Julian Lonbay

The paper will make a preliminary assessment of the impact role of the CCBE and FBE and their edicts on Training of Lawyers and ethics. It will also look at the potential effects of Directive 98/5/EC. Taken together with the Bologna Declaration (1999) there is potent mix of European influence being brought to bear on national legal education and training.

If the period under review has been largely one of carrying forward the work begun at Maastricht, the future holds out the prospect of further major develop-ments. Although the agenda for the Inter-Governmental Conference in 1996 is far from clear, its conclusions are likely ...

European legal academics and lawyers are now seriously attempting to develop an overall qualifications framework for legal training in Europe. 1 The need for such a framework, foreseen in the Sorbonne-Bologna process, 2 is all the more urgent because so many of ...

This issue of the European Journal of Legal Education includes a wide range of papers from many jurisdictions. Articles cover how the newly independent central European States are coping with law teaching, in particular the experiences in Estonia and Lithuania are related; an ...

This case deserves a special mention as it allows those armed simply with a law degree to seek access to legal professions in other Member States. Christine Morgenbesser, 1 a French national with a Maitrise en droit2 (1996) joined an Italian firm in Genoa in 1998 ...

The first part of the report describes the legal practice in England and Wales. The second part addresses the increasing flexibility of legal services in England and Wales and the need for legal education to adapt to this new scenario. It explores issues such as the goals of legal education and the options law students have to practice law. Finally, the third part of the article discusses mechanisms of quality assurance in legal education.

The article first outlines the nature and variety of legal professions active in Europe with a brief explanation of the structure and nature of the new European legal order which emerged after World War II. Next covered is how European licensing authorities cope with cross-border practice in the context of this new European Community (EC) law environment. Lastly the article delves into the training regimes operating in Europe to see how the EC and the European dimension are having an impact on them.

The Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE), founded in 1960, is a representative body covering more than 1,000,000 European lawyers through its member Bars and Law Societies from 31 full member countries and 10 further associate or observer countries. It acts as a liaison between the EU and Europe’s national Bars and Law Societies, whose national delegations represent its members, and is concerned with all European cross-border matters as they affect lawyers. It has no overt regulatory powers of its own (except over its own internal affairs) but seeks out common positions in its representative and consensus-building roles. In the sphere of legal education and training, achieving common positions has proved, in the past, to be very difficult. The CCBE has agreed that all lawyers should be professionally competent. But what does this mean?

As discussed in Part I of the article, there are many separate legal professions in Europe. The national educational requirements for becoming a lawyer vary considerably from country to country and, indeed, within some countries. The CCBE has nevertheless now adopted several measures on the education and training of lawyers in Europe, which are explore shortly.As noted in Part I of the article, the EU has very limited authority over the laws and regulations of the member states relating to the content and organization of education and training. The EU must fully respect the responsibility of the member states for the content of teaching and the organization of education systems and vocational training. However, the EU has managed to adopt several legislative measures that help translate the results of one system of training into those of another system. Recognizing that a common set of educational standards would promote confidence in cross-border recognition of professional licenses, the EU has also been moving toward the establishment of a European Higher Education Area (EHEA, the aim of the Bologna Process described below), including a European Qualifications Framework designed to create transparency and focus on common educational standards. These initiatives are examined in this article.

The Article focuses on recent developments in European multi-jurisdictional practice rights that have major implications for the control of entry to the legal professions and some of the related deontological rules that govern access to professional legal life across the EU and the EEA. Additionally, it looks at their impact on rules regulating the competence of lawyers and admission to the legal professions, primarily in Europe, but with some reference to the position in the United States as well.
The article concludes that the issues confronting the European legal professions and legal service providers indicate that change is on the way and must be handled with care. More work is necessary to define the core elements and legal skills and knowledge that are necessary for successful practice of law; the development of more understanding of how to successfully assess the preparedness for legal practice of candidates; the probable acceptance of an increasingly specialized legal services work force; and related sets of specialist titles that themselves may permit limited specialist practice rights across borders. The evolving European legal market will itself need servicing, and the development of effective modes of continuing professional training, easily achieved and recognized across borders, should help in enabling cross-border practice and delivery of legal services.

