Acumen+giving+you+the+edge
Categories:India & Pakistan

Blunder excludes Indian lawyers from QLTS

7 September 2010 | By Corinne McPartland

  • Print
  • Comments (8)

Related Articles

Hundreds of foreign qualified lawyers could be prevented from being able to practise law in England and Wales due to an administrative blunder on the new Qualified Lawyers Transfer Scheme (QLTS).

The new scheme, which has been undergoing revisions by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) for more than two years, has neglected to list key jurisdictions such as India, Canada and New York as areas, which can take the compulsory test.

But the SRA has defended its revised framework and instead put the blame on each particular jurisdiction’s regulatory body absent from the list for not returning its survey in time.

A spokesman for the SRA said: “We conducted a survey of international law societies and bars at the end of April and none of those contacted in [countries such as] India responded. Only those jurisdictions whose regulatory bodies replied and have been assessed as meeting the SRA’s criteria have been included on the list that appears on the SRA website.”

The SRA has now urged lawyers in jurisdictions that have not yet been included to encourage their bars or law societies to either complete the survey or contact the organisation directly.

But despite some countries being left off the list, the new QLTS has in fact been opened up to lawyers from a wider range of jurisdictions compared to the previous arrangement, which gave preferential treatment to Commonwealth countries.

Many non common-law jurisdictions from Europe, Asia, Africa and South America are now included on the list, including Zimbabwe and Nepal.

The new revisions for the QLTS were originally supposed to come into force two years ago, however consultation into the amendments caused controversy for discriminating against diversity when the SRA sought to put in a requirement for re-qualifiers to gain at least one year of practice under English law.

At the time the College of Law and others from the legal profession claimed the SRA’s measures were “anti-diversity” and restricted foreign lawyers’ abilities to work in the UK.

See all Related Jobs, Briefings & CPD/Events

Readers' comments (8)

  • Anonymous | 8-Sep-2010 5:37 am

    Almost all of the Caribbean jurisdictions have also been excluded. I find it amazing that major common law jurisdictions have been left off of the list.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • anon | 8-Sep-2010 1:07 pm

    Well done, SRA. Not content to turn the test into a complete shamozzle, you've also excluded some of the major jurisdictions.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | 8-Sep-2010 4:16 pm

    As a foreign qualified lawyer I had to deal with the SRA three years ago when requalifying here. Despite having just obtained a Masters Degree in English civil procedure, they would not grant me a dispensation from taking the civil procedure QLTT exam! After dealing with 5-6 individuals at the SRA, my conclusion was that the dregs of the legal world must somehow fall through the cracks in order to find themselves employed there. What a bunch of pencil-pushing, red-tape infatuated idiots, and what fittingly stupid regulations they had put in place. Reading this story today has me banging my head on the desk all over again. What megalomaniac IDIOT decided that the measure of whether a jurisdiction can be a Recognised Jurisdiction should be whether the foreign bar association replies to the SRA's survey request? How unbelievably crass to penalise individuals for something completely out of their control. No wonder the SRA receives no respect in the legal community.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | 8-Sep-2010 4:47 pm

    Why does this not surprise me? If the SRA can foul something up, then sure enough ites does.

    I cannot tell you the number of times the SRA has made a mess of something my firm or a solicitor from the firm has been involved in.

    It's a complete disgrace that our profession's regulator should be so incompetent when it is there to ensure the highest standards from the legal profession.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | 10-Sep-2010 5:06 am

    I question whether the SRA actually sent the survey to all the jurisdictions in April as indicated. When I contacted my local Bar Association here in my locale, they indicated that they only received the survey last week!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | 15-Sep-2010 2:03 am

    It appears that the QLTS is going to be an exam for the riches only. The assessment provider, Kaplan, has just notified that the assessment fees for the three parts of the QLTS are over GBP 3,200!

    Forget about the SRA jurisdiction list - even if you are there - how can a young lawyer afford such expense?!

    These are artificial barriers put on lawyers from poor countries who will not be able in a life time to take these exams.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | 16-Sep-2010 4:42 pm

    Again, is it not so blatant what the SRA is up to. I am ashamed to be associated with such a racist organisation.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous | 8-Jun-2011 7:54 pm

    An addittional chance to pass the QLTS exam has been granted by SRA now. Kaplan look like in a right mess now to figure out the right way to conduct the exams. Additional chances rae offered in order to encourage people to apply for exam. No one is offering the preparation and study material because it look like some thing is wrong.
    I presume Kaplan has got trapped by SRA by taking this sole responsibilty as test provider. For Kaplan it was shown a wonderfull oppurtunity to get bussiness and now kaplan has invested money in it no response good response.
    The amount of money required to do this test is rediculous and no job gurantee even after it. Foreign lawyers can still do paralegal work without passing exams so look like some one is scartching there head.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Related Briefings

View All Related Briefings

  • Print
  • Comments (8)

Most popular

Most commented

Most emailed