Should you be able to call yourself a Barrister?
Approach the bar or become a QC. Discuss everything about legal careers here.
| Announcements | Posted on | |
|---|---|---|
| Interview discussion rules - please read before posting! | 12-01-2013 | |
-
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- Full Member
- Posts: 137
Should you be able to call yourself a Barrister?I know what the BSB says but I'm interested to know what people think....if you haven't secured pupillage, should graduates of the BPTC and those who have been called to the Bar hold themselves out as Barristers-at-law?
Would you even want to? -
- Reputation:
- Full Member
- Posts: 76
Re: Should you be able to call yourself a Barrister?No- it's misleading. The public and even those within the profession would expect 'barrister-at-law' to mean someone who has completed pupillage and secured tenancy. Pupillageless BPTC graduates describing themselves as barristers of law are not being particularly honest and it would be much more suitable for them to describe themselves as having the qualities and skills of a barrister than to call themselves a barrister at law.(Original post by Luckypupil)
I know what the BSB says but I'm interested to know what people think....if you haven't secured pupillage, should graduates of the BPTC and those who have been called to the Bar hold themselves out as Barristers-at-law?
Would you even want to?
Would you not expect a barrister to have higher rights to represent you in court? I can't think of many people who wouldn't (perhaps only those who have encountered pupillageless BPTC grads calling themselves barristers...). -
- Reputation:
- Full Member
- Location: England
- Posts: 108
Re: Should you be able to call yourself a Barrister?I'm sure I've read somewhere that if we don't have pupillage we have to 'non-practising' in brackets after our name in anything in which we are describing ourselves as barristers? Or have I dreamt that? I may well have done...(Original post by Luckypupil)
I know what the BSB says but I'm interested to know what people think....if you haven't secured pupillage, should graduates of the BPTC and those who have been called to the Bar hold themselves out as Barristers-at-law?
Would you even want to? -
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- Full Member
- Posts: 137
Re: Should you be able to call yourself a Barrister?something like that.....but do those who have completed the LPC able to call themselves non-practicing solicitors? I dont think so. Why the difference?(Original post by FurryFeet)
I'm sure I've read somewhere that if we don't have pupillage we have to 'non-practising' in brackets after our name in anything in which we are describing ourselves as barristers? Or have I dreamt that? I may well have done... -
- Reputation:
- Full Member
- Location: England
- Posts: 108
Re: Should you be able to call yourself a Barrister?No idea on the answer to either of those, I'm afraid.(Original post by Luckypupil)
something like that.....but do those who have completed the LPC able to call themselves non-practicing solicitors? I dont think so. Why the difference? -
- Reputation:
- Full Member
- Posts: 96
Re: Should you be able to call yourself a Barrister?The title comes from being called to the Bar, not from getting a practising certificate, so I don't think that anyone without pupillage using a title legitimately conferred upon them by an Inn of Court, in the contexts mandated by the BSB, is being dishonest.
That doesn't stop it being a wholly impotent title, one that would only cause embarrassment because its announcement would almost always be shortly followed by "ooh, er, well...I haven't actually got a pupillage yet." -
- Reputation:
- Respected Member
- Posts: 199
Re: Should you be able to call yourself a Barrister?The difficulty being of course that the average lay person will not appreciate the distinction between a qualified barrister and a practising barrister. As such, if you tell people that you are a barrister before securing pupillage, either verbally or by noting the title under a signature or similar on paperwork, you run the risk of misleading the person who reads that title because they will likely assume that you are a practising barrister with all of the rights and competency that that entails. Hence why it is not allowed.(Original post by Shearn)
The title comes from being called to the Bar, not from getting a practising certificate, so I don't think that anyone without pupillage using a title legitimately conferred upon them by an Inn of Court, in the contexts mandated by the BSB, is being dishonest. -
- Reputation:
- New Member
- Posts: 8
Re: Should you be able to call yourself a Barrister?Absolutely not, in my opinion. As is the case with solicitors, the professional title should be used when the professional qualifications have been acheived, which (if it does not), should include a period of work-based learning.
If my understanding is correct, the system in the US is one where you are eleigible to refer to yourself as 'Attorney' once you have finished law school. This must be at least inconvenient for the consumer as they will need to assure themselves in every case that the Attorney has at least some practical experience. In England and Wales, a solicitor cannot become an owner of a law firm until they are 3 years PQE, which at least gives the guarantee that someone in that organisation has 5 years of work-based experience. -
- Reputation:
- Vengeful, Imperial Overlord of The Student Room
- Location: I am not a brony
- Posts: 4,948
Re: Should you be able to call yourself a Barrister?This ties in with the "Golden Rules" thing with pupillage application. I don't think pre-training solicitor candidates consider themselves to be solicitors of any colour - it's clear that they're law students or LPC graduates.(Original post by Luckypupil)
something like that.....but do those who have completed the LPC able to call themselves non-practicing solicitors? I dont think so. Why the difference?
On the other hand - what's a paralegal? Is that a job title or a status? If you've opened a few cases for FRU - does that make you a paralegal? -
- Reputation:
- Thread Starter
- Full Member
- Posts: 137
Re: Should you be able to call yourself a Barrister?Maybe not barrister but do they need to be called something?
At present they are not even paralegals (are they?). They only thing they appear to be is £15k in the hole!
Maybe that is just tough luck? -
- Reputation:
- Overlord in Training
- Location: Essex/ London
- Posts: 2,749
Re: Should you be able to call yourself a Barrister?There will be an article about this subject in the Criminal Law and Justice Weekly soon.
The BSB has considered deferring call, here is the consultation which considers arguments for and against: http://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/...ferral-of-call
Holding oneself out as a barrister while providing legal services is a criminal offence, the BSB appears to be content that this fact serves as adequate protection. -
- Reputation:
- TSR Demigod
- Posts: 7,283
Re: Should you be able to call yourself a Barrister?You can call yourself a barrister, providing it is not in connection with the provision of legal services.(Original post by Luckypupil)
I know what the BSB says but I'm interested to know what people think....if you haven't secured pupillage, should graduates of the BPTC and those who have been called to the Bar hold themselves out as Barristers-at-law?
Would you even want to?
Apart from people with grandfather rights, you cannot use the title non-practising barrister in connection with the provision of legal services.
http://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/...s-a-barrister/
