5 June 2013 - 4:11pm | posted by | 15 comments

Prime Minister’s barrister brother heads legal chambers representing Rebekah Brooks in phone hacking defence

Alexander Cameron QC heads Three Raymond Buildings chambers Alexander Cameron QC heads Three Raymond Buildings chambers

As Rebekah Brooks pleads not guilty to charges of phone hacking, conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and unlawful payment to officials, Prime Minister David Cameron's high flying barrister brother, head of the legal chambers she is using, told The Drum his role did not present him with any conflict of interest.

He said that all the barristers working in the Chambers of which he is head were self-employed and had separate practices.

The Chambers UK legal directory entry for Three Raymond Buildings, the barristers Chambers for which Mr Cameron QC is described as head, states: “Advice and representation has also been provided in respect of charges levelled against Rebekah Brooks and Charles Brooks.”

When approached by The Drum asking whether he had represented Mrs Brooks, Alexander Cameron QC responded by simply stating: “You are misinformed.”

The Drum asked Mr Cameron QC if he acted in an informal capacity in this case, rather than by way of formal instruction, and given the nature of his family connection to Mr and Mrs Brooks, whether there was any conflict of interest.

Mr Cameron QC provided the following explanation:

“Under the current rules in England and Wales individual barristers practise from a set of chambers. A set of chambers is made up of self-employed barristers who share some of the expenses of practice (for example, rent and staff costs). But each of the barristers have separate practices. Barrister A in set of chambers X can be prosecuting a case in which the defendant is defended by barrister B who is in the same set of chambers. There is no corporate entity.

“The Head of Chambers is merely the person chosen by the barristers in his set to be its head.

“The Chambers entry does not say that I acted for or represented Mrs Brooks. It merely describes by example, of which the Brooks case is one, some of the cases in which individual members of chambers have been involved, in that instance, Hugo Keith QC.”

The Bar Council directory lists a total of 358 barristers’ Chambers in London, with 50 chambers in the city specialising in criminal law work.

Comments

6 Jun 2013 - 00:32
jasonstone's picture

So you asked: "do you represent Brooks?" and he replied: "you are misinformed." Huh? Why not just say 'no' if he doesn't represent her?

Then you ask about a possible conflict of interest and he gives you a description of how a set of chambers is structured that might have come from a badly-written wikipedia page.

And then, for good measure, he provides you with the kind of waffle Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn used to write for duplicitous Sir Humphrey in Yes Minister:

“The Chambers entry does not say that I acted for or represented Mrs Brooks. It merely describes by example, of which the Brooks case is one, some of the cases in which individual members of chambers have been involved, in that instance, Hugo Keith QC.”

It's almost as if Cameron is on a single-minded mission to demonstrate that lawyers are slippery, evasive and condescending.

In which case... well done him. Mission accomplished.

6 Jun 2013 - 11:59
duh_sponge's picture

Ahhhh - it's all nice and cosy, isn't it? Dave's brother and Dave's mates. All we need now is a tory-favouring judge (where could they possibly find one of those?) Judicial nepotism anyone? I'm sure nothing like that could ever happen.

9 Jun 2013 - 10:12
leighrioache

@duh_sponge - We already do - Judge Pattinson - who criticised the RSPCA for bringing a prosecution against the Heythrop Hunt on several accounnts - this is PM Cameron's hunt and attended by his friends. This so-called impartial judge has cost the RSPCA thousands in donations because the pro hunters have persisted in dragging this up at every opportunity and also distorting other cases of illegal hunting.

1 Nov 2013 - 04:13
davidhamilton01

@duh_sponge I'm not a little concerned at George Osborne'/s friend making a lot of money out of selling Royal mail.

4 Nov 2013 - 10:25
duh_sponge's picture

@davidhamilton01 And why should you be concerned David?

Gideon and his chums are simply making hay while the sun shines.

The stars of good fortune have aligned in their favour (strange how commonly this occurs?) and they have managed to have a couple of old boys in a position to sell of some of the Nation's remaining assets at such a time that they can depress the value and clean-up.

