University of Technology, Sydney Law Review
|
|
Home
| Databases
| WorldLII
| Search
| Feedback
University of Technology, Sydney Law Review |
|
Geoff Monahan[1] and Bronwyn Olliffe[2]
JUST LIKE many other aspects in our nation’s development, the Australian lawyer evolved more from tradition, reaction and compromise than from a cohesive and logical strategy. It has only been in the last decade that some positive steps have been taken to forge a truly national (and trans-Tasman) legal profession. Despite much discussion, the Australian law student has been educated, trained and regulated, for admission purposes, on a state and territory basis. This is now in the process of changing.
Broadly speaking, this article will examine the movement towards recognised competencies in the training of law students for admission in Australia. It does not examine the recent developments in legal education that have been taking place in the UK and Canada.
The article will also consider the ever-changing partnership between law schools and practical legal training (PLT) providers (including providers of ‘articles’) in producing a pre-admission law graduate. This relationship needs reappraisal given the movement towards the provision of legal skills tuition and assessment in law degrees and the overall cost of education.
Overall, it is worth noting that the judiciary, in particular the private legal profession, has traditionally dictated the state-based pre-admission standards for academic and PLT providers. In NSW, this is clearly demonstrated by the fact that both the judiciary (via the Legal Practitioners Admission Board Diploma of Law course) and the NSW Law Society (via the College of Law Professional Program) are involved in pre-admission academic and vocational legal training. While there is no monopoly in NSW with respect to pre-admission legal education and training, both these organisations conduct courses with significant numbers of students. Consequently, it should come as no surprise that the debate surrounding a national approach to pre-admission standards has focused upon the knowledge, skills and competencies required for legal practice, essentially in the private sector. It should be noted at the outset, however, that pre-admission standards are directed towards general legal practice, rather than specialist legal practice. While legal educational providers have a role in the training of specialist legal practice, it is presumed that this will occur post-admission.
In April 1992, the Law Admissions Consultative Committee (LACC, commonly referred to as the Priestley Committee)[3] made recommendations for uniform admission based upon defined areas of academic legal study. In relation to required length of such study, the Committee recommended that a student undertake a course of study comprising at least three years full time attendance or equivalent part time[4].
The 11 subjects (known as the Priestley 11) suggested by the LACC as a minimum in the academic education of a lawyer are:
An example of the comprehensive description for the subject Professional Conduct is found in Appendix 1. The Committee stated that:
...although the topics below are grouped together for convenience under the headings of particular areas of knowledge, there is no implication that a topic needs to be taught in a subject covering the area of knowledge mentioned in the heading rather than in another suitable subject.
Each jurisdiction subsequently adopted (although not formally in Western Australia) the so-called ‘Priestley 11’ as the academic requirements for admission.
In 1999 all Australia law schools, legal professional bodies and admitting authorities were asked to comment on whether the Priestley 11 needed to be amended. It is our understanding that no substantial suggestions for change were made.
In February 1994, the LACC released a proposal for uniform practical legal training (PLT) requirements[5], which drew upon the work that had been done by a Working Group established by the Law Council of Australia. Apart from prescribing areas of practice for PLT courses, the Committee also recommended, in lieu of PLT, a minimum requirement of two years’ practical experience of which at least one year must be gained after admission.[6] The Committee provided the following practice topics (commonly referred to as the Priestley 12) for convenience only:
Legal Profession
An example of the content details for the subject areas of Legal Profession (Ethics and Professional Responsibility/Trust and Office Accounting) is found in Appendix 2.
In July 1994, the Law Council of Australia finally released its blueprint for uniform standards of admission and of PLT.[7] The proposal endorsed the practice topic areas suggested by its Working Group which had been adopted earlier by the LACC.[8] Notwithstanding the recommendations made by the LACC and the release of the Law Council blueprint, the admitting authorities did not adopt the suggested uniform PLT requirements.
In late 1996, the Law Council of Australia established a National Advisory Committee for Legal Education and Professional Admission to revisit the issue of uniform admission requirements, and in particular, uniform vocational standards. The National Advisory Committee included representatives from the Council of Australian Law Deans and the legal profession and a representative from the PLT providers and Australian Law Students Association (ALSA). While the National Advisory Committee met on several occasions throughout 1997, it is our understanding that no firm decisions were reached.
