Categories
Legal Analysis Legal Professionals

Bar Standards Board Justice !

Bar Standards Board Justice
Bar Standards Board Justice !

The Bar Standards Board published disciplinary findings against barrister Mr Thomas David Davidson on the 21st November 2023.

Thomas Davidson, a practising barrister, behaved in a way which was likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public places in him or in the profession, in that, on 7 February 2022 at Salisbury Magistrates Court, following the conclusion of a trial during which he had represented a defendant before a Bench consisting of three Lay Magistrates, and after the Chairperson raised with him the issue of his having used a German accent during the proceedings and telling him that this conduct had been inappropriate, Mr Davidson looked at the Bench and said “Jawohl” at the same time as raising a hand in a Nazi salute, which conduct was seriously offensive and discreditable.

For professional misconduct contrary to Core Duty 5 (CD5) of the Code of Conduct of the Bar of England and Wales, Thomas Davidson was reprimanded and fined £250 with costs of £1,750.00.

The work that the Bar Standards Board do is governed by the Legal Services Act 2007 (the Act) as well as a number of other statutes.

The BSB Handbook contains the rules about how barristers must behave and work. Version 4.8 of the BSB Handbook came into force on the 21st May 2024.

This is hardly a punishment or deterrent by the Bar Standards Board. Where is the justice in this pathetic reprimand ?

Why was he not dealt with by the magistrates for contempt of court ?

•    setting the education and training requirements for becoming a barrister;
•    setting continuing training requirements to ensure that barristers’ skills are maintained throughout their careers;
•    setting standards of conduct for barristers;
•    authorising organisations that focus on advocacy, litigation, and specialist legal advice;
•    monitoring the service provided by barristers and the organisations we authorise to ensure they meet our requirements; and
•    considering reported concerns about barristers and the organisations we authorise and taking enforcement or other action where appropriate.

Bar Standards Board Responsibilities

Check out our articles on Barristers, Gavin Howe, Eleanor Battie, Direct Access Barristers, Inns of Court, Bar Standards Board, Bar Council, Law Society, Legal Services Board, Rule of Law, Lincoln’s Inn and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

[post_title] was last updated on the 23rd June 2026

By Dom Watts

Dom Watts founded the Ministry of Injustice in July 2021. Dom is an IT Professional with 30+ years experience in Tier 1 Banking, Government, Defence, Healthcare and Global Blue Chips. Dom has no legal training and is not a lawyer but has previously consulted for a Magic Circle Law Firm. You can find Dom on X or Google.

Dom Watts publishes the Ministry of Injustice as a citizen journalist. The journalism exemption is detailed in the Data protection and journalism code of practice published by the ICO and Section 124 of the Data Protection Act 2018.

Section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of truth. Section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of honest opinion. Section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of public interest. Section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the single publication rule.

Section 4a of The Limitation Act 1980 defines the time limit for actions for defamation or malicious falsehood as one year from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives the right to freedom of expression. "This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."

"Free speech encompasses the right to offend, and indeed to abuse another." - Para 43 Scottow v CPS [2020] EWHC 3421 (Admin)

"Free speech is a fundamental common law right" - Para 21 R v Shayler [2002] UKHL 11 [2003] 1 AC 247 per Lord Bingham and Para 42 Phillips -v- Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs [2024] EWHC 32 (Admin)

Dom is a member of The Free Speech Union

“A key issue here is the need to distinguish between conduct which, however objectionable, does not justify invoking the criminal law and conduct which crosses the line and results in criminal liability" - Para 31 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

“Harassment is generally understood to involve improper oppressive and unreasonable conduct that is targeted at an individual and calculated to produce alarm and distress” - Para 38 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

"The behaviour said to amount to harassment must reach a level of seriousness passing beyond irritations, annoyances....The gravity of the misconduct must be of an order which would sustain criminal liability" - Paras [40-44] Hayden v Dickenson [2020] EWHC 3291 (QB)

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything"

In 2002 Dom Watts was an unlikely consumer champion. The dad of three from Croydon took on the power and might of Kodak – and won...Dom on BBC Working Lunch

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent