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


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:




Blog


How unstoppable AI is reshaping UK legal practice

At a time when most technology innovation still flows from the US and China, UK lawtech is attracting growing international attention and capital.


Modern vehicles: new injury profiles and new legal challenges

As the number of electric vehicles on UK roads continues to grow year-on-year, it is important to address the risks that come with their increased adoption.


The SRA needs to admit it got it wrong about SLAPPs

The High Court judgment in Ashley Hurst v SRA in January raises serious questions about the regulator’s approach to allegations of SLAPP-like behaviour.


Loading animation