Report this comment to a moderator

Time to cut the silken thread

I'd like to pick two points that miss the mark, in my view. Milly says every time a barrister appears in court he/she is evaluated by judges. This is not a systematic process. There was some research some years ago that showed the standards of advocacy weren't that great among the Bar. I suspect they have improved but our measures of these may well lag. After all it is the clients and state who pay for these services that need to be reassured. The granting of a QC is insufficient guarantee as it stands. Secondly my comparison with the medical profession, as Eurolawyer picks up, does work. The Royal Colleges are involved in the development of curricula for specialisms but they are not the sole evaluators. That is mix of the GMC, colleges, NHS working collaboratively. Nothing of that sort exists in law. Moreover, these systems are based around "specialties" not the vague category of "good surgeon" or "good psychiatrist". At the moment we let the market determine the quality of the specialism, but we could do with a more rigorous, analytical and sustained system.

12-Apr-2012

12:59 pm