Tag Results

The regulators of solicitors and barristers have been accused of failing to collaborate closely enough on their responses to the Legal Education and Training Review, after they announced they would pursue independent strategies for ensuring competency.

The Legal Education and Training Review report was published this week to a collective ‘meh’. In an age of instant judgements, that it failed to deliver either a devastating critique of the current regime or suggest sweeping reforms for the future seemed to mean to many that it was already destined for the long grass. Worse still, in the eyes of some (including, dare I say, my fellow hacks), it ran to 350 pages, used some jargon and had been compiled by academics.

A training regime whose only specification is what a newly-qualified lawyer should be able to offer on day one is the kind of deregulation the Legal Education and Training Review should be considering, according to the chief executive of the Legal Services Board.

Completion of the much-anticipated Legal Education and Training Review has been delayed, it has emerged. The academic team compiling the report after 18 months of research and consultation was meant to have delivered it by the end of 2012.

The Legal Education and Training Review may end up “unbalanced or worse” because it has incorrectly identified its purpose, the president of the Supreme Court warned last night. Lord Neuberger also questioned the need for root-and-branch change.