[Crazy Jamie]

(Original post by younglawyer)
I'm glad you mentioned PI. I want to go down the same route but was wondering what you did in the gap between graduation/call to the Bar and attaining pupillage. Also, post-BPTC, what did you do to gain advocacy experience?

Many thanks.

M

I know this question wasn't directed at me, but given that PI is a notable part of my practice, I thought I might as well answer. Personally my advocacy experience post BVC (as it was then) came from working as an in house advocate in a solicitors form. It's a position that I was aware of when I came out of the BVC, and one that I actively worked my way towards. I secured a position as a paralegal in the firm first, and then moved into the in house advocacy team after a number of months. The firm I worked for was Insurance based, and therefore the majority of my hearings related to Defendant PI. There was a decent range of hearings as well, both in the value of the cases and nature of the issues. There are freelance advocacy positions available, but hearings for those agencies tend to more to do with housing (possession hearings etc) and, when you work your way up the ladder, general civil disputes. For PI advocacy experience, an in house position is your best bet.

[SevenStars]

(Original post by Wildman)
9 Bedford Row's application was due in 5pm today to start in February - so clearly the standard timetable isn't in practice yet. Long may that continue.

According to their website, 9BR use the pupillage portal - and also that they are not recruiting first sixes during 2011 and 2012. Perhaps the application you're referring to is a third six?

[b4u386]

(Original post by SevenStars)
According to their website, 9BR use the pupillage portal - and also that they are not recruiting first sixes during 2011 and 2012. Perhaps the application you're referring to is a third six?

It is a first six. However, it's a very specialised pupillage working solely within their international practice group. Requirements include prior work experience with one of the International HR Bodies and a sound knowledge of International criminal and hr law and practice.... So not your 'usual' pupillage.

[SevenStars]

(Original post by b4u386)
It is a first six. However, it's a very specialised pupillage working solely within their international practice group. Requirements include prior work experience with one of the International HR Bodies and a sound knowledge of International criminal and hr law and practice.... So not your 'usual' pupillage.

Indeed, not the usual.

Sounds like an interesting opportunity for those interested in that sort of pupillage.

[younglawyer]

(Original post by Crazy Jamie)
I know this question wasn't directed at me, but given that PI is a notable part of my practice, I thought I might as well answer. Personally my advocacy experience post BVC (as it was then) came from working as an in house advocate in a solicitors form. It's a position that I was aware of when I came out of the BVC, and one that I actively worked my way towards. I secured a position as a paralegal in the firm first, and then moved into the in house advocacy team after a number of months. The firm I worked for was Insurance based, and therefore the majority of my hearings related to Defendant PI. There was a decent range of hearings as well, both in the value of the cases and nature of the issues. There are freelance advocacy positions available, but hearings for those agencies tend to more to do with housing (possession hearings etc) and, when you work your way up the ladder, general civil disputes. For PI advocacy experience, an in house position is your best bet.

That's great advice, thank you so much!

[younglawyer]

I had another question. Some of the sets have put a problem question with their pupillage application form, but there's no guideline on answering the questions. This may sound stupid but this is my first proper go at applying for pupillage, but here goes:

1. Do they expect legal analysis, i.e. mention of case-law, statutes etc or just identification of principles from the factual problems [if so]

2. Now that I've left university, how can I get hold of case-law/statutes because I don't have access to Westlaw, Lexis or Lawtel?

Thanks again guys

[Isherwood100]

(Original post by younglawyer)
2. Now that I've left university, how can I get hold of case-law/statutes because I don't have access to Westlaw, Lexis or Lawtel?

Thanks again guys

Have you joined an Inn yet? If so you can use their library (though it may have to be back to the book versions, sadly).

[pupil101]

(Original post by Wildman)
The 9 Bedford Row one was only up on the website for 1 week prior to deadline as well, which makes me think that they have already decided who they are giving the pupillage to - a 'research assistant' at chambers or suchlike - as often happens.

9BR recruit for a short period in January every year, and every year the requirement is for considerable practical experience of international criminal law.

[pupil101]

(Original post by Wildman)
And the current two pupils are former research assistants. Most chambers are a bit more open re their recruitment wouldn't you say?

I made no comment about the openness of their recruitment process, just stated the fact that it was advertised and with very similar requirements as previous years. I don't know their current pupils, but no doubt they are talented individuals regardless of how long their pupillages appeared on the Portal for.

I agree that rumours of chambers giving out pupillages to their own research assistants can leave a bad taste in the mouth. Such practices should be discouraged, unless the chosen candidates are the best suited to the position. No doubt the niche areas of international criminal law for which 9BR sought a pupil necessitates a relativeley small pool of qualified candidates. I think research assistant positions 'with a view' to pupillage are wrong (and I think prohibited), but if one or more assistants in one year or another turn out to be the best candidates, then good luck to them.

