practising law in Canada..
Apr 29th 2007 | 4:23 am
#16
Thread Starter
Just Joined
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 12
Re: practising law in Canada..
Jen,
You will probably get 6 -9 NCA challenge exams.
You can sit them in January and August each year, you can chose how many to take at each sitting, I would strongly advise not to take more than 3 each sitting.You have no right of appeal for papers, you are allowed only one resit and do not pester the administrator , she gets very crabby!
If you are motivated, I would take the challenge exams, They are not as hard as LLB (english) law exams, the thing that makes them tough, is you have no tution/guidance, just a reading list.
Motivation is key to passing with NCA.
Each exam costs $535.
Law school is not cheap, Its approx $900.00 per course.
I loved UBC, it was fun and to be fair to the Candians students, they had no idea about the length of our training, postgrad studies etc, they were very impressed once I explained what we have to do.
As for provinces, I did liase with the law society in Ontario once and have to say they were the most friendly, not so provincial as BC.
If you consider BC, you will have 9 month articling programme plus 10 week bar final course, which I am trying to be exempted from as we speak! I should hear next week, but lets just say i dont expect them to do me any favours!
Another option is to sit your NCA in the UK, I wish I had done this, it would have stopped alot of grief here! You can obtain permission from NCA to sit at a University local to you, its an option.
Yes, we are very fair to foreign lawyers, a simple Lawyers Transfer Test.
At UBC, I kid you not, I have been learning law that I was examined on at law school in 1997!
crazy eh?
bye for now
You will probably get 6 -9 NCA challenge exams.
You can sit them in January and August each year, you can chose how many to take at each sitting, I would strongly advise not to take more than 3 each sitting.You have no right of appeal for papers, you are allowed only one resit and do not pester the administrator , she gets very crabby!
If you are motivated, I would take the challenge exams, They are not as hard as LLB (english) law exams, the thing that makes them tough, is you have no tution/guidance, just a reading list.
Motivation is key to passing with NCA.
Each exam costs $535.
Law school is not cheap, Its approx $900.00 per course.
I loved UBC, it was fun and to be fair to the Candians students, they had no idea about the length of our training, postgrad studies etc, they were very impressed once I explained what we have to do.
As for provinces, I did liase with the law society in Ontario once and have to say they were the most friendly, not so provincial as BC.
If you consider BC, you will have 9 month articling programme plus 10 week bar final course, which I am trying to be exempted from as we speak! I should hear next week, but lets just say i dont expect them to do me any favours!
Another option is to sit your NCA in the UK, I wish I had done this, it would have stopped alot of grief here! You can obtain permission from NCA to sit at a University local to you, its an option.
Yes, we are very fair to foreign lawyers, a simple Lawyers Transfer Test.
At UBC, I kid you not, I have been learning law that I was examined on at law school in 1997!
crazy eh?
bye for now
Thanks again! I just looked at the NCA website and the exams all appear to be 'open book' exams, and if I not mistaken this includes taking in the textbooks as well as the statutes?? I wonder does this make the exams easier or do they factor in the fact we have the textbooks and make the answer more difficult.
I have never been able to take more than a statute book in (at the most).
The idea of sitting the papers over here sounds v. good - and studying them over a long period as I have no idea how long it will take to polish my PhD this would be the way to go.
Apr 29th 2007 | 4:29 am
#17
Thread Starter
Just Joined
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 12
Re: practising law in Canada..
Because when we do jump through all the hoops, we will make a killing 
My reply wasn't intended to slur all Canadian lawyers, just their representatives that seem to insist that any lawyer not trained in Canada is automatically inferior to one that was. The NCA appears to begin with such a presumption and there is very little that the individual lawyer can do to persuade them that this is not the case. In the UK the presumption is reversed - the foreign trained lawyer is presumed to be intelligent enough to adapt to the nuances of the UK system under the supervision of a UK principle.
I seriously doubt that most Canadian lawyers would be able to cope with the workload of an average UK lawyer. This is not a "them and us" situation but a reflection on how the UK (with most trades/professions) has descended into stress central.:curse:
As Steve P has said, I did not come to Canada purely to practise law, that just happened to be the profession I am in. If I had not read about other professionals (teachers, doctors, engineers etc) from other countries also being told that their hard earned qualifications are "worthless" I would probably reflect that I am being a little pig-headed. Unfortunately, my experience leads me elsewhere.
A very well respected law professor in one of Canada's top universities recently wrote an article totally slating the whole requalification process - this from "one of your own" that I assume knows what he is on about
My reply wasn't intended to slur all Canadian lawyers, just their representatives that seem to insist that any lawyer not trained in Canada is automatically inferior to one that was. The NCA appears to begin with such a presumption and there is very little that the individual lawyer can do to persuade them that this is not the case. In the UK the presumption is reversed - the foreign trained lawyer is presumed to be intelligent enough to adapt to the nuances of the UK system under the supervision of a UK principle.
