Legal 500 Submission Deadline: 19 February Print E-mail

Those interested in submitting details of their mediation practice for consideration in the 2010 edition of The Legal 500, are invited to do before 19 February. Publishers Legalease Ltd have set out mediation-specific submission guidelines for the first time this year. Copies are available here:

 

http://www.legal500.com/assets/images/research/guidelines_mediators.pdf

 

Research will be ongoing during March and April prior to publication in September 2010.

 
David I Shapiro (1928-2009) - A Tribute Print E-mail

David I ShapiroIn fond memory of David I Shapiro, who died on 1 October 2009, we publish an excerpt from his biography, Writ Large

 
It is from numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that human history is shaped. Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centres of energy and daring, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.
Robert F Kennedy, South Africa 1966 
 
Prologue
David Israel Shapiro, a volunteer attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), sat alone in his Washington, DC office with a feeling of mounting desperation. In the four years since moving from his native New York to Washington, DC he’d met a lot of attorneys, and that afternoon he’d called them all. The hours passed, the light faded and the heap in his ashtray grew. Begging professional favours for militant fascists was proving to be an arduous business. 
 
It was February 1960 and America’s most prominent Nazi, George Lincoln Rockwell, had pushed freedom of speech to its limits and in the process provoked a fight in downtown Washington, DC. Following his arrest for disorderly conduct he contacted the ACLU knowing they believed in everyone’s right to counsel, no matter what the charge against them. In practice, things were never so simple. Shapiro’s attempts to find him counsel had come to nothing: every attorney in town was suddenly ‘too busy’. Reconciled to defeat, Shapiro put in a final call to Alan Reitman, associate director of the ACLU nationally. 
 
‘Alan, it’s no good,’ Shapiro explained, ‘I can’t find him a lawyer. No one wants to touch this case. I’m sorry…’ 
Reitman cut him short: ‘You’re a lawyer – why the hell can’t you represent him?’
 
Shapiro, a Brooklyn-born Jew, had six million reasons not to represent the self-styled Commander of the American Nazi Party. Reitman knew it, but there were principles at stake and he knew that Shapiro – then aged 32 and already a pugnacious advocate of civil liberties – shared his reverence for the Bill of Rights and would eventually respond in his distinctive forceful style. Still, the verbal arm-wrestle continued: 
‘What? Are you crazy?’ Shapiro shouted, ‘My middle name’s Israel. I’m not going to represent this sonofabitch.’
‘When was the last time you read the Sixth Amendment?’ continued Reitman. ‘Don’t you believe in the right to counsel?’
‘Sure he should have a lawyer,’ agreed Shapiro, ‘but it doesn’t have to be me!’
‘You’re the only one left, so you’re it,’ Reitman said, and put the phone down.
 
Shapiro’s choice was stark: accept the brief and the inevitable vilification that would follow, or abandon all his principles – ethical, professional and intellectual – and leave a man facing trial without counsel. Shapiro took the case.
 
The facts of the matter were straightforward, if repugnant. Earlier that February Rockwell and his sidekick JV Kenneth Morgan – Commander and Deputy Commander of the American Nazi Party – had been distributing hate literature on a street corner not far from the White House. The content was vicious and extreme; the objective was the furtherance of fascism through race-hate and violence. Indicative of the tone was one pamphlet that read: ‘When they snarl “you are Nazis,” we gleefully reply “You’re damned right, and we will shortly give you Jew traitors the gas-chamber, like the Rosenbergs!”’
 
Rockwell and Morgan had distributed pamphlets like these each Saturday for several months without incident. Then, on 6 February 1960, Irving Berman, a contractor from Falls Church, Virginia, arrived at the scene with four friends. Berman’s stated intention was to ‘observe’ Rockwell as he distributed these leaflets. Berman, described by the court as ‘active in Jewish affairs’, had previously been shown one of Rockwell’s pamphlets entitled, ‘White Man! Are you going to be run out of your nation’s Capitol without a fight?’ It espoused a crude ideology: Jews and Negroes were becoming dominant in the District of Columbia, resulting in certain deplorable conditions. The solution, the literature implied, was to resettle blacks in Africa and liquidate those of the Jewish faith.
 
In full view of three local police officers, Berman seized Rockwell’s pamphlets and a scuffle soon ensued. The police responded swiftly: they arrested Morgan and Rockwell. The entire incident lasted just seconds; its implications for Shapiro and his family, however, would drag on for months.
 
The law was on Rockwell’s side: as long as the views expressed in the hate literature were not incitements to action, they were protected by the First Amendment – the right of every American to free speech. Despite his contempt for Rockwell and the views he expressed, Shapiro could not support the suppression of such views by physical attack.
The hearing itself was a formality: it took the judge just 20 minutes to kick the case against Rockwell out of court. His job done, Shapiro began to gather up his papers.
Rockwell, however, wanted the last word. ‘Listen up, Jewboy,’ he said to Shapiro. ‘Just because you got me off, that doesn’t do anything for you. Make sure you understand that I’ll watch as you and all the other Jews go to the gas chamber.’ 
 
He’d gone too far. Shapiro, an intimidating presence even when unprovoked, launched his 200-pound frame at Rockwell and snarled in his face: ‘Step outside this courtroom and say that again…’ Rockwell was no match for Shapiro. He stood and said nothing. ‘Fuck him’ thought Shapiro; he stuffed his briefcase, reached for his cigarettes and barged his way out into the street. 
 
Then the real trouble started. In taking a principled stand for free speech, Shapiro put the basic rights of every American before his own safety and that of his family. But to the press and the world outside, this was somehow underhand – a smart lawyer contriving a clever defence for a worthless human being. Hostilities escalated. Abusive phone calls followed night and day. Jewish War Veterans marched in protest outside Shapiro’s home. During one such incident they smashed his windows, narrowly missing Shapiro’s month-old son Miles with flying shards of glass. 
 
None of the family was spared the taunting. Shapiro’s wife, Carol-Ann, who fully supported his stand for free speech, was also verbally abused. Each day’s mail brought fresh horrors. One day they were sent photos of children killed in Nazi Germany with the message ‘Who’ll protect you when Rockwell does this to your children?’
 
While the Jewish community at large shunned the Shapiros for the next 18 months, those who understood the issues at stake stood by them. Shapiro’s family were steadfast in their support. In time, colleagues and contemporaries who had been hostile at the time also came round, ultimately recognising that as a selfless – and thankless – defence of the legal profession’s noblest principles and the basic rights of free people, few parallels exist. 
 
Shapiro grew all the stronger. He had publicly established himself as a lawyer of high principle and conviction, a tough but compassionate attorney who would never abandon his client regardless of their circumstances, political hue, or potential to damage him personally. 

 
CMC Consultation Questionnaire 2009 Print E-mail
Dear Friends and Colleagues,
 
One of the most exciting developments in the law over the last twenty years has been the growth of the use of mediation as a means of resolving disputes quickly, cheaply and effectively. This is not only a legal development: community, workplace and neighbourhood mediation have also become well established and often have nothing at all to do with litigation or legal issues.

Six years ago the Civil Mediation Council was established to foster that growth and to act as a voice for the civil mediation community in its dealings with government and the public. Since then there has been a steady growth in the use of mediation as more and more people have experienced its value. To give just one example, mediation is now provided free of charge in over 8,000 small claims court cases each year by trained mediators employed by HM Courts Service.  Figures provided to the Council this year suggest that the number of heavier civil or commercial mediations carried out in England and Wales increased again sharply in 2008.  The paid up membership of the CMC, of both individual mediators and providers, has risen significantly in the last 12 months.

We want to move forward now, and to this end the CMC and the cause of civil mediation generally asks for your help.

I attach below a link to an on-line survey we are conducting as part of a major ongoing consultation exercise.   

We ask our members and the mediation community generally to try to ensure the widest possible circulation of this email and the link. We believe this exercise to be very important, and we are keen to canvass the views not only of mediators and mediation providers but also of clients, lawyers, judges and as many other people who are involved in the world of mediation as possible.  

It may even be that you will receive this email more than once. If this does happen I apologise.  

The questionnaire deals with various issues of policy and principle that will affect the CMC’s future work and decide our priorities. We will greatly value your reply.  

So if you are
  • A mediator
  • A mediation provider

Please complete the survey and make sure that this email and the link below get the widest possible circulation among
  • Users of mediation
  • Consumer organisations, trade unions and business associations
  • The courts
  • The legal profession
  • Academics and researchers

We want all of you to take part.

The link for the questionnaire is:

 
If you would like to know more about mediation or the work of the Civil Mediation Council please visit our website at www.civilmediation.org

HENRY BROOKE

Sir Henry Brooke

Chairman

Civil Mediation Council 
 
Mediator Specialisation: IBA Survey Results Print E-mail

pie chartFrom a presentation given to the IBA Mediators' Section

6 October 2009, Madrid 

 

Specialisation is an inescapable fact of modern life. One shouldn't however, conclude from that that specialisation is either approved of, or desirable. One can make a case, for example, that the current financial crisis is a crisis of over-specialisation.

In the UK, disdain of the specialist is somehow a tradition. Some of it is caught up in a misty-eyed nostalgia for the era of the "gentleman amateur" - a long-gone figure, if he ever existed, who had the time and money to cultivate and indulge a tremendous range of interests. Some of it, let's be frank, is snobbery: part of the British mindset has never got to grips with the fact that some people work for a living.  

Something of that mentality led comedian Kenneth Williams to lament that 'these days, people are becoming more and more expert in less and less. Very soon,' he concluded, 'it'll be possible to be the world's leading expert in absolutely nothing.'

[CLICK TITLE TO READ MORE] 

[DOWNLOAD PDF OF SLIDES HERE

 
Six things I'd Change About Mediation Print E-mail

From a talk by Matthew Rushton for the Standing Conference of Mediation Advocates 

Norton Rose

16 September 2009 

 

First, thank you for inviting me to be here this evening. 


Let me kick off with a little background. As you'll gather from the title of my talk this evening - Six Things I'd Change if I Could - I believe that if mediation is to thrive, then change is necessary. I don't expect what I'm about to say will make me popular, so before I'm chased from the room under a hail of biros and Blackberrys, let me at least offer some background as to how I came by these views.

The first thing you need to know is that I am basically a journalist. So if you find me unbearably sanctimonious, sensationalist, and hypocritical, please understand that I'm only maintaining the best traditions of my profession.
 
[CLICK TITLE TO READ MORE]
 
Farm Assist: the latest developments in mediation privilege Print E-mail
Mediation privilege is once again under scrutiny following Mr Justice Ramsey’s judgment in Farm
Assist Limited (in liquidation) v The Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural affairs (No.
2) 2009 EWHC 1102 (TCC). Is confidentiality in mediation now hopelessly compromised?
Writing for The Mediator Magazine, Michel Kallipetis QC and William Wood QC offer views from either side of the argument.
 
Download the full article here
 
 

Subscribe (it's free!)

e-mail address:

First Name:

Last Name: