If not, it is unfairly discriminatory to require non-solicitors to attend such a course, which may well be very expensive. Many SPs are assisted by a non-qualified person with wide experience but no ILEX qualification. We consider that the requirement to have worked 350 hours in each year is excessive and unreasonable. Also it would mean that a SP would be unable to be a supervisor for more than two categories at the most. We consider that it is wholly unreasonable to require a supervisor to attend at least three courses annually on the franchised category.
Courses are very expensive.
The Law Society has provided for fulfilment of CPD requirements by methods other than course attendance. We consider that this requirement will in particular penalise SPs and small firms as large firms will often be able to provide such courses in house whereas smaller firms will have to pay the commercial price. We consider that on the whole these are excessive. We would start by saying that it is unreasonable for the Legal Aid Board to require a supervisor to have recent experience in all the areas featured. A firm can only deal with the work that their clients have for them to do.