header-logo header-logo

Bar Professional Training Course could be split

02 December 2016
Issue: 7726 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Training for barristers could be split into two parts under proposals to shake up the Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC) to make entry to the Bar more affordable.

The Bar Council and Council of the Inns of Court have proposed that the 30-week BPTC, which costs £15,000-£19,000, no longer be compulsory. Instead, the BPTC would be split into: part one, knowledge-based subjects, namely civil and criminal procedure and evidence; and part two, skills such as drafting, advocacy and conferencing.

Students would be able to prepare for part one exams “by any method they think fit or can afford”, including private study. If they passed part one, they would be allowed to move on to part two, which would require formal attendance on a BPTC course.

The proposal is made in an addendum to the Bar Standards Board’s October 2016 consultation paper, The future of training for the Bar. Interested parties have until 31 January 2017 to respond.

In support of their proposal, the Council and Bar Council say: “The Inns and the Bar Council have a genuine fear, based on their direct contacts with school-leavers, university students and the Inns’ own student members, that the Bar is becoming a profession for the social ‘haves’ which excludes the ‘have nots.’”

They make the point that the BPTC has a high risk of failure. Of the 2012/13 students, 30 months after completing the taught course, 15% had failed and 7% had exams outstanding. The self-employed and employed Bar appoint just over 400 pupils per year, and a student who passes the course with a “competent” rating (rather than “outstanding” or “very competent”) has a one in 20 chance of obtaining pupillage.

They argue that splitting the course would reduce the overall costs for students and act as an early warning signal to students unlikely to do well.

However, Helen Hudson, head of legal development at Nottingham Law School (part of Nottingham Trent University), said: “The proposals appear to divorce the key elements required for effective practice. The integration of the various elements of practical legal skills is essential if we are to produce effective practitioners.”

Issue: 7726 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Moore Barlow—Jess Ready & Natasha Jones

Moore Barlow—Jess Ready & Natasha Jones

Commercial property and corporate teams expand in Southampton

Watershed—Rob Elliott

Watershed—Rob Elliott

Employment firm expands capability with experienced hire

Devonshires—Aoife Murphy & Mandeep Sahota

Devonshires—Aoife Murphy & Mandeep Sahota

Housing management and property litigation team bolstered by partner hires

NEWS
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
The long-awaited Getty Images v Stability AI judgment arrived at the end of last year—but not with the seismic impact many expected. In this week's issue of NLJ, experts from Arnold & Porter dissect a ruling that is ‘historic’ yet tightly confined
The UK Supreme Court may be deciding fewer cases, but its impact in 2025 was anything but muted. In this week's NLJ, Professor Emeritus Brice Dickson of Queen’s University Belfast reviews a year marked by historically low output, a striking rise in jointly authored judgments, and a continued decline in dissent. High-profile rulings on biological sex under the Equality Act, public access to Dartmoor, and fairness in sexual offence trials ensured the court’s voice carried far beyond the Strand
Delays at HM Land Registry are no longer a background irritation but a growing source of professional risk. Writing in NLJ this week, Phil Murrin of DAC Beachcroft explores how the ‘registration gap’—now stretching up to two years in complex cases—is fuelling client frustration, priority disputes, and negligence claims
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll