Deciding to become a barrister

page1

I have sat and passed all FE-1s and have been trying for the past year to secure a traineeship with no luck.
My plan was always to qualify as a solicitor and then as a barrister a few years down the line - the idea was to build up contacts.

I think im going to have a very difficult, if not impossible time seeking a traineeship and I am wondering now if I should forget about it altogether and go straight for the BL.

I have contacted KI and I need to sit two exams with them - Jurisprudence and Administrative law. I need to attend classes on the diploma course and sit the exams next May and then sit the entrance exams in August.

I have gone over loads of old threads on the subject and have gotten valuable information but I have a couple of queries.

When seeking a traineeship there is a huge emphasis on academic qualifications. Is this also the case when finding a master to devil with? Will they care what you got in your undergrad or just that you have passed the BL?

Is it difficult to get a master?

Where do you work? (is that a stupid question!!)

Where would I go to get experience of it beforehand - can you do work experience with a barrister?

I am considering doing the 2 yr module course next year so I can work for the next 3 years and save to help get me through the first few years.
Would working in a solicitors office be of any use, in terms of making contacts and gaining experience in the practicalities?

How difficult are the entrance exams? My FE1 results ranged from 50%-66%. Are the exams similar to the FE1s?

What are the other avenues open after qualifiying as a barrister is I didnt want to practice (or wasnt making any money)?

Many thanks for any information.

contramiction

Hi page1,

Sorry, this isn't going to answer any of your questions! (Which I'm quite interested in knowing the answers to, too!). My question is did you do a law degree? Or are Kings Inns allowing you to combine your FE1s with those additional subjects on the diploma course in lieu of one?

Thanks a mill

page1

Hi, I did Business and Legal in UCD, its on the approved list of degrees. However I didnt cover jurisprudence or administrative law - they have a list of core subjects you must have covered as part of your degree.

Therefore I must sit them with the KI. I must register for those subjects on their diploma course, attend the classes and sit the exams, before I can sit the entrance exams.

You dont get any exemptions for your FE1s unfortunately - but at least I will have done intensive study for 4 of thr 5 KI exams by having done them.

contramiction

Yeah, I was guessing that was the case. Pain in the ass.Thanks for the answers - good luck with it all.

johnnyskeleton

page1 wrote: »

When seeking a traineeship there is a huge emphasis on academic qualifications. Is this also the case when finding a master to devil with? Will they care what you got in your undergrad or just that you have passed the BL?

No. Well, anything is possible and it is theoretically possible that you would find a few barristers who are only prepared to take on the most academically accomplised devils. But really, no.

page1 wrote: »

Is it difficult to get a master?

Is it difficult to get a master? No. The Bar Council have pretty much guaranteed that they will find a master for anyone who wants one.

Is it difficult to get your choice of master? Yes, the most in demand have devils booked for several years in advance.

page1 wrote: »

Where do you work? (is that a stupid question!!)

Barristers work:
1) out of the law library in the four courts, dublin;
2) wherever justice is wanting.

page1 wrote: »

Where would I go to get experience of it beforehand - can you do work experience with a barrister?

Sure. Why not?

page1 wrote: »

Would working in a solicitors office be of any use, in terms of making contacts and gaining experience in the practicalities?

Couldn't hurt.

page1 wrote: »

How difficult are the entrance exams? My FE1 results ranged from 50%-66%. Are the exams similar to the FE1s?

Offically, they are just as hard and are all in one week which makes it more challenging. Unofficially, no, they are easier.

page1 wrote: »

What are the other avenues open after qualifiying as a barrister is I didnt want to practice (or wasnt making any money)?

Working as an inhouse counsel for the AG or some other state body, working as inhouse counsel for a company, legal academic, journalist, making jam, bartending, taxi driving etc.

Rabeile31

Would you recommend becoming a barrister over solicitor?

bath handle

Rabeile31 wrote: »

Would you recommend becoming a barrister over solicitor?

No.

NoQuarter

Rabeile31 wrote: »

Would you recommend becoming a barrister over solicitor?

Its a completely personal choice, the question doesnt make much sense.

Would you prefer to be a fisherman over a fishmonger?!

johnnyskeleton

Rabeile31 wrote: »

Would you recommend becoming a barrister over solicitor?

