Legal Women July 2025

 Senior Leadership

 DEI

 SQE

Enjoy a career without

limits, earning up to 75% of your billing.

Taylor Rose is a top 60 law firm with over 30 offices nationwide and we are seeking legal professionals that are keen to work on a consultancy, fee sharing basis.

We are seeking likeminded individuals and groups of Solicitors, FCILEx or Licensed Conveyancers with 4 years PQE+ to join our consultant programme.

We provide lawyers with a unique opportunity to thrive as part of our consultant arrangement, taking back control of their life and earnings in a smart, modern and supportive environment.

You can choose to work from home, one of our offices or both!

“The benefits of consultancy are endless and the support of Taylor Rose is amazing.”

Emily Hampson, Consultant Chartered Legal Executive

Why choose us?

Earn up to 75% of what you bill; minimum earning 70%

Choose your own clients, fees, hours and volume of work

· Work from home, 100 days access to hot-desking facilities

PII cover up to £20 million

Free calls via our app

Access to nationwide offices and meeting rooms

Fully optimised CMS and electronic systems

Access to business development

Dedicated liaison team and technical head for ops, legal support and training

To find out more, read our brochure or arrange a confidential call, please email consultantrecruitment@taylor-rose.co.uk or visit our website www.consultant-solicitor.co.uk

PUBLISHER

Ian Fletcher

Benham Publishing Limited

Aintree Building, Aintree Way, Aintree Business Park, Liverpool L9 5AQ

Tel: 0151 236 4141

Fax: 0151 236 0440

Email: admin@benhampublishing.com

Web: www.benhampublishing.com

ACCOUNTS DIRECTOR

Joanne Casey

SALES MANAGER

Catherine McCarthy

STUDIO MANAGER

John Barry

MEDIA No. 2045

PUBLISHED

July 2025 © Legal Women Magazine, Benham Publishing Limited.

LEGAL NOTICE

© Benham Publishing Limited.

None of the editorial or photographs may be reproduced without prior written permission from the publishers. Benham Publishing would like to point out that all editorial comment and articles are the responsibility of the originators and may or may not reflect the opinions of Benham Publishing. No responsibility can be accepted for any inaccuracies that may occur, correct at time of going to press. Benham Publishing cannot be held responsible for any inaccuracies in web or email links supplied to us.

DISCLAIMER

6

Legal Women Magazine welcomes all persons eligible to join our community regardless of sex, race, religion, age or sexual orientation. All views expressed in this publication are the views of the individual writers and not those of Legal Women unless specifically stated to be otherwise. All statements as to the law are for discussion and should not be relied upon as an accurate statement of the law, are of a general nature and do not constitute advice in any particular case or circumstance. Members of the public should not seek to rely on anything published in this magazine in court but seek qualified legal advice.

COVER INFORMATION

The Rt. Hon Lady Rose of Colmworth

Copy Deadline

There will be a rolling publication schedule.

Advertising

Anyone wishing to advertise please contact Catherine McCarthy before the copy deadline. 0151 236 4141 catherine@benhampublishing.com

Editorial

To submit editorial, please send to: info@LegalWomen.org.uk

Editor-in-Chief: Coral Hill.

Leadership-Supreme Court JusticeThe Rt. Hon Lady Rose of Colmworth

Leadership-Law Firm Co-Founder -Sarah Goulbourne

Leadership-PartnerBrigid Napier

Leadership-PartnerAysha Chouhdary

Leadership-Owner and Founder (Recruitment Agency)- Norah Durrant

Perspective- Nabeala Fiaz

Perspective Dr Morag Duffin

PerspectiveLatoyah Thompson

Perspective-Jacqui Gower

Commissioning Editor: Charity Mafuba .

Sub-editors: Gillian Fielden, Tilly Rubens, Ramsha Khan. Editorial Team: Ramsha Khan, Charity Mafuba, Elizabeth Shimmell, Agnes Swiecka and Emma Webb.

Researcher: David Smith, Administrator & IT Support: Stephen Flanagan

Time surely does fly. It’s been over a year since I wrote my first foreword when I served as guest editor for May 2024’s edition. This is my first foreword in my new role as the Commissioning Editor at Legal Women, thanks to our Founder and Editor-in-Chief, Coral Hill.

With the rise of the digital era, our magazine will now only be published in digital format. Additionally, we have reduced the number of editions from four to three a year (March, July and November).

We are also moving away from being “England centric”, and will now be featuring more contributions from women based in Ireland, Scotland and Wales. This will extend Internationally. As such, we will be including an international perspective on some of themes. In this Edition-we profiled women based in Kenya-Africa, Spain and the United States.

On the theme of Senior Leadership, (we know that female lawyers face a lot of hurdles in relation to career progression), I found it refreshing to profile women who have achieved Partner status, a Founder and also Co-Founder of a law firm and even a Supreme Court Justice-(l had the privilege of profiling Lady Rose of Colmworth, DBE).

The impact of the rollback of DEI policies in the US and globally; warranted a conversation. It was therefore befitting to have a domestic (UK) and International perspective(US) on this.

LW magazine is for everyone; lawyers, solicitors, barristers, advocates, judges, legal executives and those working as paralegals, legal secretaries, advisers or recruiters, the list is endless. We welcome the many male champions as readers and contributors.

The commissioning of an independent review of the Solicitor’s Qualifying Exam (SQE) by the Solicitor’s Regulatory Authority (SRA) prompted me to collate various perspectives from candidates, educators and employers in the form of interviews, which we published across our social media pages in April.

In continuing with this SQE review series, I thought it prudent to include some more perspectives. This time I interviewed two educators, a candidate who recently passed her assessment and updated the previously published employer’s perspective interview, to include additional questions. ■

Charity Mafuba,

Commissioning Editor and Director, Solicitor (England and Wales), New York Attorney

Our mission is to:

■ Provide clear information on gender parity

■ Inspire practical initiatives to create real change

■ Promote innovation in leadership and practice

Many thanks to our Sponsors

Donaghey & Chance Limited

Editorial Team

We would like to thank the following Editors for their support in editing submissions for this Edition. Tilly, Coral, Ramsha and Charity.

Tilly Rubens Coral Hill

Ramsha Khan Charity Mafuba

Benham Publishing Limited

Interview with the Rt. Hon Lady Rose of Colmworth

Charity Mafuba talks to The Rt Hon Lady Rose of Colmworth about her legal career and the importance of Senior Female Leadership in law. Currently, Lady Rose is one of two female judges of the Supreme Court.

Charity: You completed your degrees at Newnham College, Cambridge and Brasenose College, Oxford. What was your experience of studying law during that time?

Lady Rose: I really enjoyed law. The Cambridge undergraduate course is a very structured course, everybody goes to all the lectures, and they cover the syllabus, but there were a range of optional topics that I enjoyed studying.

I spent a lot of time in the library. It was hard work, but I think it taught me a lot of actual law and it's a very practical course as well. It's not just essay writing. It's little scenarios and then you have to say what advice you would give. So I think it does very much set you up to practice as a lawyer.

I was at Newnham, which was then and still is an all women's college, and we tended to have our supervisions together as a group. Because we didn't have a Director of Studies at Newnham at the time in my first year, the other faculty around the university kindly agreed to take us on and give us supervisions. So actually we were out and about a great deal. And it was a very nice cohort in the college and in the university more generally. Yes, I enjoyed law as an academic subject.

Charity: Were there many women completing legal studies during the late seventies?

Lady Rose: Yes, I mean I didn't have a sense that we were hugely outnumbered, though I suspect we were. The year I started at Cambridge, was the year that a lot of previously all male colleges took in women for the first time and also as I started my second year there were another whole group of colleges that became co-ed. So it was very much a process at that time.

I suspect we were very outnumbered, but I just don't remember being particularly affected by that at that stage. I then went to Brasenose, that had been one of the first Oxford colleges to go mixed and last year in 2024 they celebrated their 50th anniversary of having admitted women to the College.

Charity: What interested you in the Law?

Lady Rose: I've always found the law fascinating. I think, because it's very much addressing human problems. The law not only stops people from doing things, which is what most lay people think of the law, a criminal law or whatever, but it also facilitates people doing trade, doing commerce, getting married, adopting children - every aspect of life has to have rules to govern it, and I like that aspect of learning something which is really a reflection of the complexity of human beings.

This building for example, there were contracts to provide the lighting, to build the building. It's full of books, which were published. Everything that you look at has a whole bedrock of legal work behind it.

Charity: Particularly, practising as a Barrister instead of Solicitor?

Lady Rose: I always thought I would go to the Bar, I never really considered being a solicitor.

I'm not quite sure what it was that first attracted me to it. In fact, being a Barrister turned out not to be the right career path for me after a while, but I was very set on that at the start, and I think what I enjoyed about it was you really are focusing on a lot of legal issues. That's the sort of the interesting bit, really for me.

Charity: You were called to the Bar by Gray's Inn in 1984. Did you experience any difficulty in securing pupillage?

Lady Rose: Not so much in securing pupillage because at that time pupils weren't paid anything. Chambers would take on 10-11 first six-month pupils, even if in the end, they didn't keep any of them on as tenants. Now, it's shifted because chambers have to pay pupils. There are far fewer pupillages, but a much greater chance then of actually getting a tenancy at the end of the day. So I didn't have much difficulty getting pupillage, but then getting a permanent place in chambers was much more difficult.

I think Gray's Inn is a very friendly Inn and I've enjoyed my interactions with it. They have a very positive relationship with the students and are very helpful to the students and pupil barristers who are members of the Inn. And I've enjoyed very much going to events held there.

just completely ignored. And if you'd said to them at the time, actually there's something valuable about the fact that I'm a woman, they would have been baffled by that kind of idea.

Charity: Following your time at Monckton Chambers, you joined the Government Legal Service, where you served as a Legal adviser on financial services at HM Treasury.

What was that transition like in terms of the work that you undertook In-House, in contrast to your tenure in Private Practice?

Lady Rose: I left the Bar in part because I used to get very nervous before appearing in court and I didn't really enjoy it.

I enjoyed my career whilst I was doing it, but once I got to ten years call, I was expected to do more serious cases by myself without having a silk brought in to do the kind of heavy lifting in court, and I realized that I wasn't really cut out for it, and it wasn't cut out for me.

What I really liked about the Government Legal Service was that it was advisory work in a non-contentious environment. I wasn't in the Litigation Team. I was in the Advisory Team. I quite quickly got swept up into a Bill Team dealing with what became the Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA), and I loved it. It was very different also because even then, there were a lot of women in quite senior roles in government. In my little law team in the Treasury, I had a female boss and a female colleague and the woman in the room next to me, was in a different team, but we became and are still very close friends. It was a very nice atmosphere. It was also things taken at a much more considered pace.

The pace in the Government Legal Service was at that time, (I'm not sure it's still the case), much more considered because, you know, what you were doing had very serious repercussions and there were many different stakeholders who needed to be consulted so that their views could be reflected in the final product.

Charity: As your career progressed, you were consistently appointed to various senior positions.

For example, Standing Counsel to the Director General of Fair Trading, Director of Operational and International Humanitarian Law at the Ministry of Defence and President of the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber)

Would you say that once you have held a couple of senior positions, it becomes easier to be appointed to even more senior leadership positions -particularly for women?

Lady Rose: Yes, I think that's right. Those three posts were at different stages of my career. I think I've always been someone who's been happy to take on additional responsibilities as well as the core day job.

Certainly in the High Court, most High Court judges have some kind of “Corporate Responsibility” roles as you would call it, the in-house work. They are on the Rules Committee, or the Security Committee, or the IT Procurement Committee or a Presider on Circuit if you're in the King's Bench Division or the Head of a Tribunal Chamber, so there are a lot of jobs that people can do.

“the culture was that everyone just completely ignored the fact that you were a woman”

Charity: You were in practice at Monckton Chambers for a decade. What was the culture like at the Bar, especially for women at the time?

Lady Rose: I think that I was amongst the first group of women barristers to be taken on in chambers that were doing commercial work. Women had already started being accepted more in family law and in criminal law a little bit. But I was the first woman taken on in my chambers, and that was the experience of a lot of women. And the culture was that everyone just completely ignored the fact that you were a woman, and it was never really mentioned, and you had to adapt your behaviour so as not to refer to the fact, not to do anything different, really, and that was how everyone got by. It was

I was also Secretary of the High Court Judges Association. Those things are kind of voluntary in a sense, although everyone is expected to play their part. I like to play my part in the organization, and I think it does help visibility across the wider organization. Then when you want to move up, it always helps if people know who you are and of you, and have hopefully formed a positive opinion of your abilities, so that they're not saying, “Who's Vivien Rose? I've never heard of her”. So as well as being interesting and useful for their own sake, these roles meant that I was better known among my fellow judges.

Charity: On 19th of April 2021, you were appointed as a Justice of the Supreme Court, and until the subsequent appointment of Lady Simler on the 14th of September 2023, you were the only Female Supreme Court Justice.

What was your experience of working with only male colleagues during that time?

Lady Rose: It was fine because my colleagues were all very respectful and friendly – I have never had the sense that I was not sitting on a fair share of important cases and I have always felt very supported here. The current President of the Court and the Chief Executive have been very proactive in promoting diversity. In the past the assumption was that where there is a gender diversity question to be addressed, it was always the women who were expected to take on those roles. Now there is a much greater recognition of the fact that it is the responsibility of men as well as women to promote change.

So, yes, it's always nice to have women colleagues because there's no doubt you relate to them slightly differently from how you relate to men. But I was kind of pretty much used to working in a largely male cohort by the time I got here, and I can't say it's a problem. I was very thrilled when Lady Simler was appointed. Partly because she's a good friend, and as I say, you interact with women slightly differently. I think my experience was probably very different from Lady Hale's experience and even from Lady Black and Lady Arden's experience. But then things are changing quite quickly, although in small steps.

Charity: What is your approach to providing judicial interventions on cases where the topics were relatively new to you?

Lady Rose: Oh, that is fine. I think Justices and Judges generally tend to vary in how interventionist they are. I think I'm kind of medium, but probably everybody thinks that they are medium.

I like to ask questions to find out whether I've understood the point. Sometimes you ask a question t of one barrister, but really you are signalling to the other barrister on the opposing side that that's a point you're worrying about, that you need them to deal with.

Lady Rose: I think there's much more of a recognition that the court does have a role in encouraging people at a much lower level or much earlier stage in their career. Unfortunately, often the pool of applicants from which a new Justice is chosen to join the Court is not a diverse pool, if I could put it like that. But that is not a reason for the Court to sit back and do nothing to promote diversity for the future. So we do a huge amount of outreach to Schools, Universities and the Junior Judiciary, because you've got to start at that level. So, I've done a lot of work for that and our Diversity Lead amongst the Justices, Lord Leggatt, I know he does a lot of work for that as well, and I think that that's how it's got to change. It's got to start at a much earlier stage.

I think when you look at the diversity of the of the High Court, Circuit Bench, District Bench and the Tribunal Service, it is much better than it used to be. And I think also one of the things that's helping is, (and my career is sort of emblematic of this), of more career progression in the judiciary. It used to be, before the Judicial Appointments Commission, you would be a Barrister, you would become a Silk, a Recorder in the Crown Court, a Deputy High Court Judge, and you would then become a High Court Judge and then make the way up from there.

If you're going to just draw from Silks, it's already not a diverse pool. But people like me started out in the Tribunal Service, which is much better in diversity terms. So I think all that helps. And in the Chancery Division, there are quite a number now who were Solicitors and not Barristers. Again, I think the other side of the profession tends to be a bit better in terms of gender balance.

“I used to get very nervous before appearing in court and I didn't really enjoy it.”

There are lots of different ways we intervene. Sometimes in our discussions we identify that there's a point that's in favour of the barrister and he or she has not raised that. And so there are polite ways of dealing with that to say when you ask a question, you're hoping they'll give you this answer. They don't and then I'll say, “oh, I thought your answer would be this?”, and then sometimes they say, “oh yes, you know, that's a good point”. And you're really asking that to get it out there and for the other side to hear that that's something they need to deal with. So there are all sorts of ways that you can intervene.

Sometimes I intervene if I feel that we have given a particular barrister a hard time and pushed them on a weak point in their case. Then I'll say something more supportive because I think it's important that the clients sitting behind them know that the court understands the point and whether or not we accept it at the end of the day, it's important that they know that we've heard it and understood it.

Charity: Given your predominantly Commercial and Financial background, when you became a Supreme Court Justice, did you find it challenging navigating cases in areas that you were perhaps “not so well versed” ?

Lady Rose: I think that's the skill that you need to have to do this job, the range of topics that you deal with over the course of a month is vast and most of them will not be things that you've dealt with before. So, in the last few weeks I've dealt with a case about financial Sanctions imposed on Russians, I've dealt with Universal Credit, I've dealt with VAT Groupings, all sorts of cases about everything under the sun really.

Charity: What does the future hold for Lady Rose?

Lady Rose: Oh, I will stay here for a while. The retirement age has just been increased from 70 to 75. It remains to be seen how many people stay until they're 74 and 364 days old. I still feel quite new here even though there are now two more recent additions. I really love the job, and feel that I've found my "Métier” and am very happy to stay here. ■

Charity Mafuba Commissioning Editor and Director, Solicitor (England and Wales)

Particularly, also because we do a lot of work for the Privy Council and that is law from other jurisdictions as well. And the skill of the job is to be able in a day or a day and a half, which is really what you get to prepare for the hearing, to absorb all that material. Of course, we're very much assisted by the fact that we've got the judgments of the courts below who explain it all and we've got the written cases of the parties. But still, you have to have the mental agility to absorb all that material and come to a view about which arguments are better and which arguments are not. And that is mentally very demanding.

Charity: Apart from yourself and Lady Simler, the rest of the Supreme Court Justices are male.

What measures can be implemented to ensure a more diverse makeup of the Supreme Court. In particular, the selection of more women?

Interview with Sarah Goulbourne

Charity Mafuba talks to Sarah Goulbourne, co-founder of gunnercooke, about her legal career, specifically her role in founding what has now become a successful International Law Firm.

Charity: Sarah, can you please tell us a bit about yourself?

Sarah: I’m a co-founder of gunnercooke and a business coach. I also work closely with the gunnercooke foundation as a Hub Leader, where I coach CEO’s of ambitious charities to grow and develop their organisations. Last year I co-authored the second edition of Business Development for Women Lawyers

I enjoy mentoring lawyers throughout their careers, helping them to identify opportunities to develop their practices. At gunnercooke they join the firm to set up and scale up a successful practice, in a way that suits them. To do this we help them develop their entrepreneurial skills through coaching, training and events. It’s an area I’m passionate about and gunnercooke has become a fantastic platform to help lawyers achieve their full potential.

I always wanted gunnercooke to be a business with purpose. As a law firm leader, I believe it’s important to lead the way and I’m keen to promote and encourage our charitable work. It makes me immensely proud to think how our people are helping those less fortunate in society.

Charity: Prior to co-founding gunnercooke, you were Head of Legal and Company Secretary at Stanley Leisure plc. What did that role entail? And

Sarah: Yes, being a General Counsel meant I was a buyer of legal services. As a client, I understood what I wanted and needed from law firms that supplied legal services to the company I worked for. I managed the legal spend and so it was very important to build a relationship with the law firms that I used, so that we could have open and honest conversations around pricing and billing.

Charity: Would you say that role prepared you for your co-founding journey?

Sarah: My experience was one of the things that drove me to wanting to change the way legal services were delivered. I could see all the things I didn’t want and wanted to find a new way to provide a service clients do want.

Charity: In 2010, yourself and Darryl Cooke launched gunnercooke. What made you decide to set up a new law firm as opposed to, perhaps working as a Partner in an already established law firm?

Sarah: Having completed an MBA, I knew I wanted to run my own business. I felt the MBA gave me the tools and the confidence to start such a venture. It was an exciting, challenging and sometimes frustrating time. I was convinced of the need for a business like ours which could disrupt the sector and create a more modern and flexible business model.

Charity: How would you describe the co-founding process and your experience of it?

Sarah: When we founded gunnercooke in 2010, we wanted to create something better for lawyers and for clients. We challenged the market by creating a firm where our lawyers are entrepreneurs, with the freedom to practise on their own terms. It is the place for ambitious individuals and teams to design, set-up and scale-up the business they’ve always wanted, with the support of IT, compliance, finance, partners services, business development and a marketing team within gcTrust. We focussed on flexibility and escaping the restrictions of traditional firms.

At the time, there weren’t any other firms out there like ours. We wanted do things differently. Now, there are many fee share models in the market, with many recognising its benefits, but I’m proud to say we are one of the leading fee shares globally, with offices across the UK, Europe and the US. We stand ourselves apart by offering coaching and development that helps lawyers to become entrepreneurs.

Over time we have attracted many ambitious, entrepreneurial lawyers who have successfully developed large practices with their own teams. Our messaging has evolved to demonstrate that joining our firm doesn’t mean working in silos. We have a fantastic culture that encourages networking and cross-referrals; many lawyers find our firm more collaborative than a traditional firm. They simply get to choose who they work with and create bespoke teams best suited to each client.

The quality of the lawyers joining us is incredible: 57% of the lawyers have worked in a Top 50 law firm, and 21% are ranked in legal directories. We also have experts in some of the most exciting emerging areas of the law, working on highprofile and interesting cases. We have one of the largest dedicated crypto legal and advisory teams in the world, we recently won UK Impact Case of the Year at the Managing IP Awards, and we have specialists in areas such as Equestrian law, Competition, Charity, Employment and Real Estate

Charity: What are you most proud of?

Sarah: I am incredibly proud of the way we have changed the industry for the better. Our people are happier since they joined our firm and are doing good for themselves, their families, their communities and their clients. We’ve supported projects such as LandAid’s SleepOut and WrapUp London, and our bookshop House of Books & Friends is an award-winning Community Interest Company with the purpose of tackling loneliness in the community.

I’m particularly proud to have created a firm where women can thrive. I hear countless tales from female lawyers who felt pushed out at their previous firms or felt unsupported in their ambition to have a family alongside a successful career. gunnercooke removes these barriers and allows lawyers to run their practice in a way that suits them. Hearing about their success gives me satisfaction that we have achieved what we set out to do. One of our female lawyers recently took home an award for a high-profile case she worked on a few weeks before she began her maternity leave. On her return to work, she said “this would have been impossible if not for the gunnercooke model.”

Charity: gunnercooke was one of the first fee-share firms in the UK and one of the largest.

Can you please tell us more about what this entails and why it makes good business sense?

Sarah: The lawyers who join us are looking to take their career to the next level. They are ambitious, commercial and entrepreneurial and want the freedom to set up a practice that fits their goals, passions and way of working, whilst

supported by an established international firm. We encourage lawyers to design their lives by setting up and scaling up the practice they’ve always wanted. We support them on their journey to becoming entrepreneurs. Even though they run their own practice, Partners have the opportunity to collaborate with a global community of toptier experts in just about every corporate and commercial discipline. £15m of fees are referred internally each year. Over 90% of our partners earn more than they did previously, with many doubling or tripling their previous salary because they are keeping the majority of what they bill. It’s a fairer model.

All lawyers complete a business plan when they join us, as well as other assessments around cultural fit, happiness and personality. This helps us to understand the objectives for their practice and support them in meeting their goals. Supporting the Partners is gcTrust, an inhouse team servicing our lawyers with marketing, business development and networking opportunities including events and webinars, content creation and pitches and proposals. We provide branded assets, materials and training to help them in this area. Partners are supported as business professionals and coaching is an incredibly important part of their development. We connect lawyers with business coaches to support them with their goals. We also have a Business Development Office and provide regular training sessions to help them grow their practice.

Having this support team takes the burden of admin and stress associated with running your own firm, so that our lawyers can focus on what they do and enjoy best: the law. One of the most common revelations I hear from our lawyers after they have joined our firm is that they have missed practising law and revel in the chance to get back to providing quality bespoke service to clients.

Charity: What does the gunnercooke foundation’s inspire* project do?

Sarah: When Darryl and I started gunnercooke we were both very clear that our business should be a force for good. The inspire* programme launched as part of the gunnercooke foundation in 2012 to support grassroots charities and has been so important to the business. The project has worked with over 160 charities in the UK. It is one

of a kind network, where lawyers as a peer group help charities through hubs. These hubs allow charities to meet with other charity leaders, and build comradery, while having access to advice, toolkits and resources. It can be lonely leading an organisation, at the meetups charities can meet with other leaders, form friendships and build a supportive network.

Charity: What advice would you give to female lawyers considering the co-founding journey?

Sarah: My advice would be to have confidence in your vision, trust in your ability to lead, and study further for business qualifications, like an MBA, when needed. Being a business founder and building a firm from the ground up requires resilience, adaptability, and an unwavering belief in your ideas.

Take the time to link into networks of supportive colleagues and mentors, who can provide outside guidance and perspective. Explore the market and identify business models that are representative of your goals. Moreover, have a strong sense of what you want your company to represent; it is our culture, values, commitment to society and collective personalities that makes gunnercooke unique.

Don't hide from the challenges ahead, in reality co-founding a firm is not just about legal expertise, but about developing a strong leadership identity, astute commercial awareness, and embracing strategic thinking. As a business owner, you need to make bold decisions, take calculated risks, and advocate for the kind of firm you truly want to create. Importantly, don’t underestimate the power of collaboration and trust because finding the right partner or team can make all the difference in turning that small business idea into a valuable global brand.

What does the future hold for gunnercooke?

Sarah: This year marks 15 years of gunnercooke and sees more expansion for the firm. From mine and Darryl’s very first start-up conversation in Costa Coffee in 2010, the company has now reached a turnover £82m in 2024 – up 21% YOY (Year-over-Year), with continued growth expected this year. We recently announced the launch of gunnercookeSport, a specialist full-service sports boutique for clubs and players, and launched a new office in Chicago, our second in the US after New York.

Our first 15 years were founded on establishing ourselves as a leading fee share; now we’ve got there, our sights are firmly set on being the number one global fee share firm for entrepreneurs. ■

Sarah Goulbourne Co-founder and Partner gunnercooke LLP

https://www.linkedin.com/in/sarahgoulbourne/ https://www.linkedin.com/company/ gunnercooke-llp/

Interviewed by Charity Mafuba Commissioning Editor and Director, Solicitor (England and Wales) New York Attorney

My Journey to Senior Partner in a Legal Practice

When I graduated from Queen’s University, Belfast with a law degree in 1985, it marked a turning point—not just personally, but for women in the profession. That year saw more women graduating in law than ever before. Still, the legal field remained maledominated, especially at the senior levels. In fact, in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, there were very few female role models, and misogyny was, unfortunately, far from rare. My own path into the profession was shaped by family and opportunity. I began my career at Napier Solicitors, a firm established by my grandfather in 1930. At the time, my father, Sir Oliver Napier, was senior partner. With other family members holding high legal positions—an aunt who owned her own practice and an uncle who was a Master in the High Court—law was very much in our DNA.

Despite the privilege of a supportive entry point, my professional environment was far from typical. I was the only assistant solicitor at the firm and the only woman. But, unlike many of my peers who were given limited opportunities in the type of work they were allocated, I was fortunate to work in a practice that specialized in insolvency and litigation—areas where few women were practicing. This early divergence proved pivotal. I was also fortunate that, early in my career, my knowledge of insolvency law resulted in receiving instructions in a number of high-profile criminal cases and I handled complex fraud Crown Court cases—unusual for women at the time—which gave me a solid grounding in financial legal matters. When the Insolvency (Northern Ireland) Order came into effect in 1989, establishing a framework for licensing Insolvency Practitioners, I already had a significant head start. I received my license soon after the legislation was enacted in 1993, setting me apart as a specialist in a field with very few women.

My progression to partnership was, in many ways natural, but also deeply personal. It was a family practice, and I had worked there during school holidays from the age of 14. I knew the administrative staff and court officials well. In 1997, I became an equity partner and the transition in seniority felt more like a shift in responsibility than a change in power dynamics. I had longstanding relationships with my colleagues, and having grown up in the practice, I was deeply committed to maintaining its values. But while the setting was familiar, the cases I was now leading were of higher stakes and greater visibility. The weight of expectation increased— but so did the opportunity to shape the firm's future.

During my tenure as President of the Law Society we conducted a Diversity and Equality survey which highlighted, amongst other things, the fact that women are 4 times more likely to be working part time and earning 25% less than men. I currently Chair the Women’s Steering Group and, on International Women’s day launched The Women’s Network. The network supports women through mentorship, leadership development, and advocacy, and works to increase female representation on Council, helping to ensure women’s voices are both heard and empowered. We are also developing a Returner’s programme to create a structure for women to re-enter private practice through skill development, confidence building and reintegrating into a firm.

To see real change, law firms must go further. They must embed flexible working as the norm, not an exception. They must provide structured mentoring, particularly in male-dominated areas like litigation and commercial law. And they must actively sponsor and promote women with potential—not only those who ask, but those who may not yet feel entitled to. Becoming a partner wasn’t simply about following a wellworn path, even in a family practice. It meant carving out space in an often unwelcoming and male dominated environment—and then holding that space open for others. The legal profession has made progress, but the work of making space for women at the top is far from over, and each one of us has a responsibility to help others in their journey to partnership and senior positions. ■

“Today, I lead an all-female insolvency department filled with exceptional professionals. Still, I’m acutely aware that my journey—rooted in family support and fortunate circumstances—is not the norm. Too many talented women leave the profession before reaching leadership.”

A crucial part of my success has been the support I received along the way. My father not only championed my partnership but actively supported me in the cases I took on. Beyond family, I was lucky to have a network of talented, driven female friends— solicitors working in banks and private practice—who encouraged and uplifted each other. That sense of camaraderie was invaluable in a profession where women often felt isolated at senior levels.

Today, I lead an all-female insolvency department filled with exceptional professionals. Still, I’m acutely aware that my journey—rooted in family support and fortunate circumstances— is not the norm. Too many talented women leave the profession before reaching leadership. A 2022 survey by the Law Society of Northern Ireland revealed that, while more women than ever are entering the profession, retention drops dramatically after age 30. Many cite struggles to balance family life with the demanding hours of private practice, prompting moves to public sector roles or part-time work.

This exodus has a knock-on effect: fewer women are seeking or being considered for partnerships. I had been acutely aware of these challenges through my mentoring work with female solicitors and was elected to the Council of the Law Society of Northern Ireland in 2017 in the hope that I could highlight these issues and put measures in place to address the imbalance.

Brigid Napier Partner and Director Napier Solicitors

https://www.linkedin.com/in/brigid-napier-55616336/

My journey to Partnership

Aysha Chouhdary, Family Law Partner at Geldards LLP, talks to Legal Women about her journey to Partnership and what more needs to be done to Diversify Partnership

Iam a Family Law Partner at Geldards LLP, and I head up our Faith and Cultural Family Law offering.

I was born into a working-class family, being the first person in my family to attend University. I am a British-Pakistani Muslim and can speak five languages (Urdu, Punjabi, Mirpuri/Pothwari, Hindi and English).

I attended state primary and secondary schools, but; given my academic achievements, then secured a place at a prestigious Grammar School Sixth Form which paved the way for me to attend a Russell Group University to study Law.

Given that I hailed from a humble background, I worked in retail throughout my education to help fund a lot of my expenses. I did not have much time outside of studying and working to gain experience in law firms, but I now feel that my career accelerated due to the skills that I picked up whilst working in retail – client care, business acumen and a mindset to innovate and lead with confidence.

I completed my LLB and LPC before starting work as a Paralegal at a top tier high street practice, as I was constantly told that securing a training contract was like gold dust, especially for someone from my background. I worked incredibly hard over the coming years, successfully completed my training and continued to climb the ranks, whilst juggling family life and career.

As I began to gain confidence and the technical expertise to deal with complex family law work, I realised that standing out, and being different, could be turned into my biggest strength.

I decided, with 3 years post qualification experience, to set up my niche practice (essentially a business within a business), focused on Faith (initially with the focus being Shariah/Islamic Law) and Cultural Family Law. I was fortunate enough to develop a service that would help meet the need of our diverse society and have received national recognition and accolades for this over the years.

During my junior years, I was often mistaken for a translator or, at best, as a social worker when I attended Court. I now, proudly, represent clients across different jurisdictions and have a network of experts that I work with, globally. I strive to get the best outcome for my clients, and I am passionate about providing a holistic service to meet their individual needs.

I was honoured to be promoted to Partnership at Geldards, a Top 100 Firm, with 8 years post qualification experience (PQE). If I could say something to my younger self; I would say “Persevere, look after your physical and mental health, and then take a big hammer to shatter that cement ceiling.”

My journey to Partnership has been short but intense. Since qualification, I have worked at various reputable firms and been promoted three times. As is the case with any area of law, climbing the ranks often meant long hours, working hard to do a good

job for your clients and the business, and then doing focused business development to build my profile and practice. Being a South Asian Muslim woman, with a family, meant that I faced additional challenges, often cultural constraints, along the way. I am aware that many others from a similar background who are now Senior Lawyers, have faced a similar journey.

I had been working as a Senior Family Lawyer, with my own niche practice, for a few years, so the transition to Partner was fairly seamless in terms of complexity of cases and day to day work, however, there are more managerial demands on my time now which require more balancing between the various roles, alongside my family commitments. With experience, I have learnt that, every day as a family lawyer, with a family of my own, will be a balancing act, and there will be days were certain things will take priority over others, and that is absolutely fine.

Where the trailblazers at?

Throughout my life, as a female coming from a minority ethnic background, I have felt pressure to keep the plates spinning, often being unable to voice struggles, and mostly expected to just get on with it. In the rooms that I have walked into, and still sit in, there are not many (or, sometimes, any) people who look like me. I want to change this as diversity in the legal profession not just ensures equal representation but also enriches the practice of law itself. It is, therefore, vital to provide support and guidance to students and junior lawyers with their journey into the legal profession, especially for ethnically diverse women who often face additional struggles, like me.

The tide is turning but a lot remains to be done

The landscape is such that women are still dealing with traditional roles and expectations, regardless of their background, but are now also juggling full time careers, with many being in demanding leadership roles.

My appointment to Partnership came about as a result of the support from my family and colleagues at Geldards LLP. I have been very fortunate in this respect. It was also a culmination of the hard work and events that occurred over the course of my 12 year legal career – the good and the bad. Perseverance is key.

More females are now being promoted to Partnership, despite often having additional family responsibilities. Open discussions are now taking place so that females can be supported properly internally by their employers and externally by their support networks (family, friends etc) in their career journeys. Covid has resulted in hybrid and flexible working arrangements which has facilitated work and home life balance for many female lawyers too - this provides a further opportunity for women to achieve their career goals.

“Throughout my life, as a female coming from a minority ethnic background, I have felt pressure to keep the plates spinning, often being unable to voice struggles, and mostly expected to just get on with it.”

I have, with this goal in mind, joined the Cardiff and District Law Society Council as a Council Member and Chair their Ethnicity Network, leading the Mentoring programme which supports students and junior lawyers, but also provides reverse mentoring opportunities for senior lawyers (as we are all always learning regardless of rank or experience). I am the first British Pakistani to have been appointed to the role in the Society’s 138-year history; I am proud to be able to represent my community at this level. The presidential team is led by a strong team of females which demonstrates the positive shift in our local Law Society.

I am also a part of other committees such as Resolution which are being Chaired by female Lawyers; another positive development. Resolution is a community of family justice professionals dedicated to promoting a non-confrontational approach to family issues. The community provides learning and networking opportunities at regional and national level organised by the committee members. Many Family Law professionals are female so this provides a support network for women which may assist some with their career progression.

As more females, especially those from a diverse background, join Partnership, this will inspire the next generation of lawyers, who will ultimately feel better represented, having role models from all walks of life.

For women trying to secure Partnership, my advice is to keep going and to build up a support network around you - always remember that you have the right to occupy the space you take up. To the women already in leadership roles, make sure you leave the door open for the next generation.

■

Aysha Chouhdary Geldards LLP

Family Law Partner and Head of Faith & Cultural Family Law

https://www.linkedin.com/in/aysha-chouhdary-b3741462/

WNorah Durrant

Norah Durrant, Founder of

Female

Counsel;

Owner and Founder of Norah Durrant Recruitment, talks to Legal Women about Senior Female Leadership in the Law

hen I started out as a lawyer, I didn’t know anyone who worked in the law. My parents didn’t go to university; I was the first generation to do so, and was drawn to law without really knowing what it involved. I became an Employment Lawyer and loved it. But after having children at a time when there was little to no support for working mothers, I realised something had to give. Like many women in the profession, I made the difficult decision to step back.

I didn’t know it then, but that decision would ultimately lead me to the work I do now, supporting female lawyers on their journeys to senior leadership. After 15 years with a respected recruitment firm in London, I set up Norah Durrant Recruitment (NDR) to focus exclusively on female and diverse legal talent. I built the business on what I value most: integrity, trust, and lasting relationships—not quick placements or commission chasing.

The Numbers Still Don’t Add Up

At entry level, women make up around 60% of the legal profession in the UK. But by the time we look at partnership level, that figure plummets to just 27%. And when you dig deeper into who holds equity in firms, it gets even worse.

Now this issue is not just about representation for its own sake. It’s about the message it sends. When female lawyers look up and don’t see anyone like them in leadership, it chips away at their confidence and ambition. Too often I speak to brilliant women who have decided that they’re not quite “ready” to become partner, even when they’ve outperformed male peers who’ve been promoted ahead of them.

What’s Holding Women Back?

In my conversations with candidates, a few themes come up time and time again. The first is the relentless nature of private practice; the billable hour targets, the “always on” culture, and the

assumption that serious leadership requires sacrificing everything else. It’s a model that simply doesn’t work for many women, particularly those with caring responsibilities.

Then there’s the issue of sponsorship… or the lack of it. Women are mentored, sure, but they’re rarely actively championed in the way male colleagues are. Add to that, a shortage of visible female role models at the top, and it’s easy to see why progress has stalled.

One of the most frustrating parts of my job is hearing stories from women who’ve returned from maternity leave only to find they’ve been sidelined. I spoke to a senior associate recently, an exceptional lawyer, who was passed over for partnership while two male colleagues were promoted. The reason given: “Not this year, maybe next.” That carrot-dangling, that delay tactic… it wears people down.

