INTRODUCTION
In 2002 I was grateful when Christine Miskin, erstwhile editor of LIM, accepted an article for publication entitled ‘Of Barristers and Books’.Footnote 1 The article examined the then uncharted sector of chambers librarianship, providing library services to barristers (known variously as counsel) in their working sets of rooms. Christine invited an update later that year but to my shame I did not produce one during the remainder of her editorship, nor indeed until this very paper submitted 20 years later for LIM 2022.Footnote 2 My frail excuse is that no time seemed particularly fitting. I can but offer two points of explanation as to why the moment has come only now. The first is the stopping off point presented by the pandemic to step back and consider what lies behind us. The second is that irrespective of the pandemic or any other event, things have finally changed. The notion of ‘change’ is to be heavily underscored here. This implies that instead of chambers librarianship remaining the same, flourishing and then developing as it did (in my own jobs at least) over the last 20 years, the type and volume of work is now significantly different.
To Christine I offer an apology for my lack of an update. However, if ‘update’ implies ‘change’ then I hope I am forgiven for taking time – two decades of it! - to let those changes develop and to be able to consider the bigger picture in hindsight.
‘Change’ has placed the old cliché of an antiquated Bar steeped in archaic traditions firmly out of time. Sets of chambers today enjoy sophisticated technology, market themselves prodigiously and strongly compete for the best people. They hire a range of non-legal professionals to effect their business efficiently. Library and information professionals working within the sector can scarce not be conscious of this and the effects upon their own responsibilities.
Before considering how that might be, it is worth pausing to consider who these professionals are. ‘Of Barristers and Books’ spoke only of library work within sets of chambers but since 2004, Chambers and Inn Librarians have discovered common ground and have adopted the collective term ‘Bar librarian’. The difference is that Inn librarians are employed by one of the four Inns of Court to work in one of the large, extensively stocked libraries which serve barristers each one of whom is a member of one of the Inns.
Chambers librarians may be employed or self-employed and most work on a part-time basis to provide library services to self-employed barristers within the groups of rooms or ‘sets of chambers’ from which barristers in England and Wales operate. As a chambers librarian I cannot speak of issues exclusive to Inn libraries. Insights appear in the literature by Guy HolbornFootnote 3 and by Margaret Clay.Footnote 4
A network between Chambers and the Inns is significant because our combined insight into the Bar and its LIS suppliers is mutually informative and has lent a sense of width and depth to one of law librarianship's smallest sub-sectors. If we are able to punch above our weight it is because the 20-strong membership of the Bar Librarians’ Group (BLG) - founded in 2002 and now affiliated to BIALL - serves the interests of thousands of members of the Bar.
THE BAR AS A UNIQUE HOST SECTOR
Any insight into Bar librarianship requires some understanding of our host sector and its unique structure. This uniqueness is to be emphasised although the Bar is probably no longer as ‘enigmatic’ or ‘unfathomable’ as it was 20 years ago; two adjectives which came to my mind to include in ‘Of Barristers and Books’.Footnote 5 Indeed, as Chantal-Aimée Doerries KC says in the book entitled The Independent Bar,Footnote 6 ‘The most visible changes affecting barristers’ chambers have undoubtedly been in the way in which chambers present themselves to the outside world’.Footnote 7 The Independent Bar gives expert insight into the structure and management areas of the 21st century Bar and is significantly subtitled Insights into a Unique Business Model.
The Bar is unique in that it comprises thousands of self-employed practitioners who are co-tenants of sets of rooms and who reside in an expense sharing arrangement. The chambers librarian is conscious of this arrangement as ultimately it is individual barristers who bear the costs for any library resources provided by chambers. In addition, barristers may self-fund personal books and subscriptions.
Chambers are thus co-operative communities with structures and committees but equally, they are collectives of self-employed personalities. Sets of chambers are never boring and can assume a familial personality not sensed in a corporate law firm. ‘A barristers’ chambers is a community’ says Doerries. Consequently, a relationship with a set of chambers can feel more personal than in other work environments. Perhaps this forms something of the reason why length of service is common. For example, of the five chambers librarians who attended the inaugural meeting of the Bar Librarians’ Group in November 2002, three of us continue to represent the same sets today as we did 20 years ago. As two of us cover multiple sets we have between us served five chambers 20 years apiece. A century of Chambers librarianship since 2002!
GROWTH OF THE HOST SECTOR
Since 2002 the Bar has grown. One report by Slingo says that it has doubled in the last 30 years.Footnote 8 The figure in November 2001 at the time of ‘Of Barristers and Books’Footnote 9 was 10,334 (independent bar only) to be compared with the latest figure of 17,774 as reported by the Bar Standards Board in January 2022Footnote 10 which however includes self-employed, employed and dual practice practitioners. Should there be librarians serving barristers other than at the independent bar they are currently unknown to our network.
THE BAR LIBRARIANS’ GROUP
Unlike its host sector the BLG has not seen significant growth but where chambers’ growth is organic that is unsurprising, in other words sets are unlikely to increase library staff in response to a larger membership. That would have been much less true in the print era when tasks were greatly time-consuming. I could not imagine completing a print-based workload as a solo librarian in my original set where membership growth is over 100% since 1996, the year I joined.
If the BLG has not seen significant growth its membership has remained constant. Our first records show 17 names of which just two were Inn librarians and of the 15 chambers librarians, two distance Manchester librarians who however are no longer on the list. This is regrettable as greater representation from the regions would be welcomed. However, given that all four Inns have been represented by one or more staff members since 2004 the group has stabilised at 20 members between then and now. It has lost chambers librarians either to unreplaced retirees or unfortunately in one or two cases to redundancy but each member lost has been replaced by somebody serving in a newly created position elsewhere.
Of the 20 names currently on our mailing list 6 are Inn Librarians and 14 are in chambers and include 4 in Birmingham and 10 in London. BLG forms 3.7% of the current BIALL Membership which numbers 548. For comparison the Bar is 10% of the legal profession.Footnote 11
Between the 14 chambers librarians 19 sets of chambers are represented nearly all of which are classed as ‘leading’ according to Chambers UK Bar 2022.Footnote 12 It is unsurprising that chambers librarians are mostly hired by leading sets although the pattern is not entirely consistent; not every leading set appoints a professional librarian whilst some sets do without habitually appearing in the league tables. It is difficult to know the reasons why but as a point of conjecture, perhaps this lies partly in chambers’ specialisations as some subject areas may require a greater management of the requisite library and information materials. Flood explains the diversity in types of chambers.Footnote 13
Some chambers not hiring a library professional may allocate the work internally. That is a choice individual to sets upon which I cannot comment, although a reference helpfully located by Guy HolbornFootnote 14 on the appointment of Lincoln's Inn Librarian in 1894 imparts the following tale:
More than two hundred applicants have applied for the office, to which a salary of 400l. a year is attached. Among the number are several members of the Bar. The Benchers will have to decide whether it is desirable that a member of the Bar should hold the office – a question which ought not to admit of doubt, provided he be a skilled librarian.Footnote 15
Although the reporter went on to allege that librarians do not always possess sufficient knowledge of the legal literature it was a librarian, Mr A F Etheridge, formerly of Codrington Law Library at All Soul's Library Oxford, who was in the end appointed.Footnote 16
BLG members are nearly always at the Commercial Bar, although one London librarian (the author) is at a dedicated criminal law set and the Birmingham chambers librarians have work in sets which include criminal law practitioners. A criminal law chambers librarian must be one of the tiniest sub-sectors of BIALL!
FROM THE ARCHIVES: BLG MINUTES
BLG has stood the test of time. It has been recognised by legal publishers who occasionally attend meetings usually at our behest to discuss a particular issue but sometimes at their own. It has been mentioned in LIM other than in articles submitted by its membershipFootnote 17 and quite delightfully, had a mention in Bowman's book on British Librarianship and Information Work 2001–2005.Footnote 18
The success of BLG is down to the collective enthusiasm and intelligence of the group at sharing experiences and knowledge of the LIS sector as it affects the Bar. However, it would not have progressed beyond an embryonic stage without the dedicated leadership and influence of Margaret Clay, former Librarian and Keeper of Manuscripts at Inner Temple who headed BLG until she retired in 2020. All were grateful for her considerable contribution to the genesis of BLG and to its first 20 years. A regular meeting venue at Inner Temple was greatly appreciated.
BLG's inaugural meeting took place on 20 November 2002 and was attended by five chambers librarians and two from our hosts at the Inner Temple Library. Three of the five chambers librarians remain current members. Chambers librarians commented on two distinct challenges. The first was that the sheer volume of loose-leaf filing was overwhelming given that duties included copies owned by multiple individual barristers, especially in chambers which focused on private member libraries. The second was that working conditions were variable and often awkward. Neither of those points would find their way onto the agenda these days; the first for the obvious reason that many loose-leaf works have been automated and the second because this type of issue is no longer of real concern - to the extent that it is never mentioned. The meeting also discussed electronic services taken. Interestingly there was a strong emphasis on case reporting or analytical services such as Justis.com, Lawtel, New Law Online and Casetrack reflecting counsel's unremitting need for law reports and case law updates.
BLG members all reported the importance of securing bulk purchase discounts. At one point the group had considered a bulk buying consortium and in a meeting with Sweet & Maxwell in March 2003 was even tentatively invited to consider one. Difficulties were immediately recognised but the issue as raised demonstrates the pressure upon all Bar librarians to achieve good pricing.
Another issue discussed at the March 2003 meeting was the popularity of CDs amongst barristers who, according to the main publishers, were the biggest takers to satisfy the need for ease of portability. Crime Desktop was a popular product amongst criminal law barristers who are often itinerant between courts. However, the pricing based on bandings was not particularly understanding of the Bar. Barristers at my own criminal law set self-funded Crime Desktop; it was never part of a chambers expense, but per-capita price rises might be experienced when numbers entered a higher band to accommodate more users. I recall one year when the deal fell through entirely as a result. This was the type of issue which BLG would challenge rigorously with the publishers, pushing from the outset for the appointment of dedicated Bar reps who understood the mechanisms of the Bar and in particular that it is not a corporate environment. ‘There was discussion about the problems which arose when a rep was appointed who did not have knowledge of the workings of the Bar’ is a minute from January 2003.