If only some bored madman would do a list of all the times that people have asked that question and received comprehensive answers in this forum.

Oh wait:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68223593&postcount=2

shaneybaby

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

If only some bored madman would do a list of all the times that people have asked that question and received comprehensive answers in this forum.

Oh wait:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68223593&postcount=2

Sticky?

FreudianSlippers

shaneybaby wrote: »

Sticky?

Probably not a bad idea. If I don't do it by this weekend, someone remind me.

Chouette

I am in the exact same position as you. Getting great experience now in an industry I love, but I need to qualify. I don't want to leave my current role to earn nothing for two years as a trainee, so I think I'll go down the King's Inns route.

I don't intend on devilling afterwards - can anyone advise whether obtaining the BL as a standalone qualification coupled with several years solid legal experience is as good as doing a traineeship? Ideally I would love to be starting Blackhall this month, but I have not had any luck finding a TC. I'm really just considering other options.

page1 wrote: »

I have sat and passed all FE-1s and have been trying for the past year to secure a traineeship with no luck.
My plan was always to qualify as a solicitor and then as a barrister a few years down the line - the idea was to build up contacts.

I think im going to have a very difficult, if not impossible time seeking a traineeship and I am wondering now if I should forget about it altogether and go straight for the BL.

I have contacted KI and I need to sit two exams with them - Jurisprudence and Administrative law. I need to attend classes on the diploma course and sit the exams next May and then sit the entrance exams in August.

I have gone over loads of old threads on the subject and have gotten valuable information but I have a couple of queries.

When seeking a traineeship there is a huge emphasis on academic qualifications. Is this also the case when finding a master to devil with? Will they care what you got in your undergrad or just that you have passed the BL?

Is it difficult to get a master?

Where do you work? (is that a stupid question!!)

Where would I go to get experience of it beforehand - can you do work experience with a barrister?

I am considering doing the 2 yr module course next year so I can work for the next 3 years and save to help get me through the first few years.
Would working in a solicitors office be of any use, in terms of making contacts and gaining experience in the practicalities?

How difficult are the entrance exams? My FE1 results ranged from 50%-66%. Are the exams similar to the FE1s?

What are the other avenues open after qualifiying as a barrister is I didnt want to practice (or wasnt making any money)?

Many thanks for any information.

page1

Chouette wrote: »

I am in the exact same position as you. Getting great experience now in an industry I love, but I need to qualify. I don't want to leave my current role to earn nothing for two years as a trainee, so I think I'll go down the King's Inns route.

I don't intend on devilling afterwards - can anyone advise whether obtaining the BL as a standalone qualification coupled with several years solid legal experience is as good as doing a traineeship? Ideally I would love to be starting Blackhall this month, but I have not had any luck finding a TC. I'm really just considering other options.

Pardon me if I'm picking this up incorrectly, but are you asking is doing the BL plus your work experience the same or as good as going to BHP? BHP and KI train you in two different professions, if you want to practise as a solicitor you will need to go to BHP.
Again apologies if I'm stating the obvious for you, I'm just unclear as to what you are asking.

dermot_sheehan

If you are called to the bar, you can not be enrolled as a solicitor unless you apply to be disbarred.

GeorgeOrwell

Is anyone else here starting the King's Inns Diploma this month?

NoQuarter

GeorgeOrwell wrote: »

Is anyone else here starting the King's Inns Diploma this month?

Our results are released on tuesday so nobody knows until then!

Chouette

page1 wrote: »

Pardon me if I'm picking this up incorrectly, but are you asking is doing the BL plus your work experience the same or as good as going to BHP? BHP and KI train you in two different professions, if you want to practise as a solicitor you will need to go to BHP.
Again apologies if I'm stating the obvious for you, I'm just unclear as to what you are asking.

Not quite that. I work in-house in a particular industry and don't intend on working in a firm. I basically need to qualify and have been considering the BL for this reason coupled with the fact that I haven't managed to obtain a TC.

GeorgeOrwell

Our results are released on tuesday so nobody knows until then!

I mean the Diploma in Legal Studies, not the Barrister degree course!

