Love this advice and thanks for sharing. But I can’t help but feel my heart sink on the point about the LPC/SQE. I have completed a law degree but simply cannot afford to self fund the SQE. Putting the burden on my family would also be out of the question. Even a government masters loan would not include the £5000 or so required to book and sit the exams. I’m totally not shooting the messenger here as I thank you for sharing this advice, but I would encourage the partner who you spoke to think about ‘jumping straight into the SQE/LPC’ a bit more from the perspective of an average income household background law graduate. However, my commitment to practising law will always remain the same as someone who has self funded. Peace and love🫶🏼
My understanding of the original post was if a person is in the position of being able to do postgrad studies e.g., LLM’s in specialist areas of law, why haven’t they chose to do the LPC/SQE instead to qualify much sooner. By doing masters in specific areas of commercial law, it is possible that a candidate would be perceived to be less open to other practice areas (which may or may not be true). 🙂🙂
If someone can’t afford self-funding postgrad studies, it would make sense if they choose to not do a masters, LPC or SQE because of financial circumstances. For a partner to question this person’s commitment to a legal career would be unfair. I think there is now a stronger understanding of social mobility and how talent comes from all backgrounds. So I imagine partners would not expect people from socially mobile backgrounds to self fund postgrad courses without the security of a TC.
Getting a TC is also a lot more competitive now than it used to be. I remember at an open day a partner said that when they got their TC it involved a meeting with partners. Now there are WGTs and SJTs, VI’s, AC’s and all the other kinds of assessments. This makes it a lot harder to secure TC’s. I guess that’s why the SRA chose to introduce the SQE/QWE route, to increase the access into the legal profession.
I wouldn’t worry too much because people’s individual circumstances are different. 🙂🙂
I come from a socially mobile background myself as well. 🥲
If someone can’t afford self-funding postgrad studies, it would make sense if they choose to not do a masters, LPC or SQE because of financial circumstances. For a partner to question this person’s commitment to a legal career would be unfair. I think there is now a stronger understanding of social mobility and how talent comes from all backgrounds. So I imagine partners would not expect people from socially mobile backgrounds to self fund postgrad courses without the security of a TC.
Getting a TC is also a lot more competitive now than it used to be. I remember at an open day a partner said that when they got their TC it involved a meeting with partners. Now there are WGTs and SJTs, VI’s, AC’s and all the other kinds of assessments. This makes it a lot harder to secure TC’s. I guess that’s why the SRA chose to introduce the SQE/QWE route, to increase the access into the legal profession.
I wouldn’t worry too much because people’s individual circumstances are different. 🙂🙂
I come from a socially mobile background myself as well. 🥲
Last edited: