Career Clinic: Is the Bar open to older candidates?

Wow, that is some undertaking! The simple answer is that age is irrelevant and nothing is impossible but you do need to be realistic: two-thirds of people on the BVC never get pupillage and of those who do, not everyone gets kept on as a tenant (and many of these people have stellar academics and have won every prize going). Additionally, there are a small number of solicitors moving to the Bar each year. It is just about the most competitive area of law to get into: c70% of pupils have a first. If you really want to do this, I would seriously consider doing the GDL and LPC and trying to get a training contract then, on qualification, try to move to the Bar from the safety of a well-paid job. Lots of law firms pay for the GDL and LPC and maintenance so, depending on your circumstances, you might be able to do one or both of the courses full-time. Good luck! (Also, I didn't quite understand - does your Masters degree qualify as a first degree allowing you to take the GDL? You need to check this as a first point.)

Associate -04 Mar 2010 | 13:55

I don't think that you should qualify as a solicitor if you really want to be a barrister. If you choose to go down that route, you would have to start at the bottom of the career ladder a second time in your mid 40s. One thing which you don't make clear is whether you intend to specialise in an area of law where your current profession would be of relevance (eg clinical negligence work). If so, you might find that your current experience is an advantage. As the previous poster commented, it's a very competitive profession, and the poor state of the economy doesn't help either. A lot of people don't have enough work to do. But exceptional people will always do well.

Anon -04 Mar 2010 | 15:30

Check your eligibility

You won't normally be eligible to do a GDL without a prior undergraduate degree. Not sure how your "Masters" fits in, but it's entirely possible that you will need at least five years of study (degree + GDL + BVC) before you even start the running for those elusive pupillages.

Personally, and please prove me wrong, I think you'd be mad to leave an established career for such a long shot. The odds are not in your favour; time is not exactly on your side and the rewards (personal and financial) may not be much better than where you are now.

Assistant X -04 Mar 2010 | 16:07

I began my training contract at age 37 (and found myself older than most of my supervisors and only a few months younger than my managing partner!) and qualified as a solicitor at 39. I did focus my TC applications towards firms which I thought would value my previous work experience, but have not qualified into that area of law. So age need not be a barrier!

I would agree with previous posters that you should (a) check that you will be accepted on a GDL - a quick phonecall to the College of Law or similar provider should clear that up; (b) consider qualifying as a solicitor, not that you shouldn't follow your dreams but it would be a more realistic route into the profession. If you end up as a litigator you would be working with barristers and getting inside a courtroom from time to time in any event...

Anonymous -04 Mar 2010 | 16:19

Further to my first post, I don't think the questioner should necessarily do the GDL/LPC if it is going to take four years (i.e. both part-time) but if obtaining a training contract and the funding that goes with it cuts that to two years it might be worth considering. (Also, it is possible to do a training contract and parts of the LPC simultaneously in some circumstances.) In the meantime (or permanently) the questioner would have a career in law and the possibility of moving to a boutique firm with much of the freedom of a barrister: with higher rights of audience to get the advocacy element if that is desired.

Associate -04 Mar 2010 | 16:29

CoL website re acceptance requirements says "Overseas graduates and mature non-graduates need to apply for a Certificate of Academic Standing from the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) (for future solicitors) or Bar Standards Board (BSB) (for future barristers)"

Anon -05 Mar 2010 | 13:07

No problems here....

Hi OP,

I am almost 40 and in pupillage at the moment at a leading commmon law set. I also have a few friends of a similar age who are either in pupillage or have recently been offered tenancy.

On the basis of that experience and knowledge, I have found that age is no barrier to entry from the Bar's standpoint. In fact, I found that a lot of interview panels took a very positive view of the fact that I was in my late 30s and I'd had a previous career, because that brought with it maturity, commercial awareness, common sense, judgment, self-confidence and an easy going and un-self important manner with people. Also, I have been told numerous times by many barristers that looking slightly older than other pupils and brand new tenants can be a distinct advantage because you don't look or come across as being wet behind the ears, and when you're "on your feet" during your 2nd six, this goes down well with instructing solicitors, lay clients and the judiciary. Having said all that, I (so I am told) look quite young for my age (most people think 28 - 32 or so). If you look like you're closer to 50, then what I have said above may be slightly inaccurate in terms of your situation.

Obviously, you need to be aware that it can be psychologically quite difficult to move from a position where you may have been in an established role with power and responsibity to a role where you are at the bottom of the ladder. This is especially noticeable in your 1st six. Also, whether you can afford to move careers is, again, a matter for you. I was lucky enough to land on my feet by getting pupillage at a set that pays a very generous pupillage award, but you may not be so fortunate and you need to be aware of and make provision for that eventuality.

If I were to give you any advice beyond the usual stuff such as "get good marks, do lots of mooting etc etc", then I would say just make sure that whilst you push your previous experience, people skills and so on in your CV and in interview, that you don't come across as thinking you are the fully formed article, or you are not willing to learn and, also, if necessary, occasionally undertake fairly menial tasks. It's a bit of a balancing act.

If you want to have a chat about things, then post up an email addy and I'll get in contact with you for a chat. I'll also be at the National Pupillage Fair tomorrow, so you may be able to catch me there if you get in touch beforehand.

TTFN,
A

A -05 Mar 2010 | 13:45

Depending on what you do you could be a great bet for the clinical negligence Bar

Anonymous -05 Mar 2010 | 15:46

TC is no easier

It appears that many of the above comments suggest that getting a training contract will be easy or easier to get. That is not the case either. TCs at present are far and few between and there is intense competition for them - my point being that you should not view the solicitor route as a necessarily easier option. If it is the Bar that you want, then stick with the BVC and good luck.