In July 1997, the Australasian Professional Legal Education Council[9] (APLEC) released a draft of its own recommended standards for pre-admission vocational training[10] for submission, to both the LACC and the National Advisory Committee. The APLEC recommendations were prefaced by the fact that admission provides a licence to general practice, and as such:
...the vocational component must, as far as possible, expose aspiring practitioners to practice in the common major areas of practice.[11]
The so-called APLEC 9 was modelled with close reference to the competency standards, which apply in relation to the training of accountants in Australia and New Zealand (commonly known as the Birkett Standards).[12] As with the Birkett Standards, the APLEC 9:
...is philosophically oriented towards generalised training for a generalist licence, recognising that non-specialist practising certificates are currently issued in all Australian states and territories, with attendant implications for community expectations of threshold professional competence in a range of practice areas.[13]
In addition to the prescribed fields of practice, APLEC also recommended professional values and skills fields as follows:[14]
An example of the content details for the Value Fields (Ethics and Professional Values) is found in Appendix 3.
While there was broad consensus as to the basic legal skills and competencies required for legal practice, the debate proceeded upon a presumption that quality pre-admission legal training could best be undertaken by prescribing a minimum period of legal education.
The pre-admission/PLT requirements were somewhat indicative of a quantitative approach to the production of a competent law graduate.[15] The Executive Summary states that:
[p]rogram length is construed by the proposal in terms of an optimal nine hundred (900) hour curriculum of structured training activities or, in the case of articles of clerkship, a single professional year of supervised on the job training, being approximately eighteen hundred (1800) hours of work placement...A structured 900 hour curriculum ought ideally to include a minimum 90 hours work place experience and a minimum of 450 hours of programmed learning activities. A predominantly unstructured 1800 hour work placement in clerkship ought ideally to include a minimum 90 hours of structured training...These periodic parameters are based on the concept of the ‘professional year’ (a full time academic year or a full time working year) and reflect the literature, experience and international standards in practical legal training in many comparable jurisdictions.[16]
The APLEC 9 standards were a descriptive model only and were designed to foster minimum national competencies. Individual state-based providers would continue to determine the emphasis of the nine fields within their overall curriculum. Given the membership of APLEC it was not surprising that the proposal contemplated the integration of PLT within the Bachelor of Laws. The APLEC 9 standards were prefaced upon the view that PLT is:
more effective when it is intensive and occurs just prior to the trainee entering professional practice or is integrated with professional or clinical experience.[17]
The proposal stipulated that full integration of PLT within the LLB is only desirable where:
In relation to the issue of cross-institutional credit and advanced standing, the APLEC 9 standards commented that it was:
consistent with the move to a national legal profession, that where a person completes part of her or his vocational component training in one State or Territory, that she or he should be able to gain credit in the second State or Territory for any training already completed.[19]
While this recommendation is logical, it opens up the issue of recognising the prior learning of legal skills within the LLB.
The NSW admission requirements simply state that a person is qualified for admission if he or she has completed ‘practical training’.[20] In December 1997 the NSW Legal Practitioners Admission Board (LPAB) adopted a proposal (agreed to by the six then current NSW PLT providers) based upon the APLEC prescription.[21]
It is worth noting that currently in NSW, it is possible to obtain a complete exemption from the PLT requirement if an applicant demonstrates suitable experience in private practice. This is soon to change. Exemptions for those applicants who have had experience in a legal environment but who have not completed a formal PLT course and who have not been admitted in any jurisdiction will cease from 30 June 2003. The LPAB, as part of a review of certain policies and practices determined this in July 2001.[22] The LPAB was concerned with the quality of the training that applicants for exemptions were receiving on the job. The LPAB held the view that the quality control provided in a PLT course is superior to that provided by the training arrangements operating in most solicitors’ offices. The LPAB was confident that now there are a number of institutions offering practical legal training, there are sufficient places available for all applicants.
In summary the APLEC 9 specified in broad terms the skills, values and practical knowledge that each student ought to be able to demonstrate upon completion of a course of practical legal training.
In February 1999 the LACC invited views from the Australian Law Deans and PLT providers on:
The Hon. Mr Justice L.J. Priestley summarised the responses received by the committee.
It was a logical step for the LACC and APLEC to join forces to review pre-admission vocational requirements. It was also logical to move towards ‘competencies’ as a further development of the APLEC Standards. As has been noted:
competence is now not only a central feature of education and training reforms in many countries—it is also central to government-initiated wider industrial reform agendas.[25]
The major parts of the Competency Statements (or ‘Competency Standards’)[26] were drafted at an intensive weekend workshop held at the UTS at the end of January 2000. There were representatives from APLEC and a number of participants nominated on behalf of LACC by the Law Council of Australia. Gordon Joughin, an education consultant who had been engaged by APLEC to assist with developing competencies for the APLEC areas of practice, facilitated the workshop.
The Competency Standards developed provide a thorough foundation for minimum standards in curricula. They are based on what is usually done in the workplace and the standard performance that is normally required.[27] As such they provide a comprehensive framework for the technical knowledge and aptitudes within a program of PLT.
To successfully complete a PLT program, a student will need to provide evidence that he/she has achieved the requisite competence in the defined Skills, Practice Areas and Values.
The skills described in Lawyer’s Skills are those which have long been considered essential to the lawyer’s craft: oral communication, legal interviewing, advocacy, negotiation, dispute resolution, letter writing and legal drafting. Also included in the Skills section are problem solving, work management and business skills, and trust and office accounting.
Ethics and professional responsibility are contained in the Values section.
It is in the Practice Areas where the greatest divergence from the APLEC standards can be found. For the first time there is the possibility for a PLT student to choose optional studies. Civil litigation practice, commercial and corporate practice and property law practice are each compulsory. Students must also undertake one of the following: administrative law practice, criminal law practice or family law practice. In addition they must complete one practice area from consumer law practice, employment and industrial relations practice, planning and environmental law practice, or wills and estates practice.
A PLT student will be covering a wide range of Practice Areas. This raises the question of whether such an emphasis is going to prepare the lawyers of the 21st century in the best way available. Changes in the law are occurring so rapidly, should admitting authorities and practical legal training providers be requiring such mastery of practice areas? Professor David Weisbrot highlights this issue with the title of his recent newspaper article, ‘Lawyers need to know more than just the law’.[28] Skills and Values have certainly been included in the Competency Standards but to be able to cover the compulsory Practice Areas will absorb the greatest amount of time which a PLT course has available. We can certainly attest to the fact that law students are currently in such a hurry to complete their PLT (and thus seek admission) that perhaps the time they spend undertaking PLT should be more focused on developing the high order professional skills (oral and written communication skills, negotiation and dispute resolution, listening, fact finding, problem solving, project management and teamwork skills, and sensitivity to the client’s interests and experience) identified by Professor Weisbrot.[29]
The potential for options being offered by the PLT providers will possibly give the larger providers a market advantage over smaller providers. Students, once aware of these options, presumably will make their choice of provider based on the options available. Staff will need to develop expertise in one or more of these areas. It may also be possible for students to obtain an exemption from one of these options if a subject previously studied as part of their law qualification meets the requirements of the option.
The option of previous study of a subject is particularly relevant now that a course of Legal Ethics must be a subject of the law qualification of those students wanting to be admitted in NSW. It appears that many of the Legal Ethics courses are covering areas which traditionally have been encompassed by the term Professional Responsibility and therefore have been more likely to be studied during practical legal training. The overlap between the current Priestley academic and vocational prescriptions for legal ethics and professional responsibility is obvious.
The membership of APLEC is now quite diverse. It includes universities, law societies and institutions such as Sydney’s College of Law and Melbourne’s Leo Cussens Institute. Each of these stakeholders provide very different PLT courses. In order to achieve consensus on the competencies they have been expressed in general terms. The competencies do not prescribe the means by which the standards within them should be achieved or the overall framework in which they operate in each educational institution.
In her March 1998 Discussion Paper to the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General (known as SCAG), the then Victorian Attorney-General, Jan Wade, recommended the adoption of post-admission PLT (the Wade Proposal).[30] The Law Institute of Victoria had suggested a similar view in the early 1990s. Under this proposal, law graduates would be eligible to be admitted to legal practice immediately following graduation and would be required to undertake further structured training post-admission within a stipulated period before being eligible to seek an unrestricted practising certificate. The Wade Proposal did not progress past the ‘proposal’ stage.
The introduction of stand-alone legal skills subjects, or their integration within compulsory or elective subjects, has become more entrenched with the increase in the number of new law schools. Generally speaking, the newer law schools have adopted legal skills as part of their overall curricula. This is logical given that the private law firms and the various governments remain the significant source of employment for law graduates. More recently, some of the traditional law schools have adopted, or are examining the adoption of, legal skills programs. Apart from the obvious educational benefits of adopting legal skills programs, there is growing pressure from both students and employers for this additional form of pre-admission training. This may be particularly so in states where students undertake articles or clerkship in lieu of institutional PLT.
