MORE than 800 law undergraduates hoping to graduate and become solicitors began their High Court challenge yesterday to a change in the Law Society's regulations which means they now have to sit the entrance examination.
The applicants are all pursuing courses for undergraduate law degrees in UCC, UCD, TCD, UCG and UL. The action is against the Law Society of Ireland and the Attorney General. The defendants claim the applicants are not entitled to the relief sought.
Previously, the Law Society regulations waived the need for law graduates of the five universities to take the entrance examination. The change followed a case taken last year by law graduates from Queen's University Belfast, who had to take the entrance examination and claimed discrimination. The High Court ruled that the regulation concerning this was invalid, and it was upheld by the Supreme Court.
Yesterday Mr Adrian Hardiman SC, for the students, read an affidavit by three students, Mr Thomas Coughlan, Cook Street, Cappoquin, Co Waterford Ms Marsha Coghlan of Marval Arch, Ballintubber, Carrigtwohill, Co Cork and Mr John Meade of Ashgrove, Pembroke, Passage West, Co Cork.
They stated that some of the applicants were given express assurances by, or on behalf of, the society that they would not be required to pass the entrance examination. They stated that they were significantly influenced in their choice of study by the expectation that they would be admitted directly to the society's course.
All the applicants were surprised by the High Court declaration last September, and were disappointed. What concerned them was that they believed the society would over time raise the standards in its entrance examination, to restrict the numbers entering the profession.
In the Supreme Court appeal, to their great surprise and astonishment, the society chose not to argue the main issue, but concentrated on the issue of costs.
All applicants were now required to sit and pass the society's entrance examination. This was contrary to what the society had led them to believe, and was most unfair and unreasonable.
The applicants throughout had relied and acted upon the representations made by the society. If the society refused to grant them their exemptions much loss and damage would be suffered. The sudden withdrawal of the exemption would cause severe hardship and, in some cases, would ruin what would have been good legal careers.
The situation was both critical and urgent for the applicants, particularly for those who had just taken final examinations, and who require to know whether to commence study for the entrance examination in the coming September.
The Law Society and AG claim the decision in the Supreme Court constituted a judgment and, accordingly, the decision was final and irrevocable and was binding on the applicants. They also claim the applicants do not have locus standii to challenge the decisions of the High Court and Supreme Court.
The defendants deny that the applicants suffered the alleged or any, loss or damage.
The case continues before Mr Justice McCracken.