BPTC Ethics Paper 2

You are a barrister of 5 years' call practising from a specialist commercial chambers. You are instructed by Ashton & Partners LLP to represent their client, Meridian Trading Ltd, in a breach of contract dispute worth approximately £2 million. During your preparation, you discover that the opposing party, Neptune Logistics Ltd, is a company in which your spouse holds a 15% shareholding and serves as a non-executive director. Your spouse has never discussed Neptune's business with you, and you have no personal knowledge of the company's affairs beyond what you have now discovered in the case papers. The hearing is listed in three weeks. Ashton & Partners are a significant source of your practice income, providing approximately 30% of your annual fee income. The instructing solicitor, Ms Watts, calls you and says she is delighted you are on the case because of your expertise in this area, and that the client specifically requested you after your excellent result in a similar case last year. Consider the ethical issues that arise from this situation and explain what steps you must take.

You are a criminal defence barrister. You have been representing Mr Carl Fletcher, charged with a series of burglaries, for several months. The case is part-heard — the prosecution closed its case yesterday and the defence case is due to begin tomorrow. This evening, Mr Fletcher calls you in considerable distress and tells you: "I need to be straight with you. I did all of the burglaries. Every single one. But I've been telling you I was innocent and that's the basis you've been running the case on. I want to change my instructions. I want you to carry on defending me — put my girlfriend in the witness box to give my alibi like we planned. She knows what to say." You are aware that Mr Fletcher's girlfriend, Stacey Morris, provided a witness statement placing Mr Fletcher at her flat on the nights of the burglaries. Based on what Mr Fletcher has now told you, this alibi evidence would be false. The jury has already heard prosecution evidence, and the trial judge has indicated the case should conclude within two days. Consider the full range of ethical obligations that arise from this situation and explain what you must do.

You are a barrister specialising in regulatory law. You completed a 6-month secondment at the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) which ended two months ago. During your secondment, you worked on the investigation into Apex Financial Group plc for suspected market manipulation. You had access to confidential regulatory intelligence, internal FCA policy discussions about enforcement strategy, and privileged legal advice about the strength of the case. You are now back in independent practice. Today, you receive instructions from solicitors acting for Apex Financial Group plc, asking you to advise on and represent Apex in defending the very FCA enforcement proceedings you worked on during your secondment. The solicitors say Apex specifically wants you because of your regulatory expertise and your understanding of how the FCA approaches these cases. They add: "Your inside knowledge of how the FCA works would be invaluable to our client." Separately, a colleague in your chambers, who was not involved in the secondment, has been approached to act for a different company under FCA investigation — one you had no involvement with during your secondment. Your colleague asks whether your secondment experience creates any issue for the chambers as a whole. Analyse the ethical issues for both you and your colleague.

You are a barrister instructed to represent the claimant in a personal injury case. During the trial, you realise that a legal authority directly adverse to your client's case — a recent Court of Appeal decision — is highly relevant but has not been cited by either side. The decision, handed down two weeks ago, significantly weakens your client's argument on the applicable limitation period. Neither the judge nor opposing counsel appears to be aware of it. Your instructing solicitor, sitting behind you, passes a note saying: "I saw that case but I don't think we need to mention it — it's distinguishable and the other side should have found it themselves." Separately, during a break in proceedings, the defendant's solicitor approaches you in the corridor and says: "Between ourselves, my client is prepared to settle for £75,000 if your client drops the claim today. I haven't told my barrister about this offer because I think it's too generous, but my client insisted. Can we sort this out between us, solicitor to counsel?" Analyse the ethical obligations arising from both situations.