It will be interesting to see whether law schools will implement the recommendations of the Australian Law Reform Commission in its recent report, ‘Managing Justice: a review of the federal civil justice system’. The terms of reference of the inquiry asked the Commission to consider ‘the significance of legal education and professional training to the legal process’.[31] The Commission found that education, training and accountability ‘play a critical role in shaping the legal culture...achieving systemic reform and maintaining high standards of performance rely on the development of a healthy professional culture—one that values lifelong learning and takes ethical concerns seriously.’[32] Recommendation 2 provides:
In addition to the study of core areas of substantive law, university legal education in Australia should involve the development of high level professional skills and a deep appreciation of ethical standards and professional responsibility.[33]
Legal skills may be conveniently categorised into the following nine areas:[34]
If law schools adopt or integrate all of the above skills in a proper way, it is arguable that reduces or eliminates the need for compulsory skills training in either articles of clerkship or PLT. It could also be argued that if this did occur the PLT providers could offer skills at a higher level than is currently envisaged they should provide. The ‘one stop shop’ approach to pre-admission training (i.e. integrating skills/PLT within the LLB) certainly has some have appeal to students in terms of reducing both the length and arguably the cost of their legal education. It may also enable the newer law schools to consolidate and expand their market share into the next century. This, in turn, may place some pressure upon the established law schools.
The movement to recognised standards dominated the debate on pre-admission legal education and training in the 1990s. The question of content, and prescriptive competencies has almost been resolved in the view of LACC and APLEC. As at September 2001 there remains an outstanding issue as to whether there should be any ‘time provision’ in the Competency Standards. It is questionable whether a time provision has any place in Competency Standards. The joint approach adopted by the LACC and APLEC has meant that many of the stakeholders in practical legal training have been involved in determining the Competencies and will endeavour to ensure that their various courses meet them.
The Council of Australians Law Deans (CALD) has now supported the general thrust of the Competencies. There was some reservation that the depth of knowledge required by the Competencies is set at a level which is too high for an entry level lawyer.[37] The attainment of the depth of knowledge required is made more difficult by the lack of correlation between the required areas of practice and the core areas of substantive law taught at law schools.
The Competency standards have been submitted for consideration to all Law Admitting Authorities. The LACC has recommended to the Law Admitting Authorities that they adopt the Statements of Competency as setting out the requirements for Practical Legal Training.[38] We understand that the NSW Legal Practitioners Admission Board adopted the Statements of Competency at its meeting in August 2001. It is to be hoped that the Admitting Authorities in other jurisdictions will soon follow so that it can truly be said that there is a national admission standard in Australia.
Law students, legal education providers, the profession and the public should welcome the move towards recognised standards. Recognised standards will allow the existing LLB/PLT courses to remain vocationally relevant and will provide aspiring PLT providers with a blueprint for the adoption of a pre-admission legal training strategy.
Whatever the end result, the overlap issue needs to be addressed so that the pre- education and training of law students is a cohesive and logical one. In other words, the mix (and/or integration) of traditional legal scholarship, legal skills and legal transactions needs to be clearly recognised.
In terms of the overall cost of legal education, it is somewhat ironic that while most of the established PLT providers have moved to a full fee-paying environment, some newer providers have embraced PLT within their LLB studies and within a HECS environment. If law schools continue to adopt or integrate only part of the skills and knowledge required for admission to practice, then it is obvious that some logistical problems will arise for PLT providers. Will these providers give, as the APLEC proposal contemplates, cross-credit or advanced standing for skills training undertaken as part of the LLB? This already occurs to some extent in NSW.[39] The law schools may be wise to consider whether their legal skills integration or electives are suitable for PLT accreditation. The PLT providers may have to consider offering basic courses whereby students would be offered bridging studies for skills training not undertaken as part of the LLB. The admitting authorities may need to be understanding of the needs of providers and students by not requiring further training to be undertaken if suitable education is successfully undertaken as part of an LLB or equivalent program. Moreover, we can envisage a situation where a potential PLT student may claim to have met the requisite competencies prior to the commencement of the training program. This will no doubt cause an interesting issue for the PLT providers.[40]
the topics should include knowledge of the various pertinent rules concerning a practitioner’s duty to the law, the Courts, clients and fellow practitioners and a basic knowledge of the principles of trust accounting.
