Barristers are better than Solicitors

There is a perennial obsession in certain quarters that the statement made within the deliberately 'click-baiting' title (shameless, I know) is true. That the Bar represents the intellectually superior, exciting and sexy end of the legal profession. That it is harder to secure a pupillage than a training contract. That because solicitors instruct or seek counsel's advice, it is ultimately barristers who really know the law. That is why convention permits a barrister to refer to a solicitor in court as "friend", snidely omitting the word "learned". After all, such a proponent would say, "you don't seek out and rely on the opinions of people who know less than you, right?" 

Balderdash.

If you assembled the finest orchestra in the world and gave them the best instruments ever crafted but no music to play - what would be the point? Indeed, one might even argue that the true genius lies in the majesty of the composition itself, not the instrument or the player used to give it sound. Then again, without those things - the composition itself remains silent.

You need both. They compliment one another.

The vast majority of jurisdictions in the world have a fused profession. That is to say, they do not distinguish between the role of solicitors and barristers - in effect, you are both. You are a lawyer. In Malaysia for example, on qualification you are conferred the title of "Advocate and Solicitor of the High Court of Malaya". Such hybrids also now exist within England and Wales too (Solicitor Advocates and Barristers with authority to conduct litigation / direct access accredited). Of course, it would be wholly remiss not to acknowledge that even within fused jurisdictions, lawyers often end up gravitating towards a specialism that might be categorised as having a solicitor or barrister leaning. Think, for example, of the term 'trial attorney' in the States. They do, in my understanding though, retain the functions of both.

One of the reasons I chose to work where I do, is because DWF has adopted a model which, to my mind, represents forward thinking. A system that has existed for the best part of a thousand years isn't necessarily right. It is clearly an impressive and enduring model which should be acknowledged as such. However, it cannot be exempt from change or disruption. I have the privilege to work in tandem with lawyers from different parts of the profession. We form a team and do different jobs, to achieve one goal, for the same client. We do that without walls or boundaries and we put it all on one bill for our clients. That is DWF living its motto, "better together". Because, unsurprisingly, we are literally better when together.

Barristers aren't better than solicitors. That's not even a thing. We are all lawyers and we work for the best interests of our clients, period.