A Different Kind of Recruitment

The truth is many recruiters want a quick placement and a fee. But that’s not how I work. If I can see that what they’ve got right now is working, I’ll often tell women they’re better off staying put… for now. I coach them (with a small 'c') to build their practice, raise their profile, and grow their client base so that when the time is right, they move from a position of strength.

I often work with women for over a year before they make a move, and I’ve also helped many realise that they’re already in the right place; they just need to recognise their own worth.

And that’s where Female Counsel comes in, my networking community for women in law. It started small. A group for female partners meeting online and in person to network and share experiences, but it’s grown into something much bigger. Female Counsel now has over 700 women across a variety of disciplines, firms and seniorities, from private practice to in-house. It’s a space to connect, support, and elevate one another. No agenda. No pressure. Just honesty and solidarity.

What Women Want in a Firm

Through NDR and Female Counsel, I’ve had hundreds of conversations with women about what makes them stay… or go. And while money matters, it’s rarely the main reason. What they

care about is culture. They want to work somewhere that values them as a whole person, not just a billing machine. They want to see strong female leadership. Not tokenism, but real influence. They want to know their voices will be heard at the top table. They want flexibility that isn’t just a policy on paper but something that’s genuinely supported in practice. And most of all, they want to be somewhere they can thrive, not just survive.

What Firms Need to Do

So, what can firms do to support women into senior leadership?

Start by meeting them. Not their business plan. Not their billing figures. Them. Women often undersell their client following because they don’t want to overpromise. Men, in contrast, tend to double their numbers. So, look past the spreadsheet. Look at the trajectory. Look at the potential.

Support shared parental leave and encourage men to take it. Be flexible in meaningful ways. Give credit for the “non-promotable” tasks that keep the firm ticking over. Make remuneration transparent. And champion your existing female leaders, visibly and often.

This is about long-term investment. Retain your female talent. Nurture it. Promote it. And do it because you believe it makes your firm better, not because it’s a diversity box to tick.

Looking Ahead

I didn’t set out to become a business owner, let alone a voice for change. But here I am. I’m proud of what I do. I’m proud to be a recruiter who does things differently. I’m proud to run Female Counsel. And I’m proud to champion brilliant women who deserve their seats at the table.

We’re at a critical moment. With political shifts and DEI under scrutiny, it’s tempting for organisations to scale back. But if we want real change, now is not the time to retreat. It’s time to double down. ■

Norah Durrant

Founder of Female Counsel networking group Owner and Founder of Norah Durrant Recruitment

https://www.linkedin.com/in/norah-durrant/ https://www.linkedin.com/company/norah-durrant-recruitment/

The Solicitor Qualifying Examination (SQE): An Educators Perspective

By Nabeala Fiaz,

Since becoming a SQE supervisor, I’ve had the opportunity to support students taking the SQE exams. My role has grown over time. In addition to supervising SQE students, I also lead modules and prepare candidates for both the SQE1 and SQE2. I work very closely with students at various stages of their SQE journeys and one of the key takeaways for me as an educator is that it is essential to have the right mindset required to succeed. Academic ability is only one part of the equation, success in the SQE requires a shift in thinking, resilience and adaptability.

From LPC to SQE

The SQE represents a major shift from the Legal Practice Course (LPC) route that many legal professionals like myself once took. At its core, the SQE is designed to standardise qualification, provide broader access, and ensure that all aspiring solicitors meet the same threshold of competence, regardless of educational background.

The distinction between the LPC and SQE goes beyond format, it’s actually a shift in expectations. While the LPC prepared students to be day one trainee solicitors, the SQE prepares them to step directly into the role of a qualified solicitor. That’s a massive leap in terms of both knowledge and professional maturity. It also changes how we, as educators’ approach teaching, guidance, and support.

SQE1 focuses on Functional Legal Knowledge (FLK), which is assessed through multiple choice, best answer questions. This alone poses a new challenge for many students, who may be

used to traditional essay style or problem question formats. SQE2 is Skills Based and more practical in nature, but not without its complexities. One major misconception is that SQE2 only tests skills, when in fact it also requires substantial legal knowledge. Students must be able to recall and apply relevant principles quickly and accurately under exam pressure, which can be a real challenge.

Bridging the Academic vs Practical Divide

One of the greatest adjustments I see students struggle with is moving from theoretical learning to practical application. Many come from strong academic backgrounds where success was tied to understanding legal frameworks and writing analytical essays. The SQE1, demands a very different mindset. One that requires prioritisation under time constraints, accuracy, and contextual thinking. I usually encourage students to add context every time they learn a new legal principle. It is very relevant to think about how and when it might apply legal principles in real life. I often suggest linking new knowledge to everyday situations like crossing the road, shopping, or signing a contract, and ask "If something went wrong here, what would the legal position be?" These real-world scenarios help to think more like a solicitor and less like a student.

I often hear from students that they can usually narrow questions down to two answers but get stuck choosing the correct one. It’s at this point that overthinking kicks in. Sometimes, a single word or sentence in the question alters its meaning entirely. That’s why I constantly reinforce the importance of context. I remind students that the SQE is not just a test of knowledge it’s a test of decision making in a legal environment.

For SQE2, practical assessments like legal research for instance, can often feel deceptively straightforward. Everything you need is “right there” but identifying relevant information and discarding the irrelevant is an incredibly important skill. It’s not uncommon for students to feel overwhelmed because once you start over analysing, everything begins to seem important. Teaching students how to filter effectively is crucial.

Support for Diverse Student Needs

I work closely with students to understand their strengths, struggles, and learning styles. Many of my students are juggling SQE preparation with work or family responsibilities. For them, time management becomes as important as the legal content itself.

I always advise students to think practically about their routine and available time. For those working full time, I suggest using small windows of opportunity before or after work, on lunch breaks, or during commutes for micro revision. This could mean reviewing 10 flashcards, tackling a handful of Multiple Choice Questions (MCQ’s), or reading a short legal summary. Over time, these small efforts add up significantly. More consolidated revision can then take place during evenings or weekends, but the key is frequent exposure to the material. The more exposure the more likely they are to recall it.

of practice questions and quick summaries. It’s also important to set realistic expectations and give yourself permission to learn at your own pace.

As a supervisor, I spend a lot of time helping returning students rediscover their study rhythm, improve their organisation, and rebuild their academic confidence. These students often bring rich life experience and maturity, which can be a real strength when approaching the SQE.

Diversity and the SQE - A Work in Progress

“My advice is always to start with small, achievable goals. Build confidence by revising one topic at a time, using a mix of practice questions and quick summaries.”

As someone from a diverse background, I understand some of the unique challenges students face in accessing and navigating the SQE. The SRA has begun publishing statistics on this, and I think over time we’ll see a clearer picture of how different groups are scoring.

The SQE is, in many ways, a more accessible route to qualification. There are fewer formal barriers to entry, and the emphasis on qualifying work experience offers more flexibility than the traditional training contract route.

Persistence Pays Off

The SQE is not a shortcut, it is rigorous and demanding! It requires a great deal of motivation and sustained engagement. But it’s also a route filled with possibility. With the right approach, the right resources, and the right support, students can and do succeed.

Students need to be honest with themselves about how much time and energy they can realistically commit. If they pick a course with a rigid timetable or overly heavy demands without factoring in their other responsibilities, they can quickly fall behind. It’s not about picking the most popular course it’s about picking the right one for your life and learning style.

I also encourage students to stay engaged with Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) updates and guidance throughout their preparation. The SQE is still evolving, and being aware of any regulatory or assessment changes is really very important. The SRA regularly releases updates on exam formats, policies, and qualifying work experience requirements.

Re-entering Study After a Break

Another trend I’ve noticed is that many SQE students are returning to study after taking a break, perhaps for work, parenting, or other life responsibilities. Re-engaging with legal study after time away can be daunting. My advice is always to start with small, achievable goals. Build confidence by revising one topic at a time, using a mix

My message to all aspiring solicitors is this: be strategic, be consistent, and believe in your ability to grow. This is not just about passing exams it’s about preparing to be a capable, reflective, and an effective solicitor from day one. That’s a goal worth every effort. ■

Nabeala Fiaz

Solicitor/ SQE Supervisor/ Module Leader/ Subject Matter Expert Dispute Resolution

The College of Legal Practice

https://www.linkedin.com/in/nabeala-fiaz-35509397/ https://www.linkedin.com/school/the-college-of-legal-practice/

Dr. Morag Duffin

Charity talks to Dr Morag Duffin, Director of Student Success, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion at The University of Law, about the SQE Review -from an Educator’s viewpoint.

In December 2024, The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) commissioned the IFF, a social and market research agency, to conduct an independent review on the premise of evaluating whether the Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE) is achieving its objectives.

Morag: It is hard to define the contributing factors from the published data. What is interesting is that the pass rate was lower than previous sittings for candidates irrespective of splits, for instance there were lower pass rates for all degree classes and for all demographic groups.

Charity: As an Educator, what is your general view of the SQE as a route to qualification?

Morag: I am supportive of the intention of the SQE as a route to ensure high standards to the admission of solicitors, but I am unsure as to whether the method of assessing these standards is flexible enough to identify less traditionally visible potential or ability.

I also really appreciate the intention of the SQE in creating new and diverse pathways to qualification by, as the SRA describes it, removing ‘artificial and unjustifiable barriers’. I do, however, think that it is important to review how the SQE is working in practice to ensure that it is not inadvertently creating new barriers to diversifying the profession. The published data relating to differential outcomes suggests that it may have done.

Charity: How does the SQE fare in contrast with completing the LPC, GDL or traditional LLB law degree?

Morag: The SQE route does provide new pathways to qualification by the decoupling of the assessments and the training provision. This benefits some candidates, but for others it takes away that ease or certainty of wraparound provision that the LPC offers. Many of our students, particularly disabled students, are still electing to take the LPC route over the SQE as it is a known entity and there is less uncertainty over (and less administration required for) reasonable adjustments.

Charity: There seem to be concerns about the pass rate (in particular for the SQE1 assessments).

For example, in October 2024, the pass rate hit an all-time low of 44%. What do you think are the contributing factors? and

Charity: Additionally, there is a persistent attainment gap issue (differential outcomes by ethnicity-specifically impacting black candidates.

To date the causes have yet to be identified and no solutions established.

What do you think could be causing this “persistent issue”? and

Morag: Many reasons have been proposed that could be contributing to this ‘persistent issue’. The SRA has commissioned several pieces of research into the differences in outcomes by ethnicity for progressional legal assessments and has identified a whole range of potential causes, for instance:

• socio-economic background

• school and university outcomes

• fitting in and support

• access to legal work experience

• discrimination and bias

• institutional/professional culture

What the SRA hasn’t yet published research on, is whether there is a role that the assessment itself or the wider qualification route plays in these differential outcomes. This is what the SRA and education providers need to understand. The SRA is currently working on analysing the SQE data. Education providers also hope to do the same using detailed performance data by demographics from the SRA. Our current analysis is dependent on our students providing us with the information and many are understandably reticent to do so.

Our University of Law (ULaw )students aren’t surprised that there is a gap in outcomes, they are understandably very concerned that it exists, but they are not sure why it does. They study incredibly hard

and understandably can’t understand why there are differences in outcomes depending on a person’s ethnicity. It is important for us to listen to our students, and understand their experience, but it is equally important to remember that it is not for our students to work out why there are differential outcomes or how to address them, that is the job of education providers and the SRA.

Charity: What solutions would you as an Educator suggest to remedy this?

Morag: As an Educator who works in the equalities space, for me the solution is for education providers to be able to understand their own institutional outcomes in detail, so that the impact of any work undertaken to reduce the gaps can be effectively evaluated and practice changed accordingly.

At ULaw our work to address differential outcomes is threefold.

1. We are listening to our students to understand where we need to change as a provider. Our paid student Diversity and Inclusion Advocates provide us with their lived experience of the SQE so that we can deliver more appropriate support and make relevant institutional change. We take a non-deficit approach, it is not the students who are lacking something, but the fact that we as an institution are placing barriers preventing our students from succeeding. These are the barriers we must remove.

2. We are working with the SRA as well as wider stakeholders in the legal sector to advocate for a greater understanding of the assessment process and differential outcomes.

Charity: The negative aspects of the SQE?

Morag: By splitting assessment from education, the SQE also splits off support. Candidates who take the assessment without having taken a training course have none of the support (both academic and pastoral) that the traditional LPC route provides. Also, the training providers have less understanding of the performance of their students to be able to tailor their provision and wider support to their students. It also makes it more challenging for training providers to understand what they need to do in terms of institutional change to address differential outcomes.

Charity: As an Educator, what advice and guidance would you give to those wishing to qualify through the SQE route?

Morag: I would advise them to carefully research the different options available in terms of preparation for the assessments, chose what is most appropriate for their needs and to reach out for support.

“From my perspective, the SQE may have the potential for the SRA to achieve its goal of advancing social mobility in the legal profession.”