Meritocracy at the Bar IS alive and kicking. I don't think anyone would seriously suggest that pupils these days are not all exceptionally able people.

[pupil101]

(Original post by Wildman)
Playing devils advocate here, as I have benefited from my parents being able to support me while off CV building.

But is it really meritocratic inviting applications only from those whose parents have been able to pay for them to go human rights-ing in Africa/Former Yugoslavia/Asia?

It narrows the pool to include only the rich. In my opinion that means they wont necessarily get the right candidate. But then they have maybe already picked their preferred candidate and so that's the whole point.

I fully agree. That's the problem with the level of competition for pupillages in general these days.

In addition to high levels of academic achievement, the vast majority of successful candidates will have been able to swan off human rights-ing abroad and/or spent long periods volunteering at home - this perpetuates the socio-economic mobility problem at the Bar. I don't think it makes the application process of an individual set of chambers particularly unfair, I think it is a problem accross the Bar as a whole. For many, a gap yaaah is unaffordable - particularly with rapid increases in BPTC fees and the diminishing number of professional loans available (indeed, why should someone need to take out a loan to do something they cannot otherwise afford because the reality is that they will need to have travelled and worked abroad as well as everything else). The Inns do provide scholarships for internships, though.

[pupil101]

(Original post by Chilbaldi)
Pupil101 - you seem to know about their application for last year too. Did you apply?

You may have noticed this year that the problem question for the application changed after a couple of days. Can you confirm whether the original question (about Bangladesh war crimes tribunal) was the question for last year?

My guess was that the last minute question changing was either someting awfully fishy designed to catch people out or was simply the OLPAS people screwing up yet again and putting up last year's question by mistake.

I didn't apply. Like many others, I considered that I was ineligible on the basis that I did not have the requisite experience.

I seem to remember the question last year being about Bangladesh. I would think the change in question was probably more to do with OLPAS screwing up as usual...

[ProBono]

(Original post by pupil101)
I made no comment about the openness of their recruitment process, just stated the fact that it was advertised and with very similar requirements as previous years. I don't know their current pupils, but no doubt they are talented individuals regardless of how long their pupillages appeared on the Portal for.

I agree that rumours of chambers giving out pupillages to their own research assistants can leave a bad taste in the mouth. Such practices should be discouraged, unless the chosen candidates are the best suited to the position. No doubt the niche areas of international criminal law for which 9BR sought a pupil necessitates a relativeley small pool of qualified candidates. I think research assistant positions 'with a view' to pupillage are wrong (and I think prohibited), but if one or more assistants in one year or another turn out to be the best candidates, then good luck to them.

Meritocracy at the Bar IS alive and kicking. I don't think anyone would seriously suggest that pupils these days are not all exceptionally able people.

We would all certainly hope that all pupils these days are exceptionally able people. Given that competition for pupillages is intense one would expect only the very best to succeed. That's way the latest figures published in the Bar Council/BSB Barometer Report are extremely interesting.

The full report can be found here:

http://cms.barcouncil.org.uk/assets/....01.12_web.pdf

I've only had a brief scan of the report but what stood out to me were the following figures re pupillage.

In 2009/2010 there were 460 registered pupils. 39 of these were given pupillage having achieved a lower second class honours degree. 2 of these pupils were given pupillage having attained a third class honours degree. Around 39 applicants were given pupillage having attained a competent on the BVC (as then was).

These figures are interesting because they defy everything we believe about what it takes to succeed at obtaining pupillage. I can only hope that these pupils had some extremely serious mitigating circumstances to excuse their poor academic performance balanced against exceptional achievement elsehwere.

[mwiko]

Well it's a new year, and I still find pupillage interviews frustrating. Especially when you can hear the interviews in the waiting room. Plus the panel's thoughts about each candidate. Bleeeegggggh.

[FMQ]

(Original post by ProBono)
We would all certainly hope that all pupils these days are exceptionally able people. Given that competition for pupillages is intense one would expect only the very best to succeed. That's way the latest figures published in the Bar Council/BSB Barometer Report are extremely interesting.

The full report can be found here:

http://cms.barcouncil.org.uk/assets/....01.12_web.pdf

I've only had a brief scan of the report but what stood out to me were the following figures re pupillage.

In 2009/2010 there were 460 registered pupils. 39 of these were given pupillage having achieved a lower second class honours degree. 2 of these pupils were given pupillage having attained a third class honours degree. Around 39 applicants were given pupillage having attained a competent on the BVC (as then was).