This report outlines the findings of a group of European experts on the Turkish legal education and training system following scoping visits to seven different regions of Turkey: Adana, Ankara, Denizli, Elaziğ, İstanbul, Samsun and Şanlıurfa.

The scoping visits took place in November 2008 and constituted the first practical activity of a joint project between the Union of Turkish Bars (Türkiye Barolar Birliği - TBB), three other project partners – The Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE), the French Conseil National des Barreaux (CNB) and the Law Society of England and Wales (LSEW) – and four project associates – the Spanish Consejo General de la Abogacía Española (CGAE), the Italian Consiglio Nazionale Forense (CNF) the Polish Krajowa Rada Radców Prawnych (KRRP) and the Österreichischer Rechtsanwaltskammertag (ÖRAK) of Austria. This 18-month project is funded by the European Union under the Civil Society Dialogue programme.

The general objectives of the “Promoting Civil Society Dialogue between Bars Through Legal Education” project are to review the legal education and training system in Turkey in the light of other European experiences and best practice and to foster an evidence-based debate within the Turkish legal profession, prior to reforming the initial education and training system as well as introducing a continuous professional education system.

This report contributes to the above-mentioned objectives in several ways. It includes in its annexes individual reports on the seven scoping visits, relying on a methodology of direct observations, interviews and discussions with the various stakeholders identified (bar association officials, practising lawyers, trainers and trainees, court and police officials). The body of the report, resulting from subsequent discussions between experts and Union of Turkish Bars officials, offers a description of the current legal education and training system in Turkey and provide a “gaps and needs” analysis in light of other European experiences and best practice. Finally, the report will be translated into Turkish and used in subsequent project activities, notably regional workshops as well as the project closing conference, so as to foster an evidence-based debate on the issue within the Turkish legal profession.

Available from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1677818

Represents the work of the Quality Assurance, Accreditation and Assessment Committee (QUAACAS) of the European Law Faculties Association (ELFA) on the Tuning of Legal Studies in Europe. See the QUAACAS webpage for further information at http://elixir.bham.ac.uk/menu/quaacas_frameset.htm

Available from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1677820

In this article from the Autumn 2009 issue of Directions Julian Lonbay (University of Birmingham) discusses progress made in developing an overall qualifications framework for legal education in Europe.

Currently a small working group is discussing how to develop law indicators within Europe. Contact j.l.lonbay@bham.ac.uk if you would like to help frame a UK viewpoint on this that can be taken into account as the qualification framework for law is created.

A. Residence and Citizenship In Rudy Grzelczyk, a French student studying in Belgium was found to be entitled to receive a non-contributory state benefit, this despite the relevant EC secondary law seemingly insisting that students should not be a burden on the public purse.4 ...

There are now seven individual directives adopted under the framework direc-tive 89/391, the four proposals mentioned in the last note having been adopted.1 The fourth directive2 sets out in two technical annexes the risk factors involved in the handling of heavy loads and ...

Negotiations on the achievement of a barrier-free Europe according to Article 8a of the Treaty are continuing under European Council working groups;1 draft conventions on asylum, visas and proceedings in criminal matters are to be ready by the end of 1990. Lest uncontrolled ...

If the period under review has been largely one of carrying forward the work begun at Maastricht, the future holds out the prospect of further major develop-ments. Although the agenda for the Inter-Governmental Conference in 1996 is far from clear, its conclusions are likely ...

Community and its institutions, certain safeguards for national sovereignty are included. The principle of "subsidiarity" is expressly recognised: except in areas within its exclusive jurisdiction, the Community shall take action only if it can achieve the desired objectives ...