I seriously doubt that most Canadian lawyers would be able to cope with the workload of an average UK lawyer. This is not a "them and us" situation but a reflection on how the UK (with most trades/professions) has descended into stress central.:curse:
As Steve P has said, I did not come to Canada purely to practise law, that just happened to be the profession I am in. If I had not read about other professionals (teachers, doctors, engineers etc) from other countries also being told that their hard earned qualifications are "worthless" I would probably reflect that I am being a little pig-headed. Unfortunately, my experience leads me elsewhere.
A very well respected law professor in one of Canada's top universities recently wrote an article totally slating the whole requalification process - this from "one of your own" that I assume knows what he is on about
Who was the law prof. who slated the qualification? I wouldn't mind reading that article!
For me personally, being not qualified, the NCA requirements do not seem to be so erroneous when the Canadian bar exams any nothing like as hard or as long as the LPC or BVC. But for those of you who are qualified having to re-do articling is just nothing more than discrimination - seems so insulting to foreign legal professions!
Last edited by jenlaw; Apr 29th 2007 at 5:02 am.
Apr 29th 2007 | 5:00 am
#18
Thread Starter
Just Joined
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 12
Re: practising law in Canada..
I am not knocking the standards in Canada generally, it is the qualification process I have a problem with, and the underlying and unfounded perception that Ca. legal education is better than the UK. This is reflected by the erroneous requirements the NCA set out. I've noticed Canadian academics often poo-poo their own legal education by going to America or the U.K to follow higher law degrees rather than staying in Canada and paying much less for the same programs.
My guess would be Canada operates a "closed shop" policy because otherwise American lawyers would swamp Canadian international law firms. Maybe London07 and Almost Canadian would disagree with me on that...but I cannot think why else they would want to keep international lawyers out. It would seem a blue-collar worker has more chance finding an immediate job in Canada than a lawyer or doctor.
As for costs and qualification requirements, and generally practicing law in the UK, it is very difficult now. England is in no way better.
Last edited by jenlaw; Apr 29th 2007 at 5:03 am.
Apr 29th 2007 | 5:16 am
#19
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 15,883
Re: practising law in Canada..
Is it now a case of not wanting to be seen to discriminate against a specific group (i.e. a country who law degrees are more easily come by than those of Canada or the UK) so we discriminate against all, and that somehow is seen as not discriminating against anyone.
I do also believe it is a case of over protectionism by the societies and unions who's job it is to do just that, protect the individuals within each group.
But at a time when we need foreign workers in virtually all categories it is hard to comprehend this practice continues unabated.
Regards
Steve
Apr 29th 2007 | 8:54 am
#20
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,402
From: South of Calgary
Re: practising law in Canada..
Is it now a case of not wanting to be seen to discriminate against a specific group (i.e. a country who law degrees are more easily come by than those of Canada or the UK) so we discriminate against all, and that somehow is seen as not discriminating against anyone.
I do also believe it is a case of over protectionism by the societies and unions who's job it is to do just that, protect the individuals within each group.
Steve
I do also believe it is a case of over protectionism by the societies and unions who's job it is to do just that, protect the individuals within each group.
Steve
It's strange that in the US all English law degrees are recognised so the only hurdle to requalification is the State Bar Exam.
Never mind, once I requalified I'm sure I will ruffle some legal feathers in Calgary.
Bring 'em on
Apr 29th 2007 | 2:46 pm
#21
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 360
Re: practising law in Canada..
And as Almost Canadian said,once through the hoops, we can kick ass and earn great money!
Apr 29th 2007 | 6:33 pm
#22
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 360
Re: practising law in Canada..
Thanks again! I just looked at the NCA website and the exams all appear to be 'open book' exams, and if I not mistaken this includes taking in the textbooks as well as the statutes?? I wonder does this make the exams easier or do they factor in the fact we have the textbooks and make the answer more difficult.
I have never been able to take more than a statute book in (at the most).
The idea of sitting the papers over here sounds v. good - and studying them over a long period as I have no idea how long it will take to polish my PhD this would be the way to go.
Yes, the exams are open book, like you, i am used to closed book, I do not like open book, it gives a flase sense of security.
You can take in texts, statutes, and notes from the internet.
Really consider doing them in England, I wish I had, you can spread them out, no problem.
Good luck
Apr 29th 2007 | 6:35 pm
#23
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 360
Re: practising law in Canada..
Who was the law prof. who slated the qualification? I wouldn't mind reading that article!
For me personally, being not qualified, the NCA requirements do not seem to be so erroneous when the Canadian bar exams any nothing like as hard or as long as the LPC or BVC. But for those of you who are qualified having to re-do articling is just nothing more than discrimination - seems so insulting to foreign legal professions!
For me personally, being not qualified, the NCA requirements do not seem to be so erroneous when the Canadian bar exams any nothing like as hard or as long as the LPC or BVC. But for those of you who are qualified having to re-do articling is just nothing more than discrimination - seems so insulting to foreign legal professions!
Professor John Kelly write the article.
Go to the Globe and mail and you can locate it.
Hes really on our side!
Apr 29th 2007 | 6:38 pm
#24
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 360
Re: practising law in Canada..
