The Gazette 1994

GAZETTE

V I E W P O I N T

When is a Sol ici tor

not a Legal Adviser?

JULY 1994

The title to this Viewpoint may seem

odd: how, it may be asked, could the

question posed in the title be raised.

Solicitors are, after all, fully trained

lawyers - most of them law graduates

- who have rights of audience, as

advocates, in all the courts. Indeed,

since the late 1970s, solicitors have

benefitted from a form of vocational

training in the Society's Law School

at Blackhall Place that has been much

admired (even endorsed by the former

Fair Trade Commission) and

considered to be on a par with the best

vocational education systems

internationally. Nowadays, many

solicitors have post-graduate degrees

in law and specialisation in particular

areas of law is common. Many would

be well versed in international law,

particularly the law of the European

Union.

Yet, despite all of this, the Attorney

General's office recently advertised,

once again,

for Legal Assistants

making it clear in the advertisement

that solicitors need not apply.

Eligibility was confined exclusively to

barristers. As we move closer to the

21st Century, you might very well ask

how this could be so.

What is it about the work of the

Attorney General's office that makes

solicitors unsuitable? The

advertisement says that the duties of a

Fourth Legal Assistant (which is the

basic entry level) involve a

"very wide range of legal work of a

major public importance. They

include advisory work and research

in the fields of both domestic and

international law, including the law

of the European Union; and

participation in formulating law at

domestic and international levels."

The advertisement went on to say that

those appointed to the posts would be

expected to travel abroad to

international meetings and

conferences and to represent the State

in a legal capacity - nothing, you

might think, in any of those duties that

a well educated young solicitor could

not do. Lawyers in other areas of the

public service (for example, the

Department of Foreign Affairs) are,

after all, doing work of a broadly

similar nature and solicitors are

eligible for appointment to those

posts. Likewise, although the field of

endeavour may be somewhat

different, solicitors are, and have been

since its inception, successfully

working in the office of the Director

of Public Prosecutions in relation to

functions which were once part of the

Attorney General's office.

The single requirement for these

positions which excludes solicitors is

the requirement that candidates must

have practised for at least four years

barristers

within the State. The

experience so gained automatically

ensures that these persons will be

capable of performing the duties set

out above and this, and this alone,

distinguishes them and sets them apart

| from solicitors. It is, apparently,

irrelevant that experience gained as a

barrister in the Law Library or on

circuit may have been of the most

mundane kind and it matters not, it

seems, that a candidate may

never

have advocated before a judge in the

superior courts at all - other, perhaps,

than to seek an adjournment or bring a

minor application. The mere fact of

being a member of the Bar Library

and of having been

'on the hazard'

in itself sufficient. As against that, a

solicitor candidate (if he/she could be

a candidate) might have ten or fifteen

years of varied experience working on

behalf of demanding, high-powered

corporate clients; he might have

represented his firm internationally,

(he might even have worked in a

branch office of his firm abroad). It is

not inconceivable that he might be

expert in legal drafting, have

conducted arbitrations on his own;

indeed, he might even have advocated

in important cases before the superior

courts - as some solicitors

undoubtedly have. It matters not, it

seems, that such a solicitor might have

acted as an inspector under the

Companies Acts or conducted legal

enquiries on behalf of the Government

- so long as he has not been in the Bar

Library for at least four years he is, as

a consequence, disqualified.

Attorneys General in the past have

sought to justify this insidious

discrimination against one branch of

the legal profession on the grounds

that, to understand how law operates

in practice, one must have practised at

the Bar. Perhaps there are some who

will find that excuse convincing. We

certainly do not. It is now time that

this matter was addressed seriously by

the Government. We believe that all

restrictive practices that seek to

exclude one branch of the profession

from eligibility for appointment to

legal positions in the State - including

appointment as judges - must now be

ended. The skies will not fall in if this

happens. The two branches of the

profession will continue to fulfil their

separate roles. Once eligibility is

established, those charged with the

responsibility of selecting candidates

for appointment will, of course, be

free to exercise their own discretion in

relation to the

experience

of the

candidates and decide whether, all

things considered, a particular

individual is suitable.

Can they still be that much out of

touch in Merrion Street?

•

English Agents:

Agency work

undertaken for Irish solicitors in

both litigation and non-contentious

matters - including legal aid. Fearon

& Co., Solicitors, Westminster

House, 12 The Broadway, Woking,

Surrey GU21 5AU.

Tel: 00-44-483-726272.

Fax: 00-44-483-725807.

209