[MalleusMaleficarum]

I'm still doing my A-Levels at present, but I have an offer to study Law at Oxford next year; predictably, I aspire to move into the legal profession after graduating. I'm aware that work experience at some stage is considered more or less essential for the best jobs these days, but I'm pretty ignorant as to when, where and how. So far, the only work experience I've done is a week with a solicitors' firm back at the beginning of Year 11. I know that most people go for internships at least in the second year of a UG degree, but I can't decide whether to try to get some work experience over this summer or whether I should try to just earn as much money as possible instead. Is it at all necessary to have experience prior to going to university, or is it considered okay to show up having done no experience and hope for a fist/second-year internship?

[v3n0m06]

Most people have no experience when starting university; it certainly won't put you at any significant disadvantage when applying for VS, as most firms don't expect you to have any experience at that stage. My advice - enjoy your free time while you can, do a little bit of work experience if you really want to and earn some money. In reality, working might be looked at more beneficially than a week photocopying.

[La Songeuse]

(Original post by MalleusMaleficarum)
I'm still doing my A-Levels at present, but I have an offer to study Law at Oxford next year; predictably, I aspire to move into the legal profession after graduating. I'm aware that work experience at some stage is considered more or less essential for the best jobs these days, but I'm pretty ignorant as to when, where and how. So far, the only work experience I've done is a week with a solicitors' firm back at the beginning of Year 11. I know that most people go for internships at least in the second year of a UG degree, but I can't decide whether to try to get some work experience over this summer or whether I should try to just earn as much money as possible instead. Is it at all necessary to have experience prior to going to university, or is it considered okay to show up having done no experience and hope for a fist/second-year internship?

I'm not sure I'd agree with the poster above me. Everyone I spoke to during my first year at uni had some sort of legal work experience. When you apply for work experience or vac schemes in your first/second year, a lot of the application forms will ask you for skills, experience and competences.

From personal experience it is a lot easier to fill in those application forms if you have actual practical experience of what being a solicitor/barrister is about (i.e. work experience) and you can then put forward really strong arguments why you want to be a lawyer. I'd do a week or two in a law firm close to home and spend the rest of your time working and earning money, that way you've got the best of both options

[v3n0m06]

I had no legal work experience when I applied for VAC schemes - had interviews at firms ranging from Clifford Chance to Mcgrigors. They didn't expect me to have experience either.
The barrister route is a whole different kettle of fish, however.

[MalleusMaleficarum]

(Original post by v3n0m06)
I had no legal work experience when I applied for VAC schemes - had interviews at firms ranging from Clifford Chance to Mcgrigors. They didn't expect me to have experience either.
The barrister route is a whole different kettle of fish, however.

How, if you don't mind me asking? At this stage I'm open to either route. I'm not sure about how to get work experience with barristers though - with solicitors it's obviously just a matter of writing to enough firms, but with barristers being effectively self-employed I'm no sure how that would work.

Also, what's an interview with a Magic Circle firm like?

[Generalist]

On a practical level, barristers are entirely law and litigation focused, and they deal with the courts typically as instructed by solicitors on behalf of the solicitors' clients. Those pursuing the barrister route stand out mostly because of their legal experience, it is knowledge of the law and legal procedure when dealing with the courts that is at the core of the trade. Knowledge of an industry sector is relevant, but nowhere near as important when it comes to working as a solicitor.

Solicitors, even if non-commercial/corporate, have to consider their clients' sector and particular interests first and foremost. What is it about the solicitor's client that makes following certain practical procedures such as filing applications, setting up monitoring procedures, managing employees a certain way, or purchasing a property relevant? Solicitors are sought for delivering such practical legal advice, and they are also sought with respect to how litigation should or should not be pursued. Barristers do not involve themselves with that planning except to the extent the solicitor wants to know if the legal arguments can be made.

Barristers may focus just on the civil and criminal procedure rules, and make considerations of what is studied in the LLB and the GDL, considerations such as precedent and the like. While this is relevant to some extent when practising as a solicitor, this is the primary consideration of a barrister. Solicitors working in litigation departments will also find themselves considering more of these precedents and rules, but nowhere near as much as a barrister must consider them. This is why judges are themselves barristers. Barristers are also qualified to write expert legal opinions, which means when it comes to the word of the law, barristers are more qualified than solicitors in law.

There is also a a kind of solicitor called a solicitor advocate, which has additional rights in a court setting that a typical solicitor does not have, but the distinction is very clear. Solicitors are businesspeople, bring in business, provide advice to their clients, and carry out procedural work for them in achieving their client's objectives, even if this may include initiating alternative dispute resolution or litigation. Barristers deal with the judicial system specifically, while solicitors may do the same depending on how connected their practice area is to litigation. If their work has nothing to do with litigation, then understanding case law to the level of detail of a judge is not exactly the most important consideration for a solicitor. That solicitor will want to know what the client needs to know so that next steps can be considered. The barrister does not need to be concerned about what the client needs except to the extent of the instructions he or she is given, although the barrister will be the expert as to how the courts may deal with the legal arguments he or she provides. There is more to this, but this is a basic description.

Regarding work experience, especially for a solicitor, any work experience in any business sector is great. That work experience provides the insight into a potential client's business sector, and solicitors ought to understand their client's business sector when delivering advice or carrying out procedural work such as filing applications, signing certain documents, and adhering to certain protocols. Working in marketing, consulting, finance, IT, or any kind of skilled area in any kind of business helps you understand a potential client. Working as a volunteer is not a problem, either, as volunteers learn how organisations need to make certain legal considerations depending on their goals. Also, I disagree that legal experience is required for prospective solicitors. A prospective solicitor could have several legal work experiences and still not understand commercial / situational awareness, whereas someone who has worked in various business sectors would more often than not understand what is of commercial relevance to his or her employer. Solicitors have to understand their clients, so regarding having no legal experience yet being able to justify why one wants to be a lawyer, it is the desire both to understand how business or a private individual may operate and to apply that understanding in practice for the benefit of the client that is relevant. Understanding legal arguments and ensuring they are made in a way that judges will find favourable from a legal perspective is a barrister's consideration.

Barristers benefit by understanding business sectors or certain kinds of private clients as well, but their skills in understanding legal precedent are far more useful in their trade. Their primary purpose is legal advocacy and legal argument. Therefore, legal work experience is most beneficial for a prospective barrister as opposed to any other kind of work experience.

While I have not stated every difference, the above ought to provide a decent gauge for understanding the difference between the two roles and therefore the kinds of work experience that may be relevant for each. I hope this helps.