London Legal Practice from a German Law Student's Perspective

Report on my work experience with Wainwright & Cummins Solicitors

Looking back on the last three weeks, I had a great insight into the common law legal system during my work experience with Wainwright & Cummins Solicitors. I am very delighted that I could experience all the legal issues that I have been thought by the FFA programme at the University of Muenster before.

In addition to that, it is very interesting and important for a German law student to do an internship at a law firm in England in order to experience the legal system. This is the case, because the common law legal system appeared to me as a very vivid system, where a lot of work has to be done with the clients and especially at courts. Therefore, it is necessary to make this experience rather than just learn about the legal system in lectures.

Furthermore, from a German point of view, the common law legal system is enormously vivid and changeable. But nevertheless, I experienced that it is very important to prepare a case in advance and to read it closely and to know about all the details. This will later help at the court and during the preparation with the client.

Therefore, it was very interesting for me, how the work is separated between solicitors and barristers. Both of them have a great impact on the outcome of the case and should work together precisely.

In addition to that, it was a great pleasure for me that this law firm employs solicitors as well as barristers and that I could have an insight into both areas of work. Furthermore, it was extremely helpful that I could assist and observe a lot of different people during their work. Due to this, I got different impressions on how one can work and cope with cases and clients.

During my time with Wainwright & Cummins, I spent the most time with attending courts with Kathleen, Clea and Tariq who really explained a lot to me and answered all my legal questions. They provided me with all the helpful information that I would need in order to follow the hearing. In addition, they were always keen on giving me a full overview of the case and the legal issues. I am very thankful about that and I am very happy that everyone was extremely friendly and concerned about my interests and questions. This helped me to get used to the law firm very quickly and had the effect that I enjoyed every minute with the law firm and felt very comfortable and confident.

Furthermore, I enjoyed that I had so many opportunities to attend different courts. This was very important for me, because as I mentioned before, I learned the most while observing the courts and proceedings. Fortunately, I got to see a trial at the Inner London Crown Court, what was a great experience for me, because the trial was so different from what a German trial would be.

Starting with the wigs, gowns and the court rooms in particular, this all appeared to me more traditional and procedural than as it would be in Germany. Although there are gowns in Germany, too, the atmosphere in the court room is different. I was really surprised and impressed how polite the parties react in front of the judge and how respectful they treat him. Additionally, it was a new experience for me to get to know the adversarial system. In Germany, the judge intervenes a lot, asks the witnesses questions and leads the trial, so it appears to be more inquisitorial. Therefore, it was really new to me that the judge in this system does not intervene very often.

But what had the greatest impact on me was to see a jury. The whole process, from the beginning, where the jury gets sworn until the end when they reach a verdict, is unknown to me and the German law system. Therefore, it was very exciting for me to observe this. After having seen a trial with a jury, I thought about the advantages and disadvantages of this system and if I prefer having a jury or not.

To my mind, the jury system could be an advantage for the defendant in some cases. The reason for that is that even if the law definitely says that someone is guilty of an offence because he fulfils the requirements without any doubt, the jury can decide that he is not guilty.

This could be negative for the defendant, as well, but to my mind, it can be more convenient if the jury decides not guilty in some cases where there is no serious offence and the defendant is of very good character.

On the other hand, it appears to be unfair and not justifiable to a German law student that someone who definitely fulfils the requirements of an offence can be found not guilty, nevertheless. Due to this, I cannot decide clearly which system appears to be the better system or the fairer system.

Additionally, I also enjoyed the work at the law firm. I was really surprised at the beginning that there is so much for me to do. During my work experiences in Germany, it was rather common that I just read files and observed client meetings and court hearings. That is why I really enjoyed that I was given tasks in this law firm that could help the solicitors and barristers. I had to make phone calls, write letters to clients and to write down a police interview recording. Especially, I enjoyed the case summaries, because this gives you a full overview of the case and requires reading the file carefully and in detail.

All in all, I can confirm that I had an extremely interesting work experience and that I got a full insight into the common law system, as well in the office as when attending courts. This helped me to get an impression of the common law system and to get to know it in more detail than any lecture could teach me.

Therefore, I am very happy and delighted that I were allowed to spent my work experience at this law firm and I would recommend this law firm to any other student, if there is no objection from Wainwright & Cummins.

I want to express my deepest thanks to everyone who assisted me during these three weeks and to everyone who made this possible for me.

Furthermore, I wish everyone all the best for the future and a continuing and prospering career for the law firm.

Alina Nissen, 8^th August 2014

London to Paris by Bicycle

I am a housing solicitor. This has led me to having a particular interest in the plight of the homeless. This led to me participating (for the 2^nd time) from 24^th-27^th July in the Big Issue London to Paris bike ride to raise money for that charity.

We set off from Twickenham after some rousing words from the charity’s event organiser who was also riding, as well as the guide organisation- PIE (Perfection in Events) and then finally Bob, or rather Bob’s owner - former methadone addict James Bowen. You may have read about these two in the series of books he wrote: A Street Cat Named Bob and The World According to Bob.

The ginger cat was on his shoulder all the time he addressed us, a visible testament to the symbiosis. He credits the need to look after this cat with his recovery from methadone addiction

“I believe it came down to this little man. He came and asked me for help, and he needed me more than I needed to abuse my own body. He is what I wake up for every day now... he’s definitely given me the right direction to live my life.”

However he also credits the Big Issue for enabling him to keep going when homeless on the streets.

We were about 30 in all, a motley crew made up of teachers, lawyers, charity workers, IT etc and former Big Issue vendors. The youngest was 15 and the oldest somewhere in his 60s (didn’t like to ask exactly how old…). On my previous trip there was a woman who was 75 participating for her 35^th year in a row.

We were divided up into slow, medium and fast groups. There was a certain eyeing up of each other’s kit and bicycles which ranged from the absurdly stolid and heavy ones (my 20 year old Dawes town bike/leviathan would be one of them) to the ultra cool Bianchi so light you have to sit on it to avoid it flying up into the air.

Day 1

London to Portsmouth

After a last photo...

we left at 9am and cycled through salubrious South West London, Hampton Court, Bushy Park, Cobham etc. We stopped after about 1.5 hours and then again for lunch in Hazelmere, refuelling on carbs – cheese sandwiches, crisps, sporty nutriton drinks, cups of tea, fruit and thankfully my favourite; Tunnock’s Caramel wafer bars (5 layers of wafer, 4 layers of caramel, fully coated in real milk chocolate).

Lunch was welcome on what was a hot day as a chance to get in out of the sun and guiltlessly stuff one’s face.

There was one quite enormous hill - actually I think it was probably a mountain - which all bar two of our group ended up walking up. Has no place in a bike ride and they should consider moving it somewhere useful like the Himalayas.

We arrived at Portsmouth at about 6.30pm, and after a stretch and a shower hit the hotel pub. Ah that first ale after a day cycling. I sought out Steve the team medic early on to get some anti-inflammatory drugs (all right, pain-killers) as my right knee was sore.

Day 2 started at stupid o’clock assembling without bikes for the walk to the ferry. The journey over to Le Havre was calm and serene, most people sleeping or just sitting getting into the zone and preserving energy.

Day 2

Le Havre to Evreux

There is a massive bridge - the Pont de Normandie.

The Pont de Normandie is a cable-stayed road bridge that spans the river Seine linking Le Havre to Honfleur in Normandy, northern France. Its total length is 2,143.21 metres (7,032 ft) – 856 metres (2,808 ft) between the two piers. It is also the last bridge to cross the Seine before it empties into the ocean.

Crossing the Seine:

Many picturesque Norman villages and connecting “lumps” later, we struggled into Evreux for the 2^nd night. Knee really jolly painful by now despite borderline illegal quantities of ibuprofen, deep heat and a knee bandage.

Lovely city, good market, wonderful beer. Should have stayed.

Day 3

Evreux to Paris.

We had a nasty start. The guides decided to put together groups 1 and 2, that’s the competitive types in group 1 with the 'too proud to admit I should be in the slowest group', group 2; and there was this huge hill to get out of Evreux. That did for me. My knee giving out. Took a breather in the van going to the next rest point, only to have to suffer the driver from PIE, Ian, an older man than me, telling me about his 6 iron man competitions - his best time 10 hours for - swimming 2 ½ miles in open water, cycling 110 miles and then running  a marathon. That worked. I got on my bike to get away.

After that the day passed quickly. We cycled round the lake at Versailles (wow the scale of that place), the outskirts of Paris, then the Bois du Boulogne, the Champs Elysees, the Arch de Triomphe (so much better than Marble Arch or Hyde Park Corner) and, drumroll,  the Eiffel Tower.

I was glad to arrive but it felt a little bathetic, as Gertrude Stein said “when you get there, there’s no there.” At the party after I received the Lance Armstrong best doper award, testament to my body’s capacity for drugs.

