Oddly, I decided I wanted to become a barrister when I was ten years old. I’m not sure I entirely knew what a barrister was. There are no lawyers in my family, and in fact I was the first person from my family to go to university.
I probably had two main influences. In the 70s and 80s there used to be a programme on called Crown Court. It did dramatisations of mostly criminal trials, with actors playing all parts except the jury, and there were alternative endings, depending on what the jury decided. It used to be on before children’s shows, and I used to watch it when I came home from school. My grandmother was a secretary in a high street law firm, and that was the only connection to the law I had. As I grew up, I became interested in politics, leading me to public law, and constitutional law, and I didn’t waver from that.
The only other career I’ve ever wanted, was to be an astronaut, which may have been a bit unrealistic. Interestingly, over the last few years I’ve been involved in advising on space law, so, in some way, I fulfilled that ambition as well.
When I was acting for Sharon Shoesmith, the former head of Haringey children’s services, The Sun wrote an editorial because they didn’t like that I was acting for her. It said that I was a jackass of a lawyer and a buffoon, so it was quite tricky to deal with at the time. Now I have it framed on my wall. The Bar Council raised the issue about whether it was right to be attacking barristers because the press didn’t like the work I was doing. Sadly, the world’s moved on. It happens a lot more than it should do.
The whole experience of the Sharon Shoesmith Baby P case was extraordinary, from beginning to end. I would say that’s the case I was most pleased about winning for the client. In any view, she’d been completely wronged. I remember losing for Sharon Shoesmith at first instance, and it was the worst day of my career. I was at a planning enquiry in Woolwich. I had to come back to the city to get a physical copy of the judgment; I remember reading the end of it and feeling awful.
To then overturn an injustice in the Court of Appeal was incredible. Stanley Burnton KC was asked about his greatest case was as a judge and he said that one, for being able to right a serious wrong. I never felt as personally attached to a case as to that one.
When I was very junior, I was instructed quite late on Pinochet No. 2, when there was a challenge to a House of Lords decision in the first case. This was the Lord Hoffmann and Amnesty International apparent bias case. I was brought in on Friday night, asking me if I’d join the team. We were in the House of Lords on the Tuesday, and at the time the Pinochet extradition to Spain element was huge. So that was an interesting one, and very early on in my career.
More recently, I did the Heathrow expansion litigation for the government over a few years. That was a rollercoaster ride. It was probably the biggest piece of judicial review there’s ever been, in terms of length of hearings. I’ve done several cases in the European Court of Justice. Unfortunately English barristers can no longer do them of course, which is a real shame.
Recently I’ve been involved in a huge judicial review brought by Annington Properties against the Ministry of Defence. That was fascinating, getting to work in a sizeable team of other barristers, which doesn’t happen very often. There were 4 KCs on each side, which was great fun.
When you start, it’s hard to think about the scale of the cases you might be involved in in the future. Thinking about the Heathrow litigation, the scale was huge, and it was complex. If you’d asked me when I was a student would I want to be involved in it, the answer obviously would be yes – it almost raised every environmental issue you can think of.
You never know what direction your career is going to go in. I set off to be a public lawyer. Over the years I’ve become a planning and environmental lawyer, which I never set out to do. When I was a student, there were no environmental law modules on my undergraduate or postgraduate course. I remember getting instructed years and years ago on a case about waste, and it got me into environmental law, which I hadn’t thought about. Now, it’s a huge part of what I do. Now, almost all law degrees offer environmental law, and it seems that everyone wants to get into it, but I almost drifted into it.
Stamina is really important to be a barrister. The reality is that these days there is so much documentation. There is a lot of hard graft, a lot of hours. Not needing too much sleep is probably quite important beyond that.
Advocacy is a skill. Practice is important, you always have to be learning, and you can always learn to be a better advocate. My advocacy style is quite laid back, I’m not particularly bombastic. People who have been cross-examined by me would say I have quite an aggressive style. It’s one of the really interesting parts of what we do, trying to outmanoeuvre an expert.
These days your advocacy is recorded, and put up on video on the Supreme Court. I could not bring myself to watch that, I never have. Maybe I should, I’m sure it would be quite an interesting learning experience.
Wellbeing wasn’t on the agenda when I joined in the mid-1990s. I don’t think a job like this will ever be entirely compatible with wellbeing, but we have to try.
One of my greatest inspirations was my law tutor at Oxford, Roy Stuart. He made a huge impression on everyone he taught. Lord David Pannick KC was also one of his students. David Alvin, when I started at my current chambers was my pupil supervisor for my third six, and I’ve worked with him for years on really interesting cases, from planning and environmental to public cases. I learned a lot from him, even the way I still write skeletons. Outside of the law, my greatest inspiration is my parents; they supported me through my whole education and have constantly been supportive and inspirational.
Wellbeing wasn’t on the agenda at all when I joined in the mid-1990s, which it is much more now. When you’re caught between the demands of a client and the court, wellbeing can be squeezed. I don’t think a job like this will ever be entirely compatible with wellbeing, but we have to try.
When I joined my chambers in 1997 I put in my own phone line so I could have an email. There was very little use of it for work. Within two years that had completely changed, everything was on email and it completely revolutionised how we did things. During the Covid-19 lockdown we leapt forward again in how we use technology, with the number of meetings and advocacy taking place online.
There are ongoing discussions about the role of AI in law. I think I’m quite safe from being replaced by a robot, for now. It can help us with the documentation that’s generated by cases that is beyond the human process of assimilation. That maybe will be more manageable working alongside AI.
I wouldn’t have done anything differently. I had the experience of doing a pupillage for 12 months and not being taken on, and that was hard at the time. But it worked out. I went to a Chambers I loved, and I’ve had a fantastic career. The fact that my career has changed towards planning and environment I wouldn’t change, I think these things just happen. I would say I work too hard probably too much of the time. I should control that, but then everyone needs to try and control that in this job.
Outside of work, I really love reading and podcasts, particularly history-related ones. If not for law, it would’ve been history at university. Putting that aside, I enjoy running.
The best book I’ve read recently is The Shortest History of Germany, which does what it says on the cover, but is an absolutely fantastic account of the whole of German history, which you can read in an afternoon. Frankly, I think everybody in Europe should read that book, it will completely change your views about German history and its importance.
Most people say when they take silk that their reaction is relief, which was certainly my experience. The application process is arduous, and when you get through it, it’s worth it to get the recognition. After you get announced it’s a great time, you have a barrage of emails or letters from people saying nice things about you. It feels like recognition for everything you put in.
It’s a great career in many ways. It’s intellectually challenging, different from day to day, and it can really make a difference in people’s lives. You have to accept that the hours are punishing; there are some relentless times, perhaps all the time really. You have to bear that in mind, because if it’s not what you want, and frankly I understand why, it’s going to be very difficult.
You can speak to any lawyer, even if you’re doing primarily environmental work, you can make a difference to people’s lives. And that’s an important and fulfilling thing. Even getting planning permission for someone following an appeal allowed him to retire after 22 years of trying. We’re still friends.
James Maurici KC is a barrister at Landmark Chambers