I read your recent feature article on higher rights of audience with interest (see [2007] Gazette, 25 January, 20).


The public would be astonished to learn that the vast majority of senior barristers and solicitor-advocates received no advocacy training and assessment during their training at law school.



Prior to 1989, when training and assessment in advocacy and other legal skills were introduced on the bar vocational course (BVC) at the Inns of Court School of Law, and later by other course providers, barristers were called to the bar after passing written examinations and complying with the inns' dining requirements. Following call, those going into practice were required to undertake further training in pupillage for one year. They were granted rights of audience in all courts.



Prior to 1993, when training and assessment in advocacy and other legal skills were introduced on the legal practice course (LPC), solicitors were not admitted to the roll until they had passed written examinations and completed two years' articles (now a training contract). They were granted rights of audience in the lower courts.



The anomaly in the rules on rights of audience for barristers vis-a-vis solicitors was retained, notwithstanding the introduction of advocacy training and assessment on the LPC. An example of the nonsensical operation of the rules is that many of the solicitor tutors in advocacy on the BVC have no rights of audience in higher courts, yet their students receive those rights on qualification.



The anomaly in the rules ought to be removed forthwith.



Colin Bobb-Semple, solicitor and senior lecturer, the Inns of Court School of Law, City Law School, London