Legal clinic facts,
A legal clinic (also law clinic or law school clinic) is a law school program providing hands-on-legal experience to law school students and services to various clients. Clinics are usually directed by clinical professors. Legal clinics typically do pro bono work in a particular area, providing free legal services to clients.
Students typically provide assistance with research, drafting legal arguments, and meeting with clients. In many cases, one of the clinic's professors will show up for oral argument before the Court. However, many jurisdictions have "student practice" rules that allow law-clinic students to appear and argue in court.
Types of activity
The clinics may include variety of activity:
Legal Aid Clinic is traditionally the most common type of Clinical education. Students under supervision of lectors provide pro bono legal aid to general public (usually to those, who can't otherwise afford it).
Lewis further distinguishes:
Simulations - students can learn from a variety of simulations of what happens in legal practice. For example, moot courts are commonplace. They have traditionally formed part of law school activity and introduce students to the itricacies of adcovacy, at least before appelate courts. More abitiously, use can be made of mock trials, sometimes involving professional actors in order to convery the difficulties of, for example, introducing evidence and establishing facts in what may be the rapidly changing environment of a first instance tribunal. Other simulations can range from
negotiation exercises - whereby opposing groups of students learning the art of negotiation, rather than trial court litigation, by being given realistic case files and asked to resolve them in as economic and fair manner as possible
client interviewing exercises
transaction exercises - between groups of students such as buying and selling property or with individual students in e.g. drafting a will
legal drafting and writing programmes
Although of exceptional value in teaching law, these simulations can lack the complexity of real client work, adn the role play may not create the same demands that exist upon the legal practitioner.
Placements - students can be sent out to work with practising lawyers for short periods to encounter real problems, clients, and courts. They are then expected to bring back theri experience to the law school and reflect upon it, using it to inform the remainder of their time spent in academic establishment. They are particularly attractive to some law schools, because that they can be arranged at little cost. On the other hand, the student's experience can vary greatly, and it is especially difficult for teachers to monitor what has happened in order to make use of it, and provide effective feedback. It is difficult to assess the student's progress.
Many clinics combine all the before mentioned activities. For example, at the beginning of the clinical program the students are thoroughly taught some area of law (which may be taught in the general program only briefly - for example immigration and asylum laws), later they go through simulations to strengthen their knowledge in practical way, and in the third part they come to contact with real clients and solve their legal issues (this may be done also via placements, for example in NGOs related to the area).
Areas of service
Clinical legal studies exist in diverse areas such as immigration law, environmental law, intellectual property, housing, criminal defense, criminal prosecution, American Indian law, human rights and international criminal law. Clinics sometimes sue big companies and government entities. This has led to pushback in courts and legislatures, including attempts to put limits on who clinics can sue without losing state subsidies.
Learning by experience - Instead of learning by means of traditional lectures, the students are much more pro-active participants in the learing process - they are "learning by doing". Their initiative determines the scope of the client's problem, they plan and work for its solution. Such students are much more likely to learn if they recognise that their success is determined by their own efforts rather than external factors (e.g. how good the lecturer is, or what questions have previously been asked on the exam paper). The key is applying the knowledge, not just learning it. It also calls for reflection and self-examination. Legal praciticioners themselves rarely have the time or opportunity to do this. Students, by contrast, can examine the legal and social issues in some depth, and they can form the basis for looking at the lawyer's role and at legal ethics within a practical context. The result is that what is learned is far more likely to remain with the student that the knowledge crammed for an extremely artificial examination paper.
Acquisition of skills - Clinical education embraces a skills-based approach. This means paying as much attention to the processes associated with legal practice - e. g. the structure of a letter, the interview with the client, face to face negotiation - as to the legal content of the rules forming the background to the work done. The skills include:
Interpersonal and organisational skills
Student motivation and development - Students who work in a legal clinic are enthusiastic about their experience. They are self-motivated and often highly committed to the work. They are more responsible for what they do and how they do it. In theory, the teacher’s role becomes more facilitative - helping students discover solutions for themselves. According to Lewis many students share disenchantment with the classical law school. To an extent involvement in clinical work can help reduce such feelings, and can invigorate future study. It can cause students to think again about what law school offers and what direction their future career could take.
Professional ethics and responsibility - The study of ethics and the professional responsibility and conduct of lawyers has been markedly absent from law schools in contrast to medical schools. However, there has been a growth of interest in this area in recent years, and it is a subject which arguably is better dealt with in a clinical context where the often abstract notions can be given a practical context.the crucible of the clinic allows moral issues to be debated more openly than within the confines of the traditional curriculum.
Involvement with the local community - Not only University's students but also its staff can be cut off from the local community. A law clinic can help reduce this isolation by making the law school more relevant to that community. Most obviously, the most disadvantaged members of society may gain some means of redress. But in addition the young student may be faced with the problems of those from a different generation and background. This experience can add to their understanding of the position of others in society, and can increase their maturity and sense of responsibility.
The integration of the clinic within the law school - this covers:
Clinic may become isolated from the law school - it is important to link the substantive law courses and work done in clinic (i.e. re-examining cases from clinics in other law-classes)
The clinic may be marginalised and treated as merely providing poverty law service to the community. Introduction of clinics require embracing the direction in educational philosophy which lies behind the teaching of skills.
Staffing problem - there are usually to few university teachers, who are qualified to practice, and very few of these had actually worked as lawyers for any period of time
Resources- the students must be individually supervized, making the clinical education much more expensive compared to the traditional classes of large groups. Extra resources must therefore be allocated to the teaching and running of the clinic. On the other hand, clinics are usually very popular among students, therefore the issue arises, how to choose those who can attend them.
Difficulties in supervision and assessment - Supervising students in the clinic is subject to pressures which pull in opposite directions. Arriving at the right balance can be difficult. On the one hand the student learns best if left with as much control over a case as possible so that there is room to make mistakes, appreciate how thing may be done differently and change practice or behaviour accordingly. If ‘learning by doing’ is to be the leitmotif, it is no good looking over the student’s shoulder all the time to correct what is being done. On the other hand, the obvious danger is that too much freedom will be given to the student and that this could result in a poor or even negligent service being provided to a client. The public could be used as guinea pigs on which the inexperienced experiment. It is therefore essential for a system of supervision to include checks on the quality of work being done e.g. the approval of all letters sent out, certain interviews recorded, file entries checked and diaries examined. It is also crucial that the supervisor be given sufficient knowledge of what the student has done in order to provide effective feedback a nd ensure that the clinical work forms part of the skills learning experience. In the end, also assessment of the work has to be done in some way, otherwise the student may treat the clinical work as less important.
The dangers of public service - Although the idea of providing free legal advice is attractive to those who wish to see the university become more closely involved with the wider community in which it is based, problems can develop if the public service aim takes precedence over that of providing a sound and well rounded legal education.
Relationship with the local legal profession - Some may fear that a legal clinic offering free legal work will upset the law school’s relation with the local legal profession. However, far from reducing the amount of work done by local practitioners, the clinic is likely to expand it. This is because it stimulates resort to the law, and the need for advice is increased out of proportion to the clinic’s ability to deal with it. A referral system to local firms for certain types of advice or assistance is essential, and the number of people thus sent to lawyers far outweighs the work taken on by the clinic and which otherwise would have been dealt with a law firm. Far from being a source of friction, the clinic helps to foster a closer relationship with the local legal profession.
Legal clinics in USA,
The first wave of clinical legal education in the United States began in the early part of the 20th century, shortly after the casebook method emerged in the late 1890s as a popular route to preparing for a career in law. The casebook method's emphases on appellate judicial decisions and the Socratic method as the means to teach the skill of legal analysis were a departure from the three prevailing methods of American legal education in the 19th century: the applied skills training method inherent in the apprenticeship system; the general education approach of the prevailing European legal educational model, which was adopted by some colleges and universities in the United States; and an analytical and systematized approach to the law as interconnected rational principles, taught primarily through lectures at proprietary law schools. While the casebook method was gaining wide acceptance, law students at several law schools in the late 1890s and early 1900s established volunteer, non-credit "legal dispensaries" or legal aid bureaus to provide hands-on opportunities to learn and practice lawyering skills and legal analysis, and also to serve a social justice mission by providing legal assistance to those unable to hire attorneys.
With the changes of legal education in United States at the beginning of the 20th century came the need for practical education as opposed to booklearning. Previously, a young law school graduates received their "clinical experience" in pupillage, in which they were an apprentice to an established lawyer. The same system was used for medical students; but at the start of the 1910s hospital clinics were already well established institutions of medical education.
Especially after four-year law courses were established in American law schools (such as Northwestern University, the University of California, and Yale), the need for practical education became urgent. Legal aid clinics were meant to affiliate with already established legal aid societies. They would have between ten and fifty positions (depending on the size of the community), each having a stipend equal to that usually paid in local law offices. A Professor of Practice was in charge of the young lawyers, and the professor would have a staff of specialists available in particular branches of law. The clinics were meant to provide maximum educational value.
Northwestern Law School in Chicago has one of the oldest of the legal clinics, it being first established in 1910. In the USA clinics were set up partly because of the absence of a formal trainee or apprenticeship position within the legal profession. Students are admitted to practice immediately on passing the bar exams.
By 1915 the plan to establish such law clinics was devised and approved by the Chicago Bar Association. Approval by the New York Bar Association soon followed. The committee's chairman, W. V. Rowe, set forth the plan in the Illinois Law Review:
Every large city and every university town where is a law school were supposed to have student legal aid offices; if the town was too small to supply either "medical or a legal hospital" with sufficient variety of cases, then this part of the law-school was supposed to be carried on in he nearest metropolis.
In 1921, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching funded a study on legal education, commonly called the "Reed Report" after its nonlawyer author, Alfred Z. Reed. The Reed Report identified three components necessary to prepare students for the practice of law: general education, theoretical knowledge of the law, and practical skills training. To satisfy the requirement of a general education component, the Reed Report called for at least two years of pre-law college training - a proposal the ABA promoted, starting in 1921. At that time, not a single state required a university-based law school degree as a precondition for admission to the bar, proprietary law schools were still prevalent, and apprenticeships still provided the basic legal training for many entering the legal profession. In the wake of Rowe's early efforts to integrate clinical education into the law school curriculum, and the Reed Report's call for practical skills training, John Bradway and Jerome Frank pioneered the cause of clinical legal education methodology in the 1920s through the 1940s, advocating an in-house clinic as an essential component of sound legal education. Yet, despite the efforts of Bradway and Frank, only a handful of law schools instituted in-house clinical courses through the first half of the 20th century.
In spite of there being old examples, clinical education as recognised today in the USA really began in the 1960s. It spread rapidly. By 1973 of the 147 US Law Schools 125 reported having some form of clinical education. Many of these benefited from Ford Foundation monies on condition that they supplied free poverty law advice. These monies came to an end in 1979, and this led to a re-evaluation and re-orientation of the American programmes.,
Legal clinics in United Kingdom,
In Britain the development of clinical education was much slower, and had no special funding. By 1994, in spite of all the problems of locating such education within the traditional university framework, 13% of universities made use of live-client clinics. Two things combined to make it more attractive for UK law schools to develop clinical programmes:
In 1993 the Law Society, the governing body of UK lawyers, gave up its direct control over the vocational stage of education and let universities set up their own skills courses – their fourth year of teaching law – if they wanted to. Cardiff Law School was the first to do so, and appointed several law practitioners to teach the skills courses. The involvement of former law practitioners at Cardiff and other universities led to an increasing interest in how legal education is delivered. There has been a steady rise in the literature dealing with legal education, including articles on, for example, methods for delivering the skills curriculum. An umbrella organisation, the Clinical Legal Education Organisation, has been set up to disseminate information about clinical courses.
There is greater chance of universities to get funds from outside, to set up clinical programmes. There are at least two distinct sources:
The State, through community legal services initiative
Large Law Firms. In 1997 a number of large firms, mostly based in the City of London, came together to set up the Solicitors Pro Bono Group. This charitable national organisation provides a co-ordinated response to legal need by working with the legal profession to set up new initiatives where free or reduced-cost legal advice can be provided.,
Legal clinics in Czech Republic,
Main article: Centre for Clinical Legal Education (Palacký University, Faculty of Law)
The Faculty of Law at the Palacký University of Olomouc had been closed in 1855 following the professors' and students' participation in the revolutionary movement. It reopened in 1991. This helped to introduce new concepts into Czech legal education, which were deemed inconvenient by the other older Czech conservative law schools.
Following the model of American law schools, in 1996 the first legal clinics were established at the Faculty, making it the first law school in Central Europe with a clinical program. Later in 2006 the Centre for Clinical Legal Education was established to provide methodical aids for innovation in current school subjects and to run the clinics.
As of 2010, there are nine clinics, and this Faculty remains the only one in the Czech Republic to provide clinical legal education.,
Legal clinics in Poland,
On 1 October 1997 the first legal clinic was established at the Faculty of Law and Administration of the Jagiellonian University. A year later a legal clinic was established also at the University of Warsaw Department of Law, followed by legal clinics being established at number of other universities with law education.