A week in the life of a barrister!

NoQuarter

bet ya thought it was an article didnt ya!

im startin the LLB in griffith in sept and at the moment the plan is to go to the kings inn after that(subject to change!) so i was just wondering if anyone could describe a typical day/week on life at the bar as i'd find it very interesting and im sure others would too!
thanks, stuy.

Tom Young

http://timesonline.typepad.com/baby_barista/

dats_right

It's certainly not as glamarous as most people think, especially at the very junior Bar (i.e. 1-3 years post devilling). I'm a trainee solicitor so whilst not ideally placed to advise, I have numerous friends who are barristers and I am regularly in court to 'attend' at various motions and applications, etc. Those who are so called very Junior or Devils will most likely be moving pre-trail motions and applications in the County Registrar's Court or the Master's Court from about 10 am onwards (not exactly very glamorous, especially when the Registrar or Master tears into you for not having served some document correctly or some such and you haven't got an answer because you only found out you were moving the motion five minutes ago and were handed your papers three minutes ago by some apprentice solicitor or other).

After that if you are a devil, you will meet up with your master and attend whatever he/she happens to be doing (with a bit of luck you'd have a busy master with a good and varied practise). However, as a very junior barrister without the comfort of having a master, you are highly unlikely to get any work of your own, so you will most likely be doing nothing after about 11-11.30 (except maybe sitting around doing the crossword or sudoku). That is unless you have managed impress your ex-master or other practising barristers, who from time to time may feed you with some scraps, things like drafting or researching some or other piece of law that they couldn't be arsed doing themselves.

The biggest sacrifice is the financial one and is usually what breaks most, as many soon realise after studying for many years that they are still not making any money whatsoever and have no immediate prospect of even clearing the equivalent of minimum wage. It is exceptionally tough to make it as a barrister that there is no denying, but should you overcome all the hurdles it is a very rewarding, interesting and stimulating career. My advice would be to try and talk to any barristers you know, or even pop into the Four Courts and sit around striking up conversation in the canteen with said very junior barristers. Nonetheless, deciding upon a career at the Bar shouldn't be done lightly and without the utmost careful consideration.

Good luck whatever you decide.

PS> You should take a look at this article 'Why Lawyer's are so Miserable?', here's the link:
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article2045254.ece

Also if you could get your hands on this book: An Eye on the Whiplash and other stories by Henry Murphy. It is a highly amusing, fictitous account of a guy trying to make it down at the Law Libray.

NoQuarter

dats_right wrote:

(not exactly very glamorous, especially when the Registrar or Master tears into you for not having served some document correctly

ah well im no stranger to this carry on, ive just finished serving four years in the army, now theres a place where theres some serious bull**** to put up with! but after four years of wasting time i decided to change career so it was either accountancy or law and i chose the latter as it interests me more, although i have to say that it is a good wage im lookin for in the end and im willing to sacrifice now for it but if i get by all the hurdles is there financial reward? from what i gathered lookin at some salary statistics is solicitors can earn 60 - 80k per year and barrissters 90k+ ?!? obviously not while devilling i know but would that be right after a few years practice perhaps? thanks for the help as its better to find this out now than later on!
oh and great links by the way, although by the sound of things they should call it bein a bitch instead of a devil! :rolleyes:

IANAL (hullaballoo's test a/c)

dats_right wrote:

...PS> You should take a look at this article 'Why Lawyer's are so Miserable?', here's the link:
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article2045254.ece

Although the rest of your advice is quite good, I would like to point out that the only part of that link worth reading is the second comment down, from a person named Clay, from Manchester.

@ King=stew, if by 'a few years' you mean 'more than a decade', then yes, the pay for barristers can reach high figures.

johnnyskeleton

The traditional progression is like this:

1) 1-3 years - boredom, humiliation, poverty, solitude, less respect than the worst criminals, whenever you do get something good you will already have agreed to do a menial task for someone else, occasional bursts of madness followed by long waits to get paid. You will probably have to work part time and try your hand lecturing/tutoring/writing etc. you spend your days hanging around the library or the district court trying to get solicitors to look at you (they won't). You might have to do research/paperwork for your master, and you don't get paid for this. You will have to juggle your own miniscule practice with the demands of your master and with other attempts to further your career.

If you survive this go to stage 2.

2) 3-7 years - getting work and enough to live, but not as much as you would had you dedicated your life to another profession. Periods of stress followed by periods of relative ease, long holidays in which you can do your paperwork or spend lying on a beach.

If you thrive in this environment go to stage 3.

3) 7 years to senior counsel - hard work but you could have a devil to do some of that for you, every day should involve some element of court work, and the paperwork will never, ever be complete (just moved around a lot). You could be earning very good money, good money, or normal money, but if you like advocacy then there will be good job satisfaction.

If you distinguish yourself go to stage 4.

4) Senior counsel - in court most days, only dealing with decent cases, great money, funky costumes and if you like you only need to come in at 11 o'clock. Someone else can always do the paperwork.

