There is something uniquely rancid about the legal class preaching equality in public, then quietly tolerating the kind of politics that treats whole groups of people as disposable. St Philips Chambers wants to be seen as polished, elite, serious. Fine. Then explain how a BNP candidate was sat in the building, wearing the brand, and only got shown the door when it became a PR problem.
I’m not interested in pearl clutching. I’m interested in patterns. And St Philips has one.
The BNP Barrister: A Stain That Should Not Fade
In 2010, Robert James Grierson, a tax barrister and door tenant at St Philips Chambers, decided running for the British National Party was a sensible life choice.
Not a silly joke. Not a dodgy retweet. A candidacy. For the BNP. A party that made its name selling racist bile like cheap lager.
When it hit the press, St Philips did what institutions always do when the wallpaper starts peeling. It claimed surprise. It pushed distance. It turned the whole thing into a neat little “resignation” and moved on. Problem solved. Brand protected.
Except the stain does not vanish just because you shut the door quietly.
And yes, he lost. A sad little vote count and a fourth place finish. But that is not the point. The point is that he was there at all. In a chambers that later wanted to stand in court and play the moral grown-up.
The Convenient Exit: Damage Control Dressed As Principle
The story is not that a man held ugly political views. The story is that the chambers only appeared to care once the association became embarrassing.
It is the oldest corporate move in the book. Keep the relationship until it threatens the revenue, then pretend the separation is about values. It is values, alright. The value of optics.
If you want the public to trust you in discrimination cases, you do not get to treat extremist affiliation as a PR admin task.
Not Just A One-Off: The BNP Lawyer Still Doing BNP Work
Grierson did not just flirt with the BNP and disappear.
After the election circus, he reportedly acted for the BNP’s treasurer in a High Court dispute involving an inheritance left to the party. That is not a mistake. That is commitment. That is helping keep the machine fed.
This is why the 2010 episode matters. It is not a quirky footnote. It is an insight into who gets tolerated in these spaces and what only becomes “unacceptable” when it becomes loud.
The 2024 Probate Fight: When Greed Joins The Resume
Fast forward and Grierson resurfaces in a different kind of mess, this time a family probate dispute that ended up in the High Court.
Coverage and commentary around the case includes allegations about forged signatures and contested documents, alongside a published judgment. Whatever anyone’s final moral verdict is, the public record reads like another example of a lawyer’s life being spent in the same two rooms.
Power and paper.
When the same name keeps turning up around ugly politics and bitter trust disputes, it becomes harder to sell the “just one incident” line with a straight face.
The Cummins Connection: When This Stuff Stops Being Abstract
Now zoom out.
St Philips Chambers later acted for Cummins Ltd in my Employment Tribunal case. That is not me speculating. That is a matter of record. And if you have ever wondered why normal people do not trust legal institutions, here is a tidy answer.
The same brand that once had a BNP candidate under its roof can still walk into a discrimination case, put on its best courtroom manners, and demand to be treated as the neutral guardian of fairness.
Legally, they are entitled to represent whoever hires them. Morally, they do not get to avoid scrutiny for the company they keep.
If your chambers has a history of harbouring a BNP candidate, you do not get to act shocked when people look at your role in discrimination disputes and start asking uncomfortable questions.
What This Really Says About The Legal Class
This is the part that makes my teeth grind.
These people lecture everyone else about standards. About conduct. About professionalism. About tone. About how the little person should behave.
But when the rot is inside their own institutions, it gets handled like a wine stain. Dab, apologise, move on. No meaningful reckoning. No structural embarrassment. No lasting consequences.
Just a press line, a shrug, and the same machine carrying on.
That is why TCAP keeps doing this. Not because I enjoy staring into the sewer, but because the sewer keeps insisting it smells like lavender.
Judgement Day
St Philips wants the authority of the halls of justice. Fine. Then it can take the heat that comes with it.
A BNP candidacy should not be a forgettable anecdote. It should be a warning label.
And if the legal world does not like being looked at this closely, it can try a new approach.
Stop giving people reasons.
Lee Thompson – Founder, The Cummins Accountability Project
Sources
- Barrister standing for BNP at election loses post at chambers
- BNP barrister resigns
- BNP goes upmarket to target white middle class
- Birmingham barrister set to stand as BNP election candidate
- Brother sues barrister for forging mother’s signature to con him out of share of £1.2m fortune
- Barrister accused of forging his mother’s signature loses court battle with brother over £1.2m inheritance
- Grierson v Grierson 202420242024 EWHC 3048 (Ch)
- Mr L Thompson v Cummins Ltd: 2501831/2022
- Employment Tribunals Judgment: Mr L Thompson v Cummins Ltd (Reasons PDF)
- Cummins Confidential: Did Cepac (and Cummins) Hire a Serial Litigator Vs a “Serial Litigator”?