Professional Documents
Culture Documents
June 2017
PAST EVENTS
THE COMMITTEE:
If you are interested in joining the committee, please email any of us for more details.
PYLG Newsletter
June 2017
PAST EVENTS (CONTINUED!)
THE COMMITTEE:
If you are interested in joining the committee, please email any of us for more details.
THE “SUPER-EXAM”
The new system, on the face of it, may not appear to vary much from the previous one. SQE stage
1 comprises testing the knowledge of each prospective solicitor in 6 key areas (public and
administrative law, dispute resolution in contract or tort, property law, commercial and corporate
law, wills and the administration of estates and trusts and criminal law (note conspicuous lack of
EU module)). SQE stage 2 then assesses each prospective solicitor’s practical skills in 5 areas -
client interviewing, Advocacy, Case Analysis, Legal Research and Written Advice and Legal Drafting.
These five areas are assessed in two ‘practice contexts’ (read as ‘practice areas’) so each
candidate will be assessed on each area twice.
To those who have already qualified this all sounds very familiar as, broadly, the two SQE stages
equate to the ‘academic’ degree/GDL and the ‘practical’ LPC stages of training. However, the SRA’s
view is that the SQE has two main benefits over the current system, the first being the
standardisation of competence among solicitors and the second being the increased flexibility of
the training system and the consequent opening up of the profession to people from a greater
variety of backgrounds. The SRA cite the practices of other jurisdictions, notably New Zealand and
New York, as examples of where similar entrance exams exist and also makes the point that
around 110 institutions currently assess LLBs, meaning that the standard of examination for many
future solicitors varies widely.
THE “SUPER-EXAM”
Predictably, there has been a mixed reaction to the proposed changes amongst the profession and
those who train it. The SRA is keen to stress that, according to its research, 79% of people agree
everyone should pass the same final exam to become a solicitor and a similar percentage say that
this would increase their confidence in solicitors as a profession. However, despite these claims,
the lack of clarity on the precise benefits of the SQE over the current system persist. Chief
amongst these criticisms is the fact that it is unclear exactly how much the SQE’s various
component parts will cost. The SRA have said that they are ‘concerned’ about the current cost of
the GDL/LPC (no arguments from me there!) but haven’t suggested how much their revised
system would actually cost. One of the supposed virtues of the new system will be its increased
accessibility to those from more disadvantaged backgrounds so one might assume that the SQE
would be more affordable than the GDL/LPC. However, with training providers likely to be limited
and many people still wishing to become solicitors, I cannot help but be slightly concerned.
Perhaps one of the genuinely progressive benefits of the SQE is the fact that it seeks to
acknowledge and address the work that is done by paralegals and others working in the law but
not on official training contracts. The way in which the practical element of the SQE is envisaged at
present means that work undertaken as a paralegal or even as part of a ‘sandwich’ year in industry
at university might be able to count towards the practical element of an individual’s SQE
(provided, I assume, that the employer can be convinced to sign off on the quality of the work).
On the face of it this is a long-overdue step towards acknowledging that there are more ways to
train and become a competent lawyer beyond undertaking the traditional training contract route.
However, there is some concern that including a wider variety of work experience as part of the
SQE training might lead to an ‘NQ bottleneck’. It is said that the bottleneck might be formed as
more people who have completed the academic side of the SQE and who are working in paralegal
or support roles qualify to be admitted as solicitors by dint of their work experience outside of a
formal ‘training contract’. It is no secret that there is a training contracts bottleneck at present –
there are more people wanting to undertake a training contract than there are spaces. However, if
the concerns about the SQE are well-founded, would it be better to replace one bottleneck with
another?
There are undoubtedly many questions
about the SQE that still need to be
answered. Fortunately, (if you like that sort
of thing) the SRA still has an open
consultation on the SQE available until 26
July 2017. If you are at all interested or
concerned about the way in which the SQE
might affect the profession or indeed your
own training prospects, then I would
encourage you to have a look over the SRA’s
proposals and speak to them about it. You
could even speak to us at PYLG about it!
Thanks Jake! If you have a burning issue you would like to see covered in one of our newsletters, please
contact one of the committee. We’d love to hear from you!
UPCOMING PYLG & PADLS EVENTS
12 July– Annual Quiz