When you are sick of the rat race, why not go to stage 5.

5) High Court judge - does exactly what it says on the tin.

This is the traditional logic, so there is no reason to say that this is what it will be like next year or the year after. There are more people becoming barristers than ever before, there is pressure from the competition authority and there are hundred of little butterflies which, if they flap their wings at the wrong time they bring massive storms in young barrister's careers. On the other hand there are more judges coming in and crime, mortgage possessions and company liquidations are all growth areas at the moment.

As for a typical day or week, I don't think there is such a thing for barristers. Courts sit from 10.30-4.30 and any paper work/prep work can be done at any time. At the lowest(i.e. first few years) and the highest (i.e. top senior counsel and very senior junior) parts of the profession you would be lucky to know where you are going to be a day in advance. Therefore, you would have to be prepared for anything at all times. You could work from 9am one day until 6pm the following day sometimes; other times you will be just hanging around.

But most importantly, and I cannot stress this enough, you get to wear a wig.

johnnyskeleton

Times Article wrote:

the cumulatively lowering nature of the work. We all end up being shaped by our careers. Journalists become rude, incorrigible gossips. Police officers start believing what they read in the Daily Mail. Lawyers, meanwhile, become competitive, aggressive, judgmental, analytical, adversarial, emotionally detached, paranoid of being sued and, worst of all, pessimistic. Being a good lawyer involves assuming that people will do the most awful things and that treachery is to be expected. It’s inevitable that this negativity eventually seeps into their personal lives.

If this is true then it will give you some idea of the differences in the legal profession. Solicitors are a sprightly, elfin folk who like dancing, having a good time and are always on cue to help you with any legal problems you might have. Barristers, on the other hand, are dour individuals, who dress up and say things they don't mean just to feel normal.

king-stew wrote:

but after four years of wasting time i decided to [waste another 4 years becoming a barrister], although i have to say that it is [not the money] im lookin for in the end and im willing to sacrifice now [because I love legal argument so much] but if i get by all the hurdles is there financial reward?

Yes, but the money is neither easy nor excessive at any stage, and compared to working just as hard at another profession (e.g. consultant neurosurgeon, partner in a big solicitor's firm, senior accountant, property developer etc) it's probably less.

king-stew wrote:

from what i gathered lookin at some salary statistics is solicitors can earn 60 - 80k per year and barrissters 90k+ ?!? obviously not while devilling i know but would that be right after a few years practice perhaps? thanks for the help as its better to find this out now than later on!

Statistics like this are unreliable because they are averages. The top solicitors can make much more money than the top barristers, the bottom solicitors almost always make more money than the bottom barristers, and in the creamy middle there is a large variety. But many barristers leave the bar due to financial constraints, and they don't get any pensions, heath plans, paid sick leave, etc so if your sole motivation is money then think of both professions as even, or lean towards solicitors.

Amazotheamazing

Some great advice on this thread.

I feel the need to point out how mundane the vast majority of legal work is. Imo, very few middle of the road barristers or solicitors get rich off what they earn, it's what they do with what they earn.

Hard work in most professions will get you some degree of good money.

NoQuarter

well i only said it was the money to feel normal, its really the wig i'm after

well it does sound like the kind of job that would suit me as in not having a typical day, changing hours etc etc.... and i do like the sound of the progression to a judge which is the basic plan for the moment (minus of course the humiliation, poverty and less respect than the worst criminals!)
so ill do the degree anyways and theres apparantly a lot of other career options for law degree holders?!
i dont mind hard work or a long slog at the start once i get something out of it in ten years, i spoke to a guy recently who had been in the army for 26 years, he earned 750 euro a week and in this day and age thats buttons so thats what i dont want, same with my dad, he comes home from one job and has to go to another and i just wont do that so thats the money motive but apart from that it does seem very interesting (i watch judge judy every day like!! ----joke!:o)
i know i have tons more questions but i cant think of em now but thanks for the replies folks, its been the best advice ive got so far seeing as i dont actually know any bassisters or solicitors myself!

Tom Young

King-Stew, sounds like you don't need any encouragement.

As they say at Nike 'Just Do It!' work hard, ignore the grousers and all will come right.

Best of luck with it. Don't look back, look forward.

Amazotheamazing

king-stew wrote:

i know i have tons more questions but i cant think of em now but thanks for the replies folks, its been the best advice ive got so far seeing as i dont actually know any bassisters or solicitors myself!

Get to know them now, seriously, start building relationships with some if you can.

NoQuarter

oh god i actually wrote bassisters, youd think it was a typo but youd be wrong, i have a bass guitar in my hand now really!!
anyways as mr. amazo said there certainly is great advice on this thread so ill just do what i usually do and go with the flow and hopefully things work out because i pretty much have my heart set on the barrister thing.(especially paying 12000 to the kings inn, hmm cant wait to do that!)

id love to get to know some people in the legal field but i dont even know of any! i might scare people if i hang around the courts every day i dunno!!

so on that note.....anyone got any part time work????

Tom Young

Plenty of scary looking people hanging around the courts on a daily basis, and some of them are dressed up!

NoQuarter

ha ha yup, as babybarista says, "so much for Atticus Finch!"

johnnyskeleton

king-stew wrote:

id love to get to know some people in the legal field but i dont even know of any! i might scare people if i hang around the courts every day i dunno!!

so on that note.....anyone got any part time work????

Ring the courts service and ask them about becoming a judge's tipstaff/crier. That's my dream job, and you will meet loads of barristers, solicitors, judges etc. Plus, you get to push people out of your way.

NoQuarter

only problem there johnny would be id be in college full time during the week so im asuming i couldnt do that during the weekend? good idea for during the summer tho ill definitly keep that in mind!

dats_right

I think your statistics regarding wages are wide of the mark. I think the rates you provide for solicitors is grossly underestimated and looks more like the scale for primary school teachers or somesuch than a solicitor. Sure a Newly Qualified Solicitor wouldn't get out of bed for less than €55k! In reality salaried solicitors can earn up to about €150k and equity partners in the big firms well you could probably muliply that a couple of times.
(See generally http://www.brightwater.ie/documents/Salary_Survey_2007.pdf)

From reading what you say in your post OP, please don't take this as an insult, but you seem quite naive regarding the road ahead. Unless you have an approved law degree you're looking at €20k in tutiton fees to King's Inns and three years study, then you have a years devilling although most, if they can, do a second year unofficial devilling with a different master and after that you will be earning practically NOTHING for several years(by that i mean less than social welfare). So picture it, in five years time you will be earning less than you would flipping burgers in McDonald's and with practically nothing to do, unless daddy or an uncle is a solicitor and can send you some scraps.

There is an enormous over supply of BL's at the moment, in the region of 100-120 per year, there simply isn't the work to sustain that many barristers. Remember also that 95% of these highly qualified and intelligent individuals all have the same aspiration as you, of struggling through the first few years and eventually making a decent living at it. Unfortunately, it is a sad fact that most will leave practise within the first few years because they underestimated the hardship involved. I'm sure that each one of them thought that they would be the exception too and i'm also certain that those who leave practise don't do so easily. Especially having regard to the investment in terms of time, money and even emotionally into succeeding at the Bar. Don't you think that if these people were eaning anything like €90k that they would be staying at the Bar?

There is no doubt that you will need significant financial support from someone, be it; personal, parental, banks or from a partner, but families and partners should be fully informed of all of the risks too. Furthermore, in my opinion, unless you are exceptionally gifted or exceptionally lucky you will fail at the Bar, of coure, it will help to have family contacts who work in insurance companies (but even that has largely dried up as PIAB has decimated PI work for barristers) or who are solicitors. But, if you are no good it won't matter who your contacts are as the briefs will soon dry up.

OP, you will probably perceive me to be exceptionally negative and perhaps even trying to talk you out of it, however, I can assure you I'm not. I just think that you may be in danger of viewing the thing with rose-tinted specs. It is a massive step if you decide to embark on the long road to a viable career at the Bar and shouldn't be undertaken lighlty. You need to go into it with your eyes wide open to all of the risks and should you decide that the risks are worth it, then you should plan ahead in terms of finance and back-up plans.

On a positive note the BL qualification is an exceptionally good qualification to have and if things don't work out the way you had planned then you will have many, many options as the skills learnt are easily transferable into many fields. Some examples: In-house legal depts., banks, legal sections in various branches of the civil service, academia to name just a few. And OP please don't take my negativity personally, as I genuinely wish you all the best whatever you decide.

EdgarAllenPoo

Going the Griffith LLB route myself in a few weeks. I couldn't handle being a barrister mostly because I have no legal connections and would be working for peanuts for years but I would prefer the security of being a solicitor.

I had a notion that being a solicitor I could choose not to put my foot inside a court and bury myself in conveyancing until I;m old and grey but my brother (who's a garda) has told me that even the most mickey mouse of charges (it seems everyone has a solicitor and barrister to try and get them off) will see me in the district court for hours.

So much for the easy life:D At least it's all five years (and a lot of money) away.

ladylorenzo

While I agree that there is some great advice on here (have had quite a giggle at some of the liks too!), I'm just curious to know whethere it is all purely opinion unsupported by fact or whether the posters have real experience in the professional fields mentioned. In particular, since the references to salaries vary so much ,I'm just wondering of anyone is actually working as a Barrister/Solicitor or has a friend doing so that can verify the figures??

EdgarAllenPoo

The best evidence of the salries that I found was in the jobs section of the Law Society Gazette and IrishJobs.ie. Realistically you'd start on between €30-35k as a solicitor.

I would be interested to know what other (genuine) options are open to law graduates.

ladylorenzo

GDM wrote:

The best evidence of the salries that I found was in the jobs section of the Law Society Gazette and IrishJobs.ie. Realistically you'd start on between €30-35k as a solicitor.

