header-logo header-logo

02 December 2016
Issue: 7726 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Bar Professional Training Course could be split

Training for barristers could be split into two parts under proposals to shake up the Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC) to make entry to the Bar more affordable.

The Bar Council and Council of the Inns of Court have proposed that the 30-week BPTC, which costs £15,000-£19,000, no longer be compulsory. Instead, the BPTC would be split into: part one, knowledge-based subjects, namely civil and criminal procedure and evidence; and part two, skills such as drafting, advocacy and conferencing.

Students would be able to prepare for part one exams “by any method they think fit or can afford”, including private study. If they passed part one, they would be allowed to move on to part two, which would require formal attendance on a BPTC course.

The proposal is made in an addendum to the Bar Standards Board’s October 2016 consultation paper, The future of training for the Bar. Interested parties have until 31 January 2017 to respond.

In support of their proposal, the Council and Bar Council say: “The Inns and the Bar Council have a genuine fear, based on their direct contacts with school-leavers, university students and the Inns’ own student members, that the Bar is becoming a profession for the social ‘haves’ which excludes the ‘have nots.’”

They make the point that the BPTC has a high risk of failure. Of the 2012/13 students, 30 months after completing the taught course, 15% had failed and 7% had exams outstanding. The self-employed and employed Bar appoint just over 400 pupils per year, and a student who passes the course with a “competent” rating (rather than “outstanding” or “very competent”) has a one in 20 chance of obtaining pupillage.

They argue that splitting the course would reduce the overall costs for students and act as an early warning signal to students unlikely to do well.

However, Helen Hudson, head of legal development at Nottingham Law School (part of Nottingham Trent University), said: “The proposals appear to divorce the key elements required for effective practice. The integration of the various elements of practical legal skills is essential if we are to produce effective practitioners.”

Issue: 7726 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll