In past years, newly appointed Queen’s Counsel have travelled to their silks day appointment ceremony, presided over by the Lord Chancellor, in horse-drawn carriages, limousines and classic cars. Dressed in their silk robes and wigs and appointed by the Queen, it’s easy to see why questions are being asked as to how relevant and necessary the QC stamp is as a mark of quality in the modern legal world.
And I am not here to argue that there aren’t issues with the QC process. It stands to reason that the lengthy and expensive application will deter some barristers and solicitors from applying. Certainly, over the years, the title has been bestowed overproportionally on white men. However, the process is exacting, thorough and is usually a strong indication of excellence, and in the fast-paced, modern legal world still offers a reliable mark of quality.
Our legal system and processes continue to be world leading and, with that, the QC badge becomes an important kitemark, internationally recognised and acting as an aide. This helps attract litigation work from overseas. For consumers too, the QC mark can help provide a very helpful indication of quality and experience.
The appointment system has improved and continues to do so. It’s no longer the Old Boys network with a tap on the shoulder, but more transparent and consistent. In 2022, of the 101 barristers and solicitors appointed as new QCs, 45 are women, and 15 of the new QCs are from an ethnic minority background. Whilst the diversity overall amongst QCs needs significant work, these latest figures are encouraging and shows the process of appointment continues to move in the right direction. When so many High Court judges continue to be selected from the pool of Queen’s Counsel it truly highlights the importance of QC diversity and it’s encouraging that this issue continues to be at the forefront of debate.
It’s not new to question and dispute how relevant the role of QC is in our legal system. In the early 2000s, the role was threatened and it looked likely it would be scrapped for good after a debate about the state involvement in the selection process and the office of fair trading branded it anti-competitive. In 2003, on swearing in the new QCs, Lord Irvine heavily implied that year’s cohort of QCs could be the last. However, the application system was reformed in 2005/2006, creating a selection panel of 10 people - including barristers, solicitors, retired judges and non-lawyers - who assess the potential QCs on five competency areas including understanding the law and diversity.
Of course, no-one is instructing a QC based on their title alone, especially for big ticket litigation which continues to be the domain of QCs. Other important factors include the ability to work well in a team and be collaborative – this is essential in the bigger ticket commercial cases. Emotional intelligence around what’s really important to the client and how to interact with a large and complex legal team is also important and can’t be judged by the QC title, however it continues to act as a very useful starting point.
It's likely debate will continue to rage over the relevance and necessity of QCs in the modern legal world, and this is right. Like it or not, QCs continue to hold positions of privilege and go on to influence the make-up of the judiciary. What’s important is that the conversation continues, the application process continues to improve and the focus on accessibility and inclusivity continues to be firmly in the spotlight. This way, it's likely QCs, and indeed KCs, will continue to be a feature of our legal landscape, as it has been since Francis Bacon first took the role in 1603.
Farhan Farani is managing partner at Farani Taylor
No comments yet