These figures are interesting because they defy everything we believe about what it takes to succeed at obtaining pupillage. I can only hope that these pupils had some extremely serious mitigating circumstances to excuse their poor academic performance balanced against exceptional achievement elsehwere.

YOu will find most of the 2.2 / 3rd are solicitors crossing over. The "competents" will be Russel Group 1sts.

[Woolfat]

Slightly OT - but is there an exhaustive list of all pupillage opportunities somewhere? The portal list is obviously find for OLPAS sets, but does it have all the Non-OLPAA ones?

[Kessler`]

Yes. All pupillages must now be advertised through the OLPAS system. The links on OLPAS should take you directly to the site. For news/information on all available pupillages, monitor http://thepupillagepages.com/ . You will need to register for this site.

[Crazy Jamie]

(Original post by ProBono)
These figures are interesting because they defy everything we believe about what it takes to succeed at obtaining pupillage.

Do they? To obtain pupillage you need to be an exceptional candidate. Whilst there are certainly general rules as to what makes an exceptional candidate, and indeed general rules as to what you need to increase your chances of obtaining pupillage, they are always held out to be 'general' rules, and not absolute ones. I would hope that candidates would equally be aware that not every exceptional candidate has a strong academic record, just as not every person with a strong academic record will be an exceptional candidate. Strong candidates with a weak academic record will always be in the minority, which from where I'm sitting seems to be reflected in the figures.

[ProBono]

(Original post by Crazy Jamie)
Do they? To obtain pupillage you need to be an exceptional candidate. Whilst there are certainly general rules as to what makes an exceptional candidate, and indeed general rules as to what you need to increase your chances of obtaining pupillage, they are always held out to be 'general' rules, and not absolute ones. I would hope that candidates would equally be aware that not every exceptional candidate has a strong academic record, just as not every person with a strong academic record will be an exceptional candidate. Strong candidates with a weak academic record will always be in the minority, which from where I'm sitting seems to be reflected in the figures.

I think that's that what I said, isn't it? If someone has a poor academic background but has good reasons to explain why they didn't perform as well as they could have done, but they have shown exceptional ability elsewhere then they surely do deserve their pupillage.

The concern rasied earlier on this thread was that a London chambers (i forget which one) is alleged to have recruited its own research assistants. The loosely veiled allegation is one of nepotism and the like. whilst I hope that FMQ's assumptions about these figures are correct I think it would wrong to assume that this sort of thing doesn't happen.

[Crazy Jamie]

(Original post by ProBono)
I think that's that what I said, isn't it? If someone has a poor academic background but has good reasons to explain why they didn't perform as well as they could have done, but they have shown exceptional ability elsewhere then they surely do deserve their pupillage.

You said what I quoted. My point is that those figures do not 'defy everything that we believe about what it takes to succeed at obtaining pupillage'. It's always been known that you can obtain pupillage with relatively poor academic results.

(Original post by ProBono)
The concern rasied earlier on this thread was that a London chambers (i forget which one) is alleged to have recruited its own research assistants. The loosley veiled allegation is one of nepotism and the like. whilst I hope that FMQ's assumptions about these figures are correct I think it would wrong to assume that this sort of thing doesn't happen.

I noticed that discussion, though I didn't comment on it at the time. Personally I don't see the issue with a set recruiting its own research assistants per se, and certainly don't see it as nepotism on the face of it. It's akin to firms of solicitors handing out training contracts to its own paralegals, which is not uncommon. This may not look fair from the outside, but in reality the Chambers cannot pretend that they do not know these candidates very well, and if they have shown themselves to be exceptional then it is not surprising that they would be recruited. Equally, I highly doubt that any research assistant would be recruited if they had not proven themselves as exceptional in performing that role.

That said, I do highly doubt that nepotism has been completely removed from the pupillage process. I think the only thing that can be said with confidence is that it is far less common and far less blatant than it used to be, to the point where the average candidate no longer needs to have connections to secure pupillage. It should certainly not be assumed that those who have secured pupillage with relatively poor academics are more likely to have benefited from nepotism than those with 2:1s and Very Competents, though.

[ProBono]

(Original post by Crazy Jamie)
That said, I do highly doubt that nepotism has been completely removed from the pupillage process. I think the only thing that can be said with confidence is that it is far less common and far less blatant than it used to be, to the point where the average candidate no longer needs to have connections to secure pupillage. It should certainly not be assumed that those who have secured pupillage with relatively poor academics are more likely to have benefited from nepotism than those with 2:1s and Very Competents, though.

I agree entirely!