I read with dismay of the moves to afford all solicitors rights of audience in the higher courts (see [2006] Gazette, 7 December, 3). Such changes arise purely out of costs considerations, and yet risk the dumbing-down of professional advocacy standards.


The current restrictions are not 'illogical' but reflect the fact that as advocates solicitors have never been the equals of barristers. No actual or proposed change in solicitors' compulsory skills training will alter that fact. Therefore, client interests would be jeopardised where solicitors are ostensibly qualified to undertake important work that ought only to be undertaken by genuine higher court advocates.



Such dangers will not be overcome by solicitors being required only to act where they deem themselves sufficiently competent. Such a subjective judgement would require a knowledge and impartiality that for various reasons a great number of solicitors would lack. Financial considerations would also be likely to obscure judgement.



The grant of higher rights must entail a formal qualification issued by an objective adjudicator. That very system operates perfectly well, whereby any solicitor has a right to apply for higher rights merely through demonstrating the requisite experience, knowledge and skill.



Guy Gosheron, Paul Gunn & Co, Bournemouth