Pupillage in Lockdown: Remote Advocacy, New Pressures and the Future of Training at the Bar

The second six in lockdown

Second six is traditionally the most anticipated stage of pupillage.

It is the moment pupils begin representing clients in court and developing their advocacy skills. Lockdown disrupted this transition. Instead of standing in court, many pupils have spent their second six seated at home, shadowing hearings online, attending remote conferences and participating in virtual advocacy workshops.

Chambers have adapted quickly, but the question remains whether online courtrooms can fully prepare pupils for tenancy.

Some pupils have managed to appear in person, while others have taken their own cases remotely. Court closures have created unprecedented challenges, particularly for criminal pupils who rely heavily on courtroom advocacy to build confidence and establish a practice.

Although crime has been the most affected area, every part of the Bar has felt the impact. Civil and family cases have surged, with many hearings taking place on remote platforms. Pupils have had to demonstrate adaptability from the outset. While remote learning offers accessibility and efficiency, it is not the traditional route pupils expected when preparing to get on their feet.

Are remote hearings here to stay?

The pandemic left courts in crisis. More than half of courts in England and Wales were unused at the height of lockdown, and the backlog of cases continues to grow. Emergency nightingale courts have been introduced to ease pressure, but demand remains high.

The shortage of pupillage places risks worsening this backlog. Chambers must continue recruiting pupils, particularly in areas where demand is greatest, to ensure that the justice system has enough barristers to meet public need, whether hearings take place remotely or in person.

Remote hearings offer practical benefits. They reduce travel time and allow pupils to attend more hearings than they could physically reach. Pupils who would normally spend hours travelling across the country can now use that time to observe additional cases. However, technological issues still cause delays, and remote advocacy remains less effective in criminal practice, where in‑person presence is often essential.

For remote hearings to remain viable, courts must keep pace with technological developments. Despite uncertainty, increased accessibility at the Bar is a positive step, and feedback from current pupils will shape future training models.

Mental health during pupillage

Remote pupillage may appear easier to manage, with supervisors only a video call away. However, lockdown has highlighted significant mental health concerns. Many pupils report reduced supervision and support. According to a survey by Young Legal Aid Lawyers, coronavirus accounted for 45% of pupils who felt they received less guidance during lockdown.

Financial pressures compound these challenges. It is estimated that 83% of barristers of up to seven years’ call cannot survive a year at the Bar without additional support. Reduced pupillage awards and increased debt may deter aspiring barristers from entering the profession. Chambers continue to invest in training, but pupils still face uncertainty about sustaining their practice, securing tenancy and navigating the possibility of third sixes.

Greater consideration is needed to ensure that pupils are not disproportionately affected by the pandemic. The Bar must find new ways to maintain the inflow of pupils and support them through an increasingly demanding environment.

The future of pupillage

The pandemic has tested the resilience of pupillage and the Bar more broadly. Training models for future pupils must reflect the experiences of those who completed pupillage during lockdown. A long‑term combination of virtual training and remote hearings is likely. Chambers will need to establish support hubs to ensure pupils are fully prepared for tenancy.

The reopening of courts is a positive development, but it also introduces new pressures for pupils navigating a hybrid system. The future of pupillage will depend on balancing tradition with innovation, ensuring that pupils receive robust advocacy training while benefiting from the accessibility of modern technology.

Conclusion

Lockdown has reshaped pupillage, presenting challenges but also opportunities for reform. Pupils have demonstrated adaptability, resilience and commitment in unprecedented circumstances. As the Bar moves forward, it must build on these lessons to create a training environment that is supportive, accessible and fit for the future.