Hanging up my wig - an ex-barrister on why he chose to jump the track
Three months after my pupillage finished in 2002, I decided to 'cross the floor' to become an assistant solicitor. A few years later I re-qualified, and now, as a senior associate at Reynolds Porter Chamberlain (RPC), I look back with no regrets. Unsure about the long term after leaving school, I knew I wanted to go to Edinburgh University. There was no point in studying law there, so I did philosophy and politics instead, with a view to possibly converting afterwards.
November 16, 2010 at 05:27 AM
8 minute read
When Robbie Constance realised a career at the Bar was not for him, he decided to become a solicitor – and has never looked back
Three months after my pupillage finished in 2002, I decided to 'cross the floor' to become an assistant solicitor. A few years later I re-qualified, and now, as a senior associate at Reynolds Porter Chamberlain (RPC), I look back with no regrets.
Unsure about the long term after leaving school, I knew I wanted to go to Edinburgh University. There was no point in studying law there, so I did philosophy and politics instead, with a view to possibly converting afterwards.
At the end of my degree I applied to some top 10 law firms but felt that they weren't really for me and that I would instead go down the barrister route. Perhaps I should have listened more to the inner voice suggesting I aim for mid-sized, West End, niche-type practices. But I thought the Bar would suit me well as an independent thinking, confident speaking, argumentative person – and having watched family and others at the Bar, there was no mystery about it.
I enjoyed studying the law from an intellectual perspective, which reinforced my decision to go to the Bar rather than become a solicitor. I did a couple of mini-pupillages and was offered a pupillage at a general civil chambers in Lincoln's Inn. Although not a high-profile set, it had a lot of very able practitioners.
During Bar school I liked what I learned about the Bar. I enjoyed the bizarre pomp and ceremony of it, with its antiquated systems and quirks. I felt the privilege of joining 'the club' and was confident that it would suit me. I started my pupillage in October 2001. There were some stereotypical moments – before even meeting me, I heard my first pupilmaster growling, "where's my slave?" while walking up the old wooden stairs to our shared room in chambers. Another pupilmaster told me there was no need to type my drafts as he had no intention of using them.
The work was fun and varied, but each new experience meant something else to stress about. At the end of my pupillage I 'squatted' for a few months while considering what to do next. I decided that I didn't have a future at the Bar, that I was satisfied with this decision and that I was not sad to leave it behind me. I think that the intellectual intensity required to be a really good barrister at one of the top sets was either beyond me or didn't, in reality, suit me. If you work in a top set, you have to be thinking in a legal context at such a high level for so much of the time, and I wasn't willing to commit to that.
Married to the Bar
To work in an average set that couldn't offer a high-flying career seemed a bit pointless to me, particularly as being a barrister is a lonely, stressful, competitive and repetitive job wherever you do it. Being a barrister involves irregular working hours and financial insecurity. My first pupilmaster warned me that there was no point staying with my girlfriend as "marriages never last at the Bar". He told me that it takes over your whole life to be a good barrister and that it is very difficult to have a good family life in that sort of environment.
Basically, I was probably not suited to, or prepared to go for, a high-flying career at the Bar – but I was not willing to settle for anything less than that. I also realised that I was in any event more interested in the commercial side of law and that I wanted to be able to develop client relationships.
I went to see a recruitment agent who specialised in moving barristers into law firms and she found me a job at a niche insurance litigation practice. The choice between that and tenancy offers at lower ranking sets was easy.
From the start, I was given plenty of responsibility and had to learn a lot very quickly, figuring out how to be a solicitor as well as specialising in a totally new area of law. I picked up the skills but decided that I wanted to be part of a bigger organisation with more support behind me. Maybe the independence I thought I craved didn't suit me after all.
In June 2004 I moved to a highly-regarded team at RPC, where I have done professional liability litigation primarily in relation to financial services. As regulation has become an increasing concern for clients, so my work has moved also into risk management and regulatory advice.
I work for insurers and compliance/risk officers and other board members of financial services firms, which are sophisticated clients and know what they want. I report on insurance claims and advise on litigation in a similar way to how barristers advise and it therefore provides plenty of intellectual challenges.
I prefer being a solicitor because I am part of a team, working with colleagues for the same clients and seeing matters from start to finish. Although finishing cases off in court was a buzz, it felt strangely detached. I like having the support of colleagues, supervisors, trainees and secretaries. And I like the fact that the disputes are long-running, high-value and interesting. Getting paid every month is preferable to being self-employed, and I appreciate being able to switch off my computer and my brain and go home at a decent hour. I didn't enjoy the inevitable feeling at the Bar of being under-prepared for court – Sunday nights usually felt like going back to school without having done my homework.
Of course, there are some things that I miss about the Bar, such as running my own time, working when I wanted to, feeling the excitement of the courtroom advocacy, swanning through the Royal Courts of Justice in robes and experiencing the charm of the Inns. However, when I hear my friends' war stories, I do not regret my decision to leave.
I am also glad that I didn't have to do a training contract, though I think I would have benefited from doing a corporate seat. I enjoyed Bar School, whereas I'm told that the Legal Practice Course is tedious. And my pupillage experience was fantastic. Above all, I'm glad that I have ticked off being a barrister as I had some great experiences and may always have wondered about it had I not given it a go. I have no thoughts about going back to the Bar, with my ambitions now focused on partnership.
Early decision
In terms of advice to others thinking of making the switch, I found it very easy to move across because I did so at an early stage in my career. There is still considerable kudos at law firms for being a barrister. The key thing for me was adjusting from the mindset of having to deal with something immediately in court the next morning, having only just received the papers, to growing with a case over time – sometimes years.
At first, I found it hard to take a step back and let the process take its course as I was used to immediate results. The buzz of solicitors' work is less intense than going to court, but I find that the commercial issues are enough to sustain my interest.
If you switch to working in a law firm, you can be an employed barrister so long as there is another experienced barrister at the firm who can be your supervisor. You have to do your Continuing Professional Development as a barrister and it can be hard to keep this up in a law firm, particularly the advocacy side of things.
To become a partner in a firm, though, you have to be a solicitor, so I cross-qualified by taking the Qualified Lawyers Transfer Test. This was straightforward; it involved only a three-hour exam in accounts and ethics after a week of evening classes at BPP Law School, paid for by the firm.
My main advice to those considering a career at the Bar would be to ask yourself whether you are prepared to be a barrister first and foremost. Are you doing it because your sense of self requires the status of it or because you are doing good, well-paid and interesting work? If it is the former, then think long and hard about whether it is worth the enormous sacrifices that will inevitably have to be made.
Robbie Constance is an associate solicitor at Reynolds Porter Chamberlain.
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 readTrending Stories
- 1South Florida Attorney Charged With Aggravated Battery After Incident in Prime Rib Line
- 2'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 3Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 4‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 5State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
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