OFT criticises plans for 'unnecessary' BVC aptitude test
The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has criticised plans by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) to bring in a compulsory aptitude test for entry to the Bar Vocational Course (BVC). The test was one of a number of recommendations made last year by a BVC working party chaired by Derek Wood QC.
July 28, 2009 at 09:44 AM
2 minute read
The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has criticised plans by the Bar Standards Board (BSB) to bring in a compulsory aptitude test for entry to the Bar Vocational Course (BVC).
The test was one of a number of recommendations made last year by a BVC working party chaired by Derek Wood QC.
It had been hoped that the aptitude test would be brought in to coincide with the introduction of the new Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC), which will replace the BVC from autumn 2010. However, an OFT report on the matter has concluded that the test would have "the potential to have a significant effect on competition through unnecessary restriction of entry into the profession."
It adds that it would require "ongoing, potentially costly, regulatory oversight to ensure it did not become an unnecessary restriction on competition."
Instead the OFT has proposed a voluntary aptitude test as an alternative.
The BSB had hoped the aptitude test would filter out those students unlikely to pass the BVC. However it would have had no effect on the main criticism levelled against the BVC – that only a very small percentage of students go on to secure pupillages – as pass rates have historically been high.
Commenting on the OFT's position, the BSB said: "We have received comments from the OFT and will respond to the Ministry of Justice in due course. In developing the aptitude test, we are taking steps to consult extensively. The test will be piloted before it is put into use as an admission requirement for the BPTC."
Between 2003 and 2007 the number of students enrolling on the BVC rose from 1,332 to 1,932, while during the same period the number of pupillages steadily fell to around 500.
More news and features for law students
Click here to join the Legal Week Student Facebook group
This content has been archived.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 AllNorton Rose Sues South Africa Government Over 'Unreasonable' Ethnicity Score System
3 minute readBirkenstocks: Footwear or Fine Art? German Law Firm SKW Schwarz Steps Up in Court
Freshfields and Quinn Emanuel Face Off in Latest JP Morgan-WeRealize Dispute
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Church of Scientology Set to Depose Phila. Attorney in Sexual Abuse Case
- 2An AG Just Specified How AI Could Get You in Hot Water
- 3Supreme Court Appears to Lean Toward Letting TikTok Ban Take Effect
- 4Standing Spat: Split 2nd Circuit Lets Challenge to Pfizer Diversity Program Proceed
- 5Judge Jablonski and Chief Justice Rabner Both Acted Completely Properly
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