header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Question time

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
19 January 2012 / Jane Ching , Natalie Byrom
Issue: 7497 / Categories: Features , Training & education , Profession
printer mail-detail

Jane Ching & Natalie Byrom grapple with the present & future demands of legal services education

 

Happy new year, happy new legal services landscape. With the first (conveyancing) ABSs already in place and others to follow, ever-present changes to legal aid, and university applications decreasing, predicting where the legal profession might be in even the very near future is an enormous task. Then work backwards to work out what kind of education and training system might be needed to equip people to work in the new landscape and to deal with future changes to it. And then suggest how that system might best be regulated (by, for example, regulating training providers and courses; by regulating outcomes; by regulating how individual legal services businesses are conducted, or some combination of all of the above?). All of this is the challenge with which the legal education and training review research team has been grappling since the middle of last year.

Question marks

You may well have seen the research questions we identified early
If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Shareholder secrecy sunk
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
NLJ this week: The expanding remit of national security law
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
NLJ this week: Trauma-informed pro bono
In NLJ this week, Bea Rossetto of the National Pro Bono Centre marks Pro Bono Week by urging lawyers to recognise the emotional toll of pro bono work
NLJ this week: When leases last hours
Can a lease legally last only days—or even hours? Professor Mark Pawlowski of the University of Greenwich explores the question in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: EU law trumps sports arbitration
RFC Seraing v FIFA, in which the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) reaffirmed that awards by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) may be reviewed by EU courts on public-policy grounds, is under examination in this week's NLJ by Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law, Zurich
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll