Lord Harley’s bid to overturn Inner Temple’s membership refusal fails

Avatar photo

By Legal Cheek on

8

Lodged multiple appeals


Former solicitor advocate Alan Blacker has been rejected in his second application to join Inner Temple, despite lodging three separate appeals.

Blacker, aka Lord Harley, has been trying unsuccessfully since February 2020 to become a member of Inner Temple, one of the four Inns of Court and a prerequisite for becoming a barrister.

In August that year he was deemed by the Inn’s Conduct Committee not to be a “fit and proper person” to be admitted to an Inn of Court. He applied unsuccessfully for this decision to be reviewed.

Three years later Blacker tried again, with the conduct committee holding firm in its position. He applied for this decision to be reviewed, and when that failed, took his claim to the High Court. After this was struck out on procedural grounds he journeyed to the employment tribunal.

Here Blacker alleged direct disability discrimination, indirect disability discrimination, and a failure to make reasonable adjustments. The latest ruling by the tribunal has, however, confirmed that it lacks jurisdiction to decide the issue, and that all of the claims are therefore struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success.

Blacker’s difficulty in joining an Inn of Court may have something to do with his checkered past.

The ex-solicitor first hit headlines back in 2014 following an incident with a Cardiff Crown Court judge who described his appearance as “like something out of Harry Potter” on account of a number of colourful ribbons attached to his robes. Two years later he was struck off for making “inaccurate and misleading” statements about his academic qualifications, amongst other things.

Since then he has been convicted of benefit fraud, banned from running a charity for 15 years, and prevented from gaining CILEx membership for at least ten years after failing to disclose his previous behaviour.

Whilst he was temporarily the recipient of the “Best Pro Bono Legal Services Practice 2024” and the “UK Legal Client Service Excellence Award 2024″, these were “officially revoked” soon after, with an employee of awarding body SME News said to have “missed” a note outlining Blacker’s history.

8 Comments

Move on, Alan

This guy is a serial time waster and complete joke. I feel sorry for the people who have to entertain his ridiculous behaviour.

Jim L

And yet on LinkedIn ,he is still making outlandish claims about his academic achievements. Despite LinkedIn rules saying people should not make misleading claims on the platform, the fake Lord is allowed to continue unabated. I feel sorry for the people that are taken in by this joker.

Sara

I have seen plenty of traditional barristers misleading, gaslighting and bullying judges to get unjust Judgments they want with the LIP Defendants. That discriminating remark about his appearance is laughable from a community that wears ridiculous antiquated costumes as uniform in the employment. There are barristers and solicitors committing crimes everyday by forging deeds, repossing properties with false accounting and identity and Judges are allowing such behaviours in courts and concealing crimes so what different about this guy?

Anon

This is a most extraordinary comment. Leaving aside the majority of it, I will make a few points:

1) It is not a discriminatory comment regarding his dress sense. By all means, wear what you would like in your own time. However, when you go to court, you absolutely must be dressed appropriately. That applies to everyone in court.

2) Whether or not there are solicitors and barristers committing crimes on a daily basis is neither here nor there; in any event, I wouldn’t be so bold to suggest such. Regardless, when becoming a member of any of the four Inns of Court, there are requirements one must meet in order to be deemed a ‘fit and proper’ person. Ordinarily, the point at which someone becomes a member of an Inn is prior to commencement of the Bar course. In Mr Blacker’s case, he’s had a very colourful life thus far, including some less-than-savoury behaviours and acts committed by him. No one would gain membership of an Inn with such a record. As such, it isn’t discriminatory of anything of the kind. In much the same way, if any member were to be found to have committed crimes in the carrying out of their duties, they too would almost certainly lose their membership (in addition to any further punishments the disciplinary tribunal wished to impose).

I’m certainly not privy to all of the details. However, it seems to me that he has received the same treatment any other person would have in his position, and there’s nothing in the public domain to suggest otherwise.

On a side note, I think it unwise to espouse such things about barristers and solicitors, unless one has the evidence to back up such claims. Doing so without evidence is simply undermining the trust placed in the profession by the public, which is an awful thing to do.

Cowboy

Elon , have you changed your name to Sara ?

Alan's pupillage application

5/5 for persistence.
0/5 for judgement.
3/5 for services to mustard yellow.

7 years' PQE

Reading his SDT judgment is equal parts frustrating and laughable – the assertions and corresponding contradictions are mind blowing.

Dr. Who XI

But bow ties are cool!

Join the conversation

Related Stories

‘Lord Harley’ scoops two legal awards

Gongs come despite 2016 strike-off

Jun 7 2024 12:48pm
6