I thought about calling this post "How to qualify as a solicitor 2: Electric Boogaloo". But, its a niche joke and I'm trying to make things clearer for people instead of confuse even more!
Following my last blog entry on this topic, I confess I underestimated the number of ways in which a candidate can qualify as a solicitor and, in turn, have shown my own ignorance to these different routes. But again, what's life if we aren't learning?
Apprenticeships
In April 2017, the government introduced the apprenticeship levy, so all businesses that make over £3m per year must spend a proportion of their profits on training new apprentices.
This route to qualification has been seen as trailblazing because it is a route not normally associated with the legal industry.
Typically candidates are expected to have at least 5 GCSEs graded A*-C (9-4 in new money) and 3 A-levels graded at B or above (or equivalent work experience). There might be some variation with providers, so it is best to check with whoever you are looking to apply to.
The timeline of this route typically tends to be:
1) Obtain GCSEs and A-levels
2) Be accepted as an apprentice and start the clock of the 6-year programme.
3) In years 1-4 of the scheme, work as an apprentice learning and gaining competence in legal and commercial skills and professional conduct whilst studying towards a law degree at a provider of the employer's choosing.
4) In years 5-6, continue working whilst completing the LPC and PSC. Once completed, you'll qualify as a solicitor.
It is a paid role, and at the time of writing this (financial year 2020/2021) the minimum wage for apprentices is £4.15ph for anyone aged under 19 and anyone in the first year of their apprenticeship. You must be paid at least the minimum wage for your age if you are an apprentice aged 19 or over and have completed your first year. This is:
£6.45 if you are aged 18 to 20
£8.20 if you are aged 21 to 24
£8.72 if you are aged 25 and over.
This route is typically aimed at school leavers of around 18 years of age, so if you're sure that you want to pursue a career in law, this is a helpful option that gives you the opportunity to gain experience right from the get-go. Obviously you'll have to demonstrate a high academic achievement at A-level. But all being well and going exactly to plan, you could see yourself qualified by 24 years old at the earliest.
Equivalent means
Some have called this the "qualified paralegal route" as many who have qualified this way have worked as paralegals for many years and gained the experience and skills and competence necessary to qualify this way without applying for and completing a training contract. But essentially "Equivalent Means" means that your certified learning and work-based learning may be recognised and used as an exemption to some or all of the training requirements to qualify in the usual way (ie law degree, LPC, training contract, PSC).
To apply to be admitted as a Solicitor this way, you'll need to have gained experience in at least 3 different areas of law for at least 2 years - whilst this isn't a min/max amount of time stated, it is suggested that at least 2 years experience will be necessary. You'll also need to complete an application form and submit a portfolio of evidence to the SRA, whilst obviously bearing in mind professional conduct when it comes to confidentiality (translation: no client personal details or anything that can identify them!).
There's some uncertainly and lack of structure in determining what counts as the evidence that will definitely be accepted to support your application. Though there are articles from solicitors who have qualified this way that I'll link here to give an idea of what they were required to show to the SRA, and what they were required to do in their role.
I would suggest that "trainee-level" work is what the SRA is looking for, but that in itself isn't particularly clear as different firms will have different interpretations of what trainee-level work is. For some, it means giving trainees total oversight of live cases. For others, it means bringing them on to support the Associates or Partners and be supervised just like a paralegal. I think the size of the firm, the number of solicitors they employ and the kind of work they do and attract would play a part in what they interpret as trainee-level work.
SQE - the "super-exam"
The Solicitors Qualification Exam (SQE) is intended to replace the GDL and LPC. It will be coming into effect from autumn 2021, though it is reported that law schools and LPC/GDL providers will still be offering the LPC/GDL, especially for students who started the course but were not able to finish it. Students who started the LPC before the SQE gets introduced will have until 2032 to complete the course and qualify.
In order to qualify via this route, you will need to:
1) Complete a degree - doesn't even have to be a law degree!
2) Complete the two stages of the course.
Stage 1 (SQE1) covers "functioning legal knowledge". This is the technical knowledge and application part of the course.
Stage 2 (SQE2) covers "core legal skills". This covers the practical skills that solicitors are expected to use on a daily basis such as interviewing, drafting and research.
3) Complete 2 years of qualifying work experience
As with all methods, so long as you meet the SRA's character and suitability requirements (https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/standards-regulations/assessment-character-suitability-rules/), you will qualify as a solicitor upon achieving the 2 years experience.
Basically, if you haven't been convicted of a serious crime, acted dishonestly, or been disciplined for anything serious such as acting negligently in a position of authority and oversight, ie Director of a company, then you're in the clear.
The above image from https://www.chambersstudent.co.uk/law-schools/the-solicitors-qualifying-examination-sqe shows a possible method as to how to qualify via this route. Though there doesn't appear to be guidance as to whether this is the only way of achieving this route, so if you wanted to then you can complete both SQE1 and 2 then do the work experience, or do the work experience then SQE1 and 2 afterwards.
