Skip to main content
BETA Regulatory Records. 3 minutes will help us improve.
Home
Menu
Search

Main navigation

  • At home
  • At work
  • In business
  • About

Main navigation

  • At home
  • At work
  • In business
  • About
  1. Home
  2. Disciplinary & Regulatory Records
  3. Barry John Harwood

Disciplinary Record - Barry John Harwood

Disbarment
Give feedback
Thank you. This feedback helps us to improve.

Disciplinary Record

Barry John Harwood

Disbarment

Details
Decision date
30/04/2024
Published date
30/04/2024

View full barrister record on The Barristers' Register View record Barrister Status: Unregistered Called: Nov 1998 Inn: Lincoln's Inn Hearing type: ...

View full barrister record on The Barristers' Register

View record

Barrister Status:
Unregistered
Called:

Nov 1998
Inn:

Lincoln's Inn
Hearing type:
Disciplinary Tribunal (5 Person)
Decision date
30/04/2024
Breach details:
Professional misconduct, contrary to rC8 and rC9.1 and rC67 and/or CD3 and CD5 and CD9 of the Code of Conduct of the Bar of England and Wales (9th Edition).
Offence details:

Mr. Barry John Harwood, a barrister, failed to act with honesty and/or with integrity in that in or around March 2019, Mr. Harwood knowingly misled or attempted to mislead the Bar Standards Board, by making false allegations against A in respect of one or more of the following:
(a) As part of his allegation of homophobia and sexual orientation discrimination and/or harassment, in or around March 2019, Mr Harwood complained about A’s use of the word “husband” within email communications to Mr Harwood when referring to Mr Harwood’s partner at the time. Mr Harwood maintained that he and his partner were in a civil partnership (as opposed to being married), and/or that Mr Harwood did not subscribe to such terms, including “husband” and “married”, and/or that A was aware of this. Mr Harwood made that complaint to the BSB, knowing that he himself had referred to his partner as “husband” and the two of them as “married” in WhatsApp messages in July and December 2018 in the ‘Nous Sommes Advocacy’ group shared by Mr Harwood and A.
(b) As part of his allegation about race discrimination and/or harassment, bullying, and general inappropriate behaviour in or around March 2019, Mr Harwood alleged that B had raised concerns with him about A’s use of the nickname, “Legally Wongers” for her. Mr Harwood made that allegation about A, knowing that B had never raised such concerns with him.
(c) As part of his allegation in or around March 2019, Mr Harwood alleged that C had raised concerns with him about comments made by A on WhatsApp regarding the 9/11 terrorist attacks as C had lost a close friend in the attack and/or C’s friend had gone missing in the attacks. Mr Harwood made that allegation, knowing C had never said to him that C knew anyone killed or gone missing in the 9/11 attacks.


As a result of the conduct set out in the Particulars of Offence in Charge 1 or (in the alternative) Charge 2, as also set out below, Barry John Harwood, a barrister, behaved in a way which is likely to diminish the trust and confidence which the public places in him or in the profession.
(a) As part of his allegation of homophobia and sexual orientation discrimination and/or harassment, in or around March 2019, Mr. Harwood complained about A’s , use of the word “husband” within email communications to Mr Harwood when referring to Mr Harwood’s partner at the time. Mr Harwood maintained that he and his partner were in a civil partnership (as opposed to being married), and/or that Mr Harwood did not subscribe to such terms, including “husband” and “married”, and/or that A was aware of this. Mr Harwood made that complaint to the BSB, knowing that he himself had referred to his partner as “husband” and the two of them as “married” in WhatsApp messages in July and December 2018 in the Nous Sommes Advocacy group shared by Mr Harwood and A.
(b) As part of his allegation about race discrimination and/or harassment, bullying, and general inappropriate behaviour in or around March 2019, Mr Harwood
alleged that B had raised concerns with him about A’s use of the nickname, “Legally Wongers” for her. Mr Harwood made that allegation about A, knowing that B had never raised such concerns with him.
(c) As part of his allegation in or around March 2019, Mr Harwood alleged that C had raised concerns with him about comments made by A on WhatsApp regarding the 9/11 terrorist attacks as C had lost a close friend in the attack and/or C’s friend had gone missing in them attacks. Mr Harwood made that allegation, knowing C had never said to him that C knew anyone killed or gone missing in the 9/11 attacks.