NoQuarter

GeorgeOrwell wrote: »

I mean the Diploma in Legal Studies, not the Barrister degree course!

Oops read that wrong sorry!

whydoibother?

Chouette wrote: »

Not quite that. I work in-house in a particular industry and don't intend on working in a firm. I basically need to qualify and have been considering the BL for this reason coupled with the fact that I haven't managed to obtain a TC.

From reading this and your previous post in this thread, if I understand properly, it seems you want to qualify as a barrister by doing the barrister degree course but skipping the devilling. I was always under the impression that a person hasn't qualified as a barrister until they have done that year as a devil. I could be wrong. Maybe there are other routes I'm unaware of.

nuac

I thought the Bar Council insisted on devilling = one year in Dublin, one year on circuit - as essential part of the training for a practising barrister.

Milk & Honey

The steps in qualifying as a barrister are

1. Award of the barrister at law degree.
2. Call to to Bar.
3. Devilling - compulsory for 1 year Dublin. Optional after that.

Many people only go as far as steps 1. or 2 above. They often but not invariably work in legal positions afterwards. They can style themselves Barrister at Law or BL and put the qualification on their CV. If they wish to subsequently join the Law library they will have to devil.
A large proportion of the people awarded the degree of barrister at law do not work in law and never go on to practise. Many civil servants for example in the Land Registry and Courts Service get the degree but continue to work on in their jobs afterwards.

At one time it was common for students from disciplines such as medicine and veterinary to complete the BL degree as it could be done simultaneously with the college course.

Res Gestae

Hi all, just looking for your opinions. As with many others I'm getting the results on Tuesday whether I'm in or out of the KI. If I'm in I have another problem. I'm working 26hrs a week (over 2 days sat & sun) at present, low paid, not in the legal field, but work is work. Company has lost its contract to a hack and slash Indian brigade who are likely to make life hell & try to get rid of many of us. This happens this December so the timing couldn't be worse in trying to choose my route to becoming a barrister. Thats the background.

My 1st question is do you reckon 26hrs per week is too much while doing the KI 1 year full time course. The other option I was considering was to quit the job, go on the SW and do the 2 year part time course. I know I cant get SW while doing the 1 year FT course as I've been told I wont be available for full time work on the 1yr course, which is fair enough. Does anyone know if I can get SW while doing the 2yr part time KI. If it were you, what would you guys do?

johnnyskeleton

whydoibother? wrote: »

From reading this and your previous post in this thread, if I understand properly, it seems you want to qualify as a barrister by doing the barrister degree course but skipping the devilling. I was always under the impression that a person hasn't qualified as a barrister until they have done that year as a devil. I could be wrong. Maybe there are other routes I'm unaware of.

As per Milk & Honey's post, people are qualified as a barrister once they get the degree and are called to the bar. If they want to practice in the law library, they must do a year's deviling.

The whole reform of the legal industry business has got me looking into a few things, and as far as I can see, the requirement to devil is merely a bar council rule. Also, as barristers are not regulated by statute so much as custom (although there are a few things e.g. legal practitioners act requirement to speak English as well as Irish), there is in theory nothing stopping a person being called to the bar, never joining the law library, never deviling and going straight before a judge and practising. It used to be a sanction that acting as a barrister when not a current member of the law library would result in disbarral, but that rule is gone because it is anti-competitive.

So in theory all the stuff that the bar council are against, such as people qualifying and going straight into practice, forming chambers, forming partnerships, being employed inhouse and advocating in court or, indeed, being employed by a solicitor and appearing in court on their behalf is perfectly legal right now. Put another way, if some brave individual wanted to try to do something like that, I can't see any legal mechanism that the bar council would have to stop them, nor in this climate would the bar council even vocally object (IMO, I am not for a minute suggesting that prospective barristers should try this at home). At worst, a few of the more traditional judges might be inclined to hold against such barristers, but that is IMO nothing a few well placed Judicial Reviews would not solve.

AFAIK, there is no definition of barrister in the court rules, but presumably once called to the bar by the chief justice, that is sufficient.

nuac wrote: »

I thought the Bar Council insisted on devilling = one year in Dublin, one year on circuit - as essential part of the training for a practising barrister.

