A complaint was made to Bar Standards Board about Mr Snell’s conduct in Bow County Court during a hearing. He basically mislead the court and provided deceptive and false information to the judge sitting who was District Judge North.
The complaint was as follows:
- Mr Snell has mislead the court.
He has failed to advise his clients that the claim was wrongly filed with the incorrect claimants name and defendants name.
The submissions he relied upon were fraudulent and misleading. He was aware of it as clearly indicated in our skeleton
argument which we sent to them 2 days before the hearing. During the hearing, he said: “The claimants are seeking
repossession.” the judge asked him who were the claimants and whether they are present. he replied: “The claimants are
present and they are RHP Services.” On the claim form, the claimants are Mr Natha and others. Upon notifying him that he
was giving contradictory information and misleading the judge, Mr Snell attempted to cover up accusing us of rent arrears of
£17000 but this was not the case. He failed to prove his point. In any circumstance, he has mislead the judge and the judge
was merely taking instructions from Mr Snell who kept on misguiding him and the case. He used his legal privileges to
mislead the judge who was only a solicitor (lower than him).
- Mr Snell has discriminated us because of our race, religion and status.
He has discriminated us by his body language and by referring us as “These people …” He did not respect his duty as a
counsel and failed to be polite. He did not introduce himself outside the court as we were unaware that he was representing
the claimants. Mr Snell however stared at us in an impolite, rude and intimidating manner outside the courtroom without
approaching us to introduce himself. He was intimidating us by speaking to all the court staffs and sitting next to them. His
body language and behaviour were discriminative to us.
- Mr Snell has failed to uphold the rule of law and the proper administration of justice.
He has mislead the court and relied upon false representations. Mr Snell has breached his code of conduct by misleading
and influencing the judge’s decision. He acted in a way through his body language (smiles, laughs or signing with his hands)
when we were addressing the court or the judge was listening to us. His body movements, though in silence, compelled the
judge to look at him and divert his attention to him. Mr Snell approach was such that it is difficult to figure out at once that he
was trying to obstruct the course of justice. but if one clearly examine his body language, it is imperative to conclude that Mr
Snell is obstructing fair justice.
- Mr Snell’s integrity is to be questioned.
He has knowingly and recklessly deceived the court. The judge who is a solicitor was unaware of those proceedings and did
not have any qualification to deal with the hearing. He was merely asking advice from Mr Snell who did advise him but with
deceit. Mr Snell was knowingly and recklessly misleading him and providing him wrong interpretation of the law.
- Mr Snell failed to submit his skeleton argument or representations of what he will submit in the court.
He provided some untrue and contradictory/false evidences during the hearing which we were not aware of, he spoke some
things which we did not know. he sent a statement of costs 1 hour before hearing takes place by fax. The judge
acknowledged that the statement of costs should have been sent at least 24 hours before the hearing. But as Mr Snell was
provocative and manipulative, the judge forgot this breach of duty and went on to give his order.
Mr Snell does not have any respect to the children. He and the judge purportedly delayed the hearing when they knew that
children were waiting outside the courtroom and hungry.
- He interrupted Mrs Ismail’s submissions and interfered with it. he distracted the judge’s and Mrs Ismail’s focus on the
matter. He knew that the Judge is his junior and his legal privileges will assist him. He is aware of the institutional racism
campaign against and was confident.
7.. Judge North’s actions will also be complained of. The solicitor whom Mr Snell was acting for has also been complained to
SRA.
It has always been the duty of a barrister, solicitor, legal executive or any other professional representing a client in
proceedings before any court to discharge not only the duties to his client but the duty to the court. That duty is in part
reflected in s.188 of the Legal Services Act 2007 as a duty applicable to anyone exercising rights of audience or conducting
litigation in the court by virtue of an authorisation under the Act as a duty to “act with independence in the interests of justice”.
The content of the duty to the court is spelt out in a number of cases.
In Ridehalgh v Horsefield [1994] Ch 205 at page 234 Sir Thomas Bingham, MR (as he then was) made clear that although a legal representative of the parties was bound to strive to win a case, he must do so without in any way seeking to evade the rules intended to safeguard the administration of justice.
The reason why that is so important is that misleading the court is regarded by the court and must be regarded by any disciplinary tribunal as one of the most serious offences that an advocate or litigator can commit. It is not simply a breach of a rule of a game, but a fundamental affront to a rule designed to safeguard the fairness and justice of proceedings.
Parents Against Injustice UK 