Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Kings Inns

Options
  • 26-03-2011 4:24am
    #1
    chops018
    Registered Users Posts: 2,458 ✭✭✭


    Hi All,

    I have a degree in Law, and I am nearly finished completing a Masters (LL.M) and was wondering around how much would it take to put yourself through the BL course?

    With the state the country is in it looks like there will be no part time job options whilst doing this course, let alone being able to do any work as I have heard the BL course is very demanding and time consuming.

    Anyway, what I am asking is: is the course financially feasible to a person with the education requirements and the drive to do it, unfortunately I do not have the money to do it. Are there any options available in which to get finacial aid?

    Any people who have undertook this course I would be very grateful if they could give me their opinions of the content involved.
    Tagged:


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    paky
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    any barrister ive met said that if they were in a position to decide what to do again they would of gone the solicitor route. barrister just doesnt seem to pay and aint worth the hassle


  • Options
    #3
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    paky wrote: »
    any barrister ive met said that if they were in a position to decide what to do again they would of gone the solicitor route. barrister just doesnt seem to pay and aint worth the hassle
    I've never heard this if I'm honest and I completely disagree with it... but to each their own.


  • Options
    #4
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    These days it is probably easier to become a solicitor, and then a barrister?


  • Options
    #5
    paky
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    Wolfe Tone wrote: »
    These days it is probably easier to become a solicitor, and then a barrister?

    that would make alot more sense.


  • Options
    #6
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Why? It makes no sense to me, but maybe I'm missing something?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    paky
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Why? It makes no sense to me, but maybe I'm missing something?

    well think about it. you'll be dealing with way more cases as a solicitor so you'll likely know more than a barrister does.


  • Options
    #8
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    paky wrote: »
    well think about it. you'll be dealing with way more cases as a solicitor so you'll likely know more than a barrister does.

    What?

    Leaving aside the logical fallacy inherent there the entire sentence presupposes that the prospective solicitor even gets an apprenticeship.


  • Options
    #9
    paky
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    Deleted User wrote: »
    What?

    Leaving aside the logical fallacy inherent there the entire sentence presupposes that the prospective solicitor even gets an apprenticeship.

    the solicitor been in full time employment and the barrister been free lance. what makes you think a barrister would have more expertise then a solicitor in that context?


  • Options
    #10
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    paky wrote: »
    the solicitor been in full time employment and the barrister been free lance. what makes you think a barrister would have more expertise then a solicitor in that context?

    The question was "which would be easier to become, a solicitor or barrister?".

    You are assuming that someone has become a solicitor and then, in spite of all contrary evidence, also has full time employment and is working constantly.

    That's a very poor assumption for solicitors today.


  • Options
    #11
    Wolfe Tone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,670 ✭✭✭✭Wolfe Tone


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Why? It makes no sense to me, but maybe I'm missing something?
    The gist of what I was told is that it is "easier" to qualify as solicitor and in turn its "relatively easy" to become a Barrister once you are a solicitor for five(?) or so years. I was told that by a junior council. She was of the opinion that her previous experience and contacts made as a solicitor made her a better barrister.

    Personally I plan to just go for kings inns.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Wolfe Tone wrote: »
    The gist of what I was told is that it is "easier" to qualify as solicitor and in turn its "relatively easy" to become a Barrister once you are a solicitor for five(?) or so years. I was told that by a junior council. She was of the opinion that her previous experience and contacts made as a solicitor made her a better barrister.

    This definitely makes sense. Not necessarily true re: experience but definitely regarding contacts.


  • Options
    #13
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    They're different jobs though. Being a solicitor does not necessarily mean you're a good advocate. Most solicitors I've come across brick it at the thought of having to be on their feet.


  • Options
    #14
    paky
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The question was "which would be easier to become, a solicitor or barrister?".

    You are assuming that someone has become a solicitor and then, in spite of all contrary evidence, also has full time employment and is working constantly.

    That's a very poor assumption for solicitors today.

    what im 'assuming' is that solicitors deal with more cases on a daily basis than barristers do. being a barrister there is no guarantee that you will be working on a full time basis.


  • Options
    #15
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    paky wrote: »
    what im 'assuming' is that solicitors deal with more cases on a daily basis than barristers do. being a barrister there is no guarantee that you will be working on a full time basis.

    The same is true for a solicitor.


  • Options
    #16
    paky
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The same is true for a solicitor.

    this is true if you decide to set up your own practice after training otherwise i cant see why a firm or an employer wouldnt have you kept busy


  • Options
    #17
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    paky wrote: »
    this is true if you decide to set up your own practice after training otherwise i cant see why a firm or an employer wouldnt have you kept busy

    Have you got any concept of how hard it is for solicitors at the moment? Those lucky enough to get taken on as apprentices still face into an enormous difficulty when they complete that training in getting regular employment.


  • Options
    #18
    paky
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Have you got any concept of how hard it is for solicitors at the moment? Those lucky enough to get taken on as apprentices still face into an enormous difficulty when they complete that training in getting regular employment.

    so whats your point?


  • Options
    #19
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    paky wrote: »
    so whats your point?

    That barristers and solicitors are in an equally difficult position with regard to regular work and saying that one is busier than the other by default is simply false.


  • Options
    #20
    paky
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    Deleted User wrote: »
    That barristers and solicitors are in an equally difficult position with regard to regular work and saying that one is busier than the other by default is simply false.

    its not false. whats false is assuming that solicitor employment is the same as barrister employment. one is mainly freelance and the other is mainly secure.


  • Options
    #21
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    paky wrote: »
    its not false. whats false is assuming that solicitor employment is the same as barrister employment. one is mainly freelance and the other is mainly secure.

