Judge throws McKenzie Friend out of court over “tirade” against him and solicitors


Keep out: McKenzie Friend excluded from hearing

A district judge has explained how he had to throw a McKenzie Friend out of his court after she disrupted proceedings and threatened complaints against him and the other side’s solicitors.

Mary Bennett was aiding the husband in the final hearing of a wife’s application for financial remedies in a divorce.

District Judge Nicol in Basingstoke recorded: “On the second day of the hearing, at the lunchtime adjournment, there was an outburst from her, during which she would not leave the court and threatened complaints against me, the solicitor for the wife and criminal sanctions against the wife.

“In consequence of her outburst, which was the last in a series of interruptions, I decided that her conduct disrupted the proceedings and I excluded her from the courtroom for the rest of the hearing.”

He said he had recorded the events because of her threat and the possible need in future to refer to them.

DJ Nicol said that, at the start of the hearing, Mrs Bennett made an application for rights of audience on the grounds that the husband was ill and confused. She also said she had considerable experience in the employment tribunals.

“When I questioned Mrs Bennett, rather than consider the question and provide an answer, she seemed to have her own agenda and commenced her first response with the words ‘this woman’ (referring to the wife) in a most aggressive and (in my opinion) derogatory way.

“That initial communication led me to the conclusion that Mrs Bennett’s participation in any way other than acting as McKenzie Friend was likely to lead to an inflammatory situation which in turn, was likely to disrupt the proceedings.”

In any case, after speaking to the husband, the judge said he considered that, “far from being confused about the proceedings he was perfectly capable of conducting his case himself”.

The judge continued: “I refused Mrs Bennett’s application. As things turned out, my decision was justified.”

She interrupted the hearing five time on the first afternoon. “She interjected when the husband was trying to cross examine the wife. She tried to give evidence herself. I warned her on those occasions that she risked expulsion from the court if she persisted.”

There was a “minor interruption” during the second morning which led to a further warning.

“Thirdly and far more seriously, at the luncheon adjournment, the husband was in the middle of his evidence and he was given the usual warning that he should not speak to anybody about his evidence or the case generally during the adjournment. Mrs Bennett thereupon wrote a note on a piece of paper and referred the husband to it (having just heard the warning given).”

When the judge asked what was in the note, Mrs Bennett responded with the “tirade” that led to her exclusion.

DJ Nicol concluded: “The husband was perfectly capable of speaking for himself and I am satisfied that he suffered no prejudice as a result of having to conduct his own case.”




    Readers Comments

  • Peter wilson says:

    Can a McKenzie friend cross address the court and witness’s ?

  • Janet Bloor says:

    As a legal consultant and professional McKensie friend having completed 6 months of pupillage. This can go the other way when both parties were ligigants in person I was supporting the wife I knew fully my responsibility as a McKenzie friend but I was accused of giving the husband a ‘look’ after his shocking announcement the mother of his children should only have two hours Access a week. She audiably gasped and my mouth must have fallen open but I never uttered a word. Then a tirade came from him to me! Luckily the judge knew I had done nothing wrong.


Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Reports

Our latest special report, produced in association with Temple Legal Protection, looks at the role of after-the-event (ATE) insurance in commercial litigation post-LASPO. We are at a time when insurers, solicitors, clients and litigation funders work ever more closely to create funding packages that work for all of them, with conditional fee and even damages-based agreements now part of many law firms’ armoury.

Blog

18 October 2019

Will your staff have confidence in your compliance officers?

The introduction of the SRA Standards and Regulations on 25 November 2019 will see new issues coming into focus for you and your firms over the reporting of serious breaches to the SRA.

Read More

Loading animation