Another barrier falls as Government Legal Service opens doors to chartered legal executives

Print This Post

18 June 2015


Fran Edwards

Edwards: GLS adapting “to reflect modern ways”

The Government Legal Service (GLS) has decided to open its lawyer job vacancies to fellows of the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEx) for the first time.

The first job being advertised is a £53,196 position as lawyer at HM Revenue & Customs, ranked as grade Seven in the Civil Service hierarchy.

Only fellows of the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEx) can apply, and, if they lack a qualifying law degree or graduate diploma in law, they must have achieved specific targets in their CILEx exams.

They must have scored 50% or above in all seven foundation subjects in law – contract, criminal, equity and trusts, European Union, land, public and the law of tort.

Solicitors, barristers and CILEx fellows are expected to have two years’ post-qualification experience to receive the full salary for the role, but those with less could be appointed as a ‘legal officer’ on just under £38,000.

The successful candidate would be working alongside 200 lawyers at the HMRC, advising on legal issues and conducting litigation.

A spokesman for CILEx said the change in policy followed a review of GLS recruitment processes. “There are still some organisations which overlook the full spectrum of lawyers they can recruit, depriving them of practically-trained specialist lawyers,” Frances Edwards, president of CILEx said.

Ms Edwards said the GLS had “adapted to reflect the modern ways that lawyers are educated”.

Tags: , ,



Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

McKenzie Friends – a storm in a teapot

Legal Futures Conference 2011Photo by Jonathan Goldberg

If the recent furore about McKenzie Friend Marketplace shows anything, it is that the profession remains acutely sensitive to the apparent threat of competition by unregulated entrants into the legal landscape. But for an outside observer, the whole McKenzie Friend debate remains curiously overblown: if not a storm in a teacup, a storm at least in a teapot. For all the characteristic sturm und drang of the Law Society’s response to last year’s senior judiciary consultation, there was pretty widespread agreement among most respondents that McKenzie Friends are here to stay.

April 28th, 2017