Search & Apply

This vacancy has now closed and is listed for reference only.

Hailsham Chambers - 12 months - September 2023

AETO information
Name of AETO:
Hailsham Chambers
Head of AETO:
Julian Picton QC
Address of AETO:
4 Paper Buildings
AETO's website address:
Main practice area:
Professional negligence, medical law and costs
Practice areas:
Professional Negligence; Healthcare; Regulatory; Costs; Commercial; Personal Injury
Specialist services:
Public Access Work
South eastern
Number of junior tenancies (in the last three years):
Pupillage vacancy information
Number of pupillages:
Financial support level:
£50,000 - £59,999
Closing date:
9 February 2022 at 2:00 PM
Pupillage start date:
September 2023
Pupillage type:
12 month pupillage
**Our interviews will take place on Monday 4th April and Tuesday 5th April 2022 (please note, however, that we have not yet selected our candidates for interview)**

At Hailsham Chambers we excel in our key areas of professional negligence, medical law, costs, regulatory and disciplinary, personal injury and commercial law. We win awards for our excellence and we are recognised by the legal directories as a leading set in our three main practice areas.

Our ethos is to provide the highest standards of advocacy, advice and service, which is supported by our open door policy and friendly atmosphere within chambers. We are proud of our history, which includes a number of former law lords, but we are an innovative and forward-thinking set.

What we look for

The successful candidate will be a motivated, ambitious candidate who is a persuasive communicator, intellectually able, hardworking and able to get on with clients, colleagues and judges. They will have a real interest in Chambers’ areas of practice.

Usually a minimum 2.1 degree is required, although we will consider applicants with a 2.2 where there are special personal or medical circumstances.

Financial matters

We offer pupils a £50,000 award including £5,000 guaranteed earnings. You will be able to keep anything you earn on top of the £5,000 guaranteed earnings.

You can draw down up to £10,000 of your award during the BPTC year.

The award substantially exceeds BSB minimum requirements and is intended to cover all of our pupils’ costs during pupillage, including any compulsory courses, resits, a laptop if you do not already have one, travel and subsistence.


We offer excellent training and prospects, and aim to invite successful pupils to become tenants. 14 of our last 16 pupils have been recruited as tenants.

Our pupils have typically earned in the region of £9,000 to £12,000 during their second, practising six months. This is of course in addition to the pupillage award, subject to the earnings guarantee.

Junior tenants in their first year of practice can expect to earn in the region of £60,000 to £80,000 (before expenses and tax), although this does vary between individuals and some have earned considerably more.


Applications will only be accepted through the Pupillage Gateway.


Chambers runs a thorough pupillage training programme, with detailed ongoing assessment against the competences in the BSB Professional Statement. Pupils will be formally appraised by their pupil supervisor after each 3 month period, against those competences. The Head of Pupillage will also review each pupil’s experience and performance with them at regular intervals during pupillage. Pupils will undertake several in-house advocacy exercises, at least two of which will be assessed. Those advocacy assessments, together with formal reports from all the pupil supervisors and from other members of chambers for whom the pupil has undertaken written work, will form the basis of the tenancy decision in June/July. Recruitment as a tenant is by reference to criteria available on our website.

Equality and Diversity

We are passionate about encouraging applications from a diverse pool of candidates. If you are disabled, please feel free to contact us to discuss any reasonable accommodation or adjustments that we might be able to make in order to facilitate your application.

Hailsham Chambers adheres to and supports the Bar Council’s policies on equal opportunity and non-discrimination. Chambers has an Equality and Diversity Policy which will be provided to all pupils at the beginning of pupillage.

For more general information about pupillage at Hailsham Chambers (including details of our privacy policy), please visit our website
Application Questions

The following questions will form the Pupillage Application Questionnaire section of the application form for this pupillage vacancy. These are included here to allow you to prepare in advance.

  1. BC1: Why do you believe you will make a good barrister? In your answer, please identify any relevant experiences or skills that you believe may help you in your career (200 words)
  2. BC2: Why do you want to join our chambers? In your answer, please give reasons for your choice of chambers and explain why you are interested in our areas of practice (200 words)
  3. Would you wish to undertake pupillage on a part-time or other flexible basis, rather than full time over 12 months? If yes, please give details. Hailsham is willing to offer pupillage on a part-time basis over a period of up to 2 years (with the pupillage award spread over any extended period). (100 words)
  4. [Candidates are advised to copy this problem into Word and separate it into the numbered paragraphs] 1. You are instructed by the partners of Avarice Solicitors LLP (“Avarice”). 2. Avarice was instructed by Buildit Limited (“Buildit”), a building contractor, regarding its claim against WLD Limited (“WLD”). 3. Buildit says it is owed £75,000 for building works performed on WLD’s new head office. WLD says there are defects in the completed works, which will cost at least £75,000 to correct and has therefore refused to make any further payments. 4. Avarice, however, is not a firm which specialises in building claims. Avarice therefore retained specialist counsel, Mr Cursory, to advise on the merits of the claim. Avarice did so at its own expense and informed Mr Cursory of this funding arrangement. 5. Mr Cursory advised that WLD’s set-off was likely to succeed such that any claim by Buildit would be extinguished by the set-off counterclaim. Avarice subsequently adopted that advice and relayed it to Buildit, which therefore instructed Avarice to negotiate an early settlement with WLD. Settlement was thereafter achieved without the need to commence court proceedings. 6. It now appears that the advice given by Mr Cursory was legally incorrect: the true position is that WLD’s set-off/counterclaim was likely to have failed and Buildit’s fee claim would probably have succeeded. 7. Avarice says that had Mr Cursory advised non-negligently then Buildit would have instructed Avarice to pursue WLD for the outstanding sum of £75,000 and defend any set-off/counterclaim raised by WLD. 8. As a consequence, Avarice says it has lost the fees it would have earned from Buildit for the work referred to in the preceding paragraph, which it estimates at £50,000. 9. There is a written agreement between Avarice and Mr Cursory. The relevant terms are: Clause 1, headed ‘Definitions’: “the ‘Lay Client’ means the Solicitor’s client for whose benefit or on behalf of whom the Barrister is instructed by the Solicitor to supply the Services.” “the ‘Services’ means the legal services supplied or to be supplied by the Barrister in connection with the case pursuant to the instructions provided by the Solicitor and otherwise in accordance with the Agreement” “the ‘Solicitor’ means Avarice Solicitors LLP” Clause 2, headed ‘Skill and Care’: “the Barrister will exercise reasonable skill and care in supplying the Services” Clause 3, headed ‘Benefit of the Barrister’s Services’:“Unless otherwise agreed in writing, the Barrister’s Services are provided to the Solicitor as the Barrister’s client, acting for the benefit of the Lay Client and it is agreed that each owes a primary duty to the Lay Client.” Clause 4, headed ‘Liability’: “The Barrister is not liable for any loss or damage suffered by any persons, firm or partnerships other than the Lay Client and the Solicitor” 10. How would you argue a case that Mr Cursory should be liable to Avarice in respect of the fees it would have charged Buildit had Mr Cursory correctly advised that WLD’s counterclaim was unlikely to succeed? Please consider whether (a) there is a potential claim under the terms of the written agreement between Avarice and Mr Cursory and (b) whether Avarice may be able to advance an argument at common law. 11. Please concentrate on the legal issues rather than exposition of the facts or the authorities. You are asked only to consider the following case: McFarland-Cruickshanks v England Kerr Hands Solcitors [2021] 4 WLR (available for free on bailii (750 words)
How to apply
To apply, please click on the Apply Online link below and then complete the online application form.