Who was the law prof. who slated the qualification? I wouldn't mind reading that article!
For me personally, being not qualified, the NCA requirements do not seem to be so erroneous when the Canadian bar exams any nothing like as hard or as long as the LPC or BVC. But for those of you who are qualified having to re-do articling is just nothing more than discrimination - seems so insulting to foreign legal professions!
For me personally, being not qualified, the NCA requirements do not seem to be so erroneous when the Canadian bar exams any nothing like as hard or as long as the LPC or BVC. But for those of you who are qualified having to re-do articling is just nothing more than discrimination - seems so insulting to foreign legal professions!
yup, articling again is just insane, I know a Judge here whos just finished articles,its another way of trying to keep us out...........
Apr 30th 2007 | 1:50 pm
#25
Retired
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 34,646
Re: practising law in Canada..
I wonder if this has always been the case or it partially the result of human rights legislation.
Is it now a case of not wanting to be seen to discriminate against a specific group (i.e. a country who law degrees are more easily come by than those of Canada or the UK) so we discriminate against all, and that somehow is seen as not discriminating against anyone.
Is it now a case of not wanting to be seen to discriminate against a specific group (i.e. a country who law degrees are more easily come by than those of Canada or the UK) so we discriminate against all, and that somehow is seen as not discriminating against anyone.
Apr 30th 2007 | 3:56 pm
#26
Forum Regular
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 74
From: Calgary
Re: practising law in Canada..
As a Canadian with a British Law Degree who practices law in Alberta I can certainly understand everyone's frustration. Unfortunately, the reality in Canada is notwithstanding a dire need for qualified professionals we are running a "closed shop". Although it is a shameful situation there doesn't appear to be anything one can do about it.
My advice is that if one wants to "really" practice law in Canada one must unfortunately swallow this bitter pill and get on with it.
As for open book exams, I would concur with one of the previous posters who suggested it gives one a false sense of security. One simply doesn't have the time to flip through textbooks to make it an efficient use of time.
Good luck and if you have additional questions feel free to send me a PM.
My advice is that if one wants to "really" practice law in Canada one must unfortunately swallow this bitter pill and get on with it.
As for open book exams, I would concur with one of the previous posters who suggested it gives one a false sense of security. One simply doesn't have the time to flip through textbooks to make it an efficient use of time.
Good luck and if you have additional questions feel free to send me a PM.
May 1st 2007 | 4:33 am
#27
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 344
Re: practising law in Canada..
The Australian system is similar to UK though- an undergrad degree- many with sensible joint degrees and the post grad Law Society qualification - isn't that so?
May 1st 2007 | 5:22 am
#28
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 360
Re: practising law in Canada..
I have a friend in Australia, who I used to practice with in England. When he moved there, all he had to do was an ethics exam and is now admitted to the bar in New South wales. No article period AGAIN unlike here in Canada.
I think the OP was trying to point out that they are not as protectionist as Canada with foreign professionals.
Its not just lawyers either, my Doctor is British, and you would not believe the hoops she had to jump through,she got so fed up, at one point she went back home for 2 years!
May 1st 2007 | 6:09 am
#29
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 344
Re: practising law in Canada..
Yeh - been there. Partner with 3 degrees up to doctorate level still had to do a uni course to get qualified here. Why do we as immigrants put up with this? Are we just grateful that we have been allowed to come here?
What was amazing on the W5 programme about qualified immigrants not getting jobs is that it did not include UK immigrants in the disaster -they used visible ethnic immigrants. But it happens to all of us. We are included in the racism. We had 2 family members who both went to Australia because of the easier system of becoming qualified there.
What was amazing on the W5 programme about qualified immigrants not getting jobs is that it did not include UK immigrants in the disaster -they used visible ethnic immigrants. But it happens to all of us. We are included in the racism. We had 2 family members who both went to Australia because of the easier system of becoming qualified there.
May 1st 2007 | 6:16 am
#30
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 13,402
From: South of Calgary
Re: practising law in Canada..
Yeh - been there. Partner with 3 degrees up to doctorate level still had to do a uni course to get qualified here. Why do we as immigrants put up with this? Are we just grateful that we have been allowed to come here? What was amazing on the W5 programme about qualified immigrants not getting jobs is that it did not include UK immigrants in the disaster -they used visible ethnic immigrants. But it happens to all of us. We are included in the racism. We had 2 family members who both went to Australia because of the easier system of becoming qualified there.
What was amazing on the W5 programme about qualified immigrants not getting jobs is that it did not include UK immigrants in the disaster -they used visible ethnic immigrants. But it happens to all of us. We are included in the racism. We had 2 family members who both went to Australia because of the easier system of becoming qualified there. Having said that, I have days when I think "what's the point" and look at other things - it doesn't normally last more than an hour
There is a girl in my firm that was thinking of doing an English LL.B. I told her that, if she ever intends to come back, her degree would not be recognised and suggested that she qualify here (quicker anyway) and then do the QLTT to become dual qualified.
