Training and work of solicitors and barristers and whether there should be a singal legal profession

Most solicitors begin with a degree, but it doesn’t have to be in law. Applicants usually now have an upper second class degree, and very few get lower than a second. Those who don’t have a law degree take a one year course which leads to the common profession examination. The next step is a one year legal practice course which is designed to provide practical skills, including advocacy as well as legal and procedural knowledge. After passing the legal practice exams the person must find a pace usually in a firm to serve a two year apprenticeship. All solicitors are required to participate in continuing education throughout their careers.

Advocacy is the main function of barristers; much of their time is spent in court preparing for it. They must be self employed and cannot form partnerships but they usually share offices with other barristers. Usually a client could not approach a barrister directly had had to see a solicitor first but in 2004 this was changed. Barristers work under a ‘cab rank’ rule which means that if they are not busy on a case at the time they must accept any case given to them.

The starting point is at least an upper second class degree. If they don’t have a degree in law they must do a one year course leading to the common professional exam. Students then join one of the four Inns of Court, after this student take the year long Bar vocational course. Students have to dine at their inn 12 times, after this the applicant is called to the bar and must then find a place in chambers to serve their pupilage, a one year aprentaship in which pupils assist a qualified barrister. After this the newly qualified barrister must find a permanent place in chambers.

There are many arguments for and against whether there should be a single legal profession. By looking at the similarities and differences of solicitors and barristers we can evaluate to a certain extent whether or not the legal system should be merged. Similarities are that both have to start with a degree in law and they both do similar types of work and have the same rights of audience ,another similarity is that they both work in similar places. Differences are that barristers not allowed to form partnerships and also clients come directly to solicitors. Arguments for the fusion of the profession are that it is expensive when a client has to pay for both a solicitor and barrister, also it is inefficient with a two tier system and work may be duplicated and a solicitor prepares the case with little or no input from the barrister who will have to argue the case in court .Arguments against them merging are that with them being separate each can specialize in different areas and better at their separate jobs rather than one profession doing both. Also importance of good advocacy may lead to leading barristers joining large firms of commercial solicitors making their specialist sills less accessible to the average person.