Impact assessment (summary)

Qualified Lawyers Transfer Scheme

Business unit: Education and Training Unit
Date:  November 2009

Overview

The Solicitors Regulation Authority Board has approved proposals for the framework of a new transfer scheme providing eligible lawyers with a fast-track route to admission as a solicitor in England and Wales. The Qualified Lawyer Transfer Scheme (QLTS) will be available to international and UK qualified lawyers.

At this stage we have agreed the framework for the scheme. The detailed provisions for applying the scheme and conducting the assessments are still to be developed. This impact assessment is based on the framework; we will be continuing with our equality impact assessment work as we develop various aspects of the scheme.

The primary focus of the new scheme is to establish parity of standards between solicitors who have followed the domestic route to qualification and the qualified lawyers seeking to exercise full practising rights through the scheme. The proposed benchmark against which transferees should be assessed is the same benchmark which applies to individuals who qualify under the domestic route. We have described these as "the day one outcomes", which includes generic skills such as analytical and problem-solving, as well as particular areas of knowledge, which are tested through the assessment process.

All applicants for the scheme will be assessed against the same set of standards and will be required to take the same assessments. The only exceptions are for those entitled to any exemptions by virtue of EU legislation or because they have qualified within the UK .

The aims of the scheme are

• to provide assurance to consumers and other stakeholders that solicitors who have been admitted via the transfer route have been assessed as competent to practise,
• to protect the client and public interest, and
• to ensure the effective administration of justice and the rule of law.

Data monitoring

As the proposed scheme is new, we do not have data on the actual impact that it has had on applicants or potential applicants for the scheme. The work that is proposed to gather the data when the scheme is implemented is set out in the action plan below.

However, we considered data from a number of sources in conducting this equality impact assessment including

• the outcomes of the consultation - respondents included the Law Societies of England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, the Law Society of Ireland, the Law Council of Australia, local law societies, the Legal Services Commission, the Junior Lawyers Division, training organisations and a range of firms and individuals;
• statistical data for solicitors who have qualified through the existing transfer process for lawyers qualified outside of England and Wales – the Qualified Lawyers Transfer Test (QLTT);
• a 2008 motivation survey - to improve our understanding of transferees' motivations;
• benchmarking of other regulators, in particular: Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS), General Dental Council (GDC), Institute of Chartered Accounts in England and Wales (ICAEW), Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS), General Medical Council (GMC);
• a roundtable meeting with potential providers of the proposed assessments.

In the next section, the data is discussed in more detail in the context of assessing the potential impact for equality of several key aspects of the scheme.

Does the policy have the potential to positively or adversely impact on different groups?

Benchmarking standards for transferees against the solicitors qualifying through the domestic route – the "day one outcomes"

The majority of those responding to the consultation agreed that there should be parity with solicitors qualifying through the domestic route and that the "day one outcomes" should be used as the benchmark.

There was some concern that this may discourage some lawyers from applying and choosing instead to work as registered foreign lawyer or registered European lawyers. We will monitor whether there is a fall in the number of applicants for the scheme and/or a rise in the number of registered foreign or European lawyers.

We did not find that there was any impact for equality in relation to this aspect of the scheme.

Testing for character and suitability

It was agreed by those responding to the questionnaire that the same test should be applied as for domestic solicitors, but it was recognised that this may be complex to apply in an international arena.

The SRA is reviewing how it tests for character and suitability as a whole and a separate equality impact assessment will consider this area in more detail.

Eligibility to apply

The majority of respondents to the consultation agreed with the proposal that transferees should be qualified in their original jurisdictions before becoming eligible for the scheme.

However, some concern was expressed about graduates of the Bar Vocational Course (BVC) who were unable to qualify because of difficulties in securing a pupillage. This was cited as a reason for seeking to transfer by a number of respondents to the motivation survey. We are aware that black and minority ethnic (BME) students are over-represented in this group and may therefore be adversely impacted by this aspect of the scheme.

The difficulties that BME students may have in securing pupillage is a matter for the Bar, but we do not wish to compound any such potential disadvantage. We are satisfied that the scheme requirements are justified and in the public interest, to ensure that access to the profession is limited to those who are qualified and to maintain consistently high standards. However, the SRA Board has previously agreed in principle to exemptions to the Legal Practice Course (LPC), although not from the LPC assessments. Once implemented this may reduce the potential negative impact for BME graduates of the BVC.

