Career advice re Kings Inns

John Hutton

I would greatly appreciate any advice on my situation as I am at a bit of a crossroads.

I graduated with a law degree some years ago. Due to, a large degree, a fair amount of immaturity on my behalf, as well as medical and family issues which prevented me from attending university (or indeed studying) with any regularity I found the exams tough going and had to repeat a semester. I graduated with a poor degree. (3rd class honours is what my institution termed it)

Because of this and the bad taste in the mouth university left me with I did not undertake any further legal studies - it was just as well because with my level of degree that door seemed firmly shut. In any case the likes of Kings Inns it was not financially viable.

So since then I have worked in a variety of positions which have been completely unrelated to law.

However, I have recently begun working in a job which has a lot of legal aspects (albeit concentrated on one area) and I have greatly enjoyed it. I am also in the happy position where my employer may partially, or even fully, fund further education and even if they do not I am in a comfortable enough financial position to fund it myself.

I had been considering doing a masters next year to help further my career (not in law, rather a general business/leadership/project management one) but when discussing this in work I was asked, that given I have a recognised degree, would I not consider the barrister route as it would be excellent to have, even if I never devil or practice. I was somewhat taken aback by this because due to my poor degree and unhappy experience in University I had banished this from my thoughts as an option.

I have been thinking a lot about this over the past few days. I believe the negative memories I have about law are more to do with my experiences at the time and not the area itself. Plus I am a lot more mature. But I am still quite wary and have a few questions.

1. My undergrad is recognised by Kings Inns and I have passed the core topics. Does it matter that my results were crap and I had to repeat a semester for the purposes of the BL degree?

2. I would have to study for the entrance exams while working full time. I have heard and read that the standard of these exams is similar to undergrad, would this be accurate? Given I have not studied law in a long time would a preparatory course be advisable, or is this a waste of money?

3. I would be looking to undertake the two year part time course. How tough is this? I have read that there are a fair number of assessments, but the form of these does not seem to be explained in any detail. How are these assessments carried out? Is it realistically achievable while working full time in a job which has a fair deal of responsibility? (However I cam a civil servant so there will be a fair deal of flexibility)

It was put to me that masters are fairly common nowadays, but a professional qualification like this is not. The more I have thought about it the more it makes sense to do this rather than a random masters.

Any advice or comments will be greatly appreciated.

johnnyskeleton

John Hutton wrote: »

1. My undergrad is recognised by Kings Inns and I have passed the core topics. Does it matter that my results were crap and I had to repeat a semester for the purposes of the BL degree?

Nope, there is an entrance exam so you can study for that. Degree results dont really matter anymore, so long as its a qualifying degree e.g. one of the universities Ki regcognise.

2. I would have to study for the entrance exams while working full time. I have heard and read that the standard of these exams is similar to undergrad, would this be accurate? Given I have not studied law in a long time would a preparatory course be advisable, or is this a waste of money?

Yes to the first part. Re: prep course, its up to you as to how you learn the best but its certainly a good idea if its cheap and convenient.

3. I would be looking to undertake the two year part time course. How tough is this? I have read that there are a fair number of assessments, but the form of these does not seem to be explained in any detail. How are these assessments carried out? Is it realistically achievable while working full time in a job which has a fair deal of responsibility? (However I cam a civil servant so there will be a fair deal of flexibility)

Its not easy as you could be losing half your weekends for 8 months of the year, plus annual leave for exams etc and studying on top. On the other hand, lots of people will be in the same boat as you. Id say youll manage easily enough as long as you dont have significant family committments or a very active social life, and if you do you could still manage but it would be very hard.

Any advice or comments will be greatly appreciated.

If your employer is paying and you dont have to bring the kids to football and ballet on saturdays then its a no brainer to be honest.

hullaballoo

If your employer is backing you to do the 2 year part time degree at KI, you would be mad to turn it down. It's a great course but more importantly, the civil service seems to rate it very highly and it's a great move to progress your career in the civil service if nothing else.

Your primary degree results don't matter at all. The only people who care about legal professionals' undergrad results are big firms looking to differentiate a huge number of applications.

The entrance exams are tough because it's 5 exams in 5 days. They are approximately undergrad standard so are regarded as easier than FE1s.

I can't speak at any length on the 2 year degree as I did the 1 year and the 2 year wasn't available then. But there is a lot in the course and it's a high standard. It's perfectly manageable, though, if you're willing to work from day 1.

It sounds to me like you're not planning on practicing, so I don't feel the need to warn you about what that's like!

John Hutton

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Nope, there is an entrance exam so you can study for that. Degree results dont really matter anymore, so long as its a qualifying degree e.g. one of the universities Ki regcognise.



Yes to the first part. Re: prep course, its up to you as to how you learn the best but its certainly a good idea if its cheap and convenient.



Its not easy as you could be losing half your weekends for 8 months of the year, plus annual leave for exams etc and studying on top. On the other hand, lots of people will be in the same boat as you. Id say youll manage easily enough as long as you dont have significant family committments or a very active social life, and if you do you could still manage but it would be very hard.



If your employer is paying and you dont have to bring the kids to football and ballet on saturdays then its a no brainer to be honest.

I'm single and have no children... So I've no excuse!

I'm nervous about the exams but if I do a course next summer and in the new year pick up some of the manuals I should have plenty of time to get to grips with the topics.

Thank you for your reply it has been helpful.

John Hutton

hullaballoo wrote: »

If your employer is backing you to do the 2 year part time degree at KI, you would be mad to turn it down. It's a great course but more importantly, the civil service seems to rate it very highly and it's a great move to progress your career in the civil service if nothing else.

Your primary degree results don't matter at all. The only people who care about legal professionals' undergrad results are big firms looking to differentiate a huge number of applications.

The entrance exams are tough because it's 5 exams in 5 days. They are approximately undergrad standard so are regarded as easier than FE1s.

I can't speak at any length on the 2 year degree as I did the 1 year and the 2 year wasn't available then. But there is a lot in the course and it's a high standard. It's perfectly manageable, though, if you're willing to work from day 1.

It sounds to me like you're not planning on practicing, so I don't feel the need to warn you about what that's like!

Yes in work they flat out told me that to take this route would be far superior than "some random masters that loads of people have". I think I just have an inferiority complex about the whole thing given my university experience which was miserable. I'll just have to get over that.

I'm happy for the foreseeable future in the civil service so I would be doing this with a view to furthering my career there and not to practice myself.

In terms of the course itself, is it a similar form to an undergraduate in terms of it being assessed on a combination of assignments and exams or does it lean one way or the other?

Its a relief to know that my poor undergrad results will not hold me back, I left college feeling that it was useless (my colleagues all mainly went into legal firms)

Raisins

You should definitely do a revision course if it's been a while since you completed the undergrad. They set out all the examinable topics of each exam in booklets and go through the papers so they're worth the money for someone in your position.

The kings inns entrance is above all law undergrad exams that I know of and depending on where you studied and what kind of lecturer you had it's way above many of them. For example, the first question is a mixed mandatory problem that can cover 9/10 topics. Very few undergrad exams would have 26/27 examinable topics with a mandatory mixed problem.

johnnyskeleton

John Hutton wrote: »

In terms of the course itself, is it a similar form to an undergraduate in terms of it being assessed on a combination of assignments and exams or does it lean one way or the other?

A lot of it, if not most, is practical exams like mock advocacy, negotiations, group discussions etc. As far as I know there is very little sitting in a big hall being told how important Lord Buckmasters partial dissent in Donoghue v Stevens is. Think its more about procedure and lofty concepts like justice and equality than it is about substantive law.

Its a relief to know that my poor undergrad results will not hold me back,

Undergrad law degrees are kinda stupid anyways. Anyone who casually refers to dissenting judgements from the House of Lords from nearly a century ago clearly has issues.

nuac

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

A lot of it, if not most, is practical exams like mock advocacy, negotiations, group discussions etc. As far as I know there is very little sitting in a big hall being told how important Lord Buckmasters partial dissent in Donoghue v Stevens is. Think its more about procedure and lofty concepts like justice and equality than it is about substantive law.



Undergrad law degrees are kinda stupid anyways. Anyone who casually refers to dissenting judgements from the House of Lords from nearly a century ago clearly has issues.

I suggest a wider education in law is no load.

I knew a barrister on the Western Circuit who occasionally would refer to "An interesting case from the Colonies "

caimitator

John Hutton wrote: »

I would greatly appreciate any advice on my situation as I am at a bit of a crossroads.