But ......
It is fair to say that there has been a mixed reaction to this news that the LPC, the practical skills and knowledge course that has been used to assess prospective solicitors, is going to be replaced.
Having read into this and spoken with my colleagues and peers, I know I still have some questions. Firstly, it is confirmed that the degree doesn't have to be a law degree. I completely welcome greater accessibility into the profession, though I'm of the mind that a law degree is the logical degree choice if you were looking to enter the profession anyway. Its like me saying I want to be a surgeon but I complete a degree in architecture. Naturally, hospitals want to recruit practitioners who have the best practical skills and knowledge from their studies because they will be responsible for vulnerable people, including people trusting them to heal what ails them, even save lives. So what could an architect realistically bring to the medical profession that the profession greatly needs, especially in the current situation we are living in at the moment?
To bring this back, and this is a personal thing, what is the thinking employed by giving a candidate who has completed a non-law degree the same opportunities as someone who has studied and trained to be a solicitor for years without being 100% certain that they are committed to the profession? I'd welcome further insight and conversation around this and would invite any readers to engage as well.
Secondly, as a sort of follow on from the above, the legal profession is a trusted profession where its practitioners are held to the highest possible standards of trust. To breach this public trust and to bring the profession into disrepute is akin to dancing with the devil, especially if the offence is dishonesty and immoral behaviour. At best, the punishment could be a fine or a short suspension. At worst, it could mean a permanent expulsion from practising as a solicitor (known as "striking off", meaning to have your name removed from the roll of Solicitors, and all the hard work you put in to qualify to be for nought). Now for students and prospective solicitors like me who have studied law since undergrad, there will be opportunities where our knowledge and application of Professional Conduct and knowledge of regulations will be tested at every possible avenue.
Let's imagine that a solicitor who has qualified via the SQE route has misconducted themselves. But that solicitor's background isn't a law degree, but a History degree, so they have not been exposed to Professional Conduct knowledge to the same degree as those who have obtained a law degree and/or LPC. Ignorance of the rules is no excuse, but there is a genuine lack of knowledge or understanding compared to their law-student peers that sadly the SQE has not been able to cover.
Would the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT), the adjudicators of alleged breaches and misconduct, take into account that this solicitor may not have spent as much time as their peers who completed a law degree and so might not have had the same amount of time to engross themselves in legal study especially regarding topics such as Professional Conduct and Regulations? What support and protections are available to these solicitors in these situations? We don't know, and we don't know if there will be adequate protection of solicitors or the industry in situations like this. Obviously the industry needs to be protected, but the industry still needs solicitors, and there will be an influx of solicitors from non-law backgrounds following the introduction of the SQE who will rely on the industry for protection and support. Furthermore, although the intended end result for solicitors qualifying this way is that all are equally equipped with the knowledge and skills and competencies required, there is still the notion that a solicitor who studied a law degree has had those extra years engrossed in studying what is required than their non-law degree peers.
Thirdly, based on publically available information and the experiences of a LinkedIn connection who sat a pilot exam, the reliance on multiple-choice questions (MCQs) worries me because they don't give ample opportunity to examine a candidate's application of the knowledge they have gained from the studies. With MCQs, all you have to do is tick a box with the answer you think is correct. Whereas with an open question worth around 15 or 20 marks, this gives the candidate a great chance to apply what they have learned and show the examiner that they have a good grasp of the technical and practical knowledge that is required of them should they encounter the scenario in practice, and also to show the examiner their way of thinking in how they would approach the problem showing the pros and cons of what actions they would and wouldn't take. With MCQs, you have a 1 in 4 chance of getting the question right and, to an extent, there is an element of luck especially if the answer isn't clear cut. With problem questions, you have free reign to put your answer out exactly the way you want showing the examiner exactly how you would approach the problem.
LawCareers.net is keeping on top of updates with the SQE. You can find further information here: https://www.lawcareers.net/Solicitors/the-solicitors-qualifying-examination
My takeaway is that it doesn't help that at the moment the SQE is still in the development phase and the Equivalent Means route isn't the clearest of routes regarding what counts as evidence that you have met the required criteria. I'm interested to see if my concerns, which I've learned are concerns shared by many of my peers, will be addressed by the SRA regarding the SQE. Certainly the National Junior Lawyers Division (JLD) of the Law Society is writing to the SRA and are in constant contact about the issues that may affect junior lawyers and hopefully when the route releases in 2021 we will see these kinks ironed out. Like I said, I'm all for increasing accessibility to the profession, and it is common for people to change careers at any point in their life - perhaps they realised the career in their youth just isn't for them, or isn't giving them what they need or desire from a workplace or an industry - but I do hope that the influx of SQE-trained solicitors will be properly supported and be allowed to thrive.
Be safe, everyone!
Credit: Cover image photo by Hunters Race on Unsplash
Comments