Recognised jurisdications

Respondents to the consultation largely agreed that eligibility should be from a wider range and larger number of jurisdictions. In the light of some of the responses, we revised the criteria for recognising eligible jurisdictions originally proposed to ensure it was objective. Respondents were also in agreement that the scheme should be phased in over time and the SRA will ensure that the criteria for phasing will be clear and transparent and based on clear justification.

Some respondents did raise concerns about the risk of discrimination which we considered very carefully. We did not find that there was any direct discrimination, because restricting those who have qualified in a particular jurisdiction is not a restriction based on race, ethnicity, nationality or ethnic origin as protected by the Race Relations Act.

However, there was a potential for indirect discrimination, which led us to consider whether our approach was justified as a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. We are satisfied that our proposed approach is justified, considering the aims of the scheme set out above. The scheme is offering a fast-track route for qualification to practise in England and Wales and the SRA would not be able to judge whether the transeree's background was in a sufficiently similar jurisdiction through assessment alone.

We considered alternatives, but none of the proposals would allow us to accurately assess whether the jurisdiction was sufficiently similar to ours. There will be a mechanism for reviewing whether the jurisdiction ought to be recognised, but not for reviewing the particular circumstances of individuals coming from the exluded jurisdiction as this would could undermine the objectivity of the criteria and fairness of the scheme.

We are satisfied that the chosen route is the most appropriate way of meeting the aims of the scheme and that our approach is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

Jurisdictions within the European Economic Area (EEA) and Switzerland will be deemed to be recognised as they enjoy particular rights given to them by European legislation. EEA transferees will therefore be considered individually. However, the same assessments will apply to EEA transferees as to others, although they may be granted exemptions to some of the assessment depending on their particular circumstances.

Practical assessments

We are proposing to include practical assessments for some of the generic legal skills and this will stand in place of the existing experience requirements for transferees. Most consultation responses were in favour of this proposal. The only impact for equality that we identified was the potential difficulties that this approach may present for transferees with a disability or older transferees who may not have encountered practical assessment in recent years or at all.

We noted that practical testing was widely used by other regulators and there were examples of good practice that we would adopt as we developed this aspect of the scheme. We also looked at the data we held for the current practising solicitors who had qualified through the QLTT. Disability data was held for only 12 per cent of QLTT qualified solicitors and of these only 0.16 per cent were recorded as having a disability. We had a full set of data in relation to age and noted that 88 per cent of the group were under 40 on admission.

We felt that there were no alternatives which would deliver the same opportunity to test transferees' practical skills, as an objective practical assessment would and have decided to proceed with this approach. However, we will be working very closely with disability and other equality groups to understand and address potential problems and will ensure that the particular requirements that we identify are included in the tender process for the assessment provider. We will monitor the assessment process annually to assess the impact on equality groups.

For disabled transferees, we would expect that any problems will be mitigated by the provision of reasonable adjustments and this will be a key requirement of the tender process in appointing the assessment provider. We will make sure that effective guidance about what the test will involve and practice questions are made available.

English language requirement

To ensure competence in English, which is essential to act as a solicitor in this jurisdiction, we have decided to require all transferees to pass an English language test before they are eligible to take the assessments. We have recognised that this could indirectly discriminate against people from non-English speaking countries and have considered whether this could be justified.

Respondents to the consultation agreed that competence in the English language was important but not all agreed that a separate test was necessary. A number of other regulators use English language testing and there are a number of internationally recognised tests available for use at a reasonable cost, such as the International English Language Testing System (IELTS).

We have decided that an English language test is the most objective and reliable way to ensure competence and passing the test at the outset will ensure that transferees who are not competent in the language do not waste time and money in taking the full suite of QLTS assessments.

We will ensure that in choosing the most appropriate test, that it is fair and objective, and that testing centres and coaching courses are available in a large number of jurisdictions.

There are particular issues for transferees from the European Economic Area (EEA) who have particular rights to practise their profession within the EEA so as to facilitate their free movement rights. We will not therefore be assessing their English language competence. We will also be considering whether there should be any further exemptions from the English language requirement.

We will ensure that our approach is proportionate and does not unlawfully discriminate against transferees from non-English speaking countries and is compliant with European law.

The domestic route involves completion of the academic stage, followed by the Legal Practice Course (LPC) followed by practical experience gained through a training contract.

Equality and diversity action plan

Search

• Find a solicitor
• Legal complaints
• Legal Services Act
• Code of Conduct