Interviews · Routes to the Bar · Which Chambers?

Here Are the Results of the BVC Jury

Below is a distillation of your comments. I have added in the names of the Heads of Chambers because some of the places about which comment has been made have more than one set in one address. If I’ve got it wrong, please email me.The views – I think I ought to make this clear – are not mine. Any set of Chambers who would like to respond will have their response posted if they ask…

Interestingly, a number of Chambers make it onto both lists. That suggests that different things please different people and that these are subjective judgements, which is fair enough. There is, however, no excuse for rudeness.

Unsurprisingly, the things that bug most of you are silence (which is a form of rudeness), failure to give feedback and failure to organise things properly. Either the Chambers concerned save those things up for the pupils –  in which case they should be ashamed of themselves – or they are not running their practices properly.

Wall of Shame:

  • 2 Temple Gardens – Benjamin Browne QC (marketing exercise)
  • Mitre Court – J M Burton(don’t respond to applications)
  • 15 New Bridge Street – Patrick Upward QC (rude and uncaring)
  • 3 Temple Gardens  – John Coffey QC (silence).
  • 1 Mitre Court Buildings – Lord Gifford QC (silent and rude when asked about progress)
  • Pendragon Chambers – Sara Rudman (silence and vacillation)
  • 39 Essex Street – Richard Wilmot-Smith QC (unpleasant and confrontational interview)
  • 1 Pump Court – no Head of Chambers discernible (silence)
  • Matrix – Anthony White QC (points scoring system that means you need a 1st but doesn’t say so)
  • Goldsmith Chambers  – Philip Sapsford QC (late response and promised interview never arrived)

Buttress of Acclaim:

  • 2 Temple Gardens – Benjamin Browne QC (well-organised)
  • 7 Bedford Row – Kate Thirlwall QC (lovely people who do what they say they will do, helpful with arrangements and good feedback).
  • 187 Fleet Street – Andrew Trollope QC (prompt and helpful feedback)
  • Argent – Harenda de Silva QC (quick and efficient)
  • QEB Hollis Whiteman – Rebecca Poulet QC (fluffy)
  • Garden Court North – Ian MacDonald QC (lovely rejection letter)
  • Queen Square Bristol – Don Tait (prompt and courteous rejection)
  • 25 Bedford Row – Rock Tansey QC (helpful arrangements, prompt and good feedback)
  • St John’s Chambers, Bristol – Richard Stead (thoroughly friendly)
  • 5 Essex Court – Richard Perks (helpful and good feedback)
  • 39 Essex Street – Richard Wilmot-Smith QC (nice and interested)
  • 1 Temple Gardens – Nigel Wilkinson QC (old-school and interested)
  • 4/5 Gray’s Inn Square – Timothy Straker QC & Robert Griffiths QC (good interview)

A very special mention on the Wall of Shame goes to the Pupillage Portal itself. I do hope that those responsible for it read this and actually ask for some help and advice next time around. The poll below might help.

Advertisements

72 thoughts on “Here Are the Results of the BVC Jury

  1. I hope those on the wall of shame will take heed, Simon – though I should not be at all surprised if they dont(given that applicants are many in number and therefore of little consequence, because they will ALWAYS garner pupils, no matter WHAT)a bit like a rhino brushing a gnat off its insensitive backside with a contemptuous flick of it’s tail.
    ( I do hold out some hope for a secnario akin to the Mouse Who Roared, but again, I very much DOUBT it)

    Very Many thanks,though, for trying to higlight the problem.
    You are, as ever, Diamond.

  2. A big thank you for doing this Simon – I will be applying for pupillage in a couple years time and thanks to your efforts maybe, just maybe, things will have improved by the time my peer group get there.

  3. Please could you also add 2 Bedford Row to the wall of shame. I had a first interview there and only became aware that I was not through to the second round by stumbling upon the word ‘rejected’ on pupillage portal. I still cannot believe that they didn’t have the decency to send an email to thank people for attending.

    Can I also add to the thank yous above. I hope your efforts go some way in improving the system for those involved in the process in the future.

  4. Like the Minx, I doubt the shamed chambers will give two hoots and neither will future applicants. But when the bad approximates to the default position, those chambers who do make the effort should, in my view, be recognised and for the wider reasons highlighted by SMQC.

