Guide on the New Practice Training Framework for Supervising Solicitors and Practice Trainees

Purpose of the new practice training framework

The new practice training framework (“New Framework”) will commence in January 2025. It is intended to strengthen the professional training regime for lawyers in Singapore and better equip law graduates with the necessary skills and competencies to meet the demands of the future economy and society. The New Framework will lift overall standards within the professional training regime, complementing other ongoing efforts to enhance legal education for a future-ready legal workforce.[1]

Under the New Framework, the practice training period (“PTP”) will be extended from six months to one year. After six months of training, practice trainees can apply for a provisional practising certificate (“PPC”) to have limited rights to practise as an advocate and solicitor, if they are supervised by a qualified solicitor.

Practice training is, at its core, an apprenticeship, where aspiring legal practitioners seek out mentors to guide them in the industry and provide opportunities for practical exposure. It is a symbiotic relationship, where both practice trainees and supervising solicitors come together to contribute to the continued development of Singapore’s legal industry.[2]

[1] “Strengthening the Professional Training Regime for Lawyers in Singapore” (Ministry of Law Press Release, 3 October 2023).

[2] Second Reading of Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill (7 November 2023).

What this guide offers

This Guide is intended to address common queries that practice trainees and supervising solicitors may have on the New Framework. The Law Society is mindful of the challenges that practice trainees and supervising solicitors are likely to encounter under the new Framework. It is hoped that the guidance offered in this Guide will help practice trainees and supervising solicitors to be ready to operationalize the changes under the New Framework and transit smoothly to the New Framework.

A. Practice Trainees

(1) Leave during practice training period

As noted in the SILE’s Practice Training Period Guidelines 2024:

“12. A day on which a practice trainee is absent from practice training is referred to as a “non-training day”. During the 12-month practice training period, a practice trainee may be absent from practice training for up to 18 working days, for any reason such as firm closures, sick leave, annual leave, maternity leave or national service leave. In other words, up to 18 non-training days will count towards a practice trainee’s fulfilment of their practice training period.”[3]

As noted in the Written Answer by Minister for Law K Shanmugam to PQ on the new Practice Training Period framework for trainee lawyers:

“Under the current admissions framework, the Working Group for the Implementation of the Committee for the Professional Training of Lawyers’ Recommendations (“CPTL WG“) decided, based on the industry norms, that it would be reasonable to introduce up to 18 non-training days to better support trainees through a longer PTP. This duration was based on considerations including:

(a) Long absences during PTP would undermine its educational purpose and rigour. This would be disruptive and detrimental to the training.

(b) As the new training framework has more structured requirements that trainees must fulfill, they require sufficient time to complete all the requirements.

Trainees who require more than 18 non-training days can take additional time off, provided they make up the shortfall within 16 months from the start of their PTP.” [4]

(2) Honorarium

The Law Society takes the view that remuneration for practice trainees should be commensurate with their contributions during their PTP. In this regard, the Law Society’s Guidance Note 3.9.1 on “Practice Training and Relevant Legal Training” has provided guidance on the amount of honorarium to be paid under practice training contracts, which applies, by default, to the New Framework. Paragraphs 4 to 6 of the Law Society’s Guidance Note 3.9.1 are reproduced below for easy reference:

“4. In determining the amount of honorarium to be paid under practice training contracts, a law practice should at a minimum, take into account the practice trainee’s direct and basic expenses reasonably incurred in the course of carrying out his/her day-to-day duties under the practice training contract, such as transport and meals.

5. For the avoidance of doubt, such honorarium need not cover ancillary or indirect costs such as call papers, bar exams or the practice trainee’s opportunity costs associated with taking up the practice training contract.

6. Nevertheless, there is no prohibition for a law practice to incentivise its practice trainee to subsequently enter into an employment contract as a qualified legal practitioner with the law practice upon the completion of his/her practice training contract and attainment of the required qualifications by the payment of a lump sum bonus under the employment contract. The lump sum bonus may be expressly designed to cover other costs incurred by the practice trainee during his/her practice training contracts which may not have been covered by the honorarium.”

As stated elsewhere in this Guide, practice training is, at its core, an apprenticeship. The Ministry of Law has explained that “[t]hrough the mentorship and experience gained from being attached to a supervising solicitor, a practice trainee is better equipped to operate independently as a lawyer”.[5] Hence, practice trainees typically receive honoraria, but do not receive employee benefits, like paid leave or Central Provident Fund (“CPF”) contributions.

