McKenzie friend - Revision history

Robert Brockway at 01:08, 24 September 2023

2023-09-24T01:08:45Z

Robert Brockway at 01:00, 24 September 2023

2023-09-24T01:00:59Z

Robert Brockway at 01:00, 24 September 2023

2023-09-24T01:00:35Z

Robert Brockway at 01:00, 24 September 2023

2023-09-24T01:00:17Z

Robert Brockway at 00:59, 24 September 2023

2023-09-24T00:59:49Z

Robert Brockway at 11:29, 13 June 2023

2023-06-13T11:29:56Z

Robert Brockway: Partial import from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=McKenzie_friend&oldid=1139642796

2023-06-13T11:25:49Z

Partial import from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=McKenzie_friend&oldid=1139642796

Robert Brockway at 11:25, 13 June 2023

2023-06-13T11:25:04Z

Robert Brockway: Partial import from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=McKenzie_friend&oldid=1139642796

2023-06-13T11:24:45Z

Partial import from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=McKenzie_friend&oldid=1139642796

New page

A [[McKenzie friend]] assists a litigant in person in a court of law in England and Wales, Hong Kong, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, New Zealand, Canada and Australia by prompting, taking notes, and quietly giving advice. They need not be legally trained or have any professional legal qualifications.

The right to a McKenzie friend was established in the 1970 case of McKenzie v McKenzie.[1] Although in many cases a McKenzie friend may be an actual friend, it is often somebody with knowledge of the area and the presumption is heavily in favour of admitting a McKenzie friend into court.[2] He or she may be liable for any misleading advice given to the litigant in person[3] but is not covered by professional indemnity insurance.

A similar, modified principle exists in Singapore. The role is distinct from that of a next friend or of an amicus curiae.

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:08, 24 September 2023
Line 28:		Line 28:
	{{Singapore}}		{{Singapore}}
	{{UK}}		{{UK}}
		+	{{Wikipedia}}

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 A similar, modified principle exists in Singapore.
-The role is distinct from a [[amicus curiae]].
+A McKenzie friend should not be confused with an [[amicus curiae]].
 == Origin ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:00, 24 September 2023
Line 14:		Line 14:

	As of 2022, Ian Hanger AM KC, the original McKenzie friend, is a King's Counsel (KC) at the Queensland Bar.		As of 2022, Ian Hanger AM KC, the original McKenzie friend, is a King's Counsel (KC) at the Queensland Bar.
		+
		+	== See Also ==
		+
		+	*[[Amicus curiae]]

	{{Australia}}		{{Australia}}

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 The right to a McKenzie friend was established in the 1970 case of McKenzie v McKenzie. Although in many cases a McKenzie friend may be an actual friend, it is often somebody with knowledge of the area and the presumption is heavily in favour of admitting a McKenzie friend into court. He or she may be liable for any misleading advice given to the litigant in person but is not covered by professional indemnity insurance.
-A similar, modified principle exists in Singapore. The role is distinct from that of a next friend or of an amicus curiae.
+A similar, modified principle exists in Singapore.
 == Origin ==

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 {{Glossary}}
 {{Ireland}}
 {{New Zealand}}
 {{Singapore}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:29, 13 June 2023
Line 12:		Line 12:

	As of 2022, Ian Hanger AM KC, the original McKenzie friend, is a King's Counsel (KC) at the Queensland Bar.		As of 2022, Ian Hanger AM KC, the original McKenzie friend, is a King's Counsel (KC) at the Queensland Bar.
		+
		+	{{Australia}}
		+	{{Canada}}
		+	{{Featured}}
		+	{{Glossary}}
		+	{{Ireland}}
		+	{{New Zealand}}
		+	{{Singapore}}
		+	{{UK}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:25, 13 June 2023
Line 4:		Line 4:

	A similar, modified principle exists in Singapore. The role is distinct from that of a next friend or of an amicus curiae.		A similar, modified principle exists in Singapore. The role is distinct from that of a next friend or of an amicus curiae.
		+
		+	== Origin ==
		+
		+	McKenzie v. McKenzie was a divorce case in England. Levine McKenzie, who was petitioning for divorce, had been legally aided but the legal aid had been withdrawn before the case went to court. Unable to fund legal representation, McKenzie had broken off contact with his solicitors, Jeffrey Gordon & Co. However, one day before the hearing, Jeffrey Gordon sent the case to an Australian barrister in London, Ian Hanger, whose qualifications in law in Australia did not allow him to practise as a barrister in London. Hanger hoped to sit with his client to prompt him, take notes and suggest questions in cross-examination, thereby providing what quiet assistance he could from the bar table to a man representing himself. The trial judge ordered Hanger not to take any active part in the case (except to advise McKenzie during adjournments) and to sit in the public gallery of the court. Hanger assumed his limited role was futile and did not return for the second day of the trial.
		+
		+	The case went against McKenzie, who then appealed to the Court of Appeal on the basis that he had been denied representation. On 12 June 1970, the Court of Appeal ruled that the judge's intervention had deprived McKenzie of the assistance to which he was entitled and ordered a retrial.
		+
		+	As of 2022, Ian Hanger AM KC, the original McKenzie friend, is a King's Counsel (KC) at the Queensland Bar.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 A [[McKenzie friend]] assists a litigant in person in a court of law in England and Wales, Hong Kong, Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland, New Zealand, Canada and Australia by prompting, taking notes, and quietly giving advice. They need not be legally trained or have any professional legal qualifications.
-The right to a McKenzie friend was established in the 1970 case of McKenzie v McKenzie.[1] Although in many cases a McKenzie friend may be an actual friend, it is often somebody with knowledge of the area and the presumption is heavily in favour of admitting a McKenzie friend into court.[2] He or she may be liable for any misleading advice given to the litigant in person[3] but is not covered by professional indemnity insurance.
+The right to a McKenzie friend was established in the 1970 case of McKenzie v McKenzie. Although in many cases a McKenzie friend may be an actual friend, it is often somebody with knowledge of the area and the presumption is heavily in favour of admitting a McKenzie friend into court. He or she may be liable for any misleading advice given to the litigant in person but is not covered by professional indemnity insurance.
 A similar, modified principle exists in Singapore. The role is distinct from that of a next friend or of an amicus curiae.