this exam is a farce. the ppl who sit for the exam are usually from cheap colleges as NLU grads join the better and newer firms which offer much better salaries and prospects. the old bombay firms still live in the 19th century. someone should tell them that the world has changed. these ppl will become extinct if the foreign law firms come in.

model answers would be nice,if you could.

Totally off topic... I graduated from National Law School, Bangalore 5 years ago. Back then no-one used to refer to students from the law schools with "National" in their official titles as NLU students/grads --- when did this happen?? NLU I think back then just referred to the Bhopal law school --- I have seen this NLU grads reference a lot on this website... as a sort of a unifying bond... interesting, like we will have our own "Ivy League" now :-)

Oops - NLU was the one at Jodhpur not Bhopal as someone just reminded me... wow its been a while...

@3:

Times have changed, Pops. Here's what's been happening since you graduated: NLSIU, NALSAR, NUJS, NLU Bhopal no longer have separate entrance examinations. They organise a joint entrance exam called the CLAT. The term NLU is used to denote the 6-7 law schools which conduct the CLAT. You're right, it is an Ivy league of sorts. Ironically, the NLUs are actually starting to lose their "national" character. Politicians have forced NLSIU, NALSAR, and NLU Bhopal to implement reservation for locals and I guess NUJS will follow suit. As it is, the SC/OBC people in the NLUs are usually locals.

Anyway....the point is that the Bombay Solicitors are stuck in a time warp. Today, students aspire to get into NLUs and join AMSS, AZB etc. I can't see many people giving the Solicitors exam continuing ten years from now, especially if they fail everybody like this. Moreover these senior lawyers in Bombay treat juniors like crap.

The solicitor's exams no more different than than the proposed bar exam. From the question papers provided it appears that the attempt is to judge the basic concepts of the articled clerks. There is no reason why these exams should be considered redundant. What they could do to keep up with the changing times is to provide more papers and make them optional - Intellectual Property/Banking/IT Law etc. These exams should be continued.

#1, Boss, I don't think you downloaded these papers, did you. These papers are damn difficult. And imagine having to give them all together. I don't know how you have the temerity of questionning the worth of these exams. Its a pedestal available to a select few who manage to clear the exam. If you have what it takes, why don't you give this exam and try (or did you look at the papers, tremble in fear and dismiss the grapes as sour?).

Oh any by the way, before you start questionning my motives, I am an NLU Jodhpur grad of 2007. Hats off to the people who clear this exam, you need a lot of substance to pass it.

#5, its NLIU Bhopal, and not NLU Bhopal. And to the best of my knowledge, NLS doesn't have a reservation for Karnataka people. Just to set the facts straight. And please do not generalise about "senior lawyers" in the fashion that you are doing. One sour incident here or there means nothing. And one more thing, why don't you check with the big law firms re solicitors - to my knowledge, whenever the results are out, most Bombay firms (including the big ones) approach the people who clear the exams with job offers. So I doubt if this exam is anywhere even near the kind of tag you're trying to put on it.

Sameer

#5 a.k.a. Bob Dylan

Your post clearly shows that neither you, nor your keyboard, has any idea about what you are typing.

Sol exams are such a farce...totally non-sensical...I am not questioning the quality of the exam or the advocates who pass this tough exam, but I am questioning the bloody need for this exam...so what happens if you become a sol? Does that make you a better counsel? How is it that very very few graduates from top law schools appear for this exam...because, once you are armed with a degree from a top law school, you realise that this exam is completely unnecessary for one to do well in a firm

A question - how many fee earners in leading law firms are solicitors? It would be good the find out...how many from AZB, AMSS, JSA, L&L, Khaitan, Trilegal, S&R are sols and do these firms insist that their lawyers qualify this exam? I think that this exam is still a colonial hangover and is encouraged in the traditional firms, like crawford, mulla, kanga, wadia ghandy etc. who are caught in a time warp...and most of these old law firms do not pay much to their associates (solicitor or not-- refer LI's article on law firms salaries revealed)

Brother, I don't know if you are aware, but a person who qualifies as a Solicitor is not required to give the AOR exam to appear before the Supreme Court. Also, Solicitors from the BILS have to just give one or two papers to qualify as a Solicitor for the Law Society in UK (I am not sure if there is a training requirement or not).

The reason why most of us from National Law Schools do not appear for the Sols is because it has an articleship time requirement, and if you see the paper, then you realise that you need leave to give the exam, which people might not be prepared to take from their hectic work schedules.

An of course, the prestige associated with the exam. There is utility and novelty associated with clearing the exam. And that's the reason why the exam survives.

Comprende?

#10 is right. the exam it is a useless colonial hangover.