As a result of the conduct set out in the Particulars of Offence in Charge 1 or (in the alternative) Charge 2, as also set out below, Barry John Harwood, a barrister, failed to be open and cooperative with his regulators.
(a) As part of his allegation of homophobia and sexual orientation discrimination and/or harassment, in or around March 2019, Mr. Harwood complained about A’s
, use of the word “husband” within email communications to Mr Harwood when referring to Mr Harwood’s partner at the time. Mr Harwood maintained that he and his partner were in a civil partnership (as opposed to being married), and/or that Mr Harwood did not subscribe to such terms, including “husband” and “married”, and/or that A was aware of this. Mr Harwood made that complaint to the BSB, knowing that he himself had referred to his partner as “husband” and the two of them as “married” in WhatsApp messages in July and December 2018 in the Nous Sommes Advocacy group shared by Mr Harwood and A.
(b) As part of his allegation about race discrimination and/or harassment, bullying, and general inappropriate behaviour in or around March 2019, Mr Harwood
alleged that B had raised concerns with him about A’s use of the nickname, “Legally Wongers” for her. Mr Harwood made that allegation about A, knowing that B had never raised such concerns with him.
(c) As part of his allegation in or around March 2019, Mr Harwood alleged that C had raised concerns with him about comments made by A on WhatsApp regarding the 9/11 terrorist attacks as C had lost a close friend in the attack and/or C’s friend had gone missing in the attacks. Mr Harwood made that allegation, knowing C had never said to him that C knew anyone killed or gone missing in the 9/11 attacks.


As a result of the conduct set out in the Particulars of Offence in Charge 1 or (in the alternative) Charge 2, as also set out below, Barry John Harwood, a barrister, acted in a way which could reasonably be seen by the public to undermine his honesty, and/or integrity.
(a) As part of his allegation of homophobia and sexual orientation discrimination and/or harassment, in or around March 2019, Mr. Harwood complained about A’s
, use of the word “husband” within email communications to Mr Harwood when referring to Mr Harwood’s partner at the time. Mr Harwood maintained that he and his partner were in a civil partnership (as opposed to being married), and/or that Mr Harwood did not subscribe to such terms, including “husband” and “married”, and/or that A was aware of this. Mr Harwood made that complaint to the BSB, knowing that he himself had referred to his partner as “husband” and the two of them as “married” in WhatsApp messages in July and December 2018 in the Nous Sommes Advocacy group shared by Mr Harwood and A.
(b) As part of his allegation about race discrimination and/or harassment, bullying, and general inappropriate behaviour in or around March 2019, Mr Harwood
alleged that B had raised concerns with him about A’s use of the nickname, “Legally Wongers” for her. Mr Harwood made that allegation about A, knowing that B had never raised such concerns with him.
(c) As part of his allegation in or around March 2019, Mr Harwood alleged that C had raised concerns with him about comments made by A on WhatsApp regarding the 9/11 terrorist attacks as C had lost a close friend in the attack and/or C’s friend had gone missing in the attacks. Mr Harwood made that allegation, knowing C had never said to him that C knew anyone killed or gone missing in the 9/11 attacks.


As a result of the conduct set out in the Particulars of Offence in Charge 1 or (in the alternative) Charge 2, as also set out below, Barry John Harwood, a barrister, made a report under Rule rC66 without a genuine and reasonably held belief that Rule rC66 applies.
(a) As part of his allegation of homophobia and sexual orientation discrimination and/or harassment, in or around March 2019, Mr. Harwood complained about A’s
, use of the word “husband” within email communications to Mr Harwood when referring to Mr Harwood’s partner at the time. Mr Harwood maintained that he and his partner were in a civil partnership (as opposed to being married), and/or that Mr Harwood did not subscribe to such terms, including “husband” and “married”, and/or that A was aware of this. Mr Harwood made that complaint to the BSB, knowing that he himself had referred to his partner as “husband” and the two of them as “married” in WhatsApp messages in July and December 2018 in the Nous Sommes Advocacy group shared by Mr Harwood and A.
(b) As part of his allegation about race discrimination and/or harassment, bullying, and general inappropriate behaviour in or around March 2019, Mr Harwood
alleged that B had raised concerns with him about A’s use of the nickname, “Legally Wongers” for her. Mr Harwood made that allegation about A, knowing that B had never raised such concerns with him.
(c) As part of his allegation in or around March 2019, Mr Harwood alleged that C had raised concerns with him about comments made by A on WhatsApp regarding the 9/11 terrorist attacks as C had lost a close friend in the attack and/or C’s friend had gone missing in the
attacks. Mr Harwood made that allegation, knowing C had never said to him that C knew anyone killed or gone missing in the 9/11 attacks.