The aims of the trust account segment of Professional Conduct are:
Areas covered should include:
1. ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
students or articled clerks should be able to describe and apply legislative and other sources of rules and procedures associated with professional conduct, identify situations of conflict and other circumstances which attract ethical responsibilities, identify professionally appropriate behaviours and responses, and reflect maturely on their role and work as lawyers.
2. TRUST AND OFFICE ACCOUNTING
students or articled clerks should have a general understanding of bookkeeping principles and practices, be able to maintain trust accounts in accordance with all statutory and other requirements, and be able to describe and apply all statutory and other requirements in regard to office accounting.
1. ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL VALUES
Descriptor: An entry level lawyer should be able to conduct civil litigation in first instance matters in one or more State or Territory courts of general jurisdiction, in a timely and cost-effective manner.
Element Performance criteria The lawyer has competently:
|
1.Assessing the merits of a case and identifying the dispute resolution
alternatives
|
|
|
2.Initiating and responding to claims
|
|
|
3.Taking and responding to interlocutory proceedings
|
|
|
4. Gathering and presenting evidence
|
|
|
5. Negotiating settlements
|
|
|
6. Taking action to enforce orders and settlement agreements
|
|
This competency standard applies to first instance civil litigation in a local lower and a local higher court of an Australian State or Territory, having general jurisdiction, and in the Federal Court.
Means by which a dispute might be resolved include, but are not limited to:
Means by which evidence might be gathered include:
Means by which evidence might be presented include:
Means of enforcement include:
Descriptor: An entry level lawyer should be able to conduct standard commercial transactions such as the sale or purchase of a small business. The lawyer should be able to set up standard business structures using entities such as companies, trusts and partnerships; provide basic advice on finance and securities and the obligations of companies and their officers; and appreciate the type of advice needed to assess the revenue implications of standard commercial transactions.
Element Performance criteria The lawyer has competently:
| 1. commercial transactions |
|
|
2. Setting up commercial structures
|
|
|
3.Dealing with loans and securities
|
|
|
4.Advising on revenue law and practice
|
|
This competency standard applies to commercial and corporate practice. It includes:
Descriptor: An entry level lawyer should act ethically and demonstrate professional responsibility and professional courtesy in all dealings with clients, the courts, the community and other lawyers.
Element Performance criteria The lawyer has competently;
|
1.Acting ethically
|
|
|
2.Discharging the legal duties and obligations of legal
practitioners
|
|
|
3.Complying with professional conduct rules
|
|
|
4.Complying with fiduciary duties
|
|
|
5.Avoiding conflicts of interest
|
|
|
6.Acting courteously
|
|
|
7.Complying with rules relating to the charging of fees
|
|
|
8.
Reflecting on
wider issues
|
|
This competency standard applies to:
The duties and obligations imposed by law on legal practitioners include duties:
Conflicts of interest commonly arise between:
Descriptor: An entry level lawyer should be able to demonstrate oral communication skills, legal interviewing skills, advocacy skills, negotiation and dispute resolution skills, and letter writing and legal drafting skills.
Element Performance criteria The lawyer has competently:
|
1.Communicating effectively
|
|
|
2.Interviewing clients
|
|
|
3.Drafting other documents
|
|
|
4.Negotiating settlements and agreements
|
|
|
5.Facilitating early resolution of disputes
|
|
|
6.Representing a client in court
|
|
This competency standard applies to ‘composite’ skills which require a lawyer to synthesise several generic skills and apply them in a specific legal context. Lawyers must be able to exercise such skills effectively.
Representation refers to advocacy on behalf of a client in a court, tribunal or other forum. It includes:
Representation includes cross-examination and re-examination.
Dispute resolution options include:
Descriptor: An entry level lawyer should be able to investigate and analyse facts and law, provide legal advice and solve legal problems.
Element Performance criteria The lawyer has competently:
|
1.Analysing facts and identifying issues
|
|
|
2.Analysing law
|
|
|
3.Providing legal advice
|
|
|
4.Generating solutions and strategies
|
|
This competency standard applies to:
Analysing law includes researching legal issues using;
Analysing law also includes applying principles of precedent and statutory interpretation.