I would be interested to know what other (genuine) options are open to law graduates.

€30-35K sounds about right.I'm a trainee at the minute and they are the sort of figures that I'd always had in my head(for newly qualified Solicitors outside of Dublin anyway). Realistically, it's not nearly as lucrative as many would like to believe.Well, not at the beginning anyway!

As for other options, you can do down any route with a law degree but in many ways, it's like an Arts degree - you need to choose a specific area and specialise ie Teaching, Business, Lecturing,Legal Exec etc. (All will require further study) or you could look into the Civil Service i.e Diplomatic Corps., Banking, Company Secretary, Law Enforcement.... The options are endless really as a Law Degree is always an asset.

johnnyskeleton

GDM wrote:

I had a notion that being a solicitor I could choose not to put my foot inside a court and bury myself in conveyancing until I;m old and grey but my brother (who's a garda) has told me that even the most mickey mouse of charges (it seems everyone has a solicitor and barrister to try and get them off) will see me in the district court for hours.

It depends what firm you work for. You don't have to go to a criminal firm, or even a firm that does some criminal. You can go to a top 5 firm (they fear crime, and only litigate at the top end of civil) or you could work for a conveyancing only firm. I'm not sure that anyone anywhere has done a masters in conveyancing, but if you did I'm sure that any firm you go to would put you to good use there. So if you don't want to go to the district court, you don't have to (unless you get caught drunk driving after a long night schmoozing corporate clients).

ladylorenzo wrote:

I'm just curious to know whethere it is all purely opinion unsupported by fact or whether the posters have real experience in the professional fields mentioned. In particular, since the references to salaries vary so much ,I'm just wondering of anyone is actually working as a Barrister/Solicitor or has a friend doing so that can verify the figures??

The whole boards system is based on arguments abstract from the individuals. I could say that I'm the revenue commissioner and tell you exactly how much every single barrister and solicitor earns, or I could be the chief justice, but would it make any difference? Why would you accept the unsupported opinion of someone who claims to be a legal professional over the unsupported opinion of someone who doesn't?

Amazotheamazing

At some point in the very near future, imo, we will have produced too many solicitors and too many barristers for this country to maintain litigious as it is. Look how hard it already is to survive at the bar or to get an apprenticeship. It'll be interesting to see how it all goes.

EdgarAllenPoo

That's what one of my old lecturers told us. By the time we finished college in 08 there would be far too many barristers for the amount of work available and they would either be unemployed or have to seek employment outside the WAG(wig and gown) brigade.

NoQuarter

dats_right, no i dont take it personnally at all i appreciate your tryin to put me wide and your right i may be a bit naive when it comes to the years after devilling as it seems that will be a very unclear time in my life but thats why i asked this question now, either way i will do the law degree and decide a plan of action towards the end of the three years, who knows what the future holds! financially it will be tough but college is already half paid for because ive just come back from 6 months over in kosovo with the army so that lined my pockets nicely but i have planned right through to paying the 12,000 entrance fee for the kings inn, wheter i get that far is another thing...
the figures i got for the salaries were just found on the internet so i didnt consider them gospel.
it may turn out that i decide to try become a solicitor but at the moment a barristers work strikes me as more interesting, although it will be a long 3 years so things may very well change,
anyways any advice is much appreciated even if you think it may be portrayed as negative id still like to hear everyones opinion beacause as you said its not a decision that can be taken lightly,
so thanks for all the help so far everyone

NoQuarter

GDM wrote:

That's what one of my old lecturers told us. By the time we finished college in 08 there would be far too many barristers for the amount of work available and they would either be unemployed or have to seek employment outside the WAG(wig and gown) brigade.

hey GDM ive just had an idea
we should just wait till all the WAG's realise theres no more work, leave their profession, an we can step right in.....
hmm, yep seems fool proof to me!!! :eek:
ferrari or posche???

Amazotheamazing

The question is, what is available with a law degree outside the WAG, most other professions will probably want a masters on top of a law degree.

clairepotatoes

Amazotheamazing wrote:

The question is, what is available with a law degree outside the WAG, most other professions will probably want a masters on top of a law degree.

I find it strange that if they are not interested in the holder of a law degree that they would be interested in someone with a masters. Unless you mean a masters in a discipline other than law. Surely since most other professions require you to pass exams, they would rather you have passed those.

EdgarAllenPoo

king-stew wrote:

hey GDM ive just had an idea
we should just wait till all the WAG's realise theres no more work, leave their profession, an we can step right in.....
hmm, yep seems fool proof to me!!! :eek:
ferrari or posche???

I'm more of a passat man myself (it's cheaper).

Another thing to consider is that if you go the Kings Inns route you'll more than likely have to stay in Dublin as that's where the majority of the work will be whereas if you take the Law Society route you have a bit more room to move.

I would imagine it would be hard to afford Dublin rent rates on a junior council's earnings or lack thereof.