P -10 Mar 2010 | 17:01

I wouldn't worry about your age, but I would worry about your CV. Competition is extremely intense and if you don't have an excellent academic record you will struggle. A distinction at an excellent uni might be indicative of the excellence required to have a real chance (at best) - but assess the 'excellence' of your uni as objectively as you can. 90% of pupillage applicants have enthusiasm, loads of legal extra-curriculars and a 'good' CV, but only about 25% get pupillage. It is objectively statistically much more difficult to get a pupillage than a training contract, regardless of what the above poster says.

Barrister -15 Mar 2010 | 11:03

Do it realistically

Your age is no bar, but as a 36-year-old who finished the PT BVC last year I will warn you that the majority of the students on the PT course and many of the full-timers will be this age, with previous successful careers and strings of degrees and experience behind them - but many fail to even get interviews, never mind pupillage.

I am in the very fortunate position of being an IT contractor so fees were not an issue, but I have had to sacrifice thousands in taking time off for minis, FRU cases, etc, etc.

I consider myself lucky though. Most of my class are now up to their eyeballs in debt, with not so much as a sniff of paralegal work to show for it.

You are a health professional so presumably will be thinking you have skills to offer in clinical negligence etc sets. Well frankly the BVC is full of doctors and nurses who haven't even had interviews (and one doctor who didn't even pass the course 1st time and I don't know if she has now).

The 40-year-old poster above was successful, but I guarantee he and his friends a rarities. Frankly with the amount of pupillages on offer, and so so many 'mature' candidates looking, it just can't happen for even a small percentage of aspirants, no matter who they are.

I don't regret it, and I am now loving pro bono etc between IT contracts, but largly the BVC is a waste of time. My advice would be to go for it but only if:

1) you will incur no debt
2) you are willing to accept that becoming a barrister is very very unlikely to happen - the stats are less than 1-3.

Additionally I wouldn’t like my chances of my OLPAS form making the pupillage committees desks without traditional academic qualifications (the whole of the first page is dedicated to this indicating its importance) - the bar recruits in its own mould and the chances of breaking that must be negligible.

CA -21 Mar 2010 | 17:00

CA is being unecessarily pessimistic

I think CA is being a little bit negative.

Whilst the bar is difficult to break into, if you have the right attributes for the job, then it is, I believe, not as difficult as everyone makes out. And if a candidate isn't realistic enough with themself to be able to conduct an honest and accurate assessment of whether they possess those attributes, then, to be brutally frank, they should not be doing the BVC in the first place.

Secondly, for mature candidates degree results and career and life experiences are far more important than A-level results. How do I know? Well, my A-levels were spectacularly awful (how does BBE sound?), but I still managed to get plenty of interviews at leading commercial/chancery chambers, came within a gnat's you-know-what of getting pupillage at a very prestigious chancery set and then got an offer from an amazing common law set.

This, however, was done off the back of a previous career, incredible commitment to a career at the Bar, lots of pro bono work, a 1st class LL.B (including prizes and top marks in year) and two Inn scholarships. All of which was done whilst also working full-time and raising a family.

I am not, therefore, suggesting complacency about academics generally, but merely pointing out that it is my very strong belief, based rationally on my own and my friends' experiences, that there are many sets of chambers out there that do not care a jot about a mature candidate's A-level results, so long as they have made up for these results by way of the sort of things I mention above.

Good luck OP (who, incidentally, does not seem to be checking back here - otherwise I would have expected a response).

A -23 Mar 2010 | 18:03

Do it realistically

Above poster.

I would say an LLB first is a pretty traditional academic qualification. The poster does not have this.

Thanks.

CA -28 Mar 2010 | 16:14

@ CA.

He may not have a 1st class LL.B, but he's on for a Distinction in his Masters. Also if he repeats that performance on the GDL, it's as good as an LL.B first.

A -31 Mar 2010 | 16:35

Please be realistic

I find this article and comments interesting.

I am now a 44-year-old mature final year LLB law student. I have a demonstrable work history from the music industry, I have dealt with contract negotiations all my working life, employment issues including tribunals, representing my employers in court on a frequent basis along with Magistrates and Crown, adviser on a community drugs project in London and have been the executive director of operations for a Charitable Trust!

At university I have participated in all the things they say too, internal and external moot competitions, street law projects, university law clinics, I am senior partner for my firm etc... etc...

And I have still not been able to even secure a mini-pupillage. It seems to me that once my age is discovered the firms that showed initial enthusiasm fall away. I tested my theory by not completing equality monitoring forms and was received extremely warmly until it was requested that I return it and was rejected within 72 hours of returning it. This has happened on a number of occasions.

I suggest that you check the Law Society statistics for entry to the profession. Not those that are presently enjoying practice, but the statistics for entry for the last couple of years. It paints a much bleaker picture than the encouraging spin the universities and professionals convey. They have a vested interest so cannot always be trusted to inform you fully. Put simply - if you fall under the age ceiling and are educated from a certain two institutions you may have a chance, if you are not female, under 30 and Oxbridge-educated, give up hope - it's really a very unlikely prospect. This of course is only my embittered opinion ! (lol)

As a result I have had to change my route and go for LPC, seek a training contract and look for higher rights of audience that way. If you like me have a passion for advocacy and are good at it, this might be an alternative and safer consideration.

But.... I would urge caution, extreme caution and do not believe the spin. Make you own mind up and be realistic!!!

NeilM -07 Apr 2010 | 08:31