@11:
you're wrong about the UK thing. advocates and solicitors are treated alike. and the reason ppl from NLUs don't appear is not just bcoz of the articleship requirement but also bcoz the salaries are not worth it. there is very little "utility" gained from giving the exam. as for "novelty", if a person gives an exam for novelty then he/she is an [...]

I think this whole debate is a little misguided.

Especially if you are from a law school where graduation by itself has less value, then the solicitors qualification is a nice feather to your cap. And anyone who can pass the exam, which is a hell of a lot harder and wider than any national law school exams, should be proud and should deserve a good job.

It may be an old colonial hangover, as you say, and you could get more money going straight into corporate law but as a discipline to learn the law and be mentored by a senior for three years it is still second to none.

The only reason it has become less relevant is because top corporate law firms already offer mega bucks to a minority of graduates, solicitor or no.

And many non solicitors firms pay less money even to graduates than solicitors firms pay to clerks.

Is a shame.

just 11 people passed??who the hell do the BIL think they are??? thwe deserving candidates who failed (or rather were made to fail) should sue [...]

Just inquisitive wethere this an open book exam or not. Questions seems to be dencent and interesting.

I don't understand how can people say that undeserving people fail this exam. given a fact that this exam test you on your application of law which is quite different from the usual memory test exams. This itself makes it clear that people who pass this exam are better than the rest (if not better than the rest). If people are deserving then undoubtedly their application must be good and there should be no reason for they not to clear this exam (this is a general scenario there might be enforceable circumstances because of which people may not clear etc.). It would be wrong to abuse the exam because of it's poor results, i have never seen people abuse the ICAI's CA exam because of its poor result or it being strict. Apart from the comparison I believe that the subjects that it prescribes or the standard that it sets is really very good. I would be wrong to accuse the BILS of being archaic because the with changing times it has also changed and updated its subjects (by incorporating and removing a few of them). Hence, I firmly believe that those clearing this exam are one of the finest lawyers of this country.

@1;@9;@10; Obviously you all talk throught your you-know-whats. Look at the best practioners in Bombay. They are all Solicitors. All the great law firms have been stewarded by quality Solicitors. The so called "National" law university grads are just a bunch of smart-alecky legal executives who walk out of college thinking that they deserve a six figure salary when they don't even know the law. SEBI & FEMA manual and press notes hardly qualify as real law. But how would you even understand? It would be like Sachin Tendulkar explaining to some T-20 batsman the joy of batting on bouncy wickets or the beauty of a solid technique! Excellence and knowledge are after all matters of choice. I've made my choice.

After about ten years of working in India and overseas, my opinion is that, while recognition is due to people who manage to pass this exam (as would be to anyone who passes any exam!) this in itself does not make a good lawyer. This exam was very relevant when there were no dedicated 5 year law schools in India and most lawyers from regular law colleges used to pass by reading guides like Jhabwala etc.

This exam cannot compare to a dedicated 5 year programme. However, credit is still due to people who manage to read up so much and clear the exam. All new law schools follow a completely different model of teaching and evaluation which is, in my opinion, more valauble than the kind of paper set up by BILS. 5 year law school curriculum is closer to teaching system in US/UK. BILS is more like the old school system.

Still no one can say who will or will not become a good corporate lawyer in the end. It all depends on the ability of the person to use the skills (whether developed through law schools) or otherwise picked up during articleship.

@15- Only the part relating to the Sebi Regulations in the Corporate Laws paper is open book. The rest is not

To all who doubt the solicitors exam- Its tough-its optional-it is as one of you said non attractive for National Law school graduates- bottom line you got to sit out for 6 months with no pay and no assurance of passing- frankly you need the stomach of making your bones-but its optional -its not the ultimate and many a great lawyer has been successful without giving it so stop whining make your choice and live happily with out turning green with envy of those who do give it.

@ all,

I went through the entire discussion and the views put forth by my fellow lawyers or lawyers to be. I understand that the discussion revolves around a. The low percentage of result of Sols exams, b. Where does this exem take an individual in terms of money and job prospects(I am sure no body questions the knowledge the exam has to offer), and c. This exam seems to be compared with the National Law Schools.

I think the kind of curriculum and training a National Law School student gets is commendable. So is the quality of Solicitors who have passed from BILS. (Note: For those who are not aware, Bombay Bar is ruled by these Solicitors. No offence to Counsels. And many of your SC big-wigs are Solicitors). Further, being a Solicitor is not just preparing for 8-9 months for the exam, but your training starts from the time you start your Articled Clerkship, which is for 3 years. It may not be advertised as a National Law School is, but a Solicitor having a standing of 5-10 years is a University in himself. (I hope my friends will not cite exeptions as a reply to this. I am sure they accept that all the students passing out of National Law School are not that great.)"Solicitor" is not a degree or a tag, but a life style. The clerkship period and the exam has lot to offer, but no one can help if you do not have the intent to take it (this is specially for @ 1).