Descriptor: An entry level lawyer should be able to convey, lease and mortgage real property. The lawyer should also be able to provide general advice instandard matters arising under local government,planning, environmental or other legislation regulating land use in that State or Territory.
Element Performance criteria The lawyer has competently:
|
1.Transferring title
|
|
|
2.Creating leases
|
|
|
3.Creating and releasing securities
|
|
|
4.Advising on land use
|
|
|
5.Advising on revenue implications
|
|
This competency standard applies to dealings with interests in real and leasehold property, land use and securities. It must include:
The competency standard includes dealings under the main system of land title operating in the jurisdiction in which the lawyer practises. For example, in Queensland it would include dealings in respect of freehold title under the Land Title Act 1994.
Aspects of land use might involve issues arising out of:
Descriptor: An entry level lawyer should have sufficient knowledge, skills and values to maintain trust and general account records according to law and good practice, to the extent usually permitted and expected of an employed solicitor.
Element Performance criteria The lawyer has competently:
|
1.Receiving money
|
|
|
2.Making outlays
|
|
|
3.Rendering costs
|
|
|
4.Maintaining Trust account
|
|
This competency standard applies to trust and general accounting . It requires a general knowledge of bookkeeping and knowledge of the solicitors’ trust account law and practice and auditing requirements in the lawyer’s jurisdiction.
Descriptor: An entry level lawyer who practises in wills and estates should be able to draft wills, administer deceased estates and take action to solve problems about wills and estates.
Element Performance criteria The lawyer has competently:
|
1.Drafting wills
|
|
|
2.Administering deceased estates
|
|
|
3.Taking action to resolve wills and estates problems
|
|
This competency standard applies to wills and deceased estate practice. It must include:
Descriptor: An entry level lawyer should be able to manage workload, work habits, and work practices in a way that ensures that clients’ matters are dealt with in a timely and cost effective manner.
Element Performance criteria The lawyer has competently:
|
1.Managing personal time
|
|
|
2.Managing risk
|
|
|
3.Managing files
|
|
|
4.Keeping client informed
|
|
|
5.Working cooperatively
|
|
This competency standard applies to the exercise of good work habits in a legal practice to ensure that:
[1]BA (Macq), LLB (Syd), LLM (NSW), Grad Cert Higher Ed (UTS). Associate Professor in Law, UTS.
[2]BA (Hons)LLB (Syd), LLM (UTS), Senior Lecturer in Law, UTS.
[3]The Committee takes its name from its chairman, the Hon. Justice L.J. Priestley, a judge of the NSW Court of Appeal.
[4]See for example, s 95(1)Legal Practitioners Transitional Admission Rules 1994 (NSW).
[5]Consultative Committee of State and Territorial Law Admitting Authorities, Report on Uniform Practical Legal Training Requirements, February 1994.
[6]Ibid p.1.
[7]Law Council of Australia, Blueprint for the Structure of the Legal Profession: A National Market for Legal Services, July 1994.
[8]n 3, p.3.
[9]In 1998 the APLEC members were: Institute of Professional Legal Studies, Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch, Hamilton and Dunedin; The Legal Workshop, Faculty of Law, Australian National University; Leo Cussen Institute, Melbourne; Legal Practice Course, Faculty of Law, Queensland University of Technology; The College of Law, Sydney; Faculty of Law, University of Newcastle; Faculty of Law, University of Technology, Sydney; Practical Legal Training Unit, Faculty of Law , University of Wollongong; Professional Legal Training Institute, Faculty of Law, Bond University; Centre for Legal Studies, University of Tasmania; School of Law and Legal Practice, University of South Australia; Legal Practice Course, Law Society of South Australia; Articles Training Course, Perth.
[10]Australian Professional Legal Education Council, Standards for the Vocational Preparation of Australian Legal Practitioners, APLEC, Sydney, 1997.
[11] Ibid p.14.
[12]Birkett, W.P., The Demand for, and the Supply of, Education for Professional Accountants, Task Force for Accounting Education in Australia, UNSW, 1990.
[13]Australian Professional Legal Education Council., Standards for the Vocational Preparation of Australian Legal Practitioners, APLEC, Sydney, 1997, p.13.
[14]Ibid p.15.
