I am a law student studying at a prominent Bombay college. I intend to give the solicitors exam. Is the 3 years of article ship worth it? Because if I graduate in 2022 I'll give the exam in 2024 then, assuming I start my articles now. What about my designation and salary at the firm after graduating? Because financially it will not be possible to be paid amounts like 10-15k per month after I graduated but still serving my articles? Does giving the exam and qualifying help in the long run?
Honestly,if you are an Articled clerk at a Tier 1/Tier 2 firm,you will definitely be absorbed as an Associate as soon as you Graduate. Its just a matter of where you sign your articles and do you actually want to give the exam or want to simply do the articleship for the sake of gaining experience - many people belong to the latter camp. But there is a caveat here,finding an articleship at a Tier 1 firm is no mean feat. Its much harder than getting a job sometimes as many firms do not have any defined policy for hiring Articled clerks. Many a times its just people getting in with a solid reference. Coming to your 1st question,signing your articles is definitely worth the time and effort provided you are consciously learning something every single day.After the 2.5/3 year period ends its up to you whether you want to actually sit for the attempt or discontinue.Even if you have seriously studied for the exam,you'll gain loads of knowledge at the end of the process.Also choosing a good boss is important or else you will be stuck with a bad senior for 3 important years of your life. All the best.
I was at a firm which had a lot of solicitors. You would be both thoroughly impressed and appalled by the people who have cleared the exam with top ranks.
I think 10 years ago, the answer would have been a resounding "yes". But not anymore.
If I were you, I would do long-ish (2 months ideally) internships at different firms and in different practice areas and also intern with counsels along the way. Don't fall in the trap that some do when they feel like they can't intern in the Banking / Debt teams because they've done 2 interships in PE / M&A teams. That's bullshit - intern in as many firms and practice areas as you can because that will give you a sense of the ebbs and flows the practice area and the culture of different firms.
Now the exam does not have questions involving critical reasoning. Most of the questions are straightforward, so no benefit as well! Do it, if you want to waste yout career.
Opinions may vary from person to person. Those who will never clear this exam or those who know that they are incompetent to clear, will always hate this exam. This course provides knowledge which LLB cannot. If people were to become lawyers through this exam, half of the lawyers would vanish as they would never clear. Don't ask any random person how the course is. Always ask a solicitor about the benefits of this exam in person, he/she might be able to help you better. Be careful about taking your opinions from unknowns.
The whole system is a little exploitative and pointless. 3 years of article clerkship involves long hours for peanuts, self explanatory.
Then there's the exam itself. The pattern is such that you need to simply rote learn lots of sections of acts and case law names. It is not application based or open book. No 'think like a lawyer' skills are involved. Questions are straightforward like: what is the difference between warrantee and guarantee? You need to simply vomit few sections of Contract Act and leading case laws explaining the difference and fill pages. See: https://www.legallyindia.com/grads-bar-exam/bombay-solicitors-past-exam-papers-20131015-4042
They seriously need to overhaul the exam itself. Make it open book and application based. Test the problem solving aptitude of the solicitors not their rote learning skills. At least then the qualification will mean something more than invitation to 'exclusive' events filled with boomers.
The two key parts to learning during solicitor articles are: conveyancing and company law. While conveyancing is worth learning from experienced solicitors given how complex real estate laws are. But for company law, now CS or even CA offers a far more marketable option.
Other thing is that solicitors association in India is not keen to expand or standardise their course and exams. They are keen to keep it as a club of south bombay elites.
If you wanna have a jump start at litigation you should consider signing articles. Even tho you don't give the exam, you will have your basics clear.
I have had seniors who are solicitors, who have done clerkship and also who haven't done either. The latter also were very competent and has a good knowledge of the law, but could see the experience in the former two. In their understanding of law, their comprehension, and I was always very impressed by their drafting skills. That language and command over arguments amd flow can come from Articled Clerkship sooner.
But, tbh this only exists in Bombay Law Circle. It's a very close knit group. Clerks are exploited for three years with long hours and minimum stipend. It's hell, you won't be able to enjoy law school much.
But there is a caveat here,finding an articleship at a Tier 1 firm is no mean feat. Its much harder than getting a job sometimes as many firms do not have any defined policy for hiring Articled clerks. Many a times its just people getting in with a solid reference.
Coming to your 1st question,signing your articles is definitely worth the time and effort provided you are consciously learning something every single day.After the 2.5/3 year period ends its up to you whether you want to actually sit for the attempt or discontinue.Even if you have seriously studied for the exam,you'll gain loads of knowledge at the end of the process.Also choosing a good boss is important or else you will be stuck with a bad senior for 3 important years of your life.
All the best.
I think 10 years ago, the answer would have been a resounding "yes". But not anymore.
If I were you, I would do long-ish (2 months ideally) internships at different firms and in different practice areas and also intern with counsels along the way. Don't fall in the trap that some do when they feel like they can't intern in the Banking / Debt teams because they've done 2 interships in PE / M&A teams. That's bullshit - intern in as many firms and practice areas as you can because that will give you a sense of the ebbs and flows the practice area and the culture of different firms.
Then there's the exam itself. The pattern is such that you need to simply rote learn lots of sections of acts and case law names. It is not application based or open book. No 'think like a lawyer' skills are involved. Questions are straightforward like: what is the difference between warrantee and guarantee? You need to simply vomit few sections of Contract Act and leading case laws explaining the difference and fill pages. See: https://www.legallyindia.com/grads-bar-exam/bombay-solicitors-past-exam-papers-20131015-4042
They seriously need to overhaul the exam itself. Make it open book and application based. Test the problem solving aptitude of the solicitors not their rote learning skills. At least then the qualification will mean something more than invitation to 'exclusive' events filled with boomers.
Other thing is that solicitors association in India is not keen to expand or standardise their course and exams. They are keen to keep it as a club of south bombay elites.
I have had seniors who are solicitors, who have done clerkship and also who haven't done either. The latter also were very competent and has a good knowledge of the law, but could see the experience in the former two. In their understanding of law, their comprehension, and I was always very impressed by their drafting skills. That language and command over arguments amd flow can come from Articled Clerkship sooner.
But, tbh this only exists in Bombay Law Circle. It's a very close knit group. Clerks are exploited for three years with long hours and minimum stipend. It's hell, you won't be able to enjoy law school much.