Practice Toolset

Andrew Otchie shares his experience of becoming a New York Attorney and discusses the common issues in academic training, qualification and practice.  

The Bar Council statistics record that when I was Called to the Bar in 2005, 1,392 candidates had successfully completed the Bar Vocational Course (now the Bar Professional Training Course) that year, but only 556 barristers commenced pupillage (the numbers however are not precise because pupillage applicants include previous course candidates, and approximately 30 per cent of those Called are from overseas and are not looking for a pupillage in this country). 

ROUND  ONE
The recommendations made by the Jackson Review are beginning to be implemented. Stuart Sime provides an overview

Sir Rupert Jackson’s 2010 Review of Civil Litigation Costs , (see ‘Jackson Review: Justice and Costs’, Counsel February 2010) remains very much on the agenda of the Ministry of Justice (MoJ), and we have now reached the stage when the recommendations made by the Review are beginning to be implemented. 

The payment of referral fees is to be banned. Lord Justice Jackson has got what he wanted. Professor Dominic Regan considers the ban and whether it may presage other seismic shifts.

A referral fee is a sum paid by a solicitor so as to acquire instructions. Trust solicitors to end up paying to do work. Chapter 20 of the final Jackson report sets out the history and ramifications. His view was that the only winners were the recipient of fees. An outright ban was proposed. 

Taryn Lee and Toby Craig look forward to this year’s Bar Conference on Saturday 5 November and explain how the Bar can overcome a period of great change to ensure a bright future.  

As barristers, clerks, practice managers, solicitors and many others come together on Saturday 5 November to take part in this year’s 26th Annual Bar Conference, the Bar looks around and finds change in almost everything it sees. The legal profession has been subject to a range of new regulation and legislation in recent years, coupled with a deep financial crisis which has affected all professions and created stark challenges and strong opportunities. 

The Court of Protection has been accused of being overly secretive. Elizabeth Cleaver examines recent cases where  the media has been allowed to attend

The new Court of Protection was set up in 2007 to take important decisions for those who lack the capacity to do so for themselves. These issues include where the patient should live, who should manage their finances and what medical treatment they should receive. Prior to 2007 the Court of Protection was part of the Office of the Public Guardian but these are now two separate bodies. It was felt that more clarity was needed concerning day to day decision-making for the most vulnerable members of our society. These decisions are of paramount importance to the patient and can be of the most private nature. Although Court of Protection cases are normally heard in private some recent cases have raised the question of publicising them. 

Christopher Stephens, the new Chairman  of the Judical Appointments Commission, talks to Counsel’s David Wurzel about the Commission’s aims and his role.  

“I arrived knowing very little in February”, Christopher Stephens, the new Chairman of the Judicial Appointments Commission (the “JAC”) confessed when I met him in September. Since then, he says, “I have learned my way through your profession”. He did however have a head start in respect of recommending people for appointments:  before becoming a Civil Service Commissioner and a member of the Senior Salaries Review Board he spent 30 years in Human Resources. 

James Woolf explains the role of the Bar Council’s Ethical Enquiries Service . 

“I’m pretty sure that I know the answer to this, but I’d just like to run it by you.” With this line or something similar begin many of the calls handled by the Bar Council’s Ethical Enquiries Line. Perhaps this should not be surprising, as part of the purpose of the service is to provide a safety net for the profession, a sounding board if you like for barristers who find themselves in those knotty situations which clearly engage the Code of Conduct.  

A look at the Bar Standards Board’s Clementi Debate on Continuing Professional Development - and the views of those who took part.  

The need for barristers to do Continuing Professional Development (“CPD”) was noted as long ago as the Ormrod Committee in 1971. It finally became compulsory for all in 2005. Things have moved more rapidly since then. In January 2010, Derek Wood CBE QC and his Working Group embarked on an inquiry into CPD as the third and final part of the Bar Standards Board’s (“BSB”) review of all stages of education and training for the Bar. In May 2011 it reported. Next has been the consultation process on the recommendations of the report. 

The Bar is changing. Toby Craig of the Bar Council looks at how the Bar is having to adapt to meet these changes.  

A modern Bar prides itself on its values and on high quality, well trained, specialist advocacy. Its product is second-to-none. It is a small profession; a cadre. Barristers are very good value, highly mobile and can provide relevant and realistic advice to their clients. However, as with so much in life, it is one thing having a good product; it is another to sell it. Good work will not alone speak for itself. Effective marketing, and ensuring that the sales pitch is responding to a rapidly changing clientele of varying sophistication, is essential. 

The Conference is open to barristers under 10 years’ Call, pupils and BPTC students. A Conference brochure and registration form will be available from mid-August. Places will be allocated on a first-come, first-served basis so early booking is advisable.