SRA 'super exam' risks damaging solicitor standards

Proposals to change the entry requirements of the solicitor profession risk adversely affecting clients, the legal services market, and the UK economy, the Law Society has claimed.

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has proposed replacing the existing routes to qualification with a solicitors qualifying examination (SQE), comprised of a series of centralised assessments of knowledge and skills.

While the Law Society supports a centralised assessment, it argues that it must be set at an appropriate level and not dilute or damage the standing of solicitors at home and abroad.

The regulator has stated that the ‘super exam’ would be set at degree level, but there would be no requirement for a law degree, CILEx, or apprenticeship courses.

‘It is essential that any new central assessment is set at the right level and does not result in the current high standards being diminished,’ said Jonathan Smithers, president of the Law Society.

‘Academic rigour underpins the commercial success of the solicitor profession and we believe that the removal of the current quality indicators – a degree-level qualification, a legal practice course, and a substantial and supervised period of work-based training – will jeopardise the international standing of the solicitor qualification, negatively impacting on clients, our economy, and jobs.

The regulator has yet to commit to pre-qualification work experience as a requirement for entry into the profession, despite the Law Society’s insistence that the present training contract is essential.

‘The SRA is making piecemeal announcements to the profession on its proposals. This is unhelpful and causing grave concern. We want to see the detail of all the proposals so that they can be robustly scrutinised and their full implications considered, ensuring the stated aims are met.’

‘We are not convinced that the SRA’s plans will result in standards being maintained and we know that many in the profession feel the same way.’

In July 2015, the society warned that the SRA’s proposals could damage the global competitiveness of UK law. 

Detailed research conducted in conjunction with City solicitors found firms were concerned at the possibility that the internationally respected period of workplace learning may be abolished.

Chancery Lane has also called for routes into the profession to be made clearer so the best candidates can gain access irrespective of their background. Plans to modify access could prevent some of the best talent from becoming solicitors.

‘This is critical if we are to promote and support social mobility in the profession,’ said Smithers.

‘The SRA maintains that its proposals will increase access to the profession, but it admits that this would only be the case if legal education and training providers develop training courses that are cheaper and more flexible than the current qualifying law degree and legal practice course (LPC),’ he added.

‘Our concern is that the ?SRA’s consultation contains disappointingly little detail on the proposed assessments. We are asking for evidence that the SRA proposals would actually represent a lower cost to potential entrants.’

In what will be seen as the latest broadside aimed at the regulator, Smithers added that in order to drive professional standards, the responsibility for professional standards needed to be ‘owned and driven’ by the profession.

‘The government’s upcoming consultation on separating ?the regulators from the representative bodies is an opportunity to redefine what regulation should cover to ensure that it is simple and better, and applies fairly to all legal services while at the same time ensuring that the profession has the responsibility for entry into the profession and for professional standards.’