London Law Lectures – news

Jurisprudence 2017 – the examinationLondon Law Lectures has posted an updated lecture on Resulting Trusts:

In Patel v Mirza (2017), the Supreme Court conducted an extensive review of the case law on restitution and the illegality defence, as well as the rationale underlying the Tinsley principle and decided that it was time for Tinsley to be overruled.

The recorded lecture on resulting trusts has been updated with an analysis of the decision.

Top barrister takes to Twitter to reveal what law schools don’t (but really should) teach their students

Gordon Exall, a civil law specialist at Leeds’ Zenith Chambers and London-based set  Hardwicke, has published a series of tweets describing what “they don’t teach you in law school.” Here are the first few:

Any piece of technology upon which you rely will fail on the evening before you have to get up early to travel far for a case #lawschool

— Gordon Exall (@CivilLitTweet) January 13, 2017


Get used to being the only one on the train platform

— Gordon Exall (@CivilLitTweet) January 13, 2017


When you travel miles & get to court on time your case will then inevitably be delayed for several hours #lawschool

— Gordon Exall (@CivilLitTweet) January 13, 2017


However if you are 2 minutes late the court will inevitably be running on time #lawschool

— Gordon Exall (@CivilLitTweet) January 13, 2017

Of course, other Tweeters have joined in the fun. Check out or follow @CivilLitTweet and #lwschool for more.

University of Law unveils BPTC LLM as it slashes cost of standard barrister course

From Legal Cheek:

The University of Law (ULaw) has revealed it’s launching a brand new Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC) LLM and will also be slashing the cost of its normal vocational barrister course.

Launching in September 2017, ULaw will combine its traditional BPTC with an internationally recognised master’s degree. According to the law school, the new course — which like a standard BPTC takes just one year to complete — is “designed to boost students’ chances of securing pupillage and to prepare them for a career as a barrister”.

Interestingly, because of the addition of the LLM content, the course will now qualify for postgraduate student loan funding of up to £10,000 — something which is currently unavailable on the standard BPTC. According to ULaw, fees for the BPTC LLM will be revealed in February 2017.

Commenting on the announcement, Jacqueline Cheltenham, ULaw’s national programme and student affairs director for the BPTC, said:

Our new BPTC LLM programme has been devised with one main aim in mind: to provide our students with the best chances of securing a highly-coveted pupillage at the bar. The course is focused on real-life advocacy and litigation experience, with students working on actual legal cases with the support of our qualified supervisors, who are all professional lawyers. In such a highly competitive environment with pupillage increasingly difficult to secure, the new course provides our students with an additional edge.

University of Law unveils BPTC LLM as it slashes cost of standard barrister course

Answers for Common Questions of Aspiring Lawyers (The Guardian)

Guardian-logo-018-624x351From The Guardian, a list of answers most commonly asked by aspiring lawyers. Answered by experts based on the most common questions asked at several talks at law schools around London in May 2016.

The questions are:

  1. How much of the knowledge gained on the Legal Practice Course (LPC) will I use as a trainee solicitor?
  2. Is there anything I can do to prepare me for the start of a training contract?
  3. Can I submit an application again if it’s rejected? If so, how will it be compared to the first attempt?
  4. Is it advisable to connect with graduate recruitment on social media?
  5. What are the hours really like?
  6. How do I decide what type of lawyer I want to be?
  7. How did you choose your training contract seats? Is there a best order?
  8. How do lawyers stay commercially aware?

Read the article >

Drink Driving Penalties Around the World

Almost all countries around the world have policies that seek out and punish drink drivers in order to keep other drivers and pedestrians safe and to deter other drivers from taking unnecessary risks.
Different countries have differing legal blood or breath alcohol limits, but they’re all roughly the same, and in most countries drink driving is punished by fines, driving bans and imprisonment. Here’s a quick review of what happens around the world to anyone convicted of drink driving.


In China the legal blood alcohol limit is 0.02%. For drivers caught with a blood alcohol content of between 0.02% and 0.08% there is a fine of between 1,000 and 2,000 Yuen and a six-month ban. For 0.08% and over there may be up to three years in prison and a five-year driving ban. If a driver causes serious injury or death, the ban is lifelong.


In Japan the legal limit is 0.15mg per litre of breath (breath alcohol content, or BrAC), which is equivalent to 0.03%. Japanese police can also decide that a driver is “driving drunk” which has more serious consequences than actually being over the limit.

The UK

In England and Wales the legal limit is 80mg per 100ml of blood, 35 μg per 100ml of breath or 107mg per 100ml of urine (Scotland has a lower limit of 50mg per 100ml of blood). It’s an offence to fail to provide a sample the penalties for which are similar to drink driving; read some case studies from a drink drive solicitor to see how cases are handled.


The legal limit in Sweden is 0.02% and if convicted, drivers face six months in prison. For results of 0.10% and over, the maximum is two years behind bars. Swedish police carry out around 2.5 million random alcohol tests on drivers annually.


In Greece the limit is 0.05% for experienced drivers and 0.02% for new drivers (two years or less), motorbike riders and professional drivers. Above 0.11% may result in up to two years in prison and a large fine, as well as a six-month driving ban. Greek police can carry out breath tests without probable cause and perform many on weekends and holidays.


The legal limit is 0.05% and 0.12% or over is considered to be an aggravated offence. For new drivers the limit is zero and the penalties are fines or six months in prison, as well as bans ranging from one month to five years. For aggravated offences, jail terms can range from 60 days to two years and the police can perform random breath testing without probable cause and often do.


Drivers with below 0.05% blood alcohol content (BAC) will get a warning, but 0.05% and over will result in a fine and a ban of between six months and two years. If an accident caused by drink driving results in the death or severe injury of another, there may be a custodial sentence. If a driver with a BAC of 0.101% or over causes death or serious injury, there is an automatic jail sentence of three to five years and a lifetime driving ban.

Should Law Students Be Paid for Legal Work Experience?

The Law Society released “best practice” guidelines this year that suggest law students should be paid at least the national minimum wage when engaged in any work experience. The Guidance, written together with the Junior Lawyers Division, describes the regulatory requirements of work experience placements, background, the purpose of work experience, and “good practice” requirements. The latter states the following:

law_society_logoWork experience should be paid to at least the national minimum wage. However, the Law Society accepts that there will be occasions where work experience placements are unpaid. Examples of when work experience might be unpaid include:

  • where the work experience student is still in school or sixth form college
  • where a firm does not have the means to pay individuals coming in for work experience and would cease to be able to host such placements if payment was required. This will most likely apply to sole traders, small firms or firms operating in the social advice sector.

Where work experience placements are unpaid, they should last no longer than four weeks.

If your organisation needs an individual to perform tasks for a particular period, you should consider the needs of your business. Engaging an individual as a paid employee may serve your purposes better. You may be able to recruit and retain someone who can assist you efficiently because they are familiar with your business needs and systems and ensure that you comply with relevant legislation and conduct issues

Read the full guidance on The Law Society webpage >


Pin It on Pinterest