BSB rejects BVC cap calls in Neuberger snub
The Bar Standards Board (BSB) has voiced its opposition to limiting the number of places on the Bar Vocational Course (BVC) after submitting its response to Lord Neuberger's working party on access to the profession. The BSB delivered its response to the Entry to the Bar Working Group interim report today (29 May), saying it could not see how limiting the number of BVC places would increase quality or diversity at the Bar.
May 29, 2007 at 06:47 AM
2 minute read
The Bar Standards Board (BSB) has voiced its opposition to limiting the number of places on the Bar Vocational Course (BVC) after submitting its response to Lord Neuberger's working party on access to the profession.
The BSB delivered its response to the Entry to the Bar Working Group interim report today (29 May), saying it could not see how limiting the number of BVC places would increase quality or diversity at the Bar.
The BSB – the newly-formed regulatory arm of the Bar Council – also rejected plans to increase the minimum academic requirement for BVC entry to a 2:1, although it did back plans to help candidates from financially disadvantaged backgrounds, including a Bar loan scheme.
The body also supported proposals that could require barristers' chambers to offer students pupillage before they commit to studying the BVC.
Neuberger's working party issued its long-awaited consultation paper on access to the Bar last month (5 April). Its final recommendations are expected to be published later this year.
BSB director Mark Stobbs said: "The BSB, through its newly established Education & Training Committee, is keen to consider the working group's proposals on quality and access to the profession."
In a Legal Week Big Question survey last month, almost three-quarters (73%) of partners backed plans to raise the bar for BVC entry to a 2:1, although support for capping the number of BVC places was less clear cut, with 55% of respondents backing the idea.
Talkback: Is capping BVC places a good idea? Click here to have your say.
This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 AllApple Subsidiaries in Belgium and France Sued by DRC Over Conflict Minerals
2 minute readBaker McKenzie, Norton Rose & Other Top Litigators Foresee Rise in AI, Data & ESG Disputes
Freshfields Takes on Syria's Brutal Legacy, But Will Victims Ever See Compensation?
5 minute readECJ Ruling Upholds German Ban on Pure Private Equity Investment in Law Firms
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Top Five Florida Verdicts of 2024
- 2The Evolution of a Virtual Court System
- 3New Acquitted Conduct Guideline: An Analysis
- 4Considering the Implications of the 2024 Presidential Election for Jurors in White Collar Cases
- 52024 in Review: Judges Met Out Punishments for Ex-Apple, FDIC, Moody's Legal Leaders
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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