Get rid of the Bar?

I read with interest the blog posted today on The Times Law pages by Marilyn Stowe suggesting that it was time to get rid of the Bar and have a fused profession similar in stylings, no doubt, to America.

I have to say that I disagree for a variety of reasons.

I myself enjoy advocacy as a Solicitor and try to do as many Hearings as I possibly can, but there are many times I cannot. This is chiefly due to not having the time.

I instruct Counsel when I cannot afford to be out of the office for days at a time due to my own workload.

I simply could not justify swanning off for two weeks to do a Finding of Fact Hearing/Final Hearing, nor could I justify clearing the time out of my diary in order to prepare for such a Hearing. This is where Counsel can assist.

I am not suggesting that I merely use Counsel to offload the work I cannot do, as I wholeheartedly believe Counsel can offer a fresh perspective and also offer a nice sounding board off which to bounce ideas. I enjoy this relationship and I have many barristers I class as friends and are always available to offer a quick “Counsels Opinion” if I ever find myself in a quandary.

There is a massive difference between life at the Bar and life in a firm of Solicitors as Marilyn seems to accept.

Should, as Marilyn suggest, that the two professions become merged the result would surely be firms of lawyers not at all dissimilar to the current setup of firms of Solicitors. With that, Counsel will become as subject to the constraints facing Solicitors today, chiefly time, diaries, clients etc.

The result, I suggest, would be that cases would suffer as one could not simply call up Chambers and book Counsel for that two week Finding of Fact and it would naturally be the case that a colleague within the firm would be unable to cover the Hearing for the same reasons that one would be seeking cover.

Conversely, with the current distinction, Counsel, can get to grips with a case in its entirety in good time, offer a second pair of eyes and bring their own experience to the case which can only enhance the case.

I am of the view that Marilyn is wrong to suggest that Counsel gets the “spectacle that is a court hearing” and conversely that Solicitors do not. Naturally, the Bar lends itself to advocacy more readily, but it is wrong to suggest that Solicitors miss out on this. The Solicitor starting out in his or her career will know whether or not he or she enjoys advocacy, if he does then he can pursue that, generally, as much as he could at the Bar.

I toyed with the idea of going to the Bar myself, and still do, I feel it would be a great shame to get rid of the Bar. The Bar offers a fresh perspective and can dedicate the time required to a matter that a Solicitor simply could not in this day and age.

Marilyn states,

“Wouldn’t it make more sense if we fused our profession and worked together, rather than competed against one another…”

I say we do not compete and that currently the distinction between both branches of the profession means we do work together.

Ultimately both sides need each other to survive and to provide the best service possible to the lay client, which, has to be the primary goal…

Marilyn Stowe’s post can be found at www.thetimes.co.uk >Business>Law. Please note subscription required.

UPDATE: In addition, you can subscribe to Marilyn’s own blog at www.marilynstowe.co.uk