Forming A Chambers

J77

Quick Q for anyone in the know. A group of barristers forming a chambers is not possible in Ireland correct? However it can be done in England correct?

Or so I deduce from this.
http://www.qebholliswhiteman.co.uk/


How do chambers work?

johnnyskeleton

Insofar as chambers means a group of barristers pooling office resources e.g. secretary, photocopying, rent etc, there is no problem.

As regards sharing work, advertising it as a "set" or "chambers" or otherwise forming a formal company, partnership or firm, it is prohibited by the requirement to maintain the independence of the bar.

Chambers in the UK are offices shared by barristers but which also employ clerks. A clerk actively goes out and procures work for the barristers, and also divides the work up among the barristers in the chambers. The clerk and the identity of the chambers as a separate entity are the main features.

Arguably the law library is one big chambers, and other office buildings are like smaller chambers.

NoQuarter

And just to quickly note, while a chambers is a great idea in one sense, on the other hard the approx figures of applicants that actually succeed in getting into a chambers is something like 1 in 4 while in Ireland, once a person finishes the Kings Inns degree they are entitled to practice straight away.

ViP3r

What about deviling? Is that not a requirement?

johnnyskeleton

NoQuarter wrote: »

And just to quickly note, while a chambers is a great idea in one sense, on the other hard the approx figures of applicants that actually succeed in getting into a chambers is something like 1 in 4 while in Ireland, once a person finishes the Kings Inns degree they are entitled to practice straight away.

Plus the cost differences at the start is phenonominal. Having to pay for an office while nurturing a fledgeling practice must be shocking expensive. And it is probably very hard to set up a new chambers.

johnnyskeleton

ViP3r wrote: »

What about deviling? Is that not a requirement?

Devilling is practice.

NoQuarter

ViP3r wrote: »

What about deviling? Is that not a requirement?

As far as i know most newly qualified's don't struggle to get a master anyway. Certainly nothing like 1 in 4.

Reloc8

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Plus the cost differences at the start is phenonominal. Having to pay for an office while nurturing a fledgeling practice must be shocking expensive. And it is probably very hard to set up a new chambers.

Actually that bit is not so bad - if you manage to get a seat in chambers after pupillage (exceptionally difficult and competitive) your chambers fees are a percentage of fee income.

Your seat in chambers more or less guarantees you a flow of work, so you are up and running very quickly.

ViP3r

Reloc8 wrote: »

Actually that bit is not so bad - if you manage to get a seat in chambers after pupillage (exceptionally difficult and competitive) your chambers fees are a percentage of fee income.

Your seat in chambers more or less guarantees you a flow of work, so you are up and running very quickly.

So which system is better Would you say?

Ah yes deviling isn't the hard part, it's getting work. Connections needed... ( either through hard work or whatever)

Reloc8

ViP3r wrote: »

So which system is better Would you say?

Ah yes deviling isn't the hard part, it's getting work. Connections needed... ( either through hard work or whatever)

The chambers system is better for established barristers as it provides stability and constant work, and also operates as a restriction on entry to the profession. They also have the administrative support of clerks to chase their fees up for them.

Its bad in one sense for devils/pupils, as unless they get chambers they are a bit goosed - although that largely only applies in the bigger urban areas. There are plenty of sole practitioners in the regions. With that said, you also don't end up with hundreds of starving devils scabbing around for a bit of trade for years, with many ultimately failing to secure a practice anyway, as you get in Ireland - i.e. chambers provides a quick death, so to speak.

The quality of representation is not really affected one way or the other, and neither are legal fees - so its much of a muchness from the point of view of the solicitor or client, or the courts.

So one has distinct advantages to the successful applicant (chambers) and the other while very equitable in its treatment of entrants provides no security of work whatsoever. These are largely concerns for barristers - the other 'stake holders' are not really affected.