judgment looks too boring to read but RPC appear to have defended themselves?  That is extremely odd.

Anyone who acts for himself has a fool for a client. 

Bit different if you're a law firm though, right? 

Lots of good cases this week.  Here's one for our personal injury colleagues: https://www.indy100.com/science-tech/metal-butt-plug-mri-scan-2660218820 

Those fees are extraordinary. £5m to win her a £350k settlement!

"Bit different if you're a law firm though, right? "

No it isn't.

CFA's eh, always have and always will give rise to obvious conflicts of interest.  The amount of times I've been in mediations where everything stands still for three hours while the other side debate fee uplifts with their sols & counsel... 

To misquote the Manic Street Preachers “ if you tolerate this then your case…..

"Anyone who acts for himself has a fool for a client. 

Bit different if you're a law firm though, right?"

Dux you moron, this old saw was specifically designed to describe lawyers acting for themselves. Otherwise it wouldn't be a "client" would it?

RPC always used to be law firm that law firms turned to when they're in regulatory trouble. I think. Who do they turn to? 

Ghostbusters?

It was actually coined to refer to litigants-in-person. Cretin. 

Litigants in person WHO ARE LAWYERS.

Because they are people who do cases for clients.

It was commonly said around the inns about any barrister or solicitor acting for themselves. Noone ever said it about a standard LiP. Ever.

3-dux cannot save himself. Thus they taunted Jesus. 

Just read this thread.

Spurius’ comments have a healthy dose of ‘exponential growth’ about them. Well done.

Oh look dux has a sockpuppet.

Heh. That actually made me chuckle on train. Well done again.