Why should this be of concern to the public? They've given you the chance to use some of your spare capital to join in the fun.

It's hardly their fault that we're all scraping by, making ends meet, paying the bills, the taxes, the 20% VAT, etc, for run-down and diminished public services and social support.

No, Gideon the weasel-turd Osbourne, Dave teflon Cameron and all their slimey buddies have no part in any of this that should be cause for your concern.

Now, back to work and pay your taxes - there may be other publicly owned companies that need your financial support before they are stripped and sold for the benefit of our glorious leaders' cronies.

7 Jun 2013 - 10:13
geoff15306's picture

keep it in the family comes to mind how they care to tell us conflict of interest but not for them it seems another tory whitewash jeff3

7 Jun 2013 - 09:49
tigge17500's picture

It could be an interesting story if it had legs... but a good Editor should, I think. have insisted on more linkage between the lawyer representing Brooks and Alex Cameron than this... they've given them something to deny only so far.

18 Jun 2013 - 09:11
punho84202's picture

In plain English. He does not represent Rebekah & Charles Brooks. He could not discuss the case with their barrister because it would be a breach of the Code of Conduct. Barristers' Chambers are effectively communes in which each barrister pays into a pot used to pay rent and administrative charges. They are not employed and they do not share information on computers etc. Someone has to manage the Chambers, take on the lease, etc. That is the Head of Chambers. So non-story - although perfectly proper for The Drum to investigate and it is a shame Mr Cameron QC didn't speak in words of one syllable or less so that the reporter could understand him.

20 Aug 2013 - 15:08
soapboxjury

@punho84202 But you might also think "of all the chambers in London..." No?

21 Jun 2013 - 19:14
wickwar's picture

You couldn't make it up.

26 Aug 2013 - 15:51
colin47435's picture

Despite all the long winded guff about the structure of Chambers' etc.....it's still within 'call me Dave's' brothers office is it not? Would it not have made more sense in the interests of fairplay and/or being seen to do the right thing, to have given the case to someone that wasn't a blood relative of the serving prime minister at the time of the hacking scandal?

29 Oct 2013 - 18:58
cymro21363's picture

Watch British Justice go down the toilet pan in this case. You just could NOT make it up could you. The name Cameron stinks of high heaven.

30 Oct 2013 - 08:43
annen42561's picture

How could anyone question the integrity of David Cameron's brother? The upper classes never look after their own. That is why their riches are diminishing at such an alarming rate. We 'plebs' can rest assured that justice will be done in this case and that Rebekah will be found not guilty.

31 Oct 2013 - 18:01
knows14901's picture

I can only agree with the previous comments and to say in the old days some attempt was made to disguise these alliances, the difference now is that they are so sure that if they deny any wrongdoing then it isn't wrongdoing. I really believe that the country is entirely run by financial institutions and managed by the government. There is really no interest in the welfare of the country, and the population are purely customers to which over inflated everything is sold whether it is energy or mortgages and everything in between. This government or the Conservative element of it and their friends and relations are only interested in maintaining this status quo, insuring well paid jobs for its members when they eventually are removed by a despondent and apathetic populace. Possible time for a revolution - if only there was someone with enough gravitas and clout who could publically voice what I think a very large amount of the populace feel. A real statesman - a genuine dude!

24 Jun 2014 - 21:01
kirstinmccoy

UNREAL - You can't make this crap up !

Please sign in or register to comment on this article.

Latest Projects from the Profile Hub

Cotswolds Distillery Inaugural Release

23/10/2014
The first ever Cotswolds Dry Gin from the first 10 runs at...

Jurlique's #AgelessBeauties Twitter Party Increases Sales!

22/10/2014
To celebrate Jurlique’s latest product range launch; Nutri-...

EMCAS

22/10/2014
OVERVIEW Financial mis-selling is an ever-growing issue –...

Visit Wales - creating romantic breaks

22/10/2014
Delivering 1000% increase in 'romantic' traffic Challenge...

Recruitment campaign

21/10/2014
Thermal Systems are an international client based in...