Register to read the introduction…
The Bar Council regulates the work of barristers so they are your go-to people in case you have any complaints.
Legal Executives
Legal executives are legally qualified professionals employed largely by solicitors and usually specialising in a given area of law and they are regulated by the Institute of Legal Executives. Legal executives can work in various locations apart from law firms. For instance, obtaining senior roles in the legal departments of commercial organisations, charities, government agencies and local authorities.
[pic]
Paralegals
A Paralegal is a person qualified through education and training to perform legal work that requires knowledge of the law and procedures and who is not a qualified solicitor or barrister. Graduating with a Law Degree or attaining the LPC does not necessarily mean a person is qualified to do paralegal work. Further training is required to gain knowledge of the practical side of the profession. Paralegals do virtually the same work as solicitors do: the work that solicitors do I have explained earlier. They are regulated by the Institution of …show more content…
They also benefit from immunity from being sued for defamation for the things they say about parties or witnesses in the course of hearing cases. These principles have led some people to suggest that Judges are somehow ‘above the law’. Judges are subject to the law in the same way as any other citizen. The Lord Chief Justice or Lord Chancellor may refer a judge to the Office for Judicial Complaints in order to establish whether it would be appropriate to remove them from office in circumstances where they have been found to have committed a criminal …show more content…
In some cases, the prosecution or defence team may decide that it is appropriate for the jury to be vetted. Vetting a jury checks the suitability of the jury in comparison to the trial matter. This is done by routine police checks to ensure no disqualified jurors are present and background checks are also carried out to make sure candidates are appropriate e.g political affiliations will be observed
Vetting is only to be carried out in exceptional circumstance, in such cases that include national security issues
Challenging
Once the court clerk has selected the final 12 jurors, they will then enter the jury box to be sworn in as jurors. Before this, once the jurors enter the court, both the prosecution and defence have the opportunity to challenge any of the jurors. There are two plausible causes that the parties can argue are to the array and For Cause
To the array- This is on the grounds that the jury has been chosen in a biased or unrepresentative way
For Cause- Challenges an individual juror's right to sit on the jury. The challenging party will have to provide a valid reason why the juror in question should not sit on that case. An obvious reason is if the juror has been disqualified for a particular reason. Another reason would be if any witness, or other party to the court proceedings know or is related to the
Legal Executives
Legal executives are legally qualified professionals employed largely by solicitors and usually specialising in a given area of law and they are regulated by the Institute of Legal Executives. Legal executives can work in various locations apart from law firms. For instance, obtaining senior roles in the legal departments of commercial organisations, charities, government agencies and local authorities.
[pic]
Paralegals
A Paralegal is a person qualified through education and training to perform legal work that requires knowledge of the law and procedures and who is not a qualified solicitor or barrister. Graduating with a Law Degree or attaining the LPC does not necessarily mean a person is qualified to do paralegal work. Further training is required to gain knowledge of the practical side of the profession. Paralegals do virtually the same work as solicitors do: the work that solicitors do I have explained earlier. They are regulated by the Institution of …show more content…
They also benefit from immunity from being sued for defamation for the things they say about parties or witnesses in the course of hearing cases. These principles have led some people to suggest that Judges are somehow ‘above the law’. Judges are subject to the law in the same way as any other citizen. The Lord Chief Justice or Lord Chancellor may refer a judge to the Office for Judicial Complaints in order to establish whether it would be appropriate to remove them from office in circumstances where they have been found to have committed a criminal …show more content…
In some cases, the prosecution or defence team may decide that it is appropriate for the jury to be vetted. Vetting a jury checks the suitability of the jury in comparison to the trial matter. This is done by routine police checks to ensure no disqualified jurors are present and background checks are also carried out to make sure candidates are appropriate e.g political affiliations will be observed
Vetting is only to be carried out in exceptional circumstance, in such cases that include national security issues
Challenging
Once the court clerk has selected the final 12 jurors, they will then enter the jury box to be sworn in as jurors. Before this, once the jurors enter the court, both the prosecution and defence have the opportunity to challenge any of the jurors. There are two plausible causes that the parties can argue are to the array and For Cause
To the array- This is on the grounds that the jury has been chosen in a biased or unrepresentative way
For Cause- Challenges an individual juror's right to sit on the jury. The challenging party will have to provide a valid reason why the juror in question should not sit on that case. An obvious reason is if the juror has been disqualified for a particular reason. Another reason would be if any witness, or other party to the court proceedings know or is related to the