The exam results were announced this week and only two first time takers passed, while nine other successful candidates passed only after one or more retakes of individual papers this time.
The previous April-May 2009 exams saw a pass rate of 11 per cent, with 14 successful candidates out of 129.
In November 2008 a total of 12 per cent or 19 out of 154 candidates passed the exams.
Bombay Incorporated Law Society secretary and examiner-in charge Dawood Mandviwala said that the exam was intentionally very difficult.
“People place more confidence in solicitors,” said Mandviwala and added: “What you can really say is that people who are passing [the exam] have great practical knowledge of the law and can quickly find the right section of legislation when asked by clients.”
The exam consists of six papers, each of which is sat by candidates in two-day intervals.
The topics are practice and procedure, corporate law, conveyancing, taxation and accounting, general commercial law, and “general lex”, which tests knowledge of miscellaneous other areas of law not covered under the other heads.
The corporate law paper had practical problem and factual questions on such areas as the Companies Act, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA).
The pass score in the exam is 360 points out of 600.
Sitting the solicitors exam requires taking an articled clerkship of three years under a law firm solicitor who has been qualified for five years.
Each solicitor is allowed to supervise up to three articled clerks.
Articled clerks work at a lower salary than associates at firms and are usually given six months off in the run-up to the exams to prepare, with questions potentially testing the legal knowledge of every statute in existence India.
The Bombay Incorporated Law Society was founded in 1894 as a supervisory body to solicitors or attorneys, who at that point did not enjoy rights of audience in courts, which was the preserve of counsel.
The division was abolished in 1976 and the solicitor qualification became a title that offered no legal benefits over advocates but still offered career opportunities and increased pay.
However, solicitors continued to dominate Mumbai’s legal market outside of the courts and at many more traditional Mumbai firms the majority of partners are solicitors.
Comments
I have heard that more than a decade back, when a leading Indian law firm wanted to promote two of its brightest young minds, who were not Bombay Solicitors but were mere law school graduates, to its partnership the memebers of this exclusive club protested against this sensing that their monopoly over Bomaby partnerships is going to whither away.. Anywyas this leading law firm went ahead and did what it had to do. Rest as they say is history....
Blogger 1# is this leading law firm ending with Advocates & Solicitors? If yes, then they are two faced, they want the tag of a Solicitor, yet they don't want to encourage or promote them. Shame on them. What the Bombay Incorporated Law Society must do is to strip them from using the tag 'Solicitor'. if this is done, I wouldn't be surprised if this denudes many 'top' firms and 'best friends'. To my mind, the Society would only be doing rather rendering justice.
You want to use the tag of a 'Solicitor' in the name of a firm, then promote them, if not don't use the tag.
1 Firstly it is highly disappointing to note that the examination results of successful candidates is only around 6 percent. Although for law exams this is not unusual and perhaps there may be few people who may remember that prior to 1961 the results of Advocate exams used to be around say 4 to 5 percent
2 Yes, it is not in dispute that the solicitors study wide range of law and can very comprehansively advise the clients because their objective is to prevent the clients from going in to litigation or any other legal minefield whilst the Advocate will usually advise the client when the matter is virtually a potential Litigation and litigation is about to commence.
3 Unlike Advocates it would appear that Solicitors are much more efficient in resolving the family law issue , the estate planning and also the Trust law issues and furthermore , the solicitors could effectively assist the clients in setting up the business than the Advocates. Accordingly, I dare say that the services of the Solicitors are user friendly /family friendly and may be economical
4 Although I stand for correction , perhaps I may be forgiven for thinking that there is an advantage in keeping and I dare say in encouraging both branches i. e the Advocates and also the Solicitors so that the clients could benefit from both these expertise .
5 I really wonder as to why we have not encouraged developed and flourished both these branches of the profession which could have been highly beneficial for the clients, for the judiciary and for the profession as a whole
Warm Regards and Best Wishes
Bhupendra K Vyas
Solicitor
Singhania and co London
(Ps The views expressed herein are exclusively of the writer and not of his firm or any one else )
With warm regards,
Bharat Sharma
one more Q1...is it like for becomin a solicitor u hv to sign some articles...
Q2.and do we need to do our llm if we are pursuing solicitation..?
Q3.according to u'll which is the best non-litigation"law'field a woman can pursue..?