    Given that this site is widely recognised as the primary source of guidance for the student/pupil community, might there be scope for SMQC to introduce some manner of “pupil friendly” kitemark which can be awarded to the acclaimed chambers ?

  5. I don’t know, there are some sets which are a delight to pupillage applicants and hell on earth to pupils, but pupils can’t “come out” as it will be obvious who they are. I know I wouldn’t be too impressed if my old set wound up with a “pupil friendly” kitemark – it would be like giving an “animal friendly” kitemark to a fur farm…:)

  6. Barboy – a flattering idea but a definite ‘no’. These are not my experiences and I don’t have the wherewithal to validate them. If enough of you post enough comments then it will speak for itself.

    Also I agree that things aren’t always so great once you’re there. The pupillage interviews may be only for tourists, as they used to say in Soviet Russia.

  7. I definitely think that 6KBW (Sibghat Kadri QC) should be added to the list. All my peers that applied, myself included, have not heard a response from our applications submitted in January!! Every time anyone has contacted them it has been the same response that they will get back to us in a week. Still no response. It is a shame because in my field, I come across a lot of their cases and they do some very interesting work.

  8. We can but hope that it will make some difference. I share the cynics view that it will not, however I still think the exercise worthwhile. Change has to start somewhere, and this is as good a place as any.

    In short, hear bloody hear.

  9. What I really want to know is are you going to vote for or against this Bar Council resolution and why.

  10. Troubled Barrister, are you the Troubled Barrister of Troubled Barrister Blog some while back?
    If so, how the DEVIL are you and LTNS!
    ( sincere apologies, Simon, for hijacking the thread)

      1. 1 Gray’s Inn Square had only flicked through my application form at the most from the questions they asked me (eg whether I had done the bvc). They came across as sloppy and rude. I couldn’t understand why they had bothered to interview me in the first place.

  11. The very same. I think it is a bit unfair to get people to “anonymously” call out chambers and even more so individual people. If you think they are being nasty then just wait until you in front of LJ this case is beneath me or HHJ I am going to take your client’s crap case on you.

  12. What a stupid rhetorical question, in short alot of you need to toughen up a bit. It is a nasty world out there!

  13. @Troubled Barrister

    Hit a nerve, did I? Poor lamb. “Other people behave like poo-poos to those they have power over, so I must too, or they won’t think I’m rock-hard”.

    Don’t worry, TB. I think you’re rock-hard. We all think that. Honestly.

  14. I wont dignify Ed with a response to his extremely immature post.

    Horse – of course it doesnt make it right being rude; however, there is no sense crying about it. I know very well the heart ache of trying to find pupillage and how it can be a frustrating an upsetting experience it can be.

    Calling out chambers and individuals is:

    a)Serves very little purpose
    b) Just plain wrong if people are going to do it from behind a computer screen

  15. Dear Troubled Barrister,

    a) You’re probably correct that a Wall of Shame / Wall of Acclaim will have little purpose. But I think it’s worth a shot – a dose to criticism towards some sets is quite refreshing and gives us an idea what to expect in the future. This is a well-respected blog and I wouldn’t be surprised if at least a couple of sets heard about some of the criticism that has been handed out. The bar is a small world.

    b) The smallness of this world necessitates anonymity from our end. The cards are stacked against us and the blogosphere creates the conditions for honest feedback. Obviously, there will be the less constructive contributions (see “Ed’s” last post) but in the main, the comments are healthy. It might sound a touch grandiose, but we are the Heads of Chambers of the future and it is our responsibility to encourage the bar’s shift into the 20th century (the 21st century will come a little later).

  16. Sorry TB – you’re wrong.

    I don’t disagree that comments about individuals are unhelpful, but I reckon that anyone who is Head of Chambers and in silk will recognise frustration for what it is and – as you insist – be tough enough to take it.

    That is a side issue. You say that you know how hard it is to get pupillage but it’s not ok to say anything about the things that make it not simply hard, but unacceptable. Sorry: I don’t understand how that works.

    Then you write a frankly insulting comment to an applicant – you being in a position of power compared to them – and then you complain that they are calling people out anonymously. I’ve looked you up in the Bar list – can’t find anyone named Barrister, Troubled.

    If Chambers don’t behave politely then they are falling below a standard that I think my profession should adhere to. Why on earth shouldn’t the people who suffer from that say so? I can think of no reason – still less when you propose no alternative and suggest nothing to change matters.