I graduated with a law degree some years ago. Due to, a large degree, a fair amount of immaturity on my behalf, as well as medical and family issues which prevented me from attending university (or indeed studying) with any regularity I found the exams tough going and had to repeat a semester. I graduated with a poor degree. (3rd class honours is what my institution termed it)

Because of this and the bad taste in the mouth university left me with I did not undertake any further legal studies - it was just as well because with my level of degree that door seemed firmly shut. In any case the likes of Kings Inns it was not financially viable.

So since then I have worked in a variety of positions which have been completely unrelated to law.

However, I have recently begun working in a job which has a lot of legal aspects (albeit concentrated on one area) and I have greatly enjoyed it. I am also in the happy position where my employer may partially, or even fully, fund further education and even if they do not I am in a comfortable enough financial position to fund it myself.

I had been considering doing a masters next year to help further my career (not in law, rather a general business/leadership/project management one) but when discussing this in work I was asked, that given I have a recognised degree, would I not consider the barrister route as it would be excellent to have, even if I never devil or practice. I was somewhat taken aback by this because due to my poor degree and unhappy experience in University I had banished this from my thoughts as an option.

I have been thinking a lot about this over the past few days. I believe the negative memories I have about law are more to do with my experiences at the time and not the area itself. Plus I am a lot more mature. But I am still quite wary and have a few questions.

1. My undergrad is recognised by Kings Inns and I have passed the core topics. Does it matter that my results were crap and I had to repeat a semester for the purposes of the BL degree?

2. I would have to study for the entrance exams while working full time. I have heard and read that the standard of these exams is similar to undergrad, would this be accurate? Given I have not studied law in a long time would a preparatory course be advisable, or is this a waste of money?

3. I would be looking to undertake the two year part time course. How tough is this? I have read that there are a fair number of assessments, but the form of these does not seem to be explained in any detail. How are these assessments carried out? Is it realistically achievable while working full time in a job which has a fair deal of responsibility? (However I cam a civil servant so there will be a fair deal of flexibility)

It was put to me that masters are fairly common nowadays, but a professional qualification like this is not. The more I have thought about it the more it makes sense to do this rather than a random masters.

Any advice or comments will be greatly appreciated.

1. It does not matter that your results weren’t first class honours. Everyone who has a recognised undergrad can sit the entrance exams. Although, you need two certificates of recommendation which should be given by “persons of standing in the community”. As long as you get 50% or more in each of the entrance exams, you’re in.

2. They’re quite similar to undergrad, depending on where you went of course. The most annoying thing about the exams is the lack of previous patterns which you’d usually get with undergrad. The past exam papers are all online so you can get a good idea from that. Plus, they send you examinable topics per subject so you know how much you need to know.

Preparatory course would be great if you could get one especially if you haven’t done law exams in a long time. They have great pass rate records and it’s a good way to ease yourself into the learning process again. They usually start around May/June.

3. The full time or part time course is tough. 99% of the people who undertake the part time course are working full time though so you’ll be on a level playing field with everyone else. You will be giving up every second weekend and you’ll be expected to do work during the week to bring in on the weekends you’re in.

Yes, there are a rake of assessments. 16/17 in total, but like another poster mentioned, this doesn’t mean sit down 3 hour college type exams. There are a few open book assessments, a lot of advocacy assessments, a couple of MCTs and various other forms of assessment.

Another thing that should be reiterated is that it isn’t like a college course. You’re in small groups and you spend a ton of time on your feet doing advocacy exercises. They assume you know the law because you got through the exams so you’re not learning off case names etc. Instead, you’re learning how the day to day applications/motions/hearings work and learning how to handle/draft/advocate for those kinds of situations. But you are expected to know the law.

John Hutton

Thank you all for the replies.

I've pretty much decided to give it a go. I'm going to pick up the core textbooks in the new year and keep an eye out for the manuals.

My plan is to work away at it moderately until doing a preparatory course which will be a hard slog until the finish line.

I have nothing to lose really, and this makes far more sense than just doing a random masters.

Having looked at the exam papers it all seems much more reasoning and practical based than some of the stuff I did in college, this has enthused me.

Claw Hammer

There have been people called to the bar who only got 5 passes in their Leaving Certs. There have been people with 2.1 law degrees who failed the entrance exam. The past is the past and getting called to the bar has nothing to do with what happened prior to entry to the Inns.