Anna Laney KC – Crown Office Chambers, London

Anna Laney KC is a construction specialist whose practice focuses on international arbitrations. She is a tenant at Crown Office Chambers in the Temple.  She comes from “a proper working-class background” and, with her brothers, was the first generation in her family to go to university. There were no connections with the legal profession, and it remained a mystery to Anna – and her family – that, at 8, she declared she wanted to be a barrister when she grew up, and she never wavered from that ambition. It wasn’t the only job outside the law that Anna had: her father – a plasterer – insisted on equal opportunities such that she spent her time working with him on building sites as her brothers had done beforehand.  This experience stood Anna in good stead as a construction specialist – with her knowledge of practicality taking precedence over the law on numerous occasions!

Anna was educated in the state system until the age of 16 when she was awarded a scholarship to Charterhouse School, after which she read Law at Manchester University.  Whilst she would have preferred to have studied a different subject at university (geography, perhaps) before embarking on her legal career that would have meant doing an additional year’s law conversion course after graduation, which she could not afford. To assist with the costs of Bar School, Anna was able to utilise her parents’ professions to secure grants from two City of London worshipful companies, respectfully The Worshipful Company Haberdashers (her mum was an upholsterer – among other trades) and The Plaisterers.  Anna said that more young people from similar skilled trade family backgrounds should seek out such sources of financial support.  When the Clerk to The Worshipful Company of Plaisterers heard of Anna’s appointment to silk, he sent congratulations and invited her to the April Banquet as a guest of honour. Given the area of law in which she practices, Anna felt this was a fitting “full circle” moment to mark her appointment as silk.

The choice of construction law was obvious for Anna given her background – and it was fortunate that her offer of pupillage was with a construction specialist set of chambers.  When she was not offered a tenancy, she spent time ‘squatting’ in the legal department of a multinational contractor whilst she found a third six: this taught her the realities of working in construction law from the sharp end rather than seeing it from the heady heights of an ivory tower.  Anna says that sitting behind counsel in court and being part of solicitors’ post-court critique of both the barristers’ performance and their approach to solicitors was, without doubt, the most useful lesson she learned – and one she would otherwise have missed.  She says that her mantra remains “everything happens for a reason” – and that applies equally to the route to taking silk.

As a construction specialist, Anna deals with traditional employers’ and contractors’ contractual claims and the insurance and professional negligence disputes that often arise. The claims are highly technical both as to the law and the underlying factual matrix, and she loves grappling with each new discipline of expert evidence, continuing to deepen her knowledge of the more commonplace, and exploring the technical angles, whether they stem from design, workmanship or management issues. As a result, she is used to working with large teams of people from diverse backgrounds, which allowed her to address a number of the competency requirements. However, the nature of her practice is such that much of her advocacy is conducted within international and domestic arbitrations rather than purely before the High Court, and she also represents clients in alternative dispute resolution forums such as mediation and adjudication.   Her focus on arbitration work was a significant challenge when applying for Kings Counsel; the guidance for applicants emphasises the need for some evidence of excellence in oral advocacy, ideally in contested settings (and also, in the case of arbitrations that they are conducted under England and Wales law or other common law jurisdictions). Anna’s advice to others in similar situations is to find the hook that allows you to demonstrate the equivalent challenges that arise in both forums (courts and arbitrations): for example, arguing a legal point before three arbitrators can be as challenging as presenting an argument to the Court of Appeal – as many members of the senior judiciary – across the world – spend their retirement years sitting as arbitrators.

Anna’s key advice to those going through the KC selection process is, “don’t lose sight of who you are and be honest”. That may sound trite, but the application is stress-tested through the referee process, with references taken from judges, counsel and clients. Make sure to try and speak to those that you are putting down as referees to ensure that their perception of the case you are listing aligns with yours. Also, think about the cases you are putting down – are they ‘worthy’ of an application for silk by virtue of their substance and complexity? Anna did not have 12 such cases in the relevant three-year period. Given the size and length of her cases (including “monster arbitrations”) and her caring obligations, it would have been surprising if she had.  Indeed, Anna believes that one of the reasons that she was unsuccessful on her first application was that she had listed 12 cases because she believed that that was essential.  In fact, it is permissible for applicants to list fewer than 12 cases so long as the reason(s) for doing so is explained in terms that are likely to satisfy the Selection Panel, for example, the nature of the practice (e.g. very long cases), part-time working, caring responsibilities etc. – remembering that you will still need to demonstrate the required competencies from a smaller pool of cases.  The second time around, Anna focussed on her substantial cases, explained the constraints and was successful.

Turning to the interview itself, Anna had a very clear sense that the KC Panel interviewers want to see the real you and possessed a honed antenna for inauthenticity.    Throughout the interview she felt that the interviewers were working actively to ensure that if you had the skills to demonstrate a competency, they would draw that out of you. At no point did Anna feel that the interviewers were trying to catch her out, and she said that – perhaps bizarrely – once the interview was over, she realised the process had been enjoyable.

To prepare for an interview, Anna had the invaluable assistance of her best friend, who works in Human Capital at Deloitte. She assisted Anna by conducting mock interviews, which they then discussed and analysed. The fact that her friend did not work in the legal profession was irrelevant; what was critical was being close friends enabled a frankness that would not be present had Anna engaged a coach from a professional training company.  Anna is open that she was “utterly rubbish” in the first few practice runs, trying to cram too much information into her answers rather than focussing on the STAR model.  Anna’s (and her friend’s) advice would be to find someone in your network that is experienced in conducting interviews and then be prepared to be told your interview skills need work – after all other than applying for a judicial position, it is unlikely that many prospective silks would have been the interviewee in many years!

Anna is married to another barrister, Simon Howarth KC, who took silk in 2022.  They had decided some years ago not to apply in the same year (and that Simon should go first), partly because of the work and pressure the application process entailed, but mainly in case one of them were to be successful and the other one not!  Anna joked that that might have caused a certain amount of discord, and she placed her remaining happily married ahead of being appointed to silk!  Being serious, Anna recommends reaching out to friends and colleagues who have applied in recent years and being honest about what you perceive as your strengths and weaknesses when looking at the competency guidelines: those who have been through the process will more readily understand how to recast a weakness as a strength thereby improving your application.

The absolute high point of the whole process was the ceremony in Westminster Hall. Having spent years watching others take silk, it was wonderful to finally be one of those dressed up like a pantomime character in knee britches and buckled shoes! Anna was accompanied on the day by her parents and her brothers, with her husband able to make recommendations about thermals (top tips for the day (i) thicker tights and a thermal top make for a happy ceremony; and (ii) wear your buckled shoes in properly!).  Anna’s father passed away suddenly in November, and it remains one of her proudest moments that her parents got to see her take Silk together.

Whisper it quietly,” Anna said, “but in many respects, being in silk was easier than being a senior junior”.  She caveats that by adding that clearly the responsibility falls more heavily upon your shoulders as ‘the buck stops here’ as a KC, and the pressures are considerably greater.  But, Anna said, she had in fact been working at silk level for a number of years (hence, so many of her peers and judges “nagging me to apply for silk for a long time”) and stepping up had enabled Anna to do what she already loved, that is, putting a team together and working closely with that team. And as a KC you also had the luxury of having juniors to assist with the leg work giving yourself more ‘thinking space’.  The added respect afforded to you as a KC is also noticeable, even as a very junior Silk.  Anna says, “Don’t be afraid to apply – and don’t keep it a secret – if you are ready, people will help you be the best applicant you can be.” Good Luck!