Amazotheamazing

clairepotatoes wrote:

I find it strange that if they are not interested in the holder of a law degree that they would be interested in someone with a masters. Unless you mean a masters in a discipline other than law. Surely since most other professions require you to pass exams, they would rather you have passed those.

Depends what area you want to move into, but yes, I meant a masters in an area other than law.

dats_right

Lady Lorenzo, I am an apprentice solictor and have been for over a year and I am in daily contact with barristers of all levels of experience.

GDM, what are you talking about? 30-35k for a NQ solicitor? Are you talking about 1997 rates or something? What NQ is going to work for less than their own secretary? NQ generally earn between 45-55 and that isn't just the big or medium firms, small firms will pay that too. I have never seen a job advertising a salary of 30-35k for a NQ (perhaps you could give me a link of jobs in Ireland- I can give you plenty of 50k jobs for NQ's). Personally, I would be highly insulted if I was offered such a comparative pittance (given the sacrifices made in terms of studying for the notorious Fe-1's, a low paid apprenticeship and never having any cash because of all of this), why would people put themselves through this to earn 30-35k when you could earn that and more as a unior manager in Tesco's!

http://www.irishjobs.ie/JobDesc.asp?ID=4460769&MID=3238 (55k-65k NQ)

http://www.irishjobs.ie/JobDesc.asp?ID=4463039&MID=1510 (45-55k NQ)

http://www.brightwater.ie/job-details.aspx?jobid=11672 (60K NQ)

http://www.brightwater.ie/job-details.aspx?jobid=12119 (60k NQ)

http://www.brightwater.ie/job-details.aspx?jobid=11858 (55k NQ in County Louth!!)

http://www.brightwater.ie/job-details.aspx?jobid=12520 (50K NQ GP in Wexford)

http://www.brightwater.ie/job-details.aspx?jobid=12567 (50K for Legal exec.)


In all fairness, no graduate with a professional qualification should work for 30k! Let alone one who has tthe responsibility and work load of a solicitor. If I thought for one moment I'd be working for that I'd tear up my Indentures on the spot.. and consider this now seemingly more lucrative career...

http://jobsearch.monster.ie/getjob.asp?JobID=60968667&AVSDM=2007%2D08%2D13+09%3A01%3A00&Logo=1&cy=ie&brd=1&sort=rv&vw=d&sq=not+++

NoQuarter

haha now ive seen it all!

This is exactly what strikes me as odd that such a qualified person as barristers are should have much trouble earning a living after their pupillage after undergoing so much study and spending so much money to get there...

johnnyskeleton

king-stew wrote:

haha now ive seen it all!

This is exactly what strikes me as odd that such a qualified person as barristers are should have much trouble earning a living after their pupillage after undergoing so much study and spending so much money to get there...

Strikes you as odd, yet you'll probably still do it.

NoQuarter

yeah maybe....
ill decide when im a little older and wiser with respect to law.

question...anyone know about a supposed irish exam in the kings inn? i cant find anything about it in the forum i have looked already, i ask because i just hadnt the heart for irish in school, higher maths - no prob, irish -
from what i have heard potentials must be able to conduct a case in irish??

EdgarAllenPoo

dats_right wrote:

GDM, what are you talking about? 30-35k for a NQ solicitor? Are you talking about 1997 rates or something? What NQ is going to work for less than their own secretary? NQ generally earn between 45-55 and that isn't just the big or medium firms, small firms will pay that too. I have never seen a job advertising a salary of 30-35k for a NQ (perhaps you could give me a link of jobs in Ireland- I can give you plenty of 50k jobs for NQ's). Personally, I would be highly insulted if I was offered such a comparative pittance (given the sacrifices made in terms of studying for the notorious Fe-1's, a low paid apprenticeship and never having any cash because of all of this), why would people put themselves through this to earn 30-35k when you could earn that and more as a unior manager in Tesco's!

http://www.irishjobs.ie/JobDesc.asp?ID=4460769&MID=3238 (55k-65k NQ)

http://www.irishjobs.ie/JobDesc.asp?ID=4463039&MID=1510 (45-55k NQ)

http://www.brightwater.ie/job-details.aspx?jobid=11672 (60K NQ)

http://www.brightwater.ie/job-details.aspx?jobid=12119 (60k NQ)

http://www.brightwater.ie/job-details.aspx?jobid=11858 (55k NQ in County Louth!!)

http://www.brightwater.ie/job-details.aspx?jobid=12520 (50K NQ GP in Wexford)

http://www.brightwater.ie/job-details.aspx?jobid=12567 (50K for Legal exec.)


http://jobsearch.monster.ie/getjob.asp?JobID=60968667&AVSDM=2007%2D08%2D13+09%3A01%3A00&Logo=1&cy=ie&brd=1&sort=rv&vw=d&sq=not+++

Seeing those figures maybe I would go for more than a Passat;) Seriously though the 30-35k was what I was told when I was in college (two years ago) would likely be starting pay with a small Dublin/Meath firm. That's what I based it on.

