The Tribunal has concluded that there is ‘no case to answer,’ meaning these charges ought never to have been brought against me. The Bar Standards Board’s (BSB) decision to prosecute me is part of a troubling pattern at the BSB, showing a lack of insight into the different forms of misogyny, particularly institutional misogyny.

​

This case is a turning point for both women’s rights and a barrister’s freedom to speak out. It is a wake-up call: misogyny within the legal profession must be rooted out, and the right to challenge harmful systemic attitudes towards domestic abuse must be allowed. The BSB has proven itself unfit for purpose. Despite all I have endured, I would be willing to work with the BSB to promote change, but under the current leadership, that is simply not possible. The internal disclosures I have received have been nothing short of shocking, revealing a lack of integrity and confidence to regulate a profession that deserves far better.

​

The BSB’s prosecution was driven by a malicious and targeted complaint. It consumed two and a half years of my life. The sleepless nights, relentless stress, and lost time—time I could have spent advocating for victims of domestic abuse—are damages that cannot be undone. While I’m relieved this ordeal is over, the injustice remains.

On Tuesday, as I sat in the tribunal listening to five charges of professional misconduct read out against me. For one of the first times in my life, I wasn’t sitting in Court as a barrister but as a respondent. I criticised a Family Court judgment that, in my view, had echoes of the boys’ club – a decision written by a judge who was a member of the Garrick Club—an all-male institution at the time. The BSB accused me of using “gender-based, derogatory language which was designed to demean and/or insult the judge.” That same judge was later recused from an appeal partly because of his Garrick Club membership following a rape survivor’s expressed lack of confidence in him.

​

My regulator’s approach towards me was chilling. For instance, I faced three charges over a tweet in which I stated that Mr Christopher Limb, a part-time judge and barrister, threw things “at” his wife. The judgment, in fact, described him throwing books into the air, one of which hit the wife on the head, leaving her with an abrasion, a bruise, and a concussion. This was reckless. My use of the two-letter word “at” formed the basis of three charges.

​

I was accused by my regulator of undermining the authority and impartiality of the entire judiciary. Thankfully, our judiciary is strong enough to embrace criticism. I stand with the many brilliant judges who uphold justice, knowing progress requires exposing and challenging systemic issues. Without self-reflection and scrutiny, no system can survive.

In my view, the BSB's case against me is a clear instance of sex discrimination. While the BSB argued that I do not have the right to criticise a domestic abuse judgment, male barristers are free to call a senior judge an “idiot,” “stupid,” and even assert that he should be “sacked.”

​

Even more disturbing is the misogynistic abuse from male barristers who have been allowed by my regulator to publicly call me a “cunt,” an “insufferable wanker,” threaten me with being “taken down,” mock my appearance and my name, dismiss my PhD, claim that I can’t wait to get married and tell me I belong in a “padded room.” One of these barristers is now a full-time criminal judge who hears rape and domestic abuse cases. Male barristers who use social media to attack women are unfit to represent victims.

​

I have watched – helplessly – as my colleagues have weaponised the BSB, lodging complaints against me and encouraging others to do the same, all to silence my voice. The BSB not only tolerated this vile behaviour but also kept complaints against me on file, labelled my views “controversial,” and looked for a supposed “pattern of behaviour.”

Barristers’ unchecked harassment of me has created fertile ground for gendered violence. A man is subject to a five-year restraining order for his harassment. Meanwhile, a police officer was banned from policing for misogynistic tweets directed at me and others, which were in response to a male barrister’s abuse of me on X. While the police officer was sacked, the BSB claimed the barrister had a right to free speech.

​

The BSB has no understanding of gender inequality, and no amount of in-house diversity reports can change that. I was investigated for six months after a male barrister filed a malicious complaint on behalf of a male KC who had used X to make offensive remarks about me. Of course, neither of them faced investigation. The BSB also accused me of being “gender-critical” and investigated me over the phrase “these male lawyers,” claiming it was gender-based derogatory language.

​

The BSB reached an all-time low during these proceedings by scouring my X account and using my reclaiming of the word "cunt" as evidence against me. They absurdly implied my use of the word is equivalent to a male barrister using it to demean me. This is further evidence of their complete failure to grasp the dynamics of gender-based abuse and feminism. They also trivialised the misogyny I faced by suggesting it wasn’t serious because the slurs were used only once or twice. Shockingly, they suggested that regulating the use of the word “cunt” would be too difficult, given its frequent use by barristers on social media.

​

Four UN Special Rapporteurs expressed serious concern over my prosecution and the BSB’s failure to address misogyny in its code of conduct. I am deeply grateful to them, particularly Ms. Reem Alsalem. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Mr. Nick Vineall KC, former head of the Bar Council, for their firm condemnation of misogyny and bullying within the Bar.

​

 I also wish to honour my former client, Ms. Amanda Traharne, in the Traharne v. Limb case.

​

The support of mothers and children who have suffered through the family courts moved me deeply. Many people – even my former clients – travelled long distances to protest in Gray’s Inn. It was a historic moment. Your fierce determination and outpouring of support gave me the strength to face this tribunal. A very special thank you to Ms. Natalie Page and Dr. Adrienne Barnett.

​

To my legal team—Ms Manveet Chhina, a fearless solicitor and kindred spirit; barrister Mr Mark McDonald, my mentor for the last 15 years, an activist barrister who always encourages me to push for change, and Ms Monica Feria-Tinta, who believed in my case from day one. Ms Alison Padfield KC, Ms Sophie Belgrove, and Mr Simon Clarke—thank you.

​

To my mum, who is my rock; my partner, who found humour in the darkest moments; my family and friends, who brought levity to this ordeal; and my colleagues at Goldsmith Chambers—thank you all for your unwavering support.

​

If you would like to read some of the public comments made by male barristers towards me, see here (pages 21-47).