Legal education review under scrutiny as profession awaits first progress report
"Even if the research team manages to make recommendations in time for the 2012 deadline, I am sure the regulators will drag their heels when it comes to implementation" - Cynics call for more progress on the review of legal education...
November 09, 2011 at 07:03 PM
6 minute read
Cynics call for more progress on the wide-ranging review of legal education. Friederike Heine reports
A year after announcing the most comprehensive review of legal education in the UK in decades, the three largest regulators in England and Wales will meet today (10 November) to discuss their progress. The meeting will see the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), the Bar Standards Board (BSB) and the Institute of Legal Executives Professional Standards (IPS) sit down with members of the committee put together after the root-and-branch review was announced in November 2010 to provide a progress report.
Given the breadth of the two-year Legal Education and Training Review (LETR – formally known as Review 2020), any updates are keenly awaited. The research and consultation is looking at educational requirements for entering the profession, requirements for continuing education for practitioners and requirements placed on law schools and education providers, as well as the impact of the Legal Services Act and social mobility issues.
With no news on any of the research emerging since the review formally kicked off earlier this year, critics argue that the deadline for publishing a final report by the close of 2012 is unlikely to be met.
The criticism was not helped by Sir Mark Potter, the retired judge who, along with Dame Janet Gaymer (pictured), is chairing a panel of experts steering the review, conceding at a conference last month that the 2012 deadline may have been "somewhat ambitious". However, the SRA, which is co-ordinating all communication on LETR, insists that the project is on track for completion in December 2012.
SRA education research manager Tracey Varnava says: "There has been a lot of progress since we last updated the committee and we remain on track for the independent research team to deliver the final report in December 2012."
Even if the report deadline is met, critics argue that there is currently no suggested timeline for when any changes emerging from the review would come into effect. As one law school manager comments: "Even if the research team manages to make recommendations in time for the 2012 deadline, I am sure the regulators will drag their heels when it comes to implementation."
The review, which formally launched in May, is still in its initial stages, with a research consortium consisting of four legal education professors, two full-time researchers and three consultants reviewing UK policy literature as well as quantitative data from UCAS and the Higher Education Statistics Agency.
Today the group will discuss the outcome of some of the initial research, including a report on diversity within the legal profession, which will be used to underpin recommendations on the subject in the final report. The research team will then start drawing comparisons between the British system and its common law counterparts, which include the US, Australia and Canada.
"Legal education in the UK cannot be viewed in isolation from the rest of the world, which makes an international comparison crucial," says Warwick University law professor Julian Webb, who heads the research consortium. "Legal education is not such a fast-changing world as legal practice, but there is still an enormous amount of research to sift."
Subsequent stages will see the research team consult with regulated and unregulated parts of the profession as well as consumers of legal services in order to map out potential reforms.
Despite the fact that the LETR is still in its initial stages, the research team has already come to several conclusions about the areas of legal education in need of new regulation. Significantly, early indications suggest the undergraduate law degree is likely to see fewer changes than courses for graduates such as the Legal Practice Course (LPC) and the Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC) provided by law schools such as BPP Law School and the College of Law.
Webb adds: "The key question is what kind and level of regulation is necessary to ensure that students acquire the appropriate foundational knowledge and skills to become legal service providers in an increasingly complex marketplace. In [vocational training] we need to find the right balance between academic and work-based learning."
Cardiff law professor Richard Moorhead agrees: "In all the discussions I have had, agreement is strongest on the need to change things at the qualification end and specialisation, in particular. This may mean the review becomes more interested in training contracts and pupillage and less interested in the law degree. I'd expect changes to the LPC and BPTC to become part of that consensus."
The team will begin putting together its proposals from August 2012, with final recommendations for regulatory change to be presented to the SRA in December.
"My understanding is that the research team will be able to deal with its work within the time frame, but I'd be very surprised if the regulators get all their ducks in a row to be able to take any decisions by then," says one academic close to the project. "I've already seen signs from one of the chairs that they expect slippage."
Commenting on the SRA's role in implementing the team suggestions, Webb says: "Our remit is to do the research and make recommendations – the nuts and bolts of how the regulators deliver on our report is not ultimately our concern."
———————————————————————————————————————————————–
Legal education review timeline
November 2010 The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), Bar Standards Board (BSB) and Institute of Legal Executives Professional Standards (IPS) regulators announce a root-and-branch review of legal education and training.
January 2011 The regulators invite research consortia to tender for the Legal Education and Training Review (LETR).
February 2011 The SRA adds five members to its education and training committee as it gears up for the review, including Slaughter and May human resources head Louise Meikle.
May 2011 Former Simmons & Simmons senior partner Janet Gaymer and former Court of Appeal judge Sir Mark Potter are appointed as chairs of the LETR consultation panel, which includes key stakeholders including representatives of the GC100, the Junior Lawyers Division, the LPC Providers Association and the Young Barristers Committee.
May 2011 Research consortium is appointed, with the UK Centre for Legal Education contracted to conduct independent research and Warwick University professor Julian Webb appointed to lead the research.
September 2011 The regulators launch an LETR website.
November 2011 Stakeholders meet to discuss a paper on Equality & Diversity.
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 All'Almost Impossible'?: Squire Challenge to Sanctions Spotlights Difficulty of Getting Off Administration's List
4 minute read'Never Been More Dynamic': US Law Firm Leaders Reflect on 2024 and Expectations Next Year
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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