Supreme Court Practice With Counsel in Uniform

Taranaki Daily News, 2 September 1942, Page 6

Supreme Court Practice With Counsel in Uniform

Wellington, Sept. 1. A clarifieation of the position regarding the wearing of military uniform by counsel in the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal was given in Wellington by the Chief Justice, Sir Michael Myers, after counsel said there appeared to be some doubt about the matter. The Chief Justice said the ruling of the Bar Council in England was that, except in cases where the barrister was serving in the armed forces, and was required to wear his uniform while so serving. he should not appear in court in uniform, but should wear robes in the usual way. Conversely, a barrister required to wear his uniform while serving. if he appeared in court. was bound to wear his uniform. That ruling, he understood, had been accepted without question by the courts. There had been a similar ruling by the council of the New Zealand Law Society, and precisely the same practice was adopted in New Zealand during the last war. If a barrister serving with the armed forces was not required to wear his uniform while serving, and he appeared in uniform, he would be committing a contempt of court. The practice had . been adopted by the Court of Appeal since the start of the war, and in the Supreme Court at Wellington and Christchurch. There need be no explanation, , no apology. and no comment, and no permission- of the court was required. It seemed to him that to ask the court for permission to appear in uniform implied that the court had a discretion to refuse, and a refusal. he thought. would be a denial of the King's commission, a slight to the King's uniform, and a reflection upon the gentleman who made the application, because he was supposed to know his duty to the court.