Today Thomson Reuters have dedicated Bar Reps as do LexisNexis.
A recurring point of discussion at BLG was the dislike of product bundling whereupon customers were not given the option to opt-out of certain products. An example was the hefty Forms volumes as a compulsory part of a White Book subscription which the majority of barristers did not require. In the fullness of time, an opt-out was won. The bundling of Informa print copies with an online element was tenaciously opposed but that battle was lost.
BLG minutes record the gradual shift towards the main online products. It is often acknowledged that law firms tend to take online products before uptake at the Bar and this was true of Westlaw and PLC. Pricing was often cited as prohibitive but there was also a sense that early content was more orientated towards law firms. The minutes for December 2003 show that the group felt Westlaw was ‘more interested in law firms than chambers.’ However, in November 2005 the group noted the importance of ICLR reports being included on Westlaw. More sets of chambers began taking up subscriptions in the following years. PLC came a few years later. In June 2006 a minute reads, ‘It was noted that PLC had now produced a new Dispute Resolution service and members wondered if this might be of use to barristers’ chambers. Other PLC services were intended for solicitors’ firms or in-house law departments.’
BLG's earliest record of a PLC sale to chambers is dated March 2014. Since then it has gained in popularity at the Bar although opinion remains split. Comments I have on record from my own subscribers range from ‘Absolutely indispensable!’ to ‘Once or twice I have thought it might be useful, but it's not very important.’ This split in opinion exemplifies how it is not easy to get subscriptions installed in the whole of a set of chambers where all members are obliged to fund something in which some of them have no interest. In those circumstances a chambers librarian may be in a tug of war.
On occasions BLG has shown prescience. A minute in March 2009 shows a question raised on the possibility of including historic versions of the White Book on Westlaw. News of these was circulated in March 2022 to include the 1999 edition and editions from 2021 onwards.
BLG TODAY
When Margaret Clay retired she delegated the leadership of BLG to me as her co-founder. I could not aspire to equal her contribution to the group either personally or in my capacity as a solo freelance librarian. However, the enthusiasm of BLG members to continue demonstrated the extent to which the group was appreciated.
A record 13 BLG members attended a reunion meeting on Teams in March 2021 after a break of almost two years of which the pandemic had been one obvious cause. The group agreed to apply for BIALL affiliation which I proposed to give BLG a place within the framework of the wider profession where I felt it surely belonged. BIALL has been most helpful towards us and this seems an apposite moment to recognise the support of Catherine Bowl, Kim Mclachlan and Diane Miller.
One of the first issues the newly assembled group tackled was that of the Lawtel migration onto Westlaw in early 2021. The migration was not well received by some subscribers at the Bar who had appreciated the alerting service on the Lawtel.com platform. BLG produced a letter to include submissions from Bar members who had felt sufficiently strongly to put their views into writing. With the support of BIALL's Supplier Liaison, Kim Mclachlan, BLG met with Thomson Reuters on Teams to consider those submissions. Thomson Reuters willingly met with us twice and subsequently worked on addressing issues raised, for example a requirement for well-presented case summaries and improvements to taxonomies. Although the episode was stressful, all sides worked together with a view to resolving points of complaint. It was gratifying to see the Bar Librarians’ Group receive a mention in the Supplier Liaison's report in the May 2021 BIALL Newsletter and to know that our relatively small group had played a pivotal and hopefully helpful role in a matter affecting others in the wider profession who had also contacted BIALL. A mention must go to the law firm librarian Laura Pike whose initial posting on Lis-Law was helpful to us in formulating our submission and was summarised within. First and foremost, though, the episode revealed the over-riding emphasis which barristers place on a reliable case reporting service. Interestingly, pupils I spoke to in July 2022 all said that the one information requirement they had in the transferral from pupillage to tenancy was the need to set up case alerts.
Later in 2021 BLG discussed Thomson Reuters violet contracts in which we were required to align all subscriptions to one chosen date. Opinion in the group was split between those who welcomed the greater ease in invoice processing and those - I include myself - who felt that is not entirely workable to treat chambers and member-only subscriptions under one umbrella. For example, there is a subsequent requirement to charge barristers monthly, not annually, and in asking them to consider White Book renewals separately from the new print edition if it is not convenient to align all other Westlaw subscriptions to the new edition of the White Book. The contracts were obligatory and in those circumstances it falls upon us as chambers librarians to make the admin processes as easy as possible for the barrister; Chambers support has an acute sense of duty towards its members.
Since the reassembling of BLG the group has held eight Teams meetings half of which have been with publishers and in half of those cases publishers have approached us either to demonstrate upgrades or to seek developmental advice. The group is pleased to see that it has made an impact