Sunday spent hobbling around avoiding bicycles eating for Britain. I have so far raised about £1200 of a target of £1500 for the Big Issue (not the Croatian football team, though they look strangely familiar...)

My knee has now finally recovered. Met some great people and enjoyed some lovely countryside through gritted teeth. Definitely have to give a 3^rd time a wide berth!

If you want to contribute here is the link:

http://www.justgiving.com/Sebastian-Peattie

The Trials and Tribulations of a Prison Law Paralegal - Part II

This afternoon, a colleague of mine stopped by my desk during lunch, and we had a brief chat. She asked how I’m enjoying prison law, and I replied that I am really enjoying it – except for one thing:

The Worst Thing About Prison Law

The worst thing about prison law is that a lot of the time, we can’t help.

The drastic cuts in scope for legal aid funding have meant that we can only get legal aid funding for very limited types of cases – parole hearings for indeterminate sentence prisoners, for example, or Independent Adjudications, when prisoners are accused of having misbehaved whilst inside. But so many cases that we used to be able to get funding for – help with transfers, access to courses, poor treatment of prisoners, resettlement cases, to name a few – are no longer within scope.

What this means is that we get letters and phone calls from people with all kinds of problems, and unless they are able to pay privately, which is rare, we cannot help them. We take on some cases pro bono when we are able, of course, but with drastic cuts to both the scope and fees of legal aid in many different areas, it is hard enough for a firm just to cover its expenses, let alone make a profit; so our ability to take on pro bono cases is very limited.

Just this morning I got a letter from someone who has been recategorised to security category D, which means that he should be transferred to an open prison. But he was recategorised over six weeks ago and has still not been transferred, or even given an indication of when he might be – and we can’t help.

Yesterday I was contacted by someone whose daughter has mental health problems and so when she comes to visit him in prison, she needs to have a special separate visiting area to keep her safe and calm. The prison have told him that they don’t have the staff to facilitate this any more and so she can’t come to visit him – and we can’t help.

A couple of weeks ago I was called by someone who has not had a security recategorisation review, which is now six months overdue. He is being held in a higher security category than is necessary but is unable to have his say and get moved down a category because he has not had a review and has not been told when this will happen – and we can’t help.

We have calls from people who have suddenly been told that their children can’t visit them because of ‘security concerns’, concerns which are never explained to the prisoner and so the prisoner can’t appeal against the decision; we have calls from people who have suddenly had their security category moved up a level without any explanation; we have calls from people arbitrarily moved down an IEP level, which means they lose privileges, without any explanation; we have calls from people who are told that because of unspecified ‘intelligence’, they are being put on the list of prisoners considered to be an escape risk, which means a much more restrictive regime and wearing brightly-coloured clothing, different to everyone else, to make you obvious in a crowd. And we can’t help any of these people.

If the clients have the means to pay, that’s a different story, and we work energetically on their behalf, writing legal representations to prisons for a whole variety of different issues and even bringing judicial reviews where necessary. But my heart breaks for those we can’t help.

Legal practice in London from the French perspective

Today is my last day at Wainwright & Cummins. I have been training within the Family Department for precisely 6 months now, and this semester abroad is part of the overall training I have to undertake in France to practice as a lawyer.

The reasons I decided to apply for a position abroad was a very personal career choice and I felt that working on an international level would give me a chance to experience new cultures - although I may have chosen more exotic than London; French and English culture have far more in common than I expected, and I understand now why London is one of the biggest French cities in the world. I also wanted to tackle the challenge of living in a foreign city for more than a semester.

However, objectively, does it make sense for the French law school to allow their student to take that internship abroad?

Let me first state that the law school of Strasbourg is an exception. The city is already focused on international matters that it was easy for me to understand why legal experience abroad would compliment a law student’s education from that specific establishment. 

One of the CNB’s (Conseil National des Barreaux) representatives however, with whom I discussed the subject when he came to Strasbourg visiting the school to present the future reform of the French lawyers’ training, saw the opportunity to practice in another country as a loophole in the Law.

The different texts on the subject (31 December 1971 Act, 11 February 2004 Act, implementing decree 21 December 2004) states that, “au cours de la troisième période, l’élève avocat effectue un stage auprès d’un cabinet d’avocat”. Translated; the student will undertake a 6 months internship in a Law firm. As there is no specific reference to France, some schools including Strasbourg have decided to allow their student’s to practice abroad.

But it does not, according to the CNB, reflect the intention of the text, and the project of reform (currently discussed) will therefore aim at making sure students are capable and effective lawyers, ready to practice in France and familiar with French proceedings as soon as we pass our last exam.

I would be lying if I told you I do not sometimes wonder whether the choice to undertake my 6 month’s of legal experience in England, working within the English legal system will impact my ability to work in a French firm.

But those 6 months have taught be invaluable skills that I would not have been able to acquire in France. There are two main aspects of the English proceedings which I feel will demonstrate this point.

The Split Profession

It is common knowledge that French and English legal practice tend to differ on one crucial point: in France the “avocat” will represent the client in court and offer advice, whereas, In England those activities are split between the Solicitor and the Barrister.

I understand that although the texts allow Barristers to be directly instructed by clients, and that Solicitors often represent their clients in courts, the distinction is still very much present.

The split used to exist for a very long time in France, but eventually totally disappeared in 2011, with the merger of the “avoué” profession within the “avocats”. It was the end of a long process that started in the 1970’s which advised lawyer’s to professionally integrate through the order of the “avocats”.

On a macroscopic level, such a trend is helpful as the order of the “avocats” has never been larger and more listened to when it comes to defending fundamental rights of our clients (think about the Legal Aid system, it is a big issue in France as well). However, it does make it harder to gather a consensus, on any given questions, as the practice is so broad it is hard sometimes to actually define the practice of a “generic” avocats.

Although more specifically, one might say that it is up to any given “avocat” to create and craft their own practice; it is a shame that because the profession is unified, when confronted with an area of law you are not a specialist in, you will not be able to instruct another lawyer in your client’s case to deal with a specific issue. You will have to either let your client go, as you are supposed never to accept a case you do not feel confident handling, or spend a non efficient amount of time understanding the issue and wasting your client’s time and money.

The discussions between the Barristers and the Solicitors as I saw it during this semester is made of mutual teaching, emulation, partnership and trust. Each side is so focused on its practice and handling the issues each is used to dealing with, the result is much more efficient.

What I would like to bring back to France is a sense of humility; although I do love the idea of running a general practice, as it is the embodiment of the “avocat” profession in France, I am well aware now that for our clients’ sake, it is sometimes more efficient to divide the case if there is more than a single issue.

Proceedings Management

I have been amazed to discover how lawyers in English proceedings as a general practice manage to agree on a schedule or a Consent Order, with the help of the court.

It may well be I only spent time in the Family department - care case proceedings driven by the “26 weeks” limit - but still the principle seems to apply in all family cases as well.

It is my understanding that contested issues (dramatic handling of cases by one or more of the parties involved, or public interests to defend cases put aside) judges most of the time tend to supervise the time schedule of proceedings however drafted and handled by parties alone.

That is not, yet, common practice in France. Although in the past ten years, a new judge’s position was created for civil matters, the “Juge de la mise en état” to hold directions hearings, the impulse is commonly still within that judge’s hands.

The only possibility for lawyers to handle the directions related to their own cases exist in front of the “Tribunal d’instance” (Lower civil litigation tribunal), and consists of a written agreement between the parties and the court.

Still, the practice is new and lawyers, for they are used to a very confrontational way of handling their cases because of the active arbitration of the court, presumably prevent any delay in the proceedings.

And that is yet another “good practice” I will do my best to bring back to France.

By Corentin Dolivet

Being called to the Bar

We are delighted to announce that Clea Topolski and Tariq Al-Mallak were both called to the Bar in July 2014. We now have 4 Barristers in our Crown Court Advocacy team - see Clea`s blog below for her experience on the day.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Being called to the bar is a little like getting married. A lot of ceremony and tradition, with a steady pulse of anxiety and fear. The weight of responsibility is not lost on you. How could it be? You stand shoulder to shoulder with young aspirational lawyers and face the visceral reminder that this is a job for life. Especially when you cast your eye to the "masters" in the second pew along from you. 

I was called by a high court judge, who happened to be the same master who moved my father's call back in 1986. My father was a transferring solicitor too, so the poetic symmetry made the occasion steep in emotion.

I was the one hundred and twenty third person out of one hundred and twenty four to be called that day. As a result of being at the back of the list, I was second to last in entering the church at inner temple. Me and number 124, were asked to wait in the doorway whilst the other 122 were seated. I whispered to the head of education  that I had purposefully avoided a big wedding, to escape the hundreds of pairs of eyes looking at me as I walked down the aisle. She smiled back at me and whispered "we got you eventually"

It does feel like a marriage of sorts. One that is almost certainly not to be a plain sailing union. But I feel honoured to be a part of an institution  that has overcome decades of adversity and continues to thrive.

By Clea Topolski