Editor's Comment: Bar to progress
A fused training regime could rescue the Bar
November 15, 2006 at 07:03 PM
3 minute read
"The profession is dying," says one frustrated contributor to legalweek.com's Talkback section as the debate rages over the dearth of pupillages available to Bar students. "Why has it taken so long for a committee to be established to deal with a problem that has become progressively worse over a span of many years?" asks another.
To be fair to the Bar Council, it has been agonising over this issue for a long time. In 2002 an independent inquiry recommended imposing a levy on barristers to help fund needy students through their training. It was shot down by an angry profession that resented being asked to stump up for what it regarded as somebody else's problem.
The dilemma is easily spelt out. Each year nearly three times as many students undertake the Bar Vocational Course (BVC) as there are pupillages available. They do this at great personal expense in the hope that they can pay off their debts once they begin practising. And yet most students fail even to get an interview, let alone secure one of the coveted pupillage places up for grabs. In the bad old days, the Bar Council sidestepped the issue by simply restricting the number of BVC places available. Given the type of people who were getting on the course – white and middle class – this exposed it to claims of racial discrimination.
The Bar was obliged to usher in a free market for BVC places, thereby handing people the right to blow money they have not got on a course that will lead them into a culde-sac. This may sound overly dramatic, but it is depress-ingly evident from many of the comments posted on legalweek.com's Career Clinic that a would-be lawyer's fate is pretty much sealed when they get their A-level results, no matter how well they do in their subsequent studies.
And yet, just occasionally, through sheer determination or by dint of good luck, people without the right academic qualifications do defy the odds and succeed in becoming lawyers. If the Bar were once again to attempt to impose restrictions on the number of people taking the BVC course the door would be permanently closed to such people.
There is a radical solution to the problem. It would be to recognise that the Bar is simply too small to maintain an equitable qualification regime. Currently, the safest option for a would-be barrister contemplating whether to pay for the BVC would be to qualify into the solicitors' profession, with the option of transferring over to the Bar at a later stage. A common training scheme for qualification into both branches of the profession would simply recognise this state of affairs, thereby securing the Bar's long-term future.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllIs KPMG’s Arizona ABS Strategy a Turning Point in U.S. Law? What London’s Experience Reveals
5 minute readKPMG Moves to Provide Legal Services in the US—Now All Eyes Are on Its Big Four Peers
International Arbitration: Key Developments of 2024 and Emerging Trends for 2025
4 minute readThe Quiet Revolution: Private Equity’s Calculated Push Into Law Firms
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1In-House Lawyers Are Focused on Employment and Cybersecurity Disputes, But Looking Out for Conflict Over AI
- 2A Simple 'Trial Lawyer' Goes to the Supreme Court
- 3Clifford Chance Adds Skadden Rainmaker in London
- 4Latham, Kirkland and Paul Weiss Climb UK M&A Rankings
- 5Goodwin Hires Quinn Emanuel Partner to Launch Office in Brussels
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250