Courtroom address, etiquette and professional duties

Address the judicial office correctly. A High Court judge is addressed as “My Lord” or “My Lady”. A Circuit Judge or Recorder is ordinarily “Your Honour”; particular established exceptions include judges at the Central Criminal Court and the Recorder of Liverpool, addressed as “My Lord” or “My Lady”. A District Judge (Magistrates’ Courts) is “Judge”. Lay magistrates may be addressed as “Your Worship”, collectively “Your Worships”, or “Sir” / “Madam”, as appropriate. Check any uncertain office or established local exception with court staff rather than infer the address from the person’s appearance. The Judiciary’s What do I call a judge? and the SRA’s Addressing the court provide the practical reference.

Etiquette supports accurate decision-making. Be ready when the case is called, follow the court’s directions about standing or sitting, address submissions to the court rather than argue across the room, and interrupt only for a necessary timely objection. Identify the evidence, bundle page, statutory provision or case passage relied on. Use neutral professional language; accommodate communication needs and ground rules. Correct a material misstatement promptly. These habits help discharge the duties not to mislead, to comply with court orders and not to waste court time.

Professional duties constrain the means, not the entitlement to defend. Under the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors, paragraphs 1.4 and 2.1–2.7, a solicitor must not mislead the court by act, omission or complicity; misuse or tamper with evidence; improperly influence its substance; or advance assertions and submissions which are not properly arguable. Court orders must be obeyed, court time must not be wasted and material legal authorities and procedural irregularities must be drawn to the court’s attention. An adverse authority cannot be concealed simply because it helps the prosecution. The SRA Principles give public-interest duties protecting the rule of law and administration of justice priority where they conflict with a client’s interests.

Confidential instructions do not become permission to deceive. A client’s private admission of guilt does not prevent the defence from requiring the prosecution to prove the charge, testing the admissibility or reliability of its evidence, making an honestly arguable no-case submission, or submitting that the tribunal cannot be sure. A not-guilty plea can put the prosecution to proof. But the advocate cannot positively advance facts known to be false: an invented alibi, a knowingly false assertion that the client was elsewhere, fabricated evidence or an unfounded accusation against an innocent third party.

The distinction is practical. Asking a witness to explain the distance and lighting may test whether the prosecution has proved identification. Asserting, on instructions known to be false, that the witness saw the client’s innocent neighbour commit the offence is not legitimate proof-testing. Equally, a lawyer’s mere personal suspicion that instructions are wrong is not the same as knowledge of falsity; investigate and advise without replacing the court’s fact-finding role with personal belief. The governing duties are the prohibition on misleading and the requirement for properly arguable assertions.

Withdrawal and disclosure are different questions. If continuing would require misleading the court, the solicitor must address whether they can continue to act and any permission or procedural requirements for ceasing to act. They must preserve confidentiality and legal professional privilege unless disclosure is lawfully required or permitted, or valid consent applies where relevant. SRA Code, paragraph 6.3, protects confidential affairs. A difficulty in continuing does not itself authorise revealing the client’s admission; the manner of withdrawal must not be a coded accusation of guilt.

Keep the neighbouring procedures in their proper places. A Newton hearingGlossary termNewton hearing addresses a material factual dispute affecting sentence after a guilty plea; Deep Dive 11 supplies its substantive sentencing rules. A Goodyear indicationGlossary termGoodyear indication is a Crown Court indication, sought by the defence, of the maximum sentence on a guilty plea at that stage and on the relevant factual basis. CrimPR 3.31 and CPD 9.4 govern that indication. It must not be confused with a magistrates’ sentencing indication during allocation or with a negotiated guarantee of the sentence after a contested trial. Neither procedure replaces no case, the defendant’s evidence choice or a verdict; neither is a mandatory step following the other.