I tend to look at internet job ads that are open to NQ solicitors and think "well who are they more likely to take for the money on offer an NQ or someone with a few years experience."

I think ads like that are like part-time job ads that say experience prefered but not essential. People will always tend to go for the person with more experience and if an NQ solicitor wants a job they have to take less money.

I hope I'm wrong though.

dats_right

king-stew wrote:

haha now ive seen it all!

This is exactly what strikes me as odd that such a qualified person as barristers are should have much trouble earning a living after their pupillage after undergoing so much study and spending so much money to get there...

King Stew, there is a fundamental difference between NQ barristers and NQ solicitors. Solicitors are employed by firms who pay their wages, baristers are self-employed and do not have this luxury. The figures of earnings on my previous post were for NQ SOLICITORS!! These figures do not in any way, shape or form reflect the earnings of a newly qualified barrister, who in comparsion will earn practically nothing [I thought I had been crystal clear re same in my earlier posts!!].

Here's a link of an article that appeared in last Sunday's Sunday Independent, written by a practising barrister, regarding the struggles, etc. that very juniors members of the Bar face. Including an attrition rate of n50%, which is colossal.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/public-too-quick-to-pass-judgment-on-barristers-1056974.html

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/public-too-quick-to-pass-judgment-on-barristers-1056974.html

EdgarAllenPoo

An equally educated graduate, placed in a banking or commercial firm, working similar hours, can earn in excess of €100,000 in their first year.

Who does that refer to? NQ solicitors who take the banking route or law graduates who go straight to work for banks?

johnnyskeleton

king-stew wrote:

question...anyone know about a supposed irish exam in the kings inn? i cant find anything about it in the forum i have looked already, i ask because i just hadnt the heart for irish in school, higher maths - no prob, irish -
from what i have heard potentials must be able to conduct a case in irish??

It's a written and oral exam. The written aspect is legal writing and the oral is general oral. It's no rubber stamp but it is no major obsticle either. If you can learn 100 cases on contract law in a few weeks, you can learn to speak Irish enough to pass in the same amount of time.

dats right wrote:

Solicitors are employed by firms who pay their wages, baristers are self-employed and do not have this luxury.

Being paid wages is a luxury?

NoQuarter

dats_right wrote:

King Stew, there is a fundamental difference between NQ barristers and NQ solicitors. Solicitors are employed by firms who pay their wages, baristers are self-employed and do not have this luxury. The figures of earnings on my previous post were for NQ SOLICITORS!! These figures do not in any way, shape or form reflect the earnings of a newly qualified barrister, who in comparsion will earn practically nothing [I thought I had been crystal clear re same in my earlier posts!!].

dats_right, ya didnt need to be crystal clear about any of this, i already knew all of this bar the figures of earnings so i think youve got the wrong impression of some of my posts and are definitely no giving me enough credit here...

just to be crystal clear myself, i havent just decided to do this overnight, i decided id do this over a year ago now and travelled to sunny kosovo to earn the money to put myself through college so i am under no illusions and the parts i am unclear about i ask on boards like this to my answers

dats_right

johnnyskeleton wrote:

Being paid wages is a luxury?

Ask anybody who works for free, say a devil practising at the Bar, or indeed anybody else who doesn't get paid for working and I'm sure they will tell you that from their perspective it is indeed a luxury to be paid wages.

roberta c

I was thinking of trying the whole barrister thing, but this thread has put that out of my head.
Just wondering, by comparison, how difficult is it to go the soliciter route?
How sure of a job could you be leaving college?
I have heard various rumors that you need contacts in a law firm to get your foot in the door..(which i have none of by the way:))

EdgarAllenPoo

Your problem will be securing a training contract. The ease of that will depend on where you look for a contract, the level of degree you have, the fight for contracts between graduates and the number of places available.

If you have the time (and money) get an extra qualification which makes you a more attractive prospect to employers.

Lawlord007

GDM wrote:

Who does that refer to? NQ solicitors who take the banking route or law graduates who go straight to work for banks?

A few friends of mine work in law firms in London. One of them got paid £75,000 in his first year - the firm is not even considered part of the so-called 'magic circle'. Incidentally, my advice to the OP is not to be too disheartened; if it is indeed too difficult to make a living u can always stop practising and seek in-house employment for a commercial firm.

Ms. Duggan, who wrote that article seems to propose the retention of the present system, rather than converting to the UK chambers model. Her main argument appears to be that a chambers model would somehow lead to unethical behaviour; perhaps she may wish to consider the case of the barrister who was recently jailed for defrauding his clients on about 10 separate occasions and effectively stealing their money.