3. We are working to address our awarding gaps at an undergraduate level through our Access and Participation Plan. One of the intervention strategies in our plan aims to mitigate the risk that as a legal education provider, we replicate the inequalities of the legal profession. Within this intervention strategy we are committed to a range of activities from academic writing support to curriculum development work, increasing staff diversity and improving staff training.

Charity: What do you perceive to be the positive aspects of the SQE? and

Morag: The SQE provides different pathways to qualification, providing more choice for candidates in how they qualify as a solicitor. Candidates can choose whether they want to complete a training course, what length course they would like to do, or if they would like to self-study.

Another key advantage for candidates is the flexibility that Qualifying Work Experience (QWE) provides, removing the need for a formal training contract.

Finally, the skills assessment aspect of the SQE may be preferable for candidates who feel they will perform better in that form of assessment or feel that the skills focus will prepare them better to be able to succeed as a solicitor.

Charity: What aspects of the SQE do you think could be improved to enable the SRA to achieve its goal of advancing social mobility in the legal profession? and

Morag: From my perspective, the SQE may have the potential for the SRA to achieve its goal of advancing social mobility in the legal profession. I think what is not yet clear is which aspects should be improved, because we do not yet have the full understanding of which aspects are working, and which aspects aren’t working. This is why I believe the SRA needs to undertake a full review of the appropriateness and effectives of the SQE assessments, as well as the appropriateness and effectives of the entire qualification route.

Charity: What feasible steps does the SRA need to take to ensure they achieve this?

Morag: The first step I think the SRA needs to take is to not be afraid to review the effectiveness of the SQE assessment regime and not be afraid to make changes if it is not advancing social mobility in the legal profession. To do this, the SRA needs to continue to work with education providers and to provide them with detailed institutional data so they can understand their institutional gaps and measure if the work they are doing is making a difference. ■

Dr Morag Duffin Director of Student Success, Equality, Diversity and Inclusion at The University of Law

https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-morag-duffin-aa137165/

Interviewed by

Charity Mafuba Commissioning Editor and Director, Solicitor (England and Wales), New York Attorney

Latoyah Thompson

Charity talks to Latoyah Thompson, Trainee Solicitor at Higgs LLP, about the SQE Review -from a Candidates perspective.

In December 2024, The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) commissioned the IFF, a social and market research agency, to conduct an independent review on the premise of evaluating whether the Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE) is achieving its objectives.

Charity: As a candidate who actually completed the SQE courses and assessments, what is your general view of the SQE as a route to qualification?

Latoyah: My general view of the SQE is that it presents a practical avenue for individuals without a law degree, who have not completed the Graduate Diploma in Law (GDL) or the Legal Practice Course (LPC), to qualify as a Solicitor in England and Wales. That was definitely true for me. Since 2018, I began keeping up with the news regarding the SQE and determined at that time that pursuing the SQE would be my path to becoming a solicitor.

Overall, I believe it creates opportunities, I am pleased the SQE has been implemented for this reason - although there are still obstacles that I will address later. I wouldn't have been able to qualify within the same timeframe without the SQE and the Graduate Solicitor Apprenticeship.

Charity: There seem to be concerns about the pass rate (in particular for the SQE1 assessments).

For example, in October 2024, the pass rate hit an all time low of 44%.

What do you think are the contributing factors?

Latoyah: I believe the contributing factors for the low pass rates for SQE1 are that candidates are not fully aware of what SQE1 entails. In my view, the SQE1 exam differs from any other exam that an individual has previously undertaken.

I believe that, as a result, numerous candidates may choose to "give it a shot" since it's permitted—there's no necessity to complete a prep course prior to taking the SQE. If candidates truly grasped the SQE1, its structure, and the subtlety of the questions, they would be more reluctant to simply dive in. It's somewhat similar to attempting a driving test without any driving lessons.

Charity: What do you perceive to be the positive aspects of the SQE? and

Latoyah: I perceive the positive aspects of the SQE is that everyone is assessed to the same standard.

Charity: The negative aspects of the SQE?

“I have encountered numerous exceptionally bright people who opted against taking the SQE because they just can't afford it –it's a gamble; you pay for the exam once and place immense pressure on yourself to succeed because, where would the funds come from if a resit is needed?”

Latoyah: I perceive the negative aspects of the SQE to include the fact that qualification mainly relies on exam results, even though these results may not accurately indicate how an individual performs daily in their job. Some candidates have excelled as paralegals for many years and are exceptional at their roles, yet if they were to fail the SQE after three attempts, they wouldn’t qualify through the SQE route and would have to wait six years to retake it, which is mentally harmful.

Charity: As a former candidate, what advice and guidance would you give to those wishing to qualify through the SQE route?

Latoyah: My advice and guidance to anyone wishing to qualify through the SQE route would be to ensure it is truly they want to pursue. They need to make sure they’re in the right frame of mind, and that they have the time and space to commit to it. The SQE is very much about mind-set and discipline. Your head has got to be in the game because it is mentally, and psychologically demanding.

Charity: What aspects of the SQE do you think could be improved to enable the SRA to achieve its goal of advancing social mobility in the legal profession? And

Latoyah: I'm not really sure if anything about the SQE itself can

be improved to enable the SRA to achieve its goal of advancing social mobility in the legal profession. The exam itself is what it is; I believe the obstacles are the fees for taking the exams and the expense of prep courses (although prep courses are unrelated to the SRA).

I was lucky to have taken the SQE through a Graduate Solicitor Apprenticeship, relieving me of the financial strain. I have encountered numerous exceptionally bright people who opted against taking the SQE because they just can't afford it – it's a gamble; you pay for the exam once and place immense pressure on yourself to succeed because, where would the funds come from if a resit is needed?

Charity: What feasible steps does the SRA need to take to ensure they achieve this?

Latoyah: I believe the SRA needs to reassess the fees and determine if the SQE is financially accessible for everyone. ■

Latoyah Thompson Trainee Solicitor Higgs LLP

https://www.linkedin.com/in/latoyah-thompson-121354229/

Interviewed by Charity

Mafuba

Commissioning Editor and Director, Solicitor (England and Wales), New York Attorney

IJacqui Gower

Charity talks to Jacqui Gower, Chief Operating Officer at JCP Solicitors, about the SQE Review -from an Employer’s viewpoint.

n December 2024, The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) commissioned the IFF, a social and market research agency, to conduct an independent review on the premise of evaluating whether the Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE) is achieving its objectives.

Charity: As an Employer (in this case, a Law Firm), what is your general view of the SQE as a route to qualification?

Jacqui: At JCP Solicitors, we take pride in supporting multiple routes to qualification including apprenticeships and the SQE. Although the SQE has contributed to new pathways to qualification and benefited employers by adding flexibility to the recruitment process, it has not quite had the socioeconomic benefit we had hoped. The SQE courses run at a similar cost to the LPC, meaning it still puts some barriers in place. That being said, it has contributed to the development of the Legal Apprenticeship, which is a huge step forward.

Charity: How does the SQE route fare in contrast with the traditional training contract route?

Jacqui: Managing recruitment through the traditional route was a simple process, but was quite narrow: it is very much “the way the legal world has always done it”, and at JCP Solicitors, we try and move away from tradition for tradition’s sake. In recent years, we have taken a much more flexible approach to managing talent which has mitigated the volatile labour market we have operated in.

We continue to have Solicitors qualifying through the traditional route of training in seats (which includes LPC and SQE candidates) but we also have legal assistants studying SQE and qualifying into their existing teams. Alongside this, we have legal apprentices who are currently on a CILEX pathway and will then move through to SQE whilst gaining a breadth of experience. This creates many opportunities for future progression within JCP.

Charity: What adjustments have you had to make in order to implement the SQE?

Jacqui: We are an agile business, and we are large enough to be leaders in our region but modest enough to manage talent flexibly. We have adapted – and continue to adapt - the way we recruit to suit how candidates wish to qualify, with many candidates at different stages of their studies or training. It is not easy to coordinate, but a good HR team and a good spreadsheet can manage it in a firm of our size.

Charity: What challenges do law firms face as they transition to recruit via the SQE?

Jacqui: There are many challenges, but a main one for us is managing when candidates qualify for talent planning purposes. With the SQE framework, we may encounter trainees qualifying mid-seat, others failing the SQE and

unable to progress at the expected time, and new trainees already recruited. Additionally, legal assistants qualifying without available NQ positions within their teams could lead to potential talent loss.

To navigate these complexities, we believe the key is to diversify risk. By running multiple qualification routes simultaneously, such as traditional seat rotations, graduate legal assistants within set teams, and legal apprentices, we create a flexible system that allows us to address talent planning challenges effectively. For instance, should a trainee fail the SQE, we can extend training contracts without disrupting a rigid rotation structure, ensuring smoother transitions and better workforce stability.

Charity: Do you employ Solicitors who qualified through SQE route and have some legal experience?

Jacqui: We haven’t yet recruited externally for a Solicitor who trained elsewhere via the SQE route, as we have created so many internal talent pools that we haven’t needed to. However, we know this will happen eventually. We are changing the way we recruit to enhance the process, ensuring we are recruiting the best talent. The traditional interview will no longer be adequate, and so we intend to move to a more structured recruitment process based on competency and values.

Charity: What advice would you give to applicants seeking a qualified role with a law firm via the SQE route?

Jacqui: I would recommend ensuring that your QWE provides exposure to as many of the Solicitors standards as possible. Keep an open mind about gaining as much experience as possible, even beyond the two-year QWE period. This is difficult if you feel that you are ready for a qualified role but keep in mind that many who qualified through the LPC route acquired significantly more experience as paralegals than what was covered in their two-year training contract.

Throughout your QWE, maintain a detailed record of tasks and responsibilities that align with the standards as this will be invaluable when preparing for applications, interviews, and assessments. Additionally, be ready to discuss how the SQE route and your QWE have equipped you with the practical legal skills you need, using real-life examples to demonstrate your competencies effectively.

Charity: There seem to be concerns about the pass rate (in particular for the SQE1 assessments).

For example, in October 2024, the pass rate hit an all-time low of 44%. What do you think are the contributing factors? and

Jacqui: We work closely with education providers and believe that the SQE was intended to be sat after gaining experience. The exams seem suited to those who have practical experience, and so we believe that apprentices and those who have been legal assistants are able to achieve higher grades. Whereas, those sitting prep courses straight from university are probably going to find the exams more difficult. The courses are not mandatory like an LPC course is, and so there also seems to be a lack of standardisation between the courses offered by different providers.

Charity: What solutions would you as an Employer suggest to remedy this?

Jacqui: We require those who are joining us through our standard recruitment to have already completed the SQE1 and then to rotate through three 8-month seats with us to gain experience or to specialise in one area with secondments where necessary. These placements are required before SQE2 irrespective of any previous paralegal experience, although we may choose to reduce the length of training in a similar way to ‘time to count’. We understand this could result in those with previous QWE leaving to take up an NQ position elsewhere before the end of their training seats, but we accept this risk and know that the training we provide will result in confident and competent lawyers. This risk is also mitigated by ongoing coaching and career planning with all our trainees.

Charity: As an Employer, what is your policy on revoking training contracts for trainees who fail the SQE exams? and

Jacqui: We hope this won’t happen as we will only be taking candidates who have already passed SQE1, and they will receive comprehensive training before sitting SQE2. However, we are realistic. If a candidate fails the SQE exam, they can be provided with an extension of the training programme. We will mitigate the risk of future talent planning by having a mix of trainees who already had paralegal positions within teams, and new candidates who are in seat circulation. Trainees at JCP are valuable team members who carry out meaningful legal work, and so there is a benefit to us in extending a trainee programme. Should a candidate not pass entirely, then we are able to explore alternative nonqualified positions for candidates who we wish to retain.

from university education, we have several methods of recruitment - and, arguably more importantly, we can attract more diverse candidates who bring different experiences and skillsets. This gives our business a major advantage.

Charity: The negative aspects of the SQE?

Jacqui: We are not sure the SQE has achieved its aims. The SQE prep course continues to be extremely expensive and leaves candidates with large student debt when taken as a Masters qualification. Welsh Government are not yet willing to fund the Solicitor apprenticeship pathway past Level 5, meaning that part student funding as well as employer contribution is still needed through this route. We had hoped that the profession would be opened up to a much wider group.

As a team member can opt to take SQE1 and SQE2 while gaining QWE, there is also the risk that team members are qualifying as Associate Solicitors without an official position being available. This can make planning strategies increasingly difficult for the business, as we may not always know who is at which stage of the SQE. However, this is mitigated as we encourage ongoing career progression conversations with team leaders.

“We provide extensive in-team training to those studying the SQE as well as access to a learning academy, which is made up of internal students who may be studying CILEX, SQE or other courses.”

Charity: What support do you provide your trainees qualifying through the SQE route to ensure that they maximise their chances of success?