    The resentment that people feel is avoidable. The optimism in this debate – which you have failed to note – is how generous people are when they have been rejected. This is not about sour grapes. It is about doing things properly – not just for the good of the profession (although, heaven knows, that’s important enough) but because it is right. I don’t very much care how it is ‘out there’. I don’t care if a Judge, be it a Magistrate or a Lord Justice of Appeal wants to be petulant and behave towards litigants like a spoiled child. The only thing one learns from experiences like that is that the Judge in question is a fool. That even people paid a lot of money to do an important job can misbehave is utterly unconnected with how Barristers ought to regard those who have spent time and money trying to join the profession.

    But I will make you a deal. You will get your Chambers to offer a place to anyone who suffers from making a complaint. And I will advertise that fact, invite people who are applying to Chambers who treat them badly to make a formal complaint and make sure that the BSB properly investigates. Or, as an alternative, you can complain.

    The culture needs to change. That isn’t entirely a matter for Chambers, and things could be made easier (especially if the people designing the PP website are made to listen to the profession). But we are the ones in control and we need to look to ourselves first, before criticising others.

  17. Just to endorse Simon’s post. An example of why he is paid – and I am not 🙂

    The nail which Simon struck is between ought/is. Sure, rudeness etc is a fact of life. But ought it to be?

    I always thought a principal attraction of the bar is that it was where plucky ideals of professional ethics became a reality. We may not be there yet but this blog shows that there are plenty of people willing to try.

  18. My allegedly immature comment included the point that TB is among those in a position of power over the pupil-applicants, on which Simon has eloquently expanded.

    I will expand slightly on my point, beyond the interest of the profession which Simon has highlighted. What kind of person behaves other than kindly and graciously towards those over whom they have power? If it’s somehow acceptable to do that just because the judge was mean to you recently, you need to examine yourself as a human being.

  19. a) i’m with ed on this (and horse)

    b) let’s not over-egg the ‘bastard judge’ cliche shall we? i have now marshalled with several, met a few socially and appeared in front of some and i haven’t hit one of these little hitlers that are supposed to pepper our courts. i have observed diligent, caring, intelligent and above all wise (an old-fashioned word but it describes them) people who are very aware that their decision impacts on the lives of people in their courts and that their entire raison d’etre is to exercise judgment (clue’s in the name). i’m not saying the other sort don’t exist, but we must not allow the straw judge to bolster the poor ogic of ‘this profession is full of nastiness at the top so we can get away with it too’.
    and if troubled barrister doesn’t enjoy a profession (s)he feels is driven by such nastiness, there are many others to try. i mean that as a positive, not a snark – barristers are gifted and educated; they have numerous productive career options. why be limited by one if they don’t like it? life is too short to do something you don’t enjoy or believe in.

  20. I am in complete agreement with the ( as ever ) sage words of my learned colleagues with respect to the comments of Troubled Barrister, whos attitude now saddens me, since this is not the person I recall having dialogue with through my blog.
    All I would add against his comments is as follows:
    Be NICE. It costs nothing, and makes everyone feel better in the grind of the day.
    You used to be Us.
    We want to be where You are.
    Is that such a difficulty to bear in mind?

  21. Why doesn’t the Bar Council have a competition, in which a set that gets 5-star feedback from applicants gets central funding for its pupils? That might change some attitudes.

  22. Minxie babe,

    TB may be suffering from heat exhaustion due to a lack of ventilation holes in his wig. I recommend Goretex, which is ideal for all weathers.

  23. The only thing I would add to all of the above is that the wall of shame/acclaim serves as an excellent way of introducing newbies into the reality of the whole application process and bar.

    Everyone knows that in order to succeed at the bar you have to have a ‘tough skin’ but it is helpful to know which chambers have a history of either responding late or not whatsoever when waiting for the responses to your first applications.

  24. It seems I cant give a contrary view without rather immature abuse.

    Simon Myerson says “you write a frankly insulting comment to an applicant – you being in a position of power compared to them”

    (a) I have no posistion of power over this person nor do I wish to. The fact you would say such a ridiculous thing says for more about you than I me;

    b) My comment(s) and I am not sure which you are referring to wasn’t insulting it was straight and to the point. We are all big boys and girls here.

    Someone has done a bit of marshalling big wow, you are in an extremely informed posistion (sarcasm) to comment on this. Come back in ten years and tell me your experience of Judges then.

