The Most Expensive Solicitor’s Letter In History?


The file below – which is in Portable Document Format – contains the full judgment in Cray v Hancock (2005). The bottom line is that Mr Hancock and his good lady engaged a builder, who ripped them off, then engaged a lawyer to sue him. The lawyer ripped them off too – or so they perceived – and when he took upbrage at their admittedly somewhat forceful expression of this opinion – he sued them. Lawyer sues client may not be as alluring a headline as man bites dog, but it does have a certain novelty.


Legal Notice: Martin Cray v Anthony Hancock


Let it be known that anyone who communicates with Martin Winston Cray or his firm Martin Cray and Co. of Edward Street, Brighton in writing or by any electronic or verbal means does so in breach of the Court Order detailed below and risks high legal costs and penalties. Anyone in any doubt contact Mr A Hancock at he will not be held responsible for any breach of this order.

A S Hancock
August 8, 2008

Cray v Hancock – the full judgment

The reader may notice that this judgment is actually dated November 4, 2004. I cannot say I am surprised, the judge was like something out of the Ark. He had actually worked on the Brabin Inquiry. At the time of writing (January 24, 2024) he is still alive. I have today added three further documents: two from Usenet and one I discovered only this week. For the benefit of future readers, the name of Tony Blair has not been misspelt unintentionally; I have no idea who came up with the alternative Tony Bliar, but it was probably someone on the left active in the anti-war movement. Indeed, it is not unlikely that several or many people came up with it independently. R.I.P. the other Tony.

The Great Tosspot Trial Ends In Farce, November 5, 2005
Link removal request to Google, September 25, 2013

To Obituary For Anthony Sandford Hancock

Back To Articles Index
Back To Site Index