June.

'A lot of those people coming back, as we know,

'have been ex-police officers'

and they're filling jobs

which do not necessarily require police skills.

Although we accept that there is a time

and a place for temporary arrangements,

that was ten years ago

and our members' patience has been exhausted now.

They feel that they should be invested in

and they should be given an opportunity to be the next leaders

of the organisation and to develop their career

like they would if they were in any other part of the public sector.

It's June 2013,

and the case is about to be heard by a High Court Judge.

Frank is the senior barrister leading the legal team.

I've had the chance now to look at this further, Frank,

-and I think it's spot on.

-Yeah? OK.

-It covers all of the matters that we...

-..talked about last night.

And I think it actually also very usefully crystallises the issues.

Yeah. I e-mailed it through to everybody last night

and I got it through to the judge as well.

The judge e-mailed me back at half six this morning,

so he was obviously up early!

And so he's on the ball and he'll have read it.

I think it just crystallises completely

and I think in a case like this, just less is more.

The judge wants to start early, so...

-I'm all in favour of that.

-..let's get on with it.

The barristers only get into a courtroom

once they've exchanged written arguments.

These documents set out the facts and examples

of the law they're using.

In court, both sides set out their position.

They're questioned by the judge

and they argue each other's legal points.

The whole day was spent with me making the applicant's case.

The first thing we had to do was go through the legislation

which took quite some time, and then in the afternoon,

I spent it going through all of the affidavit evidence.

It's very important not to rush a submission

and yet it's equally important not to be so slow

and pedantic that, in fact, you just try the patience of the judge.

You've got to make even the most turgid of cases interesting.

A lot of public speaking, particularly in a court setting,

perhaps gives you the experience

to develop an intuition as to the appropriate pace.

That will depend from judge to judge.

There is a need on barristers' parts to use the courts efficiently,

not to waste court time.

But by and large, in my experience,

most barristers are pretty good at it now.

Last year, judges, lawyers and court staff handled around 91,000 cases.

In recent time,

there's been particular pressure on the family courts.

Today I'm heading to Newtownards Family Proceedings Court

where I have two cases listed for hearing

and a number of other cases listed for review.

I think most people imagine the worst thing that could happen

within a legal proceedings is that they could go to prison.

Apart from parents who, I think,

if given the choice of going to prison or losing their child,

losing their child is actually much worse.

So, actually, while it's not a topic of law that's often talked about

and never publicised because it's so confidential,

for the individuals involved in the cases

it's probably the most stressful and high impact legal matter

that they can ever be involved in.

I've a 9.30 consultation with

a client whose child has been taken into care,

so I need to have a general discussion with him

about what he wants out of the case. That's at 09.30.

And then I have all of my other cases at 10.30.

When families fall apart,

judges step in to decide who sees who, how long for, when and where.

Last year, around 7,700 children relied on the courts

to sort out their living arrangements.

It's a complicated and growing problem.

There's a considerable amount of families

who can't sort these things out themselves for one reason or another

and the courts are getting more and more saturated.

It certainly, in the nine years that I've been practicing -

for example in Newtownards Family Proceedings Court -

I recall on most occasions, at the start there would only have been

in and around 30 cases on the list

and now there's up on 60 per day on the list to be dealt with.

A lot of family law is symptomatic of other social problems

and the lawyers can't control everything.

I had scheduled a 9.30 consultation to suit the client

because he lives in this area and he hasn't shown up yet

and we're still sitting waiting for him.

This would be the third consultation in about two weeks

that the client has failed to attend

with no notice given or no reasons given or apology.

It's difficult - the clients are legally aided

and therefore they're not paying for this themselves,

and, in fact, I can't charge legal aid for the time spent.

I'm not consulting with the client, so I can't charge for it.

These cases involve people

who, for whatever reason, just can't sort it out themselves.

For the judges to make the right arrangements for the children,

they need the lawyers and reports from psychologists,

social workers, doctors, teachers.

This means time for everyone,

including the children, to have their say.

Well, I think one of the things

that sets children's law apart particularly

is that you're dealing with a very fluid situation.

You can't make an order for a child

which will last from their toddler years and will remain the same

until they're 16, which is when the court has the remit to continue to act.

There is just a change of circumstances throughout the case,

and quite often the case moves from the original application,

which can largely be dealt with,

but something else has arisen in the meantime.

An original application could be Dad just seeking contact

but in the middle of it, Mum has a nervous breakdown

and now the children have to reside in foster care,

and then they're rehabilitated to Dad

but Mum wants them back because she's now recovered.

So, you can see that time just goes on

and things just continue to happen which dictate the pace of the case.

Cases need time to prepare, time to run their course.

Challenging the re-hiring of ex-RUC officers

takes four days of intense legal argument.

The father of UVF murder victim, Raymond McCord Junior, is in court

as Raymond's mum finds it tough to listen to the proceedings.

'Down here because Vivienne's unable to come. Her health's not too good.

'Every so often young Raymond's name gets brought up in court.'

It's stressful and traumatic for her, brings a lot of things back.

I was very impressed with the barrister, Frank O'Donoghue,

his arguments.

You're not used to people fighting your corner for you.

But he's fought it very well.

Today, we had to come in

and do the reply to the Chief Constable's argument.

I thought the court was very receptive to our reply

and to the points, the additional points, that we wanted to make.

The court has reserved its judgment,

which is not unusual in cases like this.

Cases of this complexity,

which have lasted four days of pure legal argument,

require consideration.

And the judge will hopefully give his judgment over the summer.

I've won cases that I thought I'd lost

and I've lost cases that I thought I'd won,

so you always have that uncertainty

and at the end of the day it's a matter for the judge.

I am reasonably convinced

by the strength in the legal argument that we've advanced

and hopefully the court will find in our favour.

Next time on Barristers...

Although I personally enjoy being in court a lot,

and I enjoy the applications, etc,

I don't think being in court is the place for a family,

if they can avoid it.

The case has lasted for three days but the defence have asked

to bring in an adjournment application this morning.

An employee of the company who owned the lorry

dropped a pallet onto the ground

and unbeknownst, I think, to anyone,

the pallet actually contained some sort of chemical liquid

which then splashed onto my client's feet.