    Also, if I step inside I am sure that will equal a student being able to get a pupillage who has failed to find one, get real! This is a job like any other job not a way of life, somedays I enjoy it others I hate it.

    I dont want to get sidetracked on other noise, I have said all I want to say on this. I maintain that anonymous name and shamers posting serves no constructive purpose (is potentially libelous) and “frankly” the author of this blog should know better. Those who dont like my “opinion” (which I have every right to express) I respect but I disagree with.

    1. Why does this person have such atrocious grammar? Is this person a barrister in the UK? It’s my first time to to read this page so please enlighten me.

  25. Troubled Barrister,

    What on earth has happened to you?

    You’ve become dismissive of the hopes and dreams of bar aspirants to the point of arrogance.

    Cant you even remember what it felt like when going for pupillage and impart even a tenth of that as sympathy – or do you just believe that we are all wasting our time, because you have never had the experience of being treated shabbily by chambers and so our pleas to be treated with at least a little common courtesy cannot touch you?

    I’ve never come across a profession where some feel that to treat its aspirants shabbily is some form of rite of passage, and I, personally am astounded that it carries on unchecked.

    It’s time for a change – whether you like it or not – and I whole heartedly applaud Simon for highlighting the problem.

    ( I suppose this is all noise, of course)

  26. Is troubled barraster not the same chap who was quite agressive on simon’s ‘mature student’ post a couple of years ago – until he found pupillage? I can’t find the comments now but I am sure it was him?

  27. Ginge – I have done many things but that doesnt ring any bells.

    Minx – Of course I hate Barristers being rude to students; there can be no excuse for it. Believe it or not Barristers can often be rude to their opponents too but I am not about to start a blog naming and shaming them. My point was on whether this naming and shaming exercise is right, proper and fair – the answer is no (in my opinion which the last I checked I was entitled to) . By doing this SM could be considered bringing the Bar into disrepute. In another post SM went on about integrity (quite rightly so because anyone who uses OTC is a cheat) this exercise is devoid of integrity.

    On another note Minx read your blog congrats on getting so many interviews stick at it.

  28. I am currently on a mini with one of the “shamed” sets – I mentioned this thread and was promised with, I believe, sincerity, that the comments would be passed to the head of the pupillage committee.

  29. TB – everyone knows who I am. If anyone wants to report me it would not be difficult.

    However, I do not believe that mentioning the names of sets at which those applying to them have been upset at their treatment is bringing the Bar into disrepute. The alternative, presumably, is not naming them. That works – not. There are three possibilities. The first is that the reporter is telling lies for some reason of their own. That is easy to correct – there will be plenty of people saying this isn’t how it is. The second is that the reporter is correct – in which case it is certainly right, proper and fair to let people know. The third is that the reporter is unduly sensitive or the Chambers had an off day or some combination. In which case the Chambers – if bothered about what a blog says about them – can get in touch.

    I have made 2 things clear from the off. Firstly that these are subjective reports. Secondly that there is a right of reply. My own view is that most decently run sets would welcome some feedback, especially if there is a concern that good candidates would be put off. That is how the market works, we’re all big boys now etc etc.

    Your real concern appears to be the anonymity of the reporter. Advocacy involves dealing with the points that count against you. It is not noise to point out an element of hypocrisy here. It is something by which we are entitled to assess your credibility.

    Nor has anyone suggested that you are not entitled to your opinion. There is nothing in robust disagreement that points any other way.

  30. Those who comment anonymously on this issue are protecting themselves, and I would suggest they are still taking a small chance of exposure. They should be commended for this. I would suggest that to attack them for doing this rather than the content of what they say is the classic fallacy of the ad hominem argument. Not a sign of a strong advocate.

    To say that protecting oneself like this shows a lack of integrity is at least disingenuous. Tell us, TB: why are you commenting anonymously? What are you protecting yourself from? Are you in fact a coward?

  31. On the point of bringing the Bar into disrepute. If the Bar’s reputation relies on concealing how it treats its prospective members, it is doomed. I suggest that it is in fact the sets complained of who are bringing the Bar into disrepute.

    As a possible solution to this issue, I endorse Carl Gardner’s idea (hold a treating-applicants-well competition), and add a mystery-shopper: the Bar Council would make a number of applications for pupillage, and assess the processes.

  32. “Are you in fact a coward” What a suprise after doing well Ed cant help himself by coming up with another immature statement. If it wasnt for that I would have directly answered his points.

  33. For what it is worth I applaud Simon for not only providing a valuable and practical resource for prospective bar students, for giving time to deal with emails but also for addressing the important issue of pupillage and the experiences different people have had – good and bad.

    I can see no difficulty whatsoever in providing a wall of ‘shame and acclaim’.

    I cannot believe that those prospective barristers who post here regularly would compromise their future by making libellous statements. I cannot see anything libellous or abusive in the negative comments about the interview process – assuming those who made the comments have been fair and accurate in their assessment – a not unreasonable proposition given the investment they have made in qualifying.

    I cannot for one moment see Simon Myerson bringing the profession into disrepute through his blog or in any other manner, come to that – and he certainly does not do so by seeking genuine feedback and opinion. Quite the contrary, in fact. The Bar will benefit by being able to accept open and fair dialogue. .

    SM is well known to the Bar Council. I suspect he knows many of the sets mentioned here socially and professionally . The opportunity for Chambers to explain, comment, disagree, correct, should they wish to, is stated clearly by SM. This seems perfectly fair and reasonable to me.

    I believe that this service brings a degree of maturity to the process and constructive, rather than abusive, criticism will perhaps be embarrassing, but it may well lead to improvement.

    Troubled Barrister… I have a large spade. I dug graves to pay my way through law school thirty odd years ago. I can lend it to you if you really want to dig a bigger hole and can offer advice on shoring up the sidewalls to avoid disaster. 🙂

    Onwards and upwards… for there little point in the opposite course of action. I thought I’d end with a platitude – well… England has done ratherr well in the cricket and Strauss got 161 odd so far… so not all is bad in this credit-crunched world of ours.

  34. troubled barrister – your name is well chosen. you asked the world for trouble and it delivered. keep asking, keep getting more of the same. turn a corner and you will encounter something other than trouble if you choose it. for one who bandies the word ‘immature’, your journey has a way yet to go. you will find your path, but who knows when…

    a point for now – you may have to practise being patronising; that particular kneejerk is looking very mechanical. and should you wish ‘rather immature abuse’, i imagine people could be persuaded.

    forgive my offering a tip (or don’t) – try a smile; that scowl you write with isn’t helping you.

  35. @Troubled Barrister

    “Are you in fact a coward” What a suprise after doing well Ed cant help himself by coming up with another immature statement. If it wasnt for that I would have directly answered his points.

    Without getting all technical with you, TB, that was what’s technically known as a “question”, not a statement. You might also work on your spelling and punctuation.

    And somehow, I seriously doubt that you would have answered any of the points. Don’t forget about next Tuesday. See you then.

  36. I’ll:

    See (or a letter pronounced that way)
    You (or a letter pronounced that way)
    Next
    Tuesday

    I’m on the verge of a remark about sharp knives in a drawer, but that might be beyond the pale.

  37. Putting aside the slightly meandering wander into personal slurs that seems to be going on here, I think the real point of this thread (as Simon argued so eloquently above) is that applicants aren’t – and shouldn’t be – willing to simply put up and shut up. We invest so much time and effort into their applications that we feel a little recognition of this would not go amiss. We don’t want the moon on a stick, just a little common courtesy – such as receiving a rejection email rather than simply hearing nothing.

    Often chambers are wonderful, but sometimes they are not, and in a field which is so notoriously competitive, some of us understandably do not feel confident about voicing our concerns officially. We still, however, need to let off steam – and if it achieves nothing else (which hopefully won’t be the case), at least this blog is giving us the chance to share our rantings and be listened to by someone who believes we have some valid points to make.

  38. Ed- please separate the argument from the person. You do the rest of us no favours by reducing the important points we raise to mud slinging.

  39. And if you thought the debate here with TB was heated, take a look at the comments on the Charon article linked above!

  40. What’s sad is that I worry TB doesn’t actually enjoy being a barrister – I’ve had other jobs and this one is brilliant precisely because everyone helps each other out and is, usually, pleasant with it. Sure, you meet the odd person that gets on your wick, or is a bit abrupt, but you will anywhere.

    I’ve never met a judge (ET or DJ or HHJ or even J – LJJ are well beyond my career at present) that I thought was an out and out bully. Those that are rude are known for being rude, and as has previously been said, seen as foolish. Many will call you out on your work if you’re being shoddy, but they’ve got standards in mind.

    Perhaps if TB sees the bar as a place of rudeness, and judges as being routinely rude to him, it might be because his mastery of the ad hominem argument, demonstrated throughout these discussions, makes it into his advocacy. Now that would get the judge shouting.

    Saying the bar’s rude, judges are rude, so let’s get on with it, risks bringing the bar into far more disrepute than saying ‘these chambers have shoddy recruitment procedures, these have good ones, I really still want to be a barrister.’
    [x-posted on Charon]

  41. I think TB’s line that “people are rude and horrible, just get used to it instead of whingeing” is a particular strain of conservative thinking (NB I am NOT accusing all or most conservatives of thinking that way, and know many left-wing people do) that we could benefit from junking. It’s a strange combination of passive fatalism and machismo.

    I applaud Simon, too, for publishing this information. if anyone should “get used to it”, it’s sets and barristers who are being named and shamed. This is exactly why anonymity in blogs is so important. It redresses the social power-balance just that little bit that might lead to some change.

  42. I am just finding this all rather sad. All we Aspirants ask for is to be treated with civility, and a soupcon of common decency. Nothing more than that.

    The risk of not obtaining pupillage is very high, and we are perfectly aware of that; we do not need to have it rubbed in by those who feel that it is almost their right to treat us like something they have scraped off the bottom of their shoes.

    Simon has been nothing but kind and helpful to those attempting to enter the profession, and more than generous of his time and his advice.

    Troubled Barrister, his Chambers, and his Ilk, would do well to take a leaf out of his book.

    ( TB, I confess to being very saddened, and, indeed, quite hurt, by your sentiments; as I have said before, you are not the person who used to comment on my blog. I wonder what happened to you between then, and now?)

  43. I’m always late to the party!

    Manners cost nothing. It is that simple.

    Dismissing that fact shows true colours. Yes it is true to say that rudeness, silence, and bad organisation are occupational hazards of applying for jobs in any industry. It’s just we expect so much more from the bar because it thinks itself to be so intellectually and socially superior (and, arguably, in many respects it is). In my experience, sometimes the more intellectual a person, the more socially awkward they are.

    The chambers who appear to have a touch of social autism when it comes to their applicants won’t be too much different in the treatment of their clients.

    If the bar isn’t dragged into this century, it will suffer even further than it is doing at present. The suffering is partially self-inflicted, and avoidable with a few simple changes in attitude.

    Which is all Simon is trying to highlight.

  44. I think that Simon and charonqc have nothing whatsoever to answer for. It is to their credit that they have been so careful to offer the right to reply to critics, and to scrupulously address even the ill-made criticisms made.

    It is a shame that the snide, anonymous cowards (plural now that “Me” has also unleashed his torrent of gravy) have taken up the time of those who seek to help others. It is a shame that taking the high road (as Simon and CQC are doing) has such a cost.

    Tell us, TB and Me: what have you ever done for anyone, ever? And why do you (correctly) feel that if your real names were put to your words, it would be bad for you? Do you not understand that this means you are wrong, wrong, wrong?

  45. Add Field Court to the list of rude sets. However, this isn’t anonymous, since all Field Court need to do is look at the list of people to whom they failed to send any communication – oh hang on, that’s a pretty long list.

  46. After waiting an eternity for a result from an interview with a set in Gray’s Inn, I received the worst rejection letter imagineable (like many other contributors I was well into my 2nd/3rd year of looking).

    It read something along the lines of ‘apologies for the delay, many candidates to see etc… We are now in a position to offer a pupillage…’

    Blinking with disbelief that finally I had cracked it, I could move on, live the dream, it hadn’t been all a waste of time, I read on…

    ‘only not to you’ the letter more or less concluded.

  47. 5 Kings Bench walk provided the best feedback – they actually picked up the telephone in response to my e-mail request and told me how each section of my form was marked.

    Carmelite refused point blank.

    I was surprised at 15NB, after attending a first interview I did not receive any communication at all, I assumed I was rejected!

  48. Just come across this interesting site. I should point out that Mitre Court Chambers of which I was the Head ceased to exist as a set in 2001 so it should be no surprise that I do not respond to applications, I simply do not receive them!

  49. The funnel is too clogged up guys. My suggestion is that unless the rules on pupillage requirements are changed we should all take on the government and request compensation because it is clear that the qualification is worthless for a good 80% of lawyers.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s