The bar council insisting that first year deviling is in dublin is a bit like King Canute insisting that the tide remain out.

dermot_sheehan

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

whydoibother? wrote: »

From reading this and your previous post in this thread, if I understand properly, it seems you want to qualify as a barrister by doing the barrister degree course but skipping the devilling. I was always under the impression that a person hasn't qualified as a barrister until they have done that year as a devil. I could be wrong. Maybe there are other routes I'm unaware of.

As per Milk & Honey's post, people are qualified as a barrister once they get the degree and are called to the bar. If they want to practice in the law library, they must do a year's deviling.

The whole reform of the legal industry business has got me looking into a few things, and as far as I can see, the requirement to devil is merely a bar council rule. Also, as barristers are not regulated by statute so much as custom (although there are a few things e.g. legal practitioners act requirement to speak English as well as Irish), there is in theory nothing stopping a person being called to the bar, never joining the law library, never deviling and going straight before a judge and practising. It used to be a sanction that acting as a barrister when not a current member of the law library would result in disbarral, but that rule is gone because it is anti-competitive.

So in theory all the stuff that the bar council are against, such as people qualifying and going straight into practice, forming chambers, forming partnerships, being employed inhouse and advocating in court or, indeed, being employed by a solicitor and appearing in court on their behalf is perfectly legal right now. Put another way, if some brave individual wanted to try to do something like that, I can't see any legal mechanism that the bar council would have to stop them, nor in this climate would the bar council even vocally object (IMO, I am not for a minute suggesting that prospective barristers should try this at home). At worst, a few of the more traditional judges might be inclined to hold against such barristers, but that is IMO nothing a few well placed Judicial Reviews would not solve.

AFAIK, there is no definition of barrister in the court rules, but presumably once called to the bar by the chief justice, that is sufficient.

nuac wrote: »

I thought the Bar Council insisted on devilling = one year in Dublin, one year on circuit - as essential part of the training for a practising barrister.

The bar council insisting that first year deviling is in dublin is a bit like King Canute insisting that the tide remain out.

As part of the call to the bar you undertake to the (benchers/supreme court/ chief justice I cant remember which) to join the law library and abide by its rules.

How such an undertaking can be enforced, i'm not sure.

_JOE_

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

As per Milk & Honey's post, people are qualified as a barrister once they get the degree and are called to the bar. If they want to practice in the law library, they must do a year's deviling.

The whole reform of the legal industry business has got me looking into a few things, and as far as I can see, the requirement to devil is merely a bar council rule. Also, as barristers are not regulated by statute so much as custom (although there are a few things e.g. legal practitioners act requirement to speak English as well as Irish), there is in theory nothing stopping a person being called to the bar, never joining the law library, never deviling and going straight before a judge and practising. It used to be a sanction that acting as a barrister when not a current member of the law library would result in disbarral, but that rule is gone because it is anti-competitive.

So in theory all the stuff that the bar council are against, such as people qualifying and going straight into practice, forming chambers, forming partnerships, being employed inhouse and advocating in court or, indeed, being employed by a solicitor and appearing in court on their behalf is perfectly legal right now. Put another way, if some brave individual wanted to try to do something like that, I can't see any legal mechanism that the bar council would have to stop them, nor in this climate would the bar council even vocally object (IMO, I am not for a minute suggesting that prospective barristers should try this at home). At worst, a few of the more traditional judges might be inclined to hold against such barristers, but that is IMO nothing a few well placed Judicial Reviews would not solve.

AFAIK, there is no definition of barrister in the court rules, but presumably once called to the bar by the chief justice, that is sufficient.



The bar council insisting that first year deviling is in dublin is a bit like King Canute insisting that the tide remain out.

Very interesting post Johnny...

johnnyskeleton

dermot_sheehan wrote: »

As part of the call to the bar you undertake to the (benchers/supreme court/ chief justice I cant remember which) to join the law library and abide by its rules.

How such an undertaking can be enforced, i'm not sure.

Still? Was that not abolished c. 2006 when the competition authority delivered its report?

Given that there are some barristers currently working outside of the law library system, I would say that it can't be enforced at all (or at least not without picking a fight they know they will lose).