Coronavirus fears hit law firms, courts; plans for containment

16 June 2020 · Carmel Rickard

Law firms around the world are considering how best to help contain the spread of coronavirus among staff and clients. Some legal offices have closed their corporate premises, requiring their staff to work from home. And in some countries even the courts have been affected or are making plans for possible shut-down.

When an epidemic like coronavirus hits the world, judges, courts and law firms are not exempt from infection. Or from taking steps to contain its spread among staffers.

Last week major London law firm Baker McKenzie became the first UK BigLaw outfit to require its staff to work from home as a precaution to prevent possible spread of the virus.

This followed the return of a member of staff from northern Italy. After getting back to the UK, the staffer had been taken ill and was to be tested for coronavirus. More than 1 000 Baker McKenzie employees were told to stay home until further notice, pending the results of tests on the ill staffer.

Legal Business quoted a Baker McKenzie official as saying the company’s priority was the health of staff and clients. ‘We have asked our London office employees to work from home for the time being while we are taking precautionary measures in response to a potential case of the Covid-19.’

The official added, ‘We have a well-established agile working programme – including technology and IT systems for home working – which allows us to take these precautionary measures without impacting our client service delivery. We continue to closely monitor the situation and are following the advice and guidance issued by the Government and Public Health England.’

Several major law firms have banned staff from travelling to China and Hong Kong. Some law firms in Milan, the Italian city so far most affected by the virus, have been closed and Dentons has temporarily closed its offices in Wuhan.

Most courts in Hong Kong adjourned at the end of January, as part of the strategy to prevent spread. This has worsened the backlog of cases, and the South China Morning Post quotes an official judicial statement as saying most hearings at all levels would be further adjourned to an as yet unknown date – this despite calls by lawyers and legal firms for clarity on when they would be expected in court.

An official statement on behalf of the judiciary said that judges were aware of the impact the current closure had on the daily operation and businesses of the courts, on court users and other members of the public. But, said the statement, judges were trying to ‘strike a careful balance’ between public health and the administration of justice.

Amid concern that some suspects may spend more time in jail as a result of the court closure, there have been calls for judges to sit for longer hours once court work resumes.

In Singapore, by comparison, the judiciary has continued to sit and hear cases, and some critics in Hong Kong have said the current situation made clear how technologically far behind the Hong Kong legal system had fallen. Courts in Singapore had used an electronic system for filing documents for 15 years already, and this system continued to operate during the current epidemic. In Hong Kong, by comparison, legal documents must be filed physically (rather than electronically).

The South China Morning Post quotes a commercial lawyer, May Ng, who works for a global law firm, as saying that the closure of the courts had had an ‘inevitable impact’ on the profession. Her firm was handling a multimillion dollar dispute in which a rival party had failed to respond before the stipulated deadline. Normally that would have given her clients the upper hand and allowed the firm to apply for a judgment in favour of her client.

But because the court registry was closed and there was no system of electronic filing, it was not possible to apply for a default judgment.

Among others taking precautions, one US firm has cancelled a retreat and another is reported to have cancelled meetings with its partners in Asia. Some firms have asked lawyers to self-quarantine and stay at home when they return from high-risk locations. Others have stopped certain overseas partners from attending meetings in the US, or have barred all non-essential travel to hot spot locations.

Bloomberg Law reports that the US courts have drawn up a ‘coronavirus combat plan’ for if the virus should spread. The plan would try to maintain ‘essential elements of prevention and maintaining essential services’ if there were to be an outbreak.

Among other plans, the courts were emphasizing the ‘regular, routine cleaning of workplace surfaces, hand washing and “good respiratory etiquette”.’

Carmel Rickard

About the author

Recent articles by Carmel Rickard

‘No justification for the unjustifiable’: Lesotho’s ombud slams grand-scale torture, assault in Maseru prison

22 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Lesotho’s national ombud, Tlotliso Angelina Polaki, has issued a scathing report on massive-scale torture and assaults that took place in Maseru’s central correctional institution during December 2023, leaving about 95% of the inmates of the prison injured, one dead and one who is now wheelchair-bound and will never walk again.

Major court decision on image rights benefits Ugandan soccer players

21 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Members of Uganda’s national soccer team from the period around 2007/8 have just been awarded a payout against MTN Uganda by the commercial court. The telecom giant had a year-long contract with Proline, the players’ originating development soccer club, allowing it to use the players’ images for advertising. But MTN had continued to use their images even after that contract expired on the basis that it had a sponsorship agreement with Fufa, soccer’s governing body in Uganda. The players then challenged MTN in court, through Proline, and have now won a significant damages award. But the judgment exposed some serious flaws in the way that Fufa has approached the question of using the image rights of its senior players, and the court commented that this is a ‘case study’ for why Fufa needs to sort out its contractual arrangements with senior players.

Executive interference in Ugandan court decisions continues – this time by the justice minister

21 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Uganda’s minister of justice, Norbert Mao, has taken a leaf straight from the book of the country’s president, Yoweri Museveni. This week, the minister wrote to the principal judge of the Ugandan high court, asking that the judge directly intervene in a matter that has been brought to his attention by an MP on behalf of a constituent. Mao asked for the ‘immediate administrative intervention’ in the matter by the principal judge. Earlier this year, Museveni wrote a similar letter to the chief justice of Uganda, also requesting intervention in a matter, and the CJ later indicated that this was not the first time it had happened.

Is rape by family members treated too lightly by the law?

19 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

The high court has sent the case of a Malawian teenager, charged with raping his 89-year-old grandmother, back to the magistrate’s court for a possible re-trial because the court had wrongly prosecuted a case of rape instead of incest. If convicted in a re-trial, however, Malawi’s incest law could see the accused sentenced to a mere five years. Malawi’s penal code provides for a significant difference between the sentence to be imposed when a man rapes a close family member, and in a case where the two are not related. When they are unrelated, the code provides that a rape offender ‘shall be liable to be punished with death or with imprisonment for life’ (However, Malawi has had what amounts to a moratorium on carrying out the death penalty since 1992.) By contrast, ‘incest by males’, is categorised in the code as a ‘felony’, and anyone convicted ‘shall be liable for imprisonment for five years’. There is an exception: if it is proved ‘that the female person is under the age of 16, the offender shall be liable to imprisonment for life’.

Prominent SA advocates lose battle over conviction in Namibian courts for working without a permit, misleading immigration officials

6 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Two prominent South African advocates have just lost their last hope of squashing their convictions in the Namibian courts. Johannesburg advocates, Mike Hellens SC and Dawie Joubert SC, had been found guilty on two counts, first, working as legal practitioners without an employment permit, and second, giving false or misleading information to immigration officers when they entered the country in 2019. Though they had gone to Namibia to appear in court in a bail application, they told the immigration officials they were there for a ‘visit’ and for a ‘meeting’. Both appealed against their conviction but they had also asked for a judicial review of the decision. In the high court they lost their appeal but won on the review. The outcome in both matters were taken to the apex supreme court for a final word. In December 2023, they lost their appeal at the supreme court. What would that same court say when the state appealed against the review finding? The supreme court has now given its answer: it found the review, that had favoured Hellens and Joubert, was wrongly decided, and set it aside, awarding costs against the two advocates in both the high court and the supreme court.