NoQuarter

have you a link to that article of the barrister being jailed? id like to read about that?
your right though im not disheartened at the moment as im sure the law degree will benefit me in some shape of form and as you said there is the option of working for a commercial firm, or trying the solicitor thing too...
the world is my oyster!.....sort of :rolleyes:

Lawlord007

Im afraid i dont have an article about it but there was a very good piece on RTE's 'Prime Time'. If you would like to watch the extract then follow this link and scroll down to the story about the barrister. Click on that story and it will open up media player so u can watch it.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0802/primetime.html

clairepotatoes

Lawlord007 wrote:

Ms. Duggan, who wrote that article seems to propose the retention of the present system, rather than converting to the UK chambers model. Her main argument appears to be that a chambers model would somehow lead to unethical behaviour; perhaps she may wish to consider the case of the barrister who was recently jailed for defrauding his clients on about 10 separate occasions and effectively stealing their money.

I'm not sure that I understand your point. Are you suggesting that a move to the chambers system is some sort of panacea for the corrupt members of the legal system. Is it the case that there are no frauds perpetrated by barristers in England.

The fact is that the current system of the independent referral bar prevents barristers having affiliations with solicitors firms (which is common with regard to English chambers), thus ensuring that any barrister is available to any client.

Lawlord007

clairepotatoes wrote:

I'm not sure that I understand your point. Are you suggesting that a move to the chambers system is some sort of panacea for the corrupt members of the legal system. Is it the case that there are no frauds perpetrated by barristers in England.

Might I also point out that the barrister to whom you refer is 1 of 1830 barristers practising in Ireland and he is the first to be jailed for contempt and the first to have been recommended for disbarrment. Hardly a record to be ashamed of for a profession and hardly worth a restructuring of the current system. Also as you may or may not be aware, not one of those persons was engaged in a counsel-client relationship with that barrister. The frauds were perpetrated in his personal capacity and as a financial advisor.

The fact is that the current system of the independent referral bar prevents barristers having affiliations with solicitors firms (which is common with regard to English chambers), thus ensuring that any barrister is available to any client.

I shall explain my pont then. My point was simply that it is ludicrous to even attempt to argue that a chambers system willl corrupt the fabric of the profession - at the end of the day a chambers is not a company, it is just a bunch of barristers sharing resources. I believe, from other posts u have made, that you are hoping to undertake the Bar course at the kings inns this year? If that is so then would u not like to complete that course knowing that there is a system in place which can accomodate u as a pupil (based on merit and not contacts), which will pay u handsomely for ur pupillage? The alternative is, of course, the informal rat-race which exists at present and u can hardly tell me that this is preferable.

As for the barrister to whom i have referred, my point is simply that there are barristers in the present system who cannot be described as 'ethical' so it cannot be argued that the system somehow thrives on ethics and that a chambers system will lead to any more corruption than exists at present, however much that might be. I have not said that a chamber system will lead to more ethical behaviour, but simply that it wont lead to unethical behaviour. In short, I cannot see any argument for the retention of the present system.

You may also wish to consider the fact that so many complaints have been made to the Bar Council about its barristers and some barristers have been reprimanded, though their names are never released, presumably because this would tarnish the reputation of this most 'honourable' profession. So this guy is not the only barrister to have been reprimanded and, if he is the only one to have been disbarred, then it is simply because of the gravity of his alleged misconduct and the media exposure thereto.

Amazotheamazing

The status quo simply helps the well-connected stay well connected.

It is hugely difficult to break into the profesion on merit alone.

johnnyskeleton

If you want to debate the merits or otherwise of a chambers system, perhaps a mod could split the thread, because I'm certainly willing to trash it out a bit.

Lawlord007 wrote:

If that is so then would u not like to complete that course knowing that there is a system in place which can accomodate u as a pupil (based on merit and not contacts), which will pay u handsomely for ur pupillage? The alternative is, of course, the informal rat-race which exists at present and u can hardly tell me that this is preferable.

Chambers does not mean that devils (or pupils) will be paid any more than they are at present. Like you say, a chambers is just a bunch of barristers sharing resources and they can take their individual devils (pupils) on on whatever terms they dictate. Devils (pupils) would be equally accomodated from a rule that, within the sole practitioner system, they be paid for any work that they do at market rate, or even at a reduced rate.

I don't accept the suggestion that a chambers system is based on merit while the sole practitioner system is based on contacts - to be a barrister requires both, in both chambers and sole practitioner systems.

It also seems to me that people can train as barristers in England & Wales, spend a tonne on tuition and scrape through a year of pupillage only to find that no, they are not getting into chambers after all.

Lawlord007 wrote:

As for the barrister to whom i have referred, my point is simply that there are barristers in the present system who cannot be described as 'ethical' so it cannot be argued that the system somehow thrives on ethics and that a chambers system will lead to any more corruption than exists at present, however much that might be. I have not said that a chamber system will lead to more ethical behaviour, but simply that it wont lead to unethical behaviour.

Ethics does not mean lack of corruption; the point about ethics, as I understand it, is not that chambers will increase incidents such as you have referred to, but that barristers in sole practice do not need to please their fellow tenants as regards what clients they take on (of the "it really brings down the tone of Equity Court" type), they do not treat their co-tenants more favourably than other barristers, and, as regards the competition authority's preference for a partnership model over chambers, barristers are not taken out of the market because their partners have been instructed by the other side (hence more competition) and barristers are not privy to their partners confidential information on the other side.