Jacqui: We provide extensive in-team training to those studying the SQE as well as access to a learning academy, which is made up of internal students who may be studying CILEX, SQE or other courses. Sessions will be provided by Directors and Solicitors on relevant topics to support their studies. We also offer paid study leave and flexible working hours to accommodate their studies.

Charity: In your opinion, could firms be doing more to support individuals during the SQE?

Jacqui: The introduction of the SQE and its evolving requirements have placed firms in a challenging position, with little guidance and shifting expectations. However, there are proactive steps firms can take to support candidates throughout the SQE process. Ensuring that QWE closely resembles a traditional training contract is key; this could involve seconding candidates to different teams, providing opportunities to interview clients, attend court, and conduct research for example.

Firms might also consider establishing a learning academy for SQE candidates. This could be as simple as hosting lunchtime sessions to facilitate discussion and knowledge-sharing or organising solicitor-led workshops on topics that candidates want to know more about.

Not only will these initiatives provide valuable support to employees, but they will also help mitigate talent planning risks, ultimately benefiting both the firm and its future solicitors.

Charity: What do you perceive to be the positive aspects of the SQE? and

Jacqui: The SQE has enabled us to open up several different pathways to qualification, which diversifies the risk of a decline in candidates in either route. With legal assistants training to qualify later in their careers, legal apprentices joining us from college or through career switching, and students joining us

Charity: What aspects of the SQE do you think could be improved to enable the SRA to achieve its goal of advancing social mobility in the legal profession? and

Jacqui: Potentially, SQE2 should not be taken until a specified amount of legal experience has been undertaken. This would mean that the competitive training contract positions would switch to an equally competitive paralegal position, however it would mitigate some of the challenges that were not envisaged when the SQE was launched.

Charity: What feasible steps does the SRA need to take to ensure they achieve this?

Jacqui: The SRA should work with education providers and employers to look at what is not going as well as it could be, and find solutions for how to improve that. For example, there is no involvement from employers regarding competency during QWE and this could be addressed so that a role similar to the current ‘training principal’ would be responsible for signing off Solicitor skills achieved during QWE. This would assist in future recruitment of SQE qualified solicitors.■

NB*-Please note that this is an updated version of a previously published interview.

Jacqui Gower Chief Operating Officer

at JCP Solicitors

https://www.linkedin.com/in/jacqui-gower-0a571658/

Interviewed by

Charity Mafuba Commissioning Editor and Director, Solicitor (England and Wales), New York Attorney

Olivia-Faith Dobbie talks to Legal Women about the impact of the Rollback of US DEI Policies in the UK.

The day after taking office, President Trump issued Executive Order 14173 titled “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity”, aimed at curbing the so-called “illegal discrimination” that Trump believes DEI initiatives cause. On 23 April, Trump doubled down and, on a federal level, abolished the concept of indirect discrimination. The publicity surrounding this DEI rollback has unnerved employers in Great Britain (GB), leaving some wondering whether they should reduce their DEI initiatives here.

In this article, we explain some key differences between US and GB equality law and why companies in GB that are operating lawfully should not follow the US example. It should be noted that companies that contract with US federal government will be expected to comply with Trump’s Executive Orders or they may lose their contracts, even if the company is based outside of the US. But for all other GB-based companies, we argue that the Executive Orders have no effect.

The GB vs US context

US equality legislation is fundamentally different from that which applies here in GB. The most striking difference is the way in which the US approached affirmative action until the latest Executive Order.

“In GB, the Equality Act 2010 prevents less favourable treatment of people based on specific protected characteristics (i.e. race, sex etc.).”

Affirmative action previously allowed employers in the US to take ‘protected characteristics’ (race, sex, age, sexual orientation etc.) into account in hiring and employment decisions, provided the measure was justified by a ‘manifest imbalance’ in ‘traditionally segregated categories’ and the policy had to be necessary to address that disparity and be time limited.

In GB, the Equality Act 2010 prevents less favourable treatment of people based on specific protected characteristics (i.e. race, sex etc.). The prohibition of less favourable treatment includes, of course, the prohibition of more favourable treatment meted out to one class of people, to the exclusion of others. Therefore, in GB, allowing race, sex etc. to be any part of the consideration for recruitment or promotion would be unlawful, unless the policy fell within the very narrow positive action exceptions below. As an example, if an employer gave priority to candidates of a specific ethnicity in hiring and promotion decisions (such as an automatic right to be interviewed) that would amount to discrimination against the candidates who do not share that race.

That said, the Equality Act 2010 has some very narrow exceptions that allow for a limited form of positive action in GB. The first, is the ‘tie-break’ provision where, if two candidates are genuinely equal in their merit, an employer can choose, for instance, the black person, if representation in the workforce is disproportionately low or if black people suffer a particular disadvantage. The scope is narrow. The candidates must be of equal merit – an employer cannot suppress the merit threshold to such a low point that all candidates appear equal. That was what happened in the case of Furlong v The Chief Constable of Cheshire Police, where the merit assessment was a pass or fail and the employer considered that all those who passed were equal. It then applied the tie-break clause to all who passed. An Employment Tribunal found that it was a fallacy to consider all who passed as being ‘equal’.

The second aspect to positive action in GB allows employers to take action to overcome or lessen disadvantage in respect of certain characteristics, to address disproportionately underrepresented groups of people or to address the different needs of people with that characteristic. It is not positive action in respect of selection, it aims to provide a permitted equality of opportunity based on protected characteristics rather than the forbidden equality of outcome. The action must be ‘a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim’ and the measure / policy cannot itself amount to discrimination of the group or groups that do not benefit. A real-life example of an employer getting it wrong arose in an April 2024 Employment Tribunal judgment. A police force appointed an ethnic minority Sergeant into a vacant Inspector role without giving anyone else the opportunity to apply for it. The Tribunal held that this amounted to discrimination against three white police officers interested in the role.

Another key difference is that in GB, indirect discrimination is unlawful. Indirect discrimination prohibits an apparently neutral rule that has a disproportionate adverse effect on a protected group. As an example, imagine an employer imposing a requirement to be fluent in English. This would be detrimental to a greater proportion of foreign nationals than British Nationals. However, under GB law, the employer has the opportunity to defend indirect discrimination

by evidencing that the requirement is justified. Taking the above example, if the role in question was a professor of English Literature, the language requirement would likely be justified. If the role was to be a forklift truck driver in a warehouse, it would be less likely to be justified. Under US Federal law, there is no prohibition on indirect discrimination (known as ‘disparate impact liability’). Employees can still file private law suits and state enforcement agencies might still investigate such policies at a state level, but they are no longer prohibited at a federal level.

Beware of increased legal risk

Given that UK and US equality laws are fundamentally different, peeling back DEI initiatives in GB merely because that is the mood music on the other side of the Atlantic is nonsensical. GB equality law has not changed and the effective deletion of US-style affirmative action under US law brings the current US approach more closely into line with where GB has always been on that aspect. The punitive sanctions Trump has introduced to deter US companies from pursuing DEI initiatives do not apply to GB businesses that do not contract with the US government.

Indeed, we consider that it could expose GB based companies to an increased legal risk if they roll back legitimate DEI initiatives for several reasons:

1. It might be easier for claimant to establish liability for indirect discrimination under GB law against an employer that has no DEI policies / initiatives.

2. The statutory defence under s.109 of the Equality Act 2010— which protects employers from liability for acts of discrimination by employees—is already difficult to establish. Without DEI policies, it is even less likely to succeed.

3. GB employers are under a duty to take proactive measures (reasonable steps) to prevent sexual harassment. From next year, these duties will likely extend to most protected characteristics if the Employment Rights Bill is enacted as drafted. Employers without appropriate DEI policies may struggle to demonstrate compliance.

4. EHRC Codes of Practice recommend DEI training. Employment Tribunals must consider these Codes when deciding relevant cases. As such, the presence or absence of DEI training and policies can affect outcomes in discrimination claims.

Employers should however ensure that their existing DEI initiatives are compliant with the Equality Act 2010. Some employers misunderstand their duties, and in striving to lift up one group, they inadvertently disadvantage others thereby discriminating against them, as the above examples demonstrate. There is no substitute for bespoke expert advice in respect of any such initiatives. ■

Olivia-Faith Dobbie

Barrister,

Cloisters Chambers, Management Committee Member Employment Lawyers’ Association and Diversity Lead

https://www.linkedin.com/in/olivia-faith-dobbie-a6a9a860/

Ialways knew I would become a lawyer, having many early memories in my father’s law office and hanging around the court complexes in Banjul, Gambia. I didn't fully understand the law at the time—but I sensed the power it held. The office was always filled with case files, law books, and all the paraphernalia of a law chamber. I remember the gratitude my father’s clients expressed, and that stayed with me. I saw firsthand that being a lawyer could be a force for good—for individuals and for communities.

As I grew older, my view of the law evolved. It wasn’t just about helping individual clients but about strengthening legal systems in developing countries like The Gambia. I knew that the rule of law is an essential ingredient for development. For me, this was a good enough reason to study law, and I was fortunate to do so in the United Kingdom (UK).

A Personal Journey into Law

Marque Janneh talks to Legal Women about her legal career and why she founded ROLLA (Rule of Law for Lawyers Association)

But my path to qualification was not straightforward. And that’s exactly the point of this blog: the legal profession has many valid routes. If you’re determined, willing to work hard, and open to opportunities, you will succeed—even if it means building your own table. This may sound like a cliché, but it is the plain truth.

Adjusting to a New System

Moving to and studying in the UK was a big adjustment. I didn’t pursue summer placements because I was still finding my footing. But I did secure an internship at a top Gambian firm, Amie Bensouda & Co, and after I graduated, I gave myself one summer to gain some UK legal experience. I was in no rush to practise law in The Gambia which at the time, was under almost two decades-long dictatorial regime, and my aspirations for a strengthened rule-of-lawbased system felt incompatible—and extremely risky.

My first breakthrough came through family. My aunt reached out to her cousin, who connected me to a Gambian lawyer working in a small high-street law firm. That

connection opened the door. I worked on immigration, housing, and family law—fast-paced, front-line legal work. It was here I learned what law school doesn’t always teach: client handling, planning for simple things like; document posting to meet deadlines, file management, and courtroom etiquette. It also exposed me to public law and judicial review—concepts that had previously lived only in textbooks.

It wasn’t a city firm. It wasn’t glamorous. But it involved real cases. And it was invaluable.

First Steps into Government Work

My next step was as a paralegal at the Government Legal Department (GLD), then known as the Treasury Solicitor’s Department. This was a different world—a large, highly structured organisation. I worked in the Employment Litigation and Advisory Group, supporting several lawyers simultaneously. The pace was relentless, but it taught me how to manage pressure, balance competing deadlines, and communicate effectively with senior legal professionals. Even now, I can point to cases I supported that made a real impact on people’s lives in the UK.

working life. The team had a positive culture, and the team leader was instrumental in making my training a success. I was trained well but trusted to work independently, and I loved it. I handled a good caseload and appeared regularly at the Rolls Building and County Courts—even travelled as far as Manchester for hearings.

Full Circle

“I always knew I would become a lawyer, having many early memories in my father’s law office and hanging around the court complexes in Banjul, Gambia.”

I eventually qualified as a solicitor through this role, and since then, I’ve worked as a prosecutor at the CPS and now as a government lawyer at GLD. Returning to the organisations I once aspired to join—now as a qualified lawyer—was a fullcircle moment. I also represent members of my profession at the Law Society. I’m a qualified lawyer in The Gambia and I am aiming to support the rule of law through an organisation I established called ROLLA (Rule of Law for Lawyers Association). I’m also a proud member of the Female Lawyers Association Gambia (FLAG). However I’ll reserve this story for another article!

I hope it is a reminder that progression isn’t a fixed path, and success looks different for everyone. Your journey is unique—and valid.

Final Reflections

Still, I realised early on that there wasn’t a clear progression route to qualification. I tried applying to the GLD and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) trainee schemes multiple times, getting as far as the final stages, but never securing a spot. To be honest, I didn’t apply for as many training contracts as others did. I just knew that my route would be different.

Building My Own Table

There were times I felt disillusioned working as a paralegal. However, a nudge came from an unexpected place—a legal officer at GLD called Stephen, someone from a completely different background. He suggested volunteering at the Free Representation Unit, which offered training. I started actively building my table. Soon, I had advocated at the Employment Tribunal and even negotiated a generous settlement for a client whose case initially seemed hopeless. I also took on part-time casework, assisting the lawyer who had first given me a chance and was now senior at his firm. Every experience added to the table I was building— steadily and meaningfully.

I kept a lookout for opportunities, and one came up that matched my growing skills: a senior paralegal role at HMRC Solicitor’s Office, which offered a clear training and qualification route. This period was one of the best of my

So, what do I want you to take from this?

• Take every opportunity or help seriously. Sometimes, your biggest break comes in an unexpected form, and sometimes only after a lot of consistent effort.

