The Law Society has been forced into a U-turn on its controversial plans to make the LPC non-compulsory following a furious row at the Legal Education Training Group’s (LETG) annual general meeting.
The announcement followed last Monday’s (17 October) LETG meeting, during which Training Framework Review (TFR) chair Sue Nelson responded to questions on proposed changes to the qualification process.
Individuals who attended the meeting have slated Nelson for undermining the Law Society’s latest consultation on the TFR after she dismissed law firm responses.
Nelson is believed to have expressed dismay at the lack of awareness of the current training regime and the impracticality of some of the views put forward.
College of Law chief executive Nigel Savage said: “I think it’s the height of arrogance to criticise the profession and the legal education community just because [Nelson] didn’t agree with the responses.”
One Law Society source compared Nelson’s behaviour at the meeting to “a bull in a china shop”.
Under the proposals now being considered by the TFR Group, students would still be required to complete the LPC, but could be given an exemption from parts of it because of their prior qualifications (first revealed on www.the lawyer.com, 21 October).
Savage said: “I’m delighted that the Law Society has preserved the integrity of the profession. A lot of bridges have been burnt with the legal profession and legal education providers in the process.”
Nelson did not return calls for comment.