In most countries, particularly civil law countries, there has been a tradition of giving many legal tasks to a variety of civil law notaries, clerks, and scriveners.[9][10] These countries do not have “lawyers” in the American sense, insofar as that term refers to a single type of general-purpose legal services provider;[11] rather, their legal professions consist of a large number of different kinds of law-trained persons, known as jurists, some of whom are advocates who are licensed to practice in the courts.[12][13][14] It is difficult to formulate accurate generalizations that cover all the countries with multiple legal professions, because each country has traditionally had its own peculiar method of dividing up legal work among all its different types of legal professionals.[15]
Notably, England, the mother of the common law jurisdictions, emerged from the Dark Ages with similar complexity in its legal professions, but then evolved by the 19th century to a single dichotomy between barristers and solicitors. An equivalent dichotomy developed between advocates and procurators in some civil law countries; these two types did not always monopolize the practice of law, in that they coexisted with civil law notaries.[16][17][18]
Several countries that originally had two or more legal professions have since fused or united their professions into a single type of lawyer.[19][20][21][22] Most countries in this category are common law countries, though France, a civil law country, merged its jurists in 1990 and 1991 in response to Anglo-American competition.[23] In countries with fused professions, a lawyer is usually permitted to carry out all or nearly all the responsibilities listed below.
Oral argument in the courts
Arguing a client’s case before a judge or jury in a court of law is the traditional province of the barrister in England, and of advocates in some civil law jurisdictions.[24] However, the boundary between barristers and solicitors have evolved. In England today, the barrister monopoly covers only appellate courts, and barristers must compete directly with solicitors in many trial courts.[25] In countries like the United States, that have fused legal professions, there are trial lawyers who specialize in trying cases in court, but trial lawyers do not have a de jure monopoly like barristers. In some countries, litigants have the option of arguing pro se, or on their own behalf. It is common for litigants to appear unrepresented before certain courts like small claims courts; indeed, many such courts do not allow lawyers to speak for their clients, in an effort to save money for all participants in a small case.[26] In other countries, like Venezuela or Portugal, no one may appear before a judge unless represented by a lawyer.[27] The advantage of the latter regime is that lawyers are familiar with the court’s customs and procedures, and make the legal system more efficient for all involved. Unrepresented parties often damage their own credibility or slow the court down as a result of their inexperience.[28][29]
Research and drafting of court papers
Often, lawyers brief a court in writing on the issues in a case before the issues can be orally argued. They may have to perform extensive research into relevant facts and law while drafting legal papers and preparing for oral argument.
In England, the usual division of labor is that a solicitor will obtain the facts of the case from the client and then brief a barrister (usually in writing).[30] The barrister then researches and drafts the necessary court pleadings (which will be filed and served by the solicitor) and orally argues the case.[31]
In Spain, the procurator merely signs and presents the papers to the court, but it is the advocate who drafts the papers and argues the case.[32]
In some countries, like Japan, a scrivener or clerk may fill out court forms and draft simple papers for lay persons who cannot afford or do not need attorneys, and advise them on how to manage and argue their own cases.[33]