[15]All Australian States and Territories set qualifying times for pre-admission vocational training. In 1998 the situation was as follows: Queensland—2 years of articles or 31 weeks of PLT, p.QUT (28 weeks course based, four weeks work based); ACT—22 weeks of PLT, p.ANU (18 weeks course based, four weeks work based); NSW—College of Law 15 weeks of PLT plus 15 weeks work experience plus 75 hours continuing training; UTS 18 weeks of PLT plus 16 weeks of work experience; Bond, 15 weeks of PLT plus 24 weeks work experience plus 60 hours continuing training; University of Newcastle Professional Program
integrated LLB/vocational course; University of Wollongong PLT course 20 weeks integrated course based/work based with entry requirements; SA—18 weeks of PLT, p.Uni. of SA (ten weeks course based , six weeks work experience, two week exam period) plus a post-admission training conducted by the SA Law Society; Tas—26 weeks of PLT, p.the Centre for Legal Studies/Uni. of Tas. plus one year of articles; Vic—31 weeks of PLT, p.the Leo Cussen Institute or one year of articles; WA—one year of articles and a 25 day training program.; NT—one year of articles. Such a presumption is also true of tertiary academic courses, which qualify a person for admission as a legal practitioner in NSW. Pt 11, division 1, r 94(1)of the Legal Practitioners Transitional Admission Rules 1994, states, amongst other things, ‘A person is qualified for admission if he or she has completed: a tertiary academic course in Australia whether or not leading to a degree in law, which includes the equivalent of, p.least 3 years full-time study of law and which is recognised in, p.least one Australian jurisdiction as a sufficient academic qualification for admission by the Supreme
Court of that jurisdiction as a barrister, solicitor, barrister and solicitor, or legal practitioner...’
[16]n 11, p.14.
[17]Ibid p.23.
[18]Ibid.
[19]Ibid p.26.
[20]Ibid r 94(1)(c).
[21]In particular course length, course mix and subject areas.
[22]LPAB, Review of Certain Policies and Practices, July 2001, p.1.
[23]Letter to Professor Barker (Dean, UTS Faculty of Law) from the Hon. Mr Justice L.J. Priestley, 22 February 1999.
[24]Letter to Professor Barker (Dean, UTS Faculty of Law) from the Hon. Mr Justice L.J. Priestley, 23 April 1999.
[25]Chappell, Gonczi and Hager, ‘Competency-based education’ in Foley. G. (ed.), Understanding Adult Education and Training, 2nd edn, Allen & Unwin, Sydney, 1999, p.191.
[26]The presciption for the compulsory subjects are found in Appendix 4.
[27]The competencies were developed with reference to Heywood, Gonczi and Hager, A Guide to Development of Competency Standards for Professions, Department of Employment Education and Training, 1992.
[28]Weisbrot, D., ‘Lawyers need to know more than just the law’, Australian Financial Review, 31 August 2001, p.9.
[29]Ibid.
[30]Attorney-General for Victoria, Legal Profession Admission Requirements: Discussion Paper, Melbourne, 18 March 1998, para 36.
[31]Australian Law Reform Commission, Managing Justice: a review of the federal civil justice system, AGPS, 2000. The Report reflects the law as, p.31 December 1999. Chapter 2, ‘Education , training and accountability’, p.1.
[32]Ibid
[33]Ibid, p.22.
[34]So-called transactional subjects are included in the list and the assumption made that the Priestley 11 subject Professional Conduct would be taught to include accounting transactions and procedures. In addition, ethical considerations, where relevant, would be included in the both the skills and transactional subjects.
[35]Given the substance of these transactional areas, they are often taught as separate subjects in PLT courses.
[36]This overlaps with the Priestley 11 subject Civil Procedure.
[37]Letter from Professor Paul Fairall on behalf of CALD to the Hon. Mr Justice L.J. Priestley, 12 June 2001.
[38]Letter to the Hon. Mr Justice Gleeson AC from the Hon. Mr Justice Priestley, dated 25 January 2001.
[39]Interestingly, in 1998 the NSW Legal Practitioners Admission Board wrote to the heads of the PLT courses advising them that they could grant appropriate exemptions for previous study undertaken, p.an undergraduate level. Since 1999, the NSW LPAB has required students to undertake an academic course in legal ethics, in addition to PLT, unless cross-accredited for both purposes (academic and PLT).
[40]At UTS r 2.28 provides that to be eligible for an award of the university a student must complete, p.least two-thirds of the time requirement of a course of three years or less full time duration.
AustLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UTSLawRw/2001/14.html