    I am perfectly aware of the nature of their employment. However anyone who thinks a newly qualified solicitor has secured employment as a matter of course is, at best, terribly misinformed.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    paky
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    Deleted User wrote: »
    I am perfectly aware of the nature of their employment.

    Are you sure?
    Deleted User wrote: »
    However anyone who thinks a newly qualified solicitor has secured employment as a matter of course is, at best, terribly misinformed.

    thinking and assuming are both different things.


  • Options
    #23
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    paky wrote: »
    Are you sure?



    thinking and assuming are both different things.

    Yes I am. Are you?

    As for your second point it doesn't actually make any difference in that context.


  • Options
    #24
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Lets try to keep it civil guys. paky, you're entitled to your opinion but it seems quite unfounded.


  • Options
    #25
    paky
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Yes I am. Are you?

    As for your second point it doesn't actually make any difference in that context.

    it does actually. both arguments are based on different assumptions. one argument is based on the assumption that we are discussing an employed solicitor.
    the other argument is based on the assumption that we are discussing unemployed solicitors.

    as for what constitutes what someone thinks, is what the person believes to be fact as opposed to an assumption being based on a belief for the sake of argument which may or maynot be true

    i await your response


  • Options
    #26
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,505 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    paky wrote: »
    well think about it. you'll be dealing with way more cases as a solicitor so you'll likely know more than a barrister does.
    paky wrote: »
    the solicitor been in full time employment and the barrister been free lance. what makes you think a barrister would have more expertise then a solicitor in that context?
    paky wrote: »
    what im 'assuming' is that solicitors deal with more cases on a daily basis than barristers do. being a barrister there is no guarantee that you will be working on a full time basis.

    Actually, one of the generally accepted reasons for a split profession is that because solicitors have to deal with so many files and so many clients, they simply don't have the time or manpower to research complex issues of law. Nor will most small firms have sufficient access to caselaw, journals and textbooks to enable them to do the research.

    It is precisely because barristers deal with fewer, more complex cases than solicitors that they are able to specialise and do the research. Most solicitors will maintain, rightly, that they could do the barrister's job if they had the time to do so but because they have so many clients to deal with, they don't have the time to do the research and it is more efficient for them to get barristers to do it than it is to do the research themselves, maintain a sufficient library and keep themselves current. Obviously there are notable exceptions, but as a general rule that is the system we have.

    Alan Shatter has complained before that he is not allowed to lead a junior counsel in a case that he knows more about than any silk. And insofar as his point is that a solicitor can in fact be more knowledgeable and a better advocate than a barrister, he raises a good point. But looked at another way, if he wants to do the advocacy himself, what is the point of getting a junior barrister in. If you think about that one for a bit you might better understand the respective roles of barrister and solicitor.
    paky wrote:
    any barrister ive met said that if they were in a position to decide what to do again they would of gone the solicitor route. barrister just doesnt seem to pay and aint worth the hassle

    Maybe they are better suited to the solicitor route and made a mistake in choosing the bar route. Different jobs don't suit everybody.
    paky wrote: »
    its not false. whats false is assuming that solicitor employment is the same as barrister employment. one is mainly freelance and the other is mainly secure.

    The two are completely different alright, but solicitor employment is not mainly secure. Also, barrister work is entirely freelance as barristers cant form companies or partnerships. Perhaps that will change with the implementation of the competition authority's report.


  • Options
    #27
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    paky wrote: »
    it does actually. both arguments are based on different assumptions. one argument is based on the assumption that we are discussing an employed solicitor.
    the other argument is based on the assumption that we are discussing unemployed solicitors.

    We are actually discussing prospective employment rather than current employment. The prospect of someone going down either the barrister or solicitor route finding a fruitful career in either is equally difficult in the current climate. In fact I would wager, at least in the short term, the solicitor route is harder.

    The distinction between what someone would achieve should they actually get to the stage where they are gainfully earning a living in terms of workload is actually quite irrelevant. The title of the thread is Kings Inns because we are speaking about future work, not current.


    as for what constitutes what someone thinks, is what the person believes to be fact as opposed to an assumption being based on a belief for the sake of argument which may or maynot be true

    i await your response

    This is all off point so I won't bother.


  • Options
    #28
    paky
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,138 ✭✭✭paky


    Deleted User wrote: »
    We are actually discussing prospective employment rather than current employment. The prospect of someone going down either the barrister or solicitor route finding a fruitful career in either is equally difficult in the current climate. In fact I would wager, at least in the short term, the solicitor route is harder.

    The distinction between what someone would achieve should they actually get to the stage where they are gainfully earning a living in terms of workload is actually quite irrelevant. The title of the thread is Kings Inns because we are speaking about future work, not current.





    This is all off point so I won't bother.

    i think johnnyskeleton has pretty much covered it


  • Options
    #29
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    paky wrote: »
    i think johnnyskeleton has pretty much covered it

    Finally a point on which we can agree.


  • Options
    #30
    NoQuarter
    Registered Users Posts: 4,632 ✭✭✭NoQuarter


    paky wrote: »
    well think about it. you'll be dealing with way more cases as a solicitor so you'll likely know more than a barrister does.

    Wow, just wow!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    chops018
    Registered Users Posts: 2,458 ✭✭✭chops018


    hey all,

    it's good to see a debate on which is a better profession, but my question was not about this.

    as i said i am interested in Kings Inns and want some info about the course, as regard finance, part time job, what the course demands and what the hours are like etc.

    oh, and i understand is around €12,000 or thereabouts to attend if you pass the entrance exams, could someone who does not have this as i will be (hopefully) completed my masters be able to avail of financial aid of some sort?


Advertisement