• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Describe the main differences between solicitors and barristers with regard to training and work and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of having a single legal profession

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Describe the main differences between solicitors and barristers with regard to training and work and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of having a single legal profession 8(a) Describe the main differences between solicitors and barristers with regard to training and work There are about 90,000 lawyers in England and Wales, a high number of 80,000 which are solicitors and a considerably lower number of 10,000 which are barristers. Even though over the past few years the work of the two professions has intertwined, there are still key differences between barristers and solicitors. There are many differences between the training of a barrister and a solicitor. One of these is that solicitors have to take a legal practice exam, but barristers have to take a common professional exam. The legal practice exam is a one year course which consists of three compulsory subject areas (Business, property and litigation) and provides all the practical skills required to become a solicitor. But the common professional exam consists of the studying of seven topics (Contract, land, torts, public law, European union law, equity & trusts and criminal law). Another difference between the training is that the barristers have to dine at an Inn of Court. All student barristers have to join one of the four inns in London. They can choose to join either Gray's Inn, Lincoln's Inn, Inner temple or middle temple. The students must keep terms, which means they have to regularly attend the inn and dine the correct amount of times (8 or 9) ...read more.

Middle

It was held that barristers could be sued for professional negligence outside of court, and Saif's barrister had owed him a duty of care while advising Saif so he could be sued for negligence as he had breached his duty of care owed to his client. Barristers could be sued up to �2000 or, depending on the seriousness of the case, could be barred from practising as a barrister. A barrister does dot enter a contract with his client, therefore he cannot sue for unpaid fees, which also means the client cannot sue the barrister for breach of contract. But in the more recent case of Hall v. Simons (2000) the client can now sue his/her barrister for professional negligence. This case held that the given immunity to barristers from the case of Rondel v. Worsley had not been decided wrongly at the time, but the world had changed. The House of Lords decided that the immunity from the previous case could not be justified; therefore the immunity from being sued negligence had been removed from both criminal and civil cases. Both barristers and solicitors can now be sued for negligence regarding work out of court and work during the course of a trial. This was a precedent which is now used for current cases. In conclusion there are many differences between barristers and solicitors which make the two professions different. Some of the main differences are barristers have to dine at an Inn of their choice whereas solicitors don't, most solicitors meet face to face with the client whereas barristers just advocate them in court and barristers are self employed whereas solicitors are usually employed by an employer. ...read more.

Conclusion

Another disadvantage of fusing the two professions is the loss of the cab-rank rule. The cab-rank rule is a rule which all barristers have to follow which is they must accept the next brief given to them, on the condition that they have not already been briefed for that day. This ensures that representation is fair, even in the most distasteful or unpopular cases. But if the two professions were fused, the cab-rank rule would be harder to operate, so some cases may not be ensured proper representation. Another disadvantage of fusing the two professions is that they normally split of into two branches anyway. Currently we have solicitors and barristers, solicitors being the office workers and barristers being the advocates. But even if the two professions were fused, the lawyers would usually split into office workers and advocates, which is almost the same as solicitors and barristers, destroying one of the main purposes of fusion. To conclude I feel that although fusion may seem like a good thing, the two professions should stay separated. Fusion may be ok for a little while, but overall it would just create unsolvable issues which we would not be able to handle. Although fusion reduces the duplication of work, encourages continuity and it may be a little cheaper, fusion could decrease the amount of specialists available and destroy the cab-rank rule which would mean that clients may not receive the proper representation to which they are entitled to. Proper representation of a case is high in public concern, an although cheap law may be a good thing, bad law is not, therefore putting fusion into place in the English legal system would not be the best move to make. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Law essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    Law - Resulting trusts

    4 star(s)

    alone, that that other shall be a bare trustee for him, will not prevail if evidence establishes that the true intention is otherwise. The same is true where there is a voluntary conveyance or transfer which gives rise to a presumption of a resulting trust.16 With many papers written on

  2. Marked by a teacher

    abortion research

    4 star(s)

    Godless views on whether abortion is moral and whether a woman's right to choose abortion should remain legally protected are almost never consulted. This is somewhat understandable, given the fact that there is no single atheist position on abortion and no authority to determine what atheists are supposed to think.

  1. Criminal Law (Offences against the person) - revision notes

    - E found guilty of s47 ABH. He put a bag on her head and suffocated her during sex play and caused internal bleeding of the eyes. Then put lighter fuel on her breasts and set her alight Appealed

  2. Explain the need for discipline in at least two public services. Analyse the role ...

    They face jail if found guilty. Despite that prospect, one of the "conscientious objectors", who serves with the Territorial Army's 217 Field Squadron, based in Holloway, north London, said that he had told the MoD he was not prepared to go to Iraq. He added that he would use all available avenues to seek exemption from fighting in a "war about revenge".

  1. The Law Relating to Negotiable Instruments

    Kendalls for attorneys' fees in the civil and criminal proceedings brought against them, as well as compensatory damages for the emotional distress and damage to reputation they suffered as a result of the banks wrongful dishonor of the corporation's checks.

  2. Is there a tort of invasion of privacy?

    An action for breach of confidence is not available in a situation where a person had simply been made the subject matter of surveillance (by, for example, video surveillance being directed to a private garden) without 'information' being gathered. In the Wainwright case the strip searching of the claimants did

  1. law of uk

    always have to use the decision that was previously made and you do not really get to take into account the different points of the case. The lower courts must always follow the higher courts, this again means that if there is a slightly different case then you cannot take

  2. The purpose of this assignment is to be able to understand the role purpose ...

    Keeping the Queen's Peace is an old axiom that may not seem relevant today but had a significant reason at the time it was instated. This principle basically means the Police Force is expect to keep a sense of order within the public community and make them feel secure and safe.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work