YOU’RE FIRED: A LITIGATION LAWYER ON THE APPRENTICE 1: PRECEDENTS: “THAT IS NOT A SKELETON”
This year sees a litigation lawyer featuring as a candidate in the Apprentice, together with a law graduate. Is there anything we litigators can learn from seeing lawyers on the apprentice? After a challenge was issued I decided to follow the lawyers in the series. First we start with the legal precedents. On this basis things do not bode well…
“You are clearly a talented lawyer but I am the judge, jury and executioner here — and that’s not a skeleton.”
THE CHALLENGE
Legal blogging is not a competitive sport (yet*). However when housing law blogger Giles Peaker saw there was a litigation lawyer as a candidate in the Apprentice this year he issued a challenge –
“It appears that the Apprentice this year features a claimant PI solicitor. I presume this means weekly ‘lessons to be learned’ updates from @CivilLitTweet“
[* there is talk of legal blogging being a demonstration sport in the Tokyo Olympics, we can but hope]
THE PRECEDENTS
Legal purists will argue that these are not “precedents” at all, but factual examples. Legal purists should go elsewhere.
PREVIOUS LAWYERS ON THE APPRENTICE
- Karen Bremner entered the apprentice in 2006. She won as project manager in the first week, but was fired in week three. “I don’t need another corporate lawyer” said Lord Sugar. She now owns a boutique.
- Nicholas De Lacy Brown, “trainee barrister” entered in 2008. He was fired in week one, after pricing lobsters at a quarter of their proper price.
- Elliot Van Emden was the third person to be fired in 2017, amidst controversy about the use of the title “barrister” (he had not completed pupillage).
- There were two lawyer candidates in 2014 “Lauren Riley” was the first to be sacked for “being the typical safe lawyer”.
- Felipe Alviar-Baquero was sacked later for his literal interpretation of the phrase “anatomical skeleton”
“Listen I am a lawyer. The description of Lord Sugar’s matches what I bought,” he said as he made the decision (to buy a cheap flatpack model)
This particular lawyerly skeleton did not impress the judge, with Lord Sugar stating.
“You are clearly a talented lawyer but I am the judge, jury and executioner here — and that’s not a skeleton.”
LEARNED COMMENTATORS
The view of the commentators on Lord Sugar and lawyers make for a sobering read for would be candidates from the legal fraternity.
David Levesley wrote :
“Lord Sugar hates lawyers. Almost as much as he loves scapegoating the blue-blooded candidates (case in point: Nicholas de Lacy-Brown.)”
Joanne Harris, writing in the Lawyer wrote
Many lawyers may secretly harbour a desire to go on The Apprentice. Perhaps it is the smug satisfaction that comes with a lifetime of academic achievement, or law firm life that encourages us all to think we give clients the best quality advice that is truly worth the price we charge for it. However, if we want to keep hold of that pipe dream of being covered in glory upon being bestowed with the “You’re Hired” line, lawyers should probably refrain from applying for The Apprentice.
AND THIS YEAR, THOSE WHO DID NOT LISTEN TO JOANNE’S ADVICE
We should keep a look out for two candidates.
“Sarah Ann Magson, Solicitor,
Although she says timekeeping and organisation aren’t her greatest strengths, Sarah Ann believes her loyalty, commitment and ability to remain calm under pressure are her best qualities and thinks that her skills and charm will outwit any of her competitors.”
Kurran Pooni, Law Graduate,
“Kurran gets irked by people who are out for themselves rather than working collectively for the team and gets especially rattled by people who lie”
AND THE “LESSON TO BE LEARNED”
Lord Sugar does not seem to be easily impressed by lawyers or clever legal arguments. Strangely “clever” arguments about definitions often fail in the courtroom as well. Lesson one, looking at the precedents – know what a skeleton is.