---

Court ruling reinforces traditional legal roles

An Addleshaw Goddard briefing note points out that that, in a recent ruling, the High Court has reaffirmed the long-standing principle that barristers cannot accept direct instructions from clients in litigation-related matters, unless in certain exceptions.

Lawyer Dr James Meighan writes that the ruling, Mallon v The Minister for Justice and Ors [2025] IEHC 125, analyses the legal framework surrounding the regulation of barristers and solicitors, as well as the significance of professional codes of conduct in the legal profession.

The case centred on a challenge brought by the plaintiff, Mallon, who sought permission to be represented by a specific barrister in proceedings involving a possession order granted against him in 2016.

Restriction

Mallon argued that the restriction preventing him from briefing the barrister directly, instead of through a solicitor, deprived him of his legal rights.

In her judgment, Ms Justice Stack said that the Rules of the Superior Courts (RSC) clearly stipulate that a litigant must be represented by a solicitor, who is then responsible for instructing the barrister.

This requirement was vital for ensuring proper oversight in litigation and protecting the interests of the public, the judge said.

Solicitors, who are subject to court supervision, act as the primary gatekeepers to the legal system, ensuring that barristers are properly briefed and cases proceed in a legally sound manner.

The judgment also examined the regulation of barristers, noting that most barristers are governed by the Bar of Ireland code of conduct, which similarly restricts barristers from accepting direct instructions from clients, except in specific circumstances.

However, the court pointed out that the barrister in this case was not a member of the Law Library and was therefore not governed by the Bar of Ireland’s code.

Instead, the named barrister was subject to the rules of the King’s Inns, the training body for barristers in Ireland.

The King’s Inns also requires barristers to comply with its own code of conduct, which similarly mandates that barristers work with solicitors in most cases.

The Legal Services Regulatory Authority (LSRA) also participated in the application.

Under the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015, the LSRA’s code of conduct takes precedence over other regulatory codes in case of conflict.

Contentious matters

The LSRA’s code explicitly prohibits barristers from taking direct instructions from clients in contentious matters.

The court acknowledged the plaintiff’s argument that European Union law might require the disapplication of the RSC in this case.

However, Ms Justice Stack found that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate how EU law applied to this situation, and no legal basis existed to depart from the established regulatory framework governing barristers and solicitors in Ireland.

This ruling is significant not only for its reinforcement of the traditional division of roles between solicitors and barristers, but also for the court's reliance on the codes of conduct that regulate the profession, Dr Meighan writes.