 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| ||
|
April 22, 2004
You are on the invidual archive page of Immunity. Click Simon World weblog for the main page.
|
|
Immunity
If anyone, especially members of the legal profession, can explain to me the logic of barristers' immunity from negligence suits, I would be delighted to hear it. I do not know if this immunity exists in the USA, but certainly it stands in most common law countries. If someone can present a compelling argument why this immunity should still exist I will donate HK$100 to a charity of their choice. posted by Simon on 04.22.04 at 01:00 PM in the
Trackbacks:
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blog.mu.nu/cgi/trackback.cgi/25828 Send a manual trackback ping to this post.
Comments:
NFI on that one. Though it would be amusing to see one barrister acting against another. posted by: fumier on 04.22.04 at 01:10 PM [permalink]The same justification as the one that supports the concept of a "split bar", i.e., no justification whatsoever except self-interest. I doubt that there is any profession, anywhere in the world, where the disparity between compensation and talent is as great as it is with HK barristers. BTW, there are no barristers in the USA. The bar is unified. A lawyer is a lawyer and there is no immunity from negligence for US lawyers. posted by: Conrad on 04.22.04 at 04:19 PM [permalink] |
|