College of Law gears up to fight QLTT changes

I am an American who came to the UK via marriage, with 7 years of global in-house legal experience (intellecutal property), including the UK. After I qualified via the QLTT I was subjected to a number of humiliating interviews, including one where the interviewer negatively picked about the American eductation system and another where the interviewer said that my accent "was acceptable". This is deplorable behaviour generally. There is already a reasonable framework for deciding what exams lawyers from certain countries must take, based on the legal system they come from. The broader issue is most certainly plain discrimination.

Posted by: V.Albarran

10 Feb 2008 | 19:10

The proposed 1 year training period for overseas qualified lawyers is not in itself discriminatory. In fact it should be a good thing as it should bring the UK legal profession in line with the medical, dental or pharmacuetical qualifications where overseas practitioners have to undergo a period of training in UK practice prior to working on their own. The real problem with this proposal is that it will further marginalise those overseas lawyers who are currently finding it extremely difficult to get a look-in simply because of the jurisdictions they come from and their names. One issue that doesnt appear to have been addressed is how the SRA intends to ensure that overseas lawyers actually get a place for their training. What happens to an overseas lawyer whom nobody wants to employ? In a profession where age and racial discrimination seems rife, and which has been described as an 'exclusive white man's club' (The Law Society Gazette) this process will be an added reason for firms not to employ overseas qualified solicitors, especially if they are from certain jurisdictions.

Posted by:

25 Apr 2008 | 13:23

I do agree with the above two posts. I am from India and can understand the discrimination we are talking about here. Even though i have trained in the Uk but the reason that i was away from the UK for one year after qualifying its getting difficult for me to get back into the market. It is next to impossible for someone from countries like India, Pakistan or Sri Lanka to find a law firm to sponsor their workpermit so that they can fulfil the requirement of training for one year as is being proposed by SRA. It will have a far reaching effects and would be seen as rather a negative step by the SRA specially when this is a high time for firms to go global. It will certainly force lawyers from accross the globe not to include english legal provisions in their international commercial contracts and they would prefer more friendly destination like Dubai.

Posted by: Parvez

28 Apr 2008 | 22:03