Further, only Mumbai today has the Big Firm practice existing for years, credit goes to the Solicitors. No other city or state has managed that. I appreciate that now there are firms which are coming up or have set thier foot in in other cities. And my NLS friends who aspire to work for big money for the big firms in MUMBAI, my friends 95% of these firms were set-up and are managed by SOLICITORS. All the NLS pass outs currently working with MUMBAI LAW FIRMS are feeding off the knowledge and the training that the thier seniors (SOLICITORS) have to offer. DO not lose site of this.

My National Law School friends should and will appreciate that BILS is not a factory where corporate lawyers are manufactured. Secondly it is not the sole aim of an aspiring Solicitor to ensure that he/she is paid hefty amounts. A solicitor looks for much more than just the money. I am sorry but all i hear from NLS students is that they intend to join corporates. No body wants to take on the gestation period which a litigating lawyer faces. I agree that a Sols exam is not a short cut to huge money. My friends we are lawyers at the end of the day, whether from a NLS or a Solicitor.

As far as the Ivy league - discussions, Mr. National Law School, i appreciate your efforts to create this - NLS invincible image - but nobody cares a damn for it. We have seen NLS pass outs work, they have nothing phenominal. The ones who r good, do not comment or hold the views which you hold (@ 1).

I am not saying that a NLS is useless or a BILS Sols is the only way to train your self. Choose your options and do not make un-warranted statments just because you have free time and a key board to thrust. BILS has contirbuted to the BOMBAY BAR to a great extend and consequently to the SC BAr. Let us not lose site of this.

@1 i would appreciate if you will maintian the decency even when you sound your opinions in public anonymously. It seems u cum from a NSL, doesnt reflect well on the image of NAtional Law Schools. Inculcate that in you. I c it will take some effort. I generally dont like to make personal comments, but u really need one.

#20 here and to all who doubt the value of the certification please see all the large firms from AZB, JSA Amarchand etc they all say "solicitors and advocates" so I guess they themselves put a value to the distinction by marketing themselves like that.
Cheers

I agree with #18. I am a law graduate from Government Law College, Bombay and passed the BILS solicitors' qualifying exam in the first shot. Having said that, I do not think it is THAT big a deal. Yes, students from law colleges such as mine are probably in greater need of these exams - our teachers were, for the most part, really bad. Our university exams were, for the most part, based on rote learning and writing enough BS in the answer paper to make up volume. So yes, having spent those 7 months studying law intensively was good for me. But if I were a student from say NLS or NUJS practicing corporate law with a good firm(sorry, I do not count Bhopal and Jodhpur as one of the better colleges - I have seen and worked with lawyers coming out of there) I would not be giving this exam. Simply because the BILS exam covers all sorts of law (property, litigation etc), a lot of which are not practiced by corporate lawyers.

A lot of my peers who studies a lot harder than me did not pass, so I'm not sure what to say about deserving candidates passing - I supposed that is the examiners' prerogative. But I do feel that these results are controlled to not allow many candidates to pass.

Also, to sign my articles, I had to work with one of the colonial hangover firms that #10 referred to. And yes, I worked at a payscale much lesser than what i should have been paid because I was a "student", never mind that I was also a qualified lawyer. But, I suppose that is the price one has to pay for the training, which was undoubtedly excellent. But at the end of the day, I now work with one of top corporate law firms in Bombay and I do wonder if it was all worth it..

Dear #23, you seem to be doing a balancing act. I am sure, the amount of practical experience and knowledge that one gains in getting trained under an experienced Solicitor and also by clearing the Solicitor's exam, is something not comparable with a fresher whether from NLS or from other law colleges. Let us face it. Whether Solicitorship exam is necessary, worth it, whether it would fetch additional amount etc., is secondary. What is primary is the amount of knowledge and practical experience one gains. This cannot be denied.

Thank you for bringing some sensibility to this debate and putting forward a truly articulate response to this BILS bashing and old world bashing that these purported new age lawyers with their new ideas (against our 'old' and 'antiquated' ways). The BILS is a very impressive institution and the success of Bombay as a centre for many of India's best law firms is, as you have rightly put, owed to the presence of some of India's best lawyers who are Solicitors.

Nice to read about what is in the mind of our friends with regards to the current system prevails in Soli's examinations. Take the positive from the views shared by my friends. It is always better to share positive aspects of the systems.

