Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

astragal Arb-itrary moves?

  • Comment

Not content with Ian Salisbury's deeply serious gripe last week that the ARB transgressed human rights legislation in the way it conducted a case against Ingrid Morris last week, Morris' other representative, one Stephen Fairburn from Ian Healy and Co, has now chimed in on another serious matter. The ARB, he claims, was actually in contravention of the Woolfe reforms as well. This, he says, is because the board did not set out the case in sufficient detail beforehand for the defendant (as Woolfe has urged) and crucially did not make bundles of information freely available to the defendant or the witnesses. In civil procedures, the rather heavy-looking lever arch files on the case would all have been free, but in this one Morris was asked to pay up (which she refused to do). In Fairburn's own estimate, this would have amounted to the £600 or so Astragal told you about last week. 'It was wrong and unfair,' said Fairburn. And then there's still the little matter of £20,000 or so for fees ...

  • Comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions.

Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.

Related Jobs

AJ Jobs