In any case, the article doesn't even mention chambers.

Lawlord007 wrote:

In short, I cannot see any argument for the retention of the present system.

I'll leave this unless/until the thread is split, but in the context of entry to the profession/a week in the life of a junior barrister, one very good reason for the retention of the present system is that it is not a closed shop. If you want to be a barrister and you are qualified, you can be one in the current system. Under the England & Wales system, just because you are qualified as a barrister doesn't mean that you can practice as such. You need to be part of a chambers and there are many who have qualified but can't get pupilage, and others who complete pupilage but can't get tenancy. This leads to the statistics, as pointed out in the article, that there are more barristers per head in Ireland than there are in E&W. Leaving aside the Evening Herald argument (why do we need so many barristers? we should set them all building the roads), does this not suggest that the Irish system is more permissive and therefore more open to the market than the E&W model?

Lawlord007 wrote:

You may also wish to consider the fact that so many complaints have been made to the Bar Council about its barristers and some barristers have been reprimanded, though their names are never released, presumably because this would tarnish the reputation of this most 'honourable' profession. So this guy is not the only barrister to have been reprimanded and, if he is the only one to have been disbarred, then it is simply because of the gravity of his alleged misconduct and the media exposure thereto.

There will always be complaints in any sector of Irish society, is 53 over 3 years really that much? That's less than 20 per year over 2000 or so barristers, and it is likely that rather than being 1 complaint to one barrister there would be several complaints against a few barristers. So it is less than 1%, over all the cases that are done, which is not bad considering that 50% of litigats lose at trial (through no fault of their lawyers). In any case, if a person who was both a financial advisor and a barrister is found to have committed misconduct in their financial advisor role (as opposed to their barrister role) I don't think that would be a good example of corruption at the bar.

Lawlord007

This probably does warrant a thread of its own and I apologise to the OP for this, although it is perhaps relevant to his enquiry.

1) Pupils in England can expect to earn at least £25,000 (up to £45000 if in a top chambers) in their devilling year. How is this possible? Because the barristers in the chambers contribute to a pool out of which they pay this sum. This is obviously not possible in Ireland where the pupil himself is required to pay €3000 just to join the law library, with a further €1500 every year thereafter. It is true that it is difficult to find pupillage in England but at least it is decided on merit and a proper selection process is in place, rather than ringing up someone your friend recommended to you over a pint and begging them for a pupillage. Please read through the various chambers websites and you will soon see that they select on merit - not contacts! Obviously, many of them cannot find a pupillage but this just means that those who dont will not have to waste a year only to live off scraps for the next 10, for surely a pupillage is a means to an end and in Ireland that appears to be an inevitable dead end.

2) They usually dont waste a tonne on tuition fees - most English students will attempt to find a pupillage before doing the BVC and the chambers usually funds the BVC. Even if they dont, there are many scholarships available from the inns of court - Lincolns Inns, for example, offers 1 major scholarship for every 5 students - much more than the single bursary available to the entire student body of the Kings Inns here.

3) Chambers reduces stress for an individual - you know that your clerks will find work for you and, in that sense, you need not try and 'impress' anyone because it is the reputation of the chambers and not the individual barrister which is important. Obviously, you still need to work hard and do well. In terms of ethics and corruption well if a person is going to be corrupt then he will be corrupt regardless of whether he is in chambers or whether he is a sole practitioner. I would even argue that he is more likely to be corrupt as a sole practitioner because he is not in the presence of others and his finances are not evaluated by others, as they often are in chambers.

4) I am aware that the article does not mention chambers - I mentioned it, and did so merely to point out that there are alternatives to the present system, which was advocated in the article.

5) Im not entirely sure of your familiarity with the legal world but one might argue that it is indeed a closed shop - there are the rich barristers who get the work and there are the poor ones who dont - and it is hardly ever about merit. I agree that there are fewer restrictions as regards entry to the profession but what happens beyond that? What's the point of entering a profession which welcomes you with such cold indifference? I would rather it was the case that entry were exceptionally difficult but that success was guranteed once u made it in. That there are more barristers per head in Ireland than England is not exactly a factor in favour of your argument.

6) Of course there will always be complaints, but why be so secretive in dealing with them? The English Bar are quite happy to announce how they discipline their barristers - there is a definite need for more transparency here.

7) I do not dispute the idea of a pertnership system rather than chambers. However, I see chambers as being a happy medium ie the barrister retains some level of independence while, at the same time, not beng left to fend entirely for himself.

caomhino

Does anyone know if it's still possible to qualify as a barrister or solicitor part time (via evening courses ) and are there any age limitations in doing so ?
I heard recently that it was no longer possible .... I'm working in procurement for
a couple of years am looking for a career change. I've always been interested in the law and the mechanics of it and if a part time option were available, i'd consider it. thanks ..