solicitor or barrister

enry

I have tried everything to get a solicitor to sign a training contract with me. I've spent the last number of months working with solicitors for free simply to gain experience and still no joy. I’d be happy if the law society would allow me to do the ppc-1 and then I could worry about getting a training contract or if the government would pay my dole money to a solicitor. So as to put one of the few solicitors I know in a position to take me on.

I have studied law for many years however not constantly for example I spent a few years traveling and also spent a number of years working in funds, insurance and banking I was under the impression that things in this country were good and that there was plenty of time to qualify. I could take my time experience different jobs and places and come back to the law. If the truth be known I had always wanted to become a barrister however I felt working as a solicitor was something I would also enjoy. However there were other considerations those being an understanding of the realities of life as a barrister the many years of earning little or no money etc.

So I went for the easy option or so I thought. However I have discovered to my detriment that getting the fe-1s was not a problem however securing a training contract is a different story.

At this stage I want to qualify as a lawyer I don’t think however I could ring or call into another solicitors office without screaming. So I've been thinking why not forget qualifying as a solicitor and qualify as a barrister instead. It cant be more difficult then qualifying as a solicitors the way I see it you get your exams you qualify as a barrister as simply as that.

Ok I may have to spend a sh1t load more years at it then I had anticipated and I'm 29 at this stage but as I said at least I’d qualify. So I'm wondering does anyone one else think it would be easier at this stage for me to qualify as a barrister rather then a solicitor and also would I be entitled to any exemptions for the five exams for entry into the degree course in kings inn by virtue of the fact that I have passed my FE-1s.

One more point the kings inn web site is not very helpful

Jo King

You have missed the boat. From next year Masters have to pay their pupils subscription to the Law library. Where are you going to find one willing to do that? No pupillage - no entry to the Law Library.
Fe1s do not count for anything other than entry to Blackhall.

McCrack

Sight tight, you are still young, just be aware that the FE1 will expire after 5 years though. It a very difficult time for everybody at the minute so I guess patience and continuing to work in the field in whatever capacity you can get is the key now.

enry

Jo King wrote: »

You have missed the boat. From next year Masters have to pay their pupils subscription to the Law library. Where are you going to find one willing to do that? No pupillage - no entry to the Law Library.
Fe1s do not count for anything other than entry to Blackhall.

Can’t see that being a problem. how much is the subscription fee f3ck all I’d say and flip all people look to qualify as barristers not much competition until your qualified so not overly worried about that. I'd be more concerned about the fact I don’t have large financial resources like for example wealthy parents to pay the fees for a full time course for two years and live but if i though i could qualify I’d find the money some where.

Do you think the fee structures in kings inn is the cause, that for the most part only a certain class within our society work as barristers. Something I think should have been done away with around the same time we got the English out of the country

legal eagle 1

Enry I'm in the same position as yourself and I too have considered the Barrister route.......basically at this stage i'll consider anything to get into the Legal world. I started a thread on this forum on Becoming a Barrister you should have a quick read of it if you haven't already. Alot of people contributed their opinions to it and a lot of barristers did too. It provided a great insight into a world that to me was pretty hidden. I think the main issue with the Barrister route is the unpredictiabilty surrounding getting work and cash flow issues. For me, I've decided to stick to getting qualified as a solicitor first because deep down its what i really really want. Whilst becoming a barrister is very appealing, you are self employed and I'm bit worried that my heart wont be fully in it and therefore I may struggle to make a living out of it.
One useful thing i got from my thread was that later on once you become a solicitor it is very easy to convert and become a barrister that way you can end up getting the best of both worlds
Whatever path you choose.......lots of luck with it, i hope we both end up with result we want

Jo King

enry wrote: »

Can’t see that being a problem. how much is the subscription fee f3ck all I’d say and flip all people look to qualify as barristers not much competition until your qualified so not overly worried about that. I'd be more concerned about the fact I don’t have large financial resources like for example wealthy parents to pay the fees for a full time course for two years and live but if i though i could qualify I’d find the money some where.

There is no full time two year course leading to a call to the bar. The big difficulty is going to be securing a pupillage. Getting called to the bar may be the same as passing the FE1s. A good way to waste time and money and collect PFOs.

Dante09

Jo King wrote: »

There is no full time two year course leading to a call to the bar. The big difficulty is going to be securing a pupillage. Getting called to the bar may be the same as passing the FE1s. A good way to waste time and money and collect PFOs.

Why is securing pupillage going to become more difficult. I know a guy, who this year secured two Masters. Is it the fact that law library fees will need to be paid by the Master? How much are they?

Jo King

Dante09 wrote: »

Why is securing pupillage going to become more difficult. I know a guy, who this year secured two Masters. Is it the fact that law library fees will need to be paid by the Master? How much are they?

This year is one thing. Next year Masters will have to pay about 3k. Many will not want to. Up to now Masterrs did not have to be choosy. If they have to pay 3k, they will be very choosy.

enry

Jo King wrote: »

This year is one thing. Next year Masters will have to pay about 3k. Many will not want to. Up to now Masterrs did not have to be choosy. If they have to pay 3k, they will be very choosy.

They have very little to be choosy about as where there were 250 student that came out the gates of kings inn the other year there’s only 80 gone in or so i'm told. There most be a lot of d4 heads who’s parents simply don’t have the money anymore.

I don’t mean to be getting at barristers I just think its incredibly unfair that despite the fact that I’m sure there will be many barrister qualifying this next year with less letters after their name then me. I wont even get the chance to start the ppc1 and I don’t blame myself and I don’t blame solicitors for not taking me on I blame the law society. Changes should be made

Jo King

enry wrote: »

They have very little to be choosy about as where there were 250 student that came out the gates of kings inn the other year there’s only 80 gone in or so i'm told. There most be a lot of d4 heads who’s parents simply don’t have the money anymore.

Barristers do not necessarily need or want pupils. About 30 years ago devils had to pay their master for the opportunity.
Some barristers refuse to take pupils. That number can only increase as a result of the requirement to pay for pupils.
In England, the number of pupils dropped when they had to be paid.
The law Society cannot force apprentices on firms and there is no point in taking people on courses when they do not have a training contract.