The most dominant law firms in India are Bombay Firms (i.e. descendants of the solicitor tradition) and the other so called large national firms which started outside Bombay, now earn most of their revenue in Bombay (JSA, Khaitan etc.,) and have succeeded in Bombay only after they hired senior solicitors (smart-alecky NLS grads did not take them anywhere). The Bombay Bar Association and the Bombay Incorporated Law Society have a formidable and glorious legal tradition and have contributed enormously not just to commerce but also to democracy, human rights etc., So you so called national law school types - get a sense of perspective first. I don't think you would have the b*ll$ to call Lincoln's Inn in London or Ox-bridge outdated. The best partners in magic circle firms in London and our sharpest solicitors in Bombay have learnt the law of contract or tort the same way it was taught a hundred years ago. First principles of law don't change. So when your professors teach you through 'modern techniques' like powerpoint it doesn't matter what they say as long as once a mortgage always a mortgage. But obviously law school types are selfish and they have never been mentored by their seniors like us. Nobody expects them to understand the system.

I am a solicitor myself..I cleared the BILS Exams in 2005 and it it true that if you have cleared this exam then you are eligible to appear for only 1 paper in UK to be admitted as a solicitor..

I really dont understand this farce about NLS Grads..I guess they are just a bunch of oversmart legal executives who think they have the authority to give their unwarranted remaks/comments on solicitors exams rather then apprecaite the fact that there have been people who have worked hard for it and have been sucsessful in clearing them..

It may be a colonial hangover and corporate side may definitely offer more money but I think one must make an attempt to appear for this exams since it gives you a thorough knowledge/insight about the law which is required in order to be a fine lawyer..so lets not loose site of that...

I think this NLS Gang are unfortunately interested only in making cheap/fast money and have no consideration to the fact that they are surviving in Bombay only because of the big law firms culture/practice which were set up by these solicitors themselves..just by being a small negligible part of a corporate firm my NLS Friends think that they have made it big and have the audicity to pass such unwanted comments..

@ #28:

Clearly, you envy us. It's okay, you know. We're used to this. But to call us "a bunch of oversmart legal executives" only goes on to show that you aren't smart enough to know what it takes to be, and remain, a smart person who has an inclination to being successful in life. But that's a given, wasn't it? I mean, if you were actually that smart, you would have made it to NLS after all. Now, please don't give me the "I don't care where I pass out" crap. Be brave enough to admit the fact that we regularly outshine the rest of the competition(this does not imply that students from other universities are bad; its just that we are better).

And about making quick money, well, quite a few among us don't have a choice, for god's sake! A couple of my seniors come from Below Poverty Line and had it not been for the scholarships/merit funding offered at NLS, they wouldn't have even continued with their studies. I hope you're at least aware of the fact that a corporate job ensures quicker and better pay, at least in the short run, so that it helps them repay their loans/offer a better lifestyle to their families. And if you still think it's necessary that the poor chap should aim for reaching the pinnacles of litigation, seriously, go work in an NGO.

It's okay. Happens to everyone. After all, you're human too, and are prone to mistakes as much as anyone elsee. I am sure you will learn from your mistakes and stop posting your silly and stupid thoughts on a forum like this.

I really dont know why they insist on the 3 years articleship with a solicitor as a prerequisite for writing the solicitor exam. This only helps in getting "bonded labourers" for really low paying law firms.

please read reason for not getting not becoming solicitor .
1. No. Tuition or guidance.
2. Difficult to get article ship.
3. Exploitation from the solicitors regarding salary.
4. Even no suggestion to refer the good books.
5. No. Lectures
And many more which can be said in e mail. Please be in favour of students. Help students who are in article ship. They may be the future of your society

WHO CAN APPEAR THIS EXAM?

HOW MUCH EXPERIANCE AFTER LLB

I am not a lawyer. However, I do have a number of lawyer friends some of whom are Sr advocates practicing at the Supreme Court. They are all extremely intelligent and knowledgeable persons. I have no idea where they studied law, because none of them brag about.

Consequently, I am amazed at the consistent arrogance (with a few honourable exceptions) displayed by students or recent graduates of the National Law Schools. Yes you scored well in the CLAT or whatever. Yes you are being provided (I hope) with the best legal education in the country heavily subsidised by people like me - i.e. the taxpayer. However, that does not give you the right to strut around and as though you are some superior beings descended from the heavens so lesser mortals can bask in whatever glow you generate. Perhaps your Law Schools should also conduct some classes in manners, because that is something that is evidently lacking in your make up.

All this "we are the best and the rest are s**t" ranting is a sign of some deep seated insecurity. If you guys are really the best as you claim, your work will demonstrate that. There is no need for you to go tom tomming your excellence on every thread.

Now if only the new Bar Exam were half as difficult as the Solicitors exam then we would really see how good the education provided by the "top" law schools really is.

i guess no one seems to be really aware of the fact that the minimum educational qualification to join the best foreign law frms is a solicitors degree. NLS ites espceially need to be aware of the same.

Is there a place where we can get the model answers? This paper is a great way to assess one's understanding of the law at the end of 5 years of law school.

yes we are interested in the model answers .