• And finally, if there’s no seat at the table for you, build your own. It might not be shiny at first—but keep polishing it. ■

Marque Janneh Lawyer, Founder and Law Society Council Member Founder-ROLLA

https://www.linkedin.com/in/marque-j-ab460a27/ https://rolla.gm/

Andrea Accuosto Suarez,

Founder and Owner of Accuosto & Partners International Law Firm, Barcelona, Spain talks to Legal Women about her journey in the Legal Profession, specifically owning a Law Firm.

My grandfather’s stories of crossing the Atlantic from Southern Italy to South America sparked in me a sense of destiny—and a deep curiosity. That spirit eventually carried me from Uruguay’s courtrooms to founding my own firm in Barcelona.

I am a 55-year-old Uruguayan woman with Italian roots who studied law at UDELAR (Universidad De La República Oriental del Uruguay), the public university in Montevideo. After graduating, I travelled extensively across Europe, and in September 2000, I decided to settle in Barcelona.

Moving to Europe

I initially requested one-year unpaid leave from my role as a Court Secretary in Uruguay to pursue a Master’s in Penal Law. But soon, I chose to stay. I resigned from my secure public job to begin doctoral studies in Criminal Law and to validate my law degree from Uruguay, as a Spanish lawyer —a rigorous nine-month process and a final one full day of examinations on different legal subjects. For this I affectionately call the Spanish Law Degree as my “first baby.”

First Steps in a Law Firm

My first job in a Spanish law firm was an intense learning curve. Though I held a law degree, navigating the legal system in a new country was a different challenge. Success required more than legal knowledge— it demanded familiarity with unwritten social codes, firm hierarchies, and market dynamics. These are not things you learn in books but through experience—or through family connections, which I didn’t have.

Falling Down

The Professional Organizations Net Value

I’ve always viewed professional bodies like Bar Associations as essential for solo practitioners. They provide space to share knowledge, stay informed, and find support. Early in my freelance career, I got involved with the Barcelona Bar.

For over a decade, I’ve been part of its Women’s Division, where I’ve learned deeply about gender inequality—bias, violence, and the penalization of motherhood in the legal profession. These discussions were eye-opening and strengthened my resolve to advocate for change.

Gender Equality in the Legal Profession

In 2022, I co-led a collaborative project with the ICAB (Barcelona Bar Association) and the Law Society of England and Wales, coordinated by my dear friend Lizzette Robleto de Howarth. Together, we produced a report: “Analysis and Proposals of Catalonian Women Lawyers to Promote Gender Equality in the Legal Sector.”

“Like many of my peers, I became an entrepreneur out of necessity—to balance my professional and maternal roles. Today, I’m proud to lead a growing team and define my firm’s values.”

We surveyed 297 women and conducted roundtable discussions under Chatham House rules. The report identified three major barriers: bias (both conscious and unconscious), lack of flexible work arrangements, and the gender pay gap. One clear recommendation emerged— create more platforms for women lawyers to share their experiences and amplify their voices.

Compliance and International Expansion

Since 2023, I’ve been active in the Compliance and International Divisions of the Bar. My focus remains on Labour Compliance, now with a stronger emphasis on promoting gender equality in both local and international companies. We help organizations identify invisible inequalities, develop clear policies, and provide training to build inclusive work environments.

Lacking a professional network, I faced harsh realities. The most painful setback came when I was let go while pregnant with my first daughter. Discouraged, I stepped away from the law and opened a bookstore. It was a passion project, but financially unsustainable. After a year, I sold it and returned to the legal field.

Second Round

If my first firm was my school, the second was a masterclass. I gained deep, hands-on experience and earned credibility within Spain’s legal community. I defended clients in high-profile penal cases before the Supreme and Constitutional Courts.

But the demanding work culture—long hours, rigid schedules, and no family nearby—became incompatible with raising two small children. After six years, I realized I needed a new model of practice.

Jump to an Own Firm

In 2012, I founded Accuosto & Partners International Law Firm, and finally began practicing law on my own terms. I specialized in Penal and Labour Compliance and Defence, supported by colleagues, mentors, and institutions like the Barcelona Bar Association and academic centers.

Over time, I moved from being a trainee to a trainer, delivering courses and workshops while continuing to grow professionally.

Law Firm 2025

Today, together with our team we advise companies on how to address workplace inequality constructively—without disruption or resistance. We support efforts to reduce the gender pay gap, prevent harassment, and ensure legal compliance to mitigate risks. Our approach is proactive: prevent the problem before it becomes one. This not only protects companies—it elevates them.

Final Conclusions from a Gender Perspective

Like many of my peers, I became an entrepreneur out of necessity— to balance my professional and maternal roles. Today, I’m proud to lead a growing team and define my firm’s values.

Still, the journey could have been less isolating with more empathy along the way. I believe the legal profession must reconnect with its human core. This doesn’t mean sacrificing excellence or profit—it means creating lasting value through equity, empathy, and integrity. ■

Andrea Accuosto Suárez,

Accuosto & Partners International Law Firm https://www.linkedin.com/in/andreaaccuostosuarez/

Backlash Against Progress:

Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Rollbacks in the US and the Legal Community’s Response

By: Dr Banke Olagbegi-Oloba, Diversity Officer

in the International Law Section, American Bar Association.

Introduction: A Movement Under Fire

Lately, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives in the United States (US), once heralded as necessary correctives to systemic inequity have suffered intense political and legal scrutiny. Following the US Supreme Court’s 2023 decision to strike down affirmative action in university admissions in the Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina case, public and private institutions have faced a rising tide of legal threats, state legislation, and funding cuts aimed squarely at DEI programmes. While these rollbacks have reached across many sectors, the legal profession, both as an employer and as a gatekeeper to justice, stands at a crossroad. The American Bar Association (ABA), which is the largest voluntary association of lawyers in the world, has responded with a clear message that inclusion is not optional, and the pursuit of equity remains a legal and moral imperative.

The Chilling Effect of Legal Uncertainty

In the US, law firms, corporations and even universities are redefining or scaling down their DEI initiatives. They are concerned about litigation or political backlash, while others point to ambiguous legal guidelines post-affirmative action ruling. State-level policies, particularly in Utah, Florida, Texas and other Republican-led jurisdictions, have banned DEI offices in public universities and curtailed DEI related trainings. For instance, the National Broadcasting Company (NBC) reported in 2024 that Republican lawmakers in over thirty US states had introduced over 100 bills to either ban, restrict or redefine their DEI initiatives. Florida introduced a rule banning colleges and universities from using state or federal funds to promote DEI initiatives. The government of Texas also signed a law in 2024 which required all state funded colleges and universities to close their DEI offices. This regulatory uncertainty has left many organisations scrambling to determine what is legally permissible, weakening the momentum of age-long work towards inclusivity. For marginalised communities,

if not carefully handled, this may translate into fewer opportunities, diminished recruitment and career progression pathways. It could also lead to a reversion to historically exclusionary practices.

Why does it Matter for the Legal Profession?

The legal profession has historically struggled with representation. According to the ABA’s Profile of the Legal Profession (2023), only five to six per cent of US lawyers were Black and only two to three per cent were Black women Latina women made up just about two to four per cent of the overall population of lawyers in the US. In this context, dismantling DEI initiatives threatens to exacerbate existing disparities, further distancing the profession from the communities it serves. It is important to note that DEI programmes are more than hiring targets! They help in shaping equitable workplace cultures, reducing attrition rates among underrepresented lawyers, and enriching the legal field through varied perspectives essential for justice.

The ABA’s Response: Resistance through Advocacy

The ABA has taken a proactive and firm stance against anti DEI movements. The ABA is committed to advancing DEI at all levels and recognizes the invaluable skills, talents, and experiences inherent in a membership consisting of diverse individuals with varying yet rich backgrounds. The ABA equally recognizes that diversity consists of various dimensions, including race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, age, physical abilities, religious beliefs, political beliefs, neurodiversity, where underrepresentation exists as well as at the intersectionality of the diverse differences. The ABA, therefore, introduced Goal III in 2008. Goal III promotes full and equal participation in the association, the legal profession, and the justice system by all persons. It also seeks to eliminate bias in the legal profession and the justice system.

Additionally, the ABA Board of Governors passed a resolution on April 3, 2025, reaffirming the association’s commitment to ABA Goal III. The resolution is part of ABA’s ongoing work to promote full and equal participation in the association, the profession and the justice system by everyone and to offer opportunities to all communities and advance the rule of law. The resolution calls on the ABA to review the language describing its DEI activities to ensure consistency among the association’s various policies and programmes and among the ABA’s various entities. It seeks to strengthen the efforts of ABA entities

that are keen on furthering Goal III in order to provide central direction regarding those policies and programs. The resolution resolves that ABA policies or programs that seek to further Goal III must not base eligibility for participation on particular group identities and instead must base eligibility on a person’s demonstrated commitment to Goal III.

The ABA has also reiterated its unwavering support for DEI in legal education and practice, noting that such efforts are integral to advancing the rule of law and access to justice.

Comparative Lessons and Global Relevance

While the US context is unique, the rollback of DEI measures has global implications, particularly for jurisdictions that look to the US for policy cues. Legal professionals globally must, therefore, be vigilant in protecting DEI gains. The ABA’s model, rooted in professional ethics and the role of law in a democratic society, offers valuable guidance: DEI is not a political trend but a core pillar of justice and professional integrity!

Conclusion: The Fight Is Not Over

DEI work in the US is facing formidable resistance and challenges, but it is far from defeated. The ABA’s commitment to pushing back on discriminatory policies and supporting inclusive legal practice, legal education and practice sends a powerful message to lawyers worldwide, advocating that equity is a non-negotiable element of justice. At a time when regressive forces are on the rise, it falls on the legal profession to lead with courage, clarity and compassion! ■

Dr Banke Olagbegi-Oloba,

Diversity Officer, International Law Section, American Bar Association.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/banke-olagbegi-oloba-ph-dmcarb-ficmc-25b42678/ https://www.linkedin.com/company/aba-section-ofinternational-law/

Breaking Barriers: How Women Are Reshaping Mexico’s Legal Profession From the Inside Out

When I entered the legal profession in Mexico over thirty years ago, the path to leadership for women was, at best, narrow, and at worst, invisible. While law schools were full of talented women, few of us were seen at the partnership table, or advising on cross-border deals. Today, the legal profession in Mexico is at an inflection point. Gender equity is no longer an abstract goal; it is a business imperative. And the transformation, though overdue, is now being driven by a combination of institutional strategy, lived experience, and with a woman in the Presidency, progressive national policy.

Back then, women were rarely considered for critical assignments or leadership tracks, not because of a lack of talent, but because of a deep-seated bias: the belief that we would eventually leave the profession to marry or have children. This assumption meant firm leadership often did not invest in our development. We were overlooked for mentoring, high-profile cases, and promotion opportunities simply because our long-term commitment was questioned before we ever had the chance to prove it. That culture of preemptive exclusion was one of the first, and hardest, barriers to overcome.

Breaking Through: A Personal Journey

In the 1990s, I experienced this bias firsthand, until I and other women around me proved to be so devoted to our careers, we would likely not have time for marriage. In time, our Managing Partner, Aureliano Gonzalez Baz, gave several of us an opportunity for partnership, and soon thereafter, I became the head of our office in Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico, at 33 years old. This leadership position gave me the ability to empower and promote the women in our office by mentoring, supporting, and learning from one another.

“Our work is far from finished. There are still women entering the profession today who face the same bias we once did.”

Power in Partnership: Building Together

Over the years, I have especially valued the steadfast support of Rosa Hilda Posada, my counterpart in our Matamoros office. We have drawn strength from each other’s wisdom, conviction, and empathy. Our collaboration has made the journey less isolating. Knowing we were navigating similar challenges allowed us to build on shared experience, rather than reinventing the wheel alone.

Together, we have mentored dozens of women, confronted outdated norms, and helped cultivate a culture where equity is embedded in our Firm’s identity. Our continued presence and success have powerfully challenged the status quo, offering younger lawyers a tangible example of what is possible.

Confronting Structural Bias

Notwithstanding our personal experiences, the road to partnership in Mexico remains riddled with systemic hurdles. Cultural expectations still frame women as temporary professionals, more devoted to family than work. These biases currently manifest in damaging ways, such as exclusion from important cases, delays in promotion, and a lack of meaningful mentorship from male colleagues.

At Bryanlex, Rosa and I have worked to turn lessons from our own careers into tangible policies:

• Flexible Work:

We pushed for firm-wide remote and flex-time options, not only to support working mothers but to destigmatize work-life balance for everyone.

• Bias-Aware Evaluations:

We standardized performance reviews to mitigate unconscious bias and ensure that all lawyers are assessed on results, not assumptions.

• Early Client Exposure:

Young women at our firm now have structured pathways to clientfacing work, building credibility and confidence from the start.

• Maternity Reintegration:

We support women returning from maternity leave with mentoring and flexible ramp-up schedules to allow for ease of adjustment and integration.

Leading for the Next Generation

Our work is far from finished. There are still women entering the profession today who face the same bias we once did.

