In castigating a barrister for arguing conflicting positions, Lord Justice Ward brought out the big gun: Jonathan Swift. He began his opinion with a quote from Gulliver’s Travels:
“… a society of men … bred up from their youth in the art of proving, by words multiplied for the purpose, that white is black, and black is white …”
and then he added maliciously:
“… according as they are paid”
In the case, Greenland Bank v. American Express Bank, American Express‘s barrister David Wolfson (pictured) (MA, Selwyn College, Cambridge) was faced with a daunting task. Basically, Amex had argued (and lost) in a Bangladeshi court that a guarantee Amex gave Greenland Bank had expired. In the UK action, he was arguing that the guarantee hadn’t expired and that maybe the Bangladeshi court was right – notwithstanding Amex’s pending appeal of that decision.
Riding two horses at the same time is always difficult enough: riding them when they are charging in opposite directions is an altogether remarkable feat, so let me begin by praising the skills of counsel for Amex, Mr David Wolfson, who with customary courtesy, cogency, and not a little charm, managed to stay in the saddle notwithstanding some hostile fire from at least this incredulous member of the court.
That’s not the kind of introduction that gives cause for optimism.
The result, and more colorful prose in the opinion, after the jump.
Wolfson pulled it off. LJ Ward held
With what I confess to be considerable reluctance on my part, I have to conclude that Mr Wolfson has persuaded me that even though the prospects of successfully arguing that are not high, the prospects of success cannot be said to be fanciful. To return to Jonathan Swift’s view of lawyers, while Mr Wolfson has not shown that black is white nor that white is black, he has managed to paint the problem in a shade of grey.
For what it’s worth, Wolfson was instructed by Mishcon de Reya, which recently laid off 17 people, including two partners.
That’s some quality lawyering right there.
No related posts.