Sanction:
Disbarred (Sentence still to take effect) and prohibited from being issued with a practising certificate, pending any appeal, under rE227.3 (as an unregistered barrister).
Costs:
£¤5,544.00
Status:

Open to Appeal

Bar Standards Board (BSB) records last published to this site at 7:38am on 12 May 2025. Originally published on the Bar Standards Board (BSB) website.

Give feedback
Thank you. This feedback helps us to improve.
Thank you. This feedback helps us to improve.

Footer menu

  • Accessibility
  • Getting in touch
  • Privacy and cookies
  • Terms and conditions of use

CLC CLSB The Faculty Office ICAEW CILEx Regulation IPReg SRABSB

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • YouTube
© Legal Choices All Rights Reserved
Got a spare 5 minutes to help us improve our website?

I'll do itNo thanks

  • At home
    • Arrested
      • My child has been arrested
    • Carers
      • Why baby boomers should care about Britney
    • Claims
      • Problems with your pension?
      • No win no fee
    • Courts
      • I'm due in court
        • I'm due in a criminal court
        • I'm due in a civil court
        • I'm due in a Family court
        • I’m under 18 and going to court
      • I want to take someone to court
        • High value claims
        • Small claims
        • Personal injury
      • I want to represent myself in court
      • The lowdown on going to court
    • Debt
    • Families
      • Divorce
      • I'm young and have a problem
      • I've got family problems
      • Meeting your family lawyer for the first time?
      • Understanding family law
      • Domestic abuse
    • Housing
      • Buying and selling: Finding a legal adviser
      • ID and money home-buying checks - why they are needed
      • Problems with buying or selling
      • Evictions - England
      • Evictions - Wales
      • Rent money, deposits and fees - England
      • Rent Money, Deposits and Fees – Wales
      • Repairs and poor living conditions - England
      • Repairs and poor living conditions - Wales
      • Being a landlord
    • Immigration and emigration
      • Immigration solicitors and legal advisers
      • Asylum
      • Emigration
    • Injuries
      • Negligence
    • Legal documents
    • My legal bill
    • Pets
      • What to consider before buying a pet
      • How old do I need to be to own a pet?
      • What pets are legal in the UK
      • Pet purchase protection
      • Pet owner responsibilities
      • Microchipping
    • Rights
      • I have been discriminated against
      • I want to know my rights
      • Your consumer rights this Christmas 
      • Your guide to defamation
    • Wills
      • I want to challenge a will
      • I want to make a will
      • Probate
      • Simpler choices when you make a will
  • At work
    • Confidentiality
    • Problems at work
      • Mental health in the workplace
      • Got a legal issue at work?
      • I’m not happy about something my employer has done
      • Speaking up about sexual harassment – Three things you should know
    • Employment rights
      • Covid vaccine: Can workers be forced to have the jab?
      • Time off
    • Redundancy and dismissal
      • Employment rights and dismissal
      • Redundancy and the law
  • In business
    • Copyright and ideas
      • Control of your images online 
      • Legal protection for ideas
      • Protecting ideas
    • Lawyer checklist
    • Factsheet: Business structure
    • Factsheet: Employment law
    • Factsheet: Tax law
    • Factsheet: Insurance for small business
    • Factsheet: Trading law
    • Factsheet: Premises and property
  • About
    • Types of legal advisers
      • Regulated legal advisers
        • Barristers
        • Chartered Legal Executives and CILEx Practitioners
        • Costs Lawyers
        • ICAEW Chartered Accountants and Legal Services
        • Immigration Advisers
        • Licensed Conveyancers
        • Notaries
        • Solicitors
        • Trade Mark Attorneys and Patent Attorneys
      • Other legal advisers
        • Charity and Trade Union Advisers
        • McKenzie Friends
        • Mediators
        • Paralegals
        • Will Writers
      • Legal market place
        • Customer reviews and comparison sites
          • Finding out more on the provider’s website
          • Choosing a legal adviser – other factors
          • Leaving a review
          • Complaints to legal services providers
        • DIY
        • My legal options
    • Registers of legal professionals
    • Contact a legal regulator
    • If you want to complain
    • Legal costs
      • Conditional and contingency fee agreements
      • Law Centres
      • Legal aid
      • Legal insurance
      • Paying in instalments
      • Questions to ask lawyers
      • Sources of free legal advice
      • The Money Helper site
      • Why money laundering checks are important
    • About the Legal Choices website
      • Accessibility
      • Disclaimer statement
      • Privacy
      • Terms and conditions of use
    • Going online to find a legal adviser?
    • Can I handle some of my legal work myself?
Feedback
Thank you. This feedback helps us to improve.
Back to top