To young women lawyers, I offer this: Find your allies. Build your village. Challenge the norms that don’t serve you, and create new ones that do. And when you rise, don’t forget to reach back and lift others with you.

Because when women lead together, we lead better.

To the next generation: You are not alone. With each promotion, each policy change, and each act of sponsorship, the legal profession becomes more inclusive, innovative, and representative. The legacy being built today is one of purpose, partnership, and progress..■

Judith Wilson

Co-Managing Partner, Bryan, Gonzalez Vargas & Gonzalez Baz “Bryanlex” in Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico

https://www.linkedin.com/in/judith-wilson-860bb716/ https://www.linkedin.com/company/bryan-gonzalez-vargasgonzalez-baz/

Charity: Janice, can you please briefly tell us about yourself?

Janice: My name is Janice Muchemi from Nairobi, Kenya. Professionally, I am a practicing Advocate of the High Court of Kenya currently serving as a Program Attorney at International Justice Mission-Kenya (IJM-K), where I represent clients whose rights have been violated.

In my personal life I am a wife and a mother of two children aged 5 and 2 years.

Charity: Where does your passion for advocacy of human rights stem from?

Janice: My passion stems from the clients I serve. At IJM we seek to support people living in poverty who are especially vulnerable to violence and injustice. Many of them are unable to access justice without support. Being able to use my legal skills to walk with them on the path to justice and to advocate for systemic change is what drives me every day.

Interview with Janice Muchemi

Charity Mafuba talks to Janice Muchemi, an Advocate of the High Court of Kenya about her work at the International Justice Mission (IJM) and her recent accomplishment as the recipient of the Scottish Bar International Human Rights Award for 2024/2025

Charity: Can you please tell us about the International Justice Mission organisation?

Janice: IJM is a global non-governmental organization that partners with governments to protect people in poverty from violence. Our research has shown that people living in poverty are disproportionately at risk of human rights violations. Across the 23 countries where we work, IJM collaborates with public justice systems to strengthen their capacity to serve all people equally and effectively.

Charity: The Police Abuse of Power (PAP) casework programme? and

Janice: The PAP program is unique to IJM Kenya, and focuses on holding the police accountable when they abuse their powers, while also supporting efforts to professionalize the National Police Service We provide training, support wellness initiatives, and contribute to policy development. At the same time, we engage in litigation, representing victims of police abuse in criminal cases to ensure accountability, justice, and deterrence.

Charity: Violence Against Women and Children (VAWC) casework programme?

Janice: This program aims to strengthen the public justice system’s ability to respond effectively to sexual and gender-based violence. We work to ensure that women and children who survive such violence are treated with dignity and protected as they seek justice. We do this through close collaboration with government actors, civil society, and communities to pursue accountability and prevent future violence.

Charity: You are a female human rights activist who operates in challenging circumstances in Kenya. How has this impacted your wellbeing? And

Janice: The work is emotionally demanding. We interact with trauma survivors daily, and the stories of abuse and torture take a toll. Thankfully, IJM has a strong staff care program in place. I also work as part of a multidisciplinary team, and the peer support we give each other helps us persevere.

Charity: Congratulations on winning the Scottish Bar International Human Rights Award for 2024/2025.

Can you please tell us about this award? And what winning this award means to you?

Janice: This award recognizes human rights defenders who speak up for the vulnerable and represent the voiceless. Receiving it is deeply humbling. It affirms that the efforts we are making in Kenya are being seen and appreciated globally.

The Faculty of Advocates in Scotland saw value in the innovative and persistent work we are doing to reform our justice system. Coming from a jurisdiction where the legal system is accessible and victimcentred, their recognition validates our vision. It renews my hope and strengthens our resolve to keep pressing for a justice system that truly serves and protects all, regardless of socio-economic status.

Charity: What does the future hold that you can share?

Janice: There’s still so much to be done to build public trust in the justice system in Kenya. One key focus for us is increasing public awareness of successful prosecutions and system reforms to encourage more survivors to come forward.

We are also working closely with government agencies to transition some of our interventions such as trauma-informed care into fully owned public programs. This approach has already transformed how victims, witnesses, and even accused persons are treated within the system. We believe that with these changes, cases of retraumatization of victims will soon be a thing of the past.■

Janice Muchemi, Programme Attorney

International Justice Mission

https://www.linkedin.com/in/janice-muchemi-8262567a/

Interviewed by

Charity Mafuba

Commissioning Editor and Director, Solicitor-(England and Wales), New York Attorney

“IJM is a global nongovernmental organization that partners with governments to protect people in poverty from violence.”

LW Likes

Shannon Hornigold @linkedin.com/in/shannonhornigold-923872245

From Diamond Sales to Legal Tales: The Sale That Shaped My Legal Career. Shannon Hornigold talks to Legal Women UK about her journey from Retail to Legal.

Read more on the link below: https://lnkd.in/entjeJEU Post | Feed | LinkedIn

Amelia Platton @linkedin.com/in/shannonhornigold-923872245

Amelia Platton’s blog for Mental Health Awareness week was immersed in vulnerability and transparency about her personal journey with mental health.

Read her story on the link below: NB - TRIGGER WARNING. REFERENCES TO SUICIDE IDEATION https://lnkd.in/dsuxUVBK

Post | Feed | LinkedIn

United Nations on Instagram @unitednations

unitednations Women played a vital role in the drafting and adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights over 76 years ago.

Eleanor Roosevelt's leadership as Chair of the drafting committee is well-documented, but other women also made essential contributions to shaping this historic document. Scroll through to discover some of them and their efforts in advocating for women's rights within the Declaration.

On Tuesday's International Day of Women in Diplomacy, join us in honoring the legacy of these women who helped shape the United Nations' commitment to human rights and gender equlity

: UN Photo/MB; Kari Berggrav; Marvin Bolotsky

Read more on the link below: https://www.instagram.com/p/ DLR437KsoUa/?igsh=MW4ydWtmMzU3cWx1ag== Post | Feed | LinkedIn

LW Recommends

PODCASTS

‘The Lawyer Files’A UK Legal Podcast

Hosted by the founder, Denice Obeng- an LPC LLM student, this podcast is for aspiring solicitors, law students, and anyone curious about the legal profession.

The podcast features candid conversations with legal professionals at various stages in their career- from paralegals, trainees, to senior lawyers; sharing their career journeys, insights, and providing advice and guidance on securing a training contract, navigating different practice areas, or developing essential skills like commercial awareness and public speaking.

Available on Spotify and Apple

BOOKS

‘Skilfully Passing the Solicitors

Qualifying Examination

(SQE)’

The author, Neeta Halai, is a qualified solicitor and also a trainer and coach.

For all those who are currently undertaking their SQE course or contemplating enrolment onto the course, the book is a useful resource.

The book covers a wide range of topics, from SQE Assessments, Qualifying Work Experience (QWE), exemptions and the admission process, just to name a few.

Here is a link to sample chapters of the book: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Skilfully-Passing-SolicitorsQualifying-Examination/dp/1526527405

PODCASTS

‘The Lawyer’ PodcastA UK Legal Podcast

Available on Apple

TELEVISION

Suits TV SeriesLegal Drama

Hosted by the Editor Catrin Griffiths and Litigation Editor Christian Smith, every second Thursday, ‘The Lawyer’ Podcast gives their take on the top stories and views which are impacting the Legal market.

This insightful podcast is for aspiring solicitors and solicitors alike.

Unless you have been living under a rock all this time or maybe you just haven’t got round to watching this groundbreaking legal drama, you are in for a treat.

Get immersed into the world of Harvey Spectre and Mike Ross and the formidable Louis Litt. Not forgetting the Queen Bee’s -Jessica Pearson, Rachel, Gretchen and Donna.

In the fictional firm, Pearson Spectre Litt, the stakes are quite high and the cases very interesting. The fashion in this show embodies the art of power dressing.

Whilst this is not the case in real life legal practice, the show is still worth a watch.

Available on Netflix, Amazon Prime, Apple TV

LW Events

IWD -London

Hosted by Female Lawyers Club in collaboration with gunnercooke at The Fable in Holborn and chaired by Rachel Spink, attendees got to hear from Norah Durrant, Founder of Norah Durrant Recruitment and Female Counsel and Sarah Goulbourne, Co-Founder of gunnercooke, on their career paths, why they founded their businesses, and how we can all play a role in breaking barriers for women in law.

From left to right: Norah Durrant, Sarah Goulbourne and Rachel Spink.

Rachel Spink (L) and Charity Mafuba (R).

Sarah Goulbourne (L) and Charity Mafuba (R).

LW Events

IWD - Cardiff, Wales

International Women’s Day 2025 theme was “Accelerate Action”. Legal Women celebrated IWD at Eversheds in Cardiff, Wales. With many in attendance, the panellists highlighted the various ways in which they were “accelerating action”

From left to right- Tom Evans, Trish D’Souza, Charity Mafuba (LW Commissioning Editor), Jenine Abdo, Nadine Gutteridge, Rhian Jones and Karen Jones

Optimising Law Firm Efficiency and Profitability with AI and Automated time recording

The legal industry has traditionally been resistant to change, but the emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) presents an undeniable opportunity to enhance efficiency and profitability for law firms. At a time when competition is fierce, the ability to deliver high-quality services while controlling costs is key. AI, when integrated effectively, allows law firms to meet these challenges head-on, offering tools that streamline operations and provide more value to both lawyers and their clients.

AI has a profound impact on staff productivity. Human resources are the most expensive and vital asset in any law firm. By taking over repetitive, low-value tasks like legal research, document drafting, and even matter analysis, AI allows lawyers to focus on higher-value activities that require human expertise. AI-driven research tools, for instance, sift through vast legal databases in a fraction of the time it would take a lawyer, offering comprehensive insights while reducing possible errors from lapses in human concentration.

This shift not only improves operational efficiency but also provides an opportunity for legal professionals to enhance their skill sets. Lawyers can now focus on strategic, high-level work, thereby creating more value for clients while increasing their own billing potential. However, AI is not a replacement for human judgment. It acts as a powerful complement, augmenting the lawyer's role rather than diminishing it. To this end, law firms must embrace the idea that AI will redefine—not replace—how legal services are delivered.

Driving Efficiency Through Cloud Technology

To fully leverage AI, law firms must ensure that their internal infrastructure can support these innovations. Many law firms have already migrated their practice management systems to the cloud, where centralised data storage offers a perfect environment for AI applications to thrive. With access to a vast array of client information, case documents, and workflow data, AI can efficiently analyse and process large volumes of information, driving both innovation and operational improvements.

For those law firms that continue to rely on disconnected databases or outdated systems, the potential for AI-driven efficiencies is significantly reduced. If client and matter information is not organised and centralised, AI tools struggle to function effectively. The solution is to create cloud based practice management systems, ensuring that data is accessible, secure, and can be utilised effectively to improve both firm efficiency and client outcomes.

Increasing Billable Hours with Automated time recording

Another important technological development available to law firms is the ability to improve billing accuracy through automated time recording. Traditionally, time recording has been a manual process which can be prone to human error, leading to under-billing and revenue loss. Now, lawyers can track their billable hours more precisely. With powerful tools that automatically record and assign time to specific legal tasks, ensuring that no billable work goes

unrecorded. This improved accuracy not only enhances profitability but also alleviates the administrative burden on fee earners, allowing them to focus on more meaningful client interactions.

Such leading-edge technology provides a game-changing opportunity for law firms to optimise staff output, streamline operations, and drive profitability. Those firms that have put themselves in a place whereby they can embrace such technology, particularly by ensuring their data infrastructure is AI-ready, will be well-positioned to lead the way in the evolving legal landscape.

About LEAP

LEAP Legal Software has been helping law firms to become more efficient and profitable globally for more than 25 years. LEAP is committed to consistently providing world-class legal practice productivity solutions and has innovation at the heart of its research and development so that users continually have the best possible experience.

Dedicated to delivering cutting-edge and intelligent legal software solutions, LEAP’s team of specialist developers present innovative AI solutions that automate routine tasks, simplify document management, and enhance decisionmaking, allowing lawyers to do what they do best — practise law.

For more information, please visit www.leap.co.uk ■

By Gareth Walker CEO, Leap UK

CELEBRATING 1O YEARS OF DIGITAL CONVEYANCING

In 2015, InfoTrack opened its doors with a mission to make conveyancing better for everyone. A decade later, we’re proud to support over 25,000 professionals across 2,400 law firms, helping redefine how property transactions are managed.

From launching the UK’s first digital AP1 to onboarding over one million clients through eCOS, we’ve consistently delivered technology firsts that remove friction and empower law firms to work with confidence.

Prompts

LEAP offers a fully integrated legal practice productivity solution, complete with premium, purpose-built legal AI tools. Ask any legal question and get it verified by a qualified lawyer with LawY, accelerate document creation with Prompts and find intricate details about your matters in seconds with Matter AI

LEAP AI is included in your LEAP subscription at no extra cost.