The Ministry for Law has also clarified that honoraria would be determined between trainees and law firms. Mandating a minimum honorarium quantum would be “prescriptive, introduce rigidity and would need to be constantly reviewed to account for prevailing conditions”. Moreover, it “could also inadvertently reduce the number of available training places if smaller law firms cannot afford the mandated amount or benefits”.[6]

Nevertheless, the Ministry of Law “encourage[s] training SLPs to provide fair and reasonable honoraria that recognises trainees’ contributions and allows them to meet their financial obligations”. It has also noted that under the New Framework, law practices can “also choose to grant larger honoraria to trainees with provisional PCs, recognising that they undertake a broader scope of responsibilities”. At the same time, it “recognize[s] that this needs to be balanced against the potential increased costs to law practices, particularly the smaller SLPs”.[7]

The Law Society would encourage supervising solicitors and their law practices to refer to the guidance below on charging out for a practice trainee’s contributions.

(3) Status as non-employees

The Law Society recognizes that practice trainees are, by default, non-employees of a law practice, which accords with the notion that practice training is, at its core, an apprenticeship.

In this regard, the Ministry of Law has stated as follows:[8]

“(a) Trainees are not employees because the purpose of practice training is professionalisation and education. PTP adds to trainees’ academic legal learning by enabling them to pick up practical legal skills in a live environment under the safety of supervision from a senior practitioner.

(b) Without the mentorship and experience gained from attachment to a supervising solicitor, the trainee would not be equipped to operate independently as a lawyer who is entrusted to provide legal advice.

(c) Law firms invest resources and time into the supervision and mentorship of trainees. This is a labour-intensive undertaking which historically is not revenue generating, and comes with the risk that the trainee may not continue with the firm after PTP. However, firms continue to invest in this, to ensure a pipeline of fresh and well-trained legal talent in Singapore.”

Pursuant to the Law Society’s Guidance Note 3.9.1 on “Practice Training and Relevant Legal Training”, a law practice that intends to maintain the status of practice trainees as non-employees should ensure that its practice training contract observes the following guidelines:

(a) The practice training contract should make it clear, in letter and in spirit that it is only for the training of the practice trainee in accordance with the relevant legislation.

(b) A standard clause should be incorporated in all practice training contracts as follows:

“This practice training contract is governed by the Legal Profession Act and the rules made thereunder. The duties and obligations of the Singapore law practice under this contract are prescribed by the Act, rules and guidelines issued thereto. The practice trainee shall perform his or her duties and obligations in accordance with the rules and guidelines.”

(c) The other clauses in the practice training contract should not, either in letter or in spirit, contradict the standard clause in paragraph (b) above. There should also be no derogation of the standard clause in other parts of the practice training contract. In particular, apart from the payment of any honorarium, there should be no provision of specific benefits to the practice trainee in the practice training contract. Clauses which suggest that the practice trainee is an employee of the law practice, such as provisions for specific working hours, the right to terminate the contract and the duty of the law practice to exercise effective supervision over its employees, should also be avoided.

(d) The use of the term ‘allowance’ or ‘remuneration’ should be avoided in the practice training contract. Instead, the word ‘honorarium’ should be used.

(e) The practice training contract should not state that the law practice will ‘assign work, supervise and guide your work’ or words to this effect. Instead, it should state that the law practice will ‘give training assignments and supervise training’, and that there will be a supervising legal practitioner.

Notwithstanding that practice trainees under the New Framework are entitled to be absent from practice training for up to 18 working days (for any reason including sick leave, annual leave, maternity leave or national service leave), the Law Society’s guidance above remains applicable as these entitlements do not equate to employee compensation and benefits but are only intended to better support practice trainees through the extended PTP for the reasons explained by the Ministry for Law.

However, if a law practice intends to create a clear employer-employee relationship, law practices should be mindful that consequential CPF and employment tax obligations will arise.

[3] Paragraph 12, Practice Training Period Guidelines 2024 (Singapore Institute of Legal Education).

[4] Written Answer by Minister for Law K Shanmugam to PQ on the new Practice Training Framework for trainee lawyers (9 September 2024).
[5] Written Answer by Minister for Law K Shanmugam to PQ on the new Practice Training Framework for trainee lawyers (9 September 2024).
[6] Written Answer by Minister for Law K Shanmugam to PQ on the new Practice Training Framework for trainee lawyers (9 September 2024).
[7] Second Reading of Legal Profession (Amendment) Bill (7 November 2023).

[8] Written Answer by Minister for Law K Shanmugam to PQ on the new Practice Training Framework for trainee lawyers (9 September 2024).

B. Supervising Solicitors

(1) Charging Out for Practice Trainee’s Contributions

Currently, there is no subsidiary legislation that prohibits law practices from charging out for practice trainees’ work.

The Ministry of Law has observed that:[9]

(a) PTP provides trainees with their first taste of legal practice and its accompanying realities and rigours. The onus to ensure that their time and work are fairly recognised falls squarely within the law firms’ responsibility. It is incumbent upon law firms and supervising solicitors to support trainees through these new challenges with understanding, patience, and fairness.

(b) Law firms can choose to recognise trainees’ contributions by charging out for trainees’ work. This could also help defray some costs of a longer PTP. However, this risks altering the nature of the trainee’s relationship with the firm from that of an apprenticeship. This is something that should be discussed between trainees and their supervising solicitors before commencing PTP.

The Law Society had previously published guidelines on its website to clarify that law practices may charge out for work done by practice trainees. This allows law practices to give due recognition to the practice trainee for work done, and will also help defray some costs of a longer practice training period. The Law Society’s website also provided detailed FAQs for law practices looking to charge out for practice trainees’ work. For convenience, the Law Society reproduces the latest version of its guidelines and FAQs below.

Law Society’s Guidelines (as at 13 December 2024)

These guidelines provided by the Law Society address the question of whether a law practice is entitled to charge out for the value of their practice trainees’ contribution. The guidelines are not meant to be an advisory or a Practice Direction but simply an aide-memoire if a law practice chooses to charge out for work done by its practice trainee. The Law Society is not making it compulsory or obligatory for law practices to charge out for work done, contributions made or time clocked in by a practice trainee.

Evolving Relationship

Over the years, the relationship between supervising solicitor and practice trainee has evolved. Practice trainees want some certainty during their PTP that their work is recognised and they add value to the law practice. Similarly, supervising solicitors and law practices want to give due recognition to the practice trainee for work done. This does not mean the profession is abandoning its traditional paradigmatic pupil/pupil-master relationship. It is recognising the evolving nature of that relationship with a longer and more rigorous PTP from 2025 and preparing itself for the future.

Charging out for the value of practice trainees’ contribution is consistent with the incremental approach to training under the proposed training framework of the Committee on the Professional Training of Lawyers (“CPTL”), which has been set in place in July 2024. The Report published by the CPTL in 2018 (‘the Report’) recognises that the inability to charge out for the practice trainee’s time is a strain on the law practice’s resources especially with the PTP set to double from six months to one year inform January 2025. Giving the law practice the option to charge out for work done by their practice trainee eases the burden of taking on trainees especially for smaller law practices. It might even encourage more practitioners to become supervising solicitors. This will engender a greater sense of belonging, nurturing and guidance within the profession which in turn will facilitate the transmission of values from supervising solicitors to practice trainees, ensuring practice trainees who eventually become practitioners maintain the high standards that the public expects of an Advocate & Solicitor.

Furthermore, as clients are generally cost-conscious, they might be willing to pay for work done by a practice trainee in lieu of for example, an associate doing the same job. There are also practice trainees who are quick on the uptake from the get-go and who would strongly add value to files whether on research, drafting or discovery. The important touchstone however is that it must be clearly explained to the client in advance that that a practice trainee will be apprenticing (under supervision) on the file for which the client will be charged. The Letter of Engagement should clearly and transparently explain this and also set out the basis for the charge (which should be rational e.g. hourly rates or a premium to the supervising solicitors’ rates to recognise the trainee’s work). If the client is so apprised, and agreeable to the practice trainee contributing to the file, it will be a potentially win-win-win outcome for all three parties – the client, the supervising solicitor and the practice trainee.

For the foregoing reasons, the Council is of the view that a rigid policy cast in stone of not charging out for work done by a practice trainee belongs to antiquity. While there is no denying the core aim of practice training as an apprenticeship and the fundamental nature of the training contract which is training, the time has come to recognise the dignity and value of our trainees during the PTP in a more meaningful way.

[9] Written Answer by Minister for Law K Shanmugam to PQ on the new Practice Training Framework for trainee lawyers (9 September 2024).

Benefits

First, we look at the benefit to all stakeholders on charging-out for trainees’ work and then address some of the questions you might have. We have also provided a Sample Practice Training Contract for reference and to adopt or adapt, if appropriate. The sample practice training contract is not intended to be prescriptive.

You may access it from the member’s library (click ‘for Lawyers’ > ‘Members Library’ > [Log in with your ID and Password] > ‘Practice Matters’ > ‘Admission’ > ‘Sample Practice Training Contract’).

Benefit from the perspective of the law practice

Taking on practice trainees can be a costly affair for some smaller law practices. Allowing the law practice to charge out for their practice trainee’s contribution can help defray the cost of hiring a trainee.

Benefit from the perspective of the supervising solicitor

If the practice trainee knows the client is aware he/she will be working on the file under the guidance of the supervising solicitor, while there is still on-the-job training, this could serve as an incentive to put in quality work. The benefit to the supervising solicitor is a higher standard of work from the practice trainee and a boost in the efficiency levels of the firm.

Benefit from the perspective of the practice trainee

The understanding that his/her contribution and work adds value to the management of the file gives the practice trainee the assurance that their work matters. It recognises the dignity and worth of the practice trainee (as a valuable team member) and the value of their contribution. It could also secondarily, engender a trusting relationship between the practice trainee and the law practice.

Benefit from the perspective of the Bar at large

Charging out for trainee’s contribution sends the signal that we as a profession value our practice trainees and that they belong to the profession from day one of their practice traineeship. From January 2025, the 12 month PTP allows supervising solicitors a much longer period to transmit knowledge, skills and even expertise to their practice trainees. These 12 months afford an invaluable runway to practice trainees to develop their skills and be an integral part of the legal profession.

Benefit to the client

As a practice trainee’s billable hours will be less costly than an Associate’s, some clients might opt to have a practice trainee work on their matter instead of an Associate (especially for research, discovery, etc). It increases flexibility of choices available to the client. The charge out rates of a Senior Counsel, Partner, Associate and practice trainee are different. It is important to list the charge out rates upfront so the client is aware of the difference from the outset. The client cannot subsequently remonstrate that he or she is dealing with a practice trainee instead of a Partner as the client would have gone into the engagement with eyes wide open.

Benefit from the perspective of the public

Charging out for a practice trainee’s contributions sends the message to the public that practice trainees are a valued part of the legal profession. They are not orphaned, economic digits handpicked to provide free labour under the guise of practice training only to be discarded at will after the end of the practice traineeship.

FAQs

What should I charge for my practice trainee’s time?

A rational and logical approach is something between a legal executive’s charge out rate and a first year lawyer’s hourly rate.

Will my clients be unhappy that a practice trainee is doing the chargeable work?

If it is explained clearly and transparently to the client that the practice trainee, especially if he or she holds a PPC, will be part of the team managing the file, this situation should not practically arise. It is the responsibility of the supervising solicitor to make this crystal clear to the client in the Letter of Engagement and during preliminary discussions with the client.

My trainee is not admitted to the Supreme Court; wouldn’t my trainee be in breach of s.33 of the Legal Profession Act 1966 (“LPA”) (Unauthorised person acting as advocate or solicitor) if I charge for his/ her work?

In discussions with your client, it must be explicitly stated that the individual is a practice trainee and his/her work is fully supervised by a qualified advocate and solicitor. Clearly and transparently state that the practice trainee will be working on the file. This must also be explicitly stated in the Letter of Engagement.

Your law practice should not hold out the practice trainee as an Advocate & Solicitor and should ensure that the practice trainee is properly supervised. Your practice trainee should not be allowed to practise law as a fully-fledged lawyer without proper supervision as that would court risk. Emphasising that the practice trainee remains a trainee and is neither qualified nor authorised to act as a qualified Advocate & Solicitor without proper supervision will prevent a breach of s.33 LPA. We recommend that you include this in your Letter of Engagement to nip any misperceptions on the practice trainee’s role in the bud.

The practice trainee’s charge out rate should obviously not be the same as that of an Associate. The lower charge out rate for the practice trainee is a supporting indicator that they are not a full-fledged professional.

What about CPF obligations?

If there is a clear employer-employee relationship, CPF obligations arise. The CPF Board views the PTP as an apprenticeship, thus no CPF obligation will arise unless an employer-employee relationship is established.

What about my obligations under the Employment Act?

If there is a clear employer-employee relationship, certain terms of the Employment Act will be statutorily implied such as leave and medical benefits.

Does charging out automatically mean an employer-employee relationship is established?

No, it does not. However, in the interests of fairness to practice trainees and ensuring that the fundamental obligation owed by supervising solicitors to train practice trainees is not derogated from, we urge all supervising solicitors to sign a training contract with their practice trainees. Such a contract will crystallise the practice trainee’s rights and obligations during the PTP.

Is it compulsory to charge out for work done by my practice trainee?

No, it is not obligatory. Charging out for the value of the practice trainee’s contributions, work or time is only one means of recognising the worth of your practice trainee’s contribution. Law firms may have other ideas of affirming the dignity and worth of practice trainee (both tangible and intangible).