Plant hits out at City law firms over trainee recruitment

Plant: extraordinary procedure

The ex-City lawyer chairman of the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has questioned the recruitment methods of City law firms in making university students decide to become commercial lawyers so early on in their legal careers.

Charles Plant said “we have a system for recruitment to the legal profession that isn’t followed anywhere else in the world”.

Speaking at a forum on the Legal Education and Training Review (LETR) – organised by the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives – the former Herbert Smith Freehills partner said the profession had to ask itself serious questions about how early on some students have to decide their career path.

“Why do we have this extraordinary procedure where young people at the end of the second year of university have to decide whether to go to commercial law firms?” he demanded.

In the case of non-law graduates, he pointed out, they have to make this decision “before they even set foot in a law school”.

So long as this system exists, Mr Plant said, there needs to be a great deal of flexibility to allow lawyers to change career path. “Do they have the transferable skills to move from one branch to another?” he asked.

He also repeated his personal view that there should be common training of prospective solicitors and barristers.

More broadly, Mr Plant warned the audience of regulators, representative bodies, academics and other LETR stakeholders that the SRA will push its own plans to respond to the review – as outlined last week in a policy statement – to “the most ambitious timetable”. He said: “We think there’s a real, urgent need to get on now.”

Mr Plant and the chairs of the other two regulators that commissioned the LETR – Baroness Deech of the Bar Standards Board and Alan Kershaw of ILEX Professional Standards – all came out against the LETR recommendation to create a legal education council, favouring more informal collaboration instead. They were supported from the audience by Legal Services Board chief executive Chris Kenny.

The LETR said the council would provide a forum for the coordination of the continuing review of education and training, and serve as a data archive, careers advice shop, ‘legal education laboratory’ and clearing house, for example to advertise work experience.

However, the regulators expressed concern that it would simply divert resources and energy away from progressing with reform.

Professor Julian Webb – who led the LETR team – told the summit that he was worried that the prospective role of a council in “research and development, and ensuring we have the quality of information we need” would be lost as a result.

Mr Plant and Baroness Deech were also critical at the failure of university law schools to engage with the LETR. Mr Plant suggested that the more prestigious they were, the “more disinclined” they were as well to take part.

Baroness Deech said she had appealed to Oxford University – at which she taught for many years – to get involved in the LETR, “but they just won’t”. She continued: “It is time for our best universities to get stuck into this.”


    Readers Comments

  • Kaoticoddchild says:

    It’s a great shame that the regulators are so against a Legal Education Council, I would strongly suspect it is because they don’t want to fund it. If only there was a large amount of money dedicated to legal education that could find this…. Oh wait a minute, didn’t the Legal Education Foundation receive circa £200 million from Private Equity for the sale of The College of Law? They’ve been remarkably quiet since, does anyone know what the money is being spent on, I recall the man that controls the purse strings not being fond of giving money out so maybe we’ll never know.

    Legal Ed in the UK needs something to spurn evolvement post LETR. The ideas amongst small groups are fractured and innovation somewhat stagnant.

    The US has some movements with great strength such as Reinvent Law and more importantly Law Without Walls (who’s pilot LWOWx looks very exciting)

    The UK could do with similar hub that promotes progressive legal education.

  • Pete Smith says:

    Informal collaboration is all very well, but as the first comment notes there is a need for a group which can help make such things happen.

Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


The path to partnership: Bridging the gender gap in law firms

The inaugural LSLA roundtable discussed the significant gender gap at partner level in law firms and what more can be done to increase the rate of progress.

Why private client solicitors should work with financial planners – and tell their clients

Ever since the SRA introduced the transparency rules in 2018, we have encouraged solicitors to not just embrace the regulations and the thinking behind them, but to go far beyond.

A paean to pupils and pupillage

To outsiders, it may seem that it’s our horsehair wigs and Victorian starched collars that are the most unusual thing about the barristers’ profession. I would actually suggest it’s our training.

Loading animation