Have I left it too late to become a barrister

I am currently 39 years old, with a decade long career in academia behind me. I work in environmental studies and have worked extensively with policy and law makers through my research. I am hoping to retrain as a barrister, as I am bored by academic work and the sector is really struggling. I wonder if anyone has any advice about whether this is utterly mad!

Reply 1

17Student17

Lots of people go into law when they are older although it does take a long time to train so do factor that in. Most lawyers are solicitors rather than barristers and you might find it easier particularly as for those good enough some law firms will also pay for your two years of post grad law studied and pay you after that for the two years whilst you are a trainee before qualifying.

Reply 2

AnonFuturePupil

Original post

by slamantha

Look at it this way - the age of retirement is 67. Not to scare you, but that means that you've potentially got another 28 years of working (a period much longer than what you will have already worked). I don't think it would be right to say that you have "left it too late" on the basis of age alone. That said, the older you get, the more responsibilities you tend to have (kids, mortgage etc). As such, it's not necessarily the age that is the problem, but the obligations that you may have gathered.

Becoming a barrister is hard. It will take you two years of full-time training (much of which you may have to pay for out of pocket), or four years part time. Even after training, you will be competing for pupillage, which is the real bottleneck. Whether or not you have "left it too late" will require some serious, independent consideration. Are you in a position where you can pay for the training, and perhaps be out of work for some time while you undertake it? Are your academics/experiences strong enough to give you a realistic prospect of successfully obtaining pupillage?

Reply 3

Stiffy Byng

Original post

by AnonFuturePupil

Look at it this way - the age of retirement is 67. Not to scare you, but that means that you've potentially got another 28 years of working (a period much longer than what you will have already worked). I don't think it would be right to say that you have "left it too late" on the basis of age alone. That said, the older you get, the more responsibilities you tend to have (kids, mortgage etc). As such, it's not necessarily the age that is the problem, but the obligations that you may have gathered.
Becoming a barrister is hard. It will take you two years of full-time training (much of which you may have to pay for out of pocket), or four years part time. Even after training, you will be competing for pupillage, which is the real bottleneck. Whether or not you have "left it too late" will require some serious, independent consideration. Are you in a position where you can pay for the training, and perhaps be out of work for some time while you undertake it? Are your academics/experiences strong enough to give you a realistic prospect of successfully obtaining pupillage?

Barristers have no retirement age. It is not uncommon for barristers to be barristering until they drop down dead of old age/booze/whatever. Hyper-silk Tony Grabiner KC is 79 and shows no sign of ever stopping.

OP, my pupil Jane Mulcahy KC left journalism at 38 and is currently joint-head of Blackstone Chambers. Another of my pupils Nick de Marco KC was 36 when he gave up being a Night Club Bouncer and started to become the number one football lawyer in Europe.

Reply 4

AnonFuturePupil

Original post

by Stiffy Byng

Barristers have no retirement age. It is not uncommon for barristers to be barristering until they drop down dead of old age/booze/whatever. Hyper-silk Tony Grabiner KC is 79 and shows no sign of ever stopping.
OP, my pupil Jane Mulcahy KC left journalism at 38 and is currently joint-head of Blackstone Chambers. Another of my pupils Nick de Marco KC was 36 when he gave up being a Night Club Bouncer and started to become the number one football lawyer in Europe.

I know that barristers, like most jobs. have no specific retirement age - I was referring to the age for state pension or, colloquially, "the age of retirement". The point is that even if they don't go to the Bar, they will likely still have circa 28 years left of their working life, with the implication being that it isn't too late to transition based on age alone.

Reply 5

UoL Students

Official Rep

Original post

by slamantha

Hello,

I cannot see any reason why this would be impossible. You will most likely be required to undertake a law conversion course which teaches you what's referred to as the foundations of legal knowledge (FLK). These include contract law, law of tort, constitutional and administrative law, EU law, Land law, criminal law and equity and trusts. This is what's required from anyone wishing to train to be a barrister, an up to date knowledge of these areas.

After that, you will need to complete the Bar Professional Training Course and then pupillage before becoming fully qualified.

I hope this provides some assistance. If you have any further questions please do let me know.

Charlie
Law LLB Student

Reply 6

Crazy Jamie

As others have said, it isn't utterly mad at all. You've been given examples of prominent barristers who changed careers 'late' (if you really think that there is such a thing; as I get older I tend to think that there isn't), but there are those who secure pupillage every year that have had previous careers. Obviously it's a minority of pupils because only a minority of applicants are career changers, but it's a perfectly realistic path to take for the right candidates. To give a more recent anecdote, one of the current pupils in my set is a career changer, and is in fact older than their pupil master.

The points that have been made about the relevant factors to take into consideration are good ones. It is obviously important not just to weigh up whether or not pupillage is a realistic aspiration for you, but whether it is the right thing for you personally. The frame of reference for that decision is very different for you in your late 30s compared to someone in their early 20s, and you will have both advantages and disadvantages over other younger candidates in that regard. You may well have the money to self fund, for example, and you equally may have a career to fall back on as well as significant experience that can give you an edge over other candidates, both on paper and in person. At the same time, family and other obligations may not only make the prospect of reduced earnings for a number of years a difficult one, but may also make you less flexible in terms of where you can accept pupillage. There is also always the reality that some sets, often inadvertently, will have scoring frameworks and approaches to recruitment that favour younger candidates.

Those are all things to weigh up. But in principle, a career change to the Bar at this stage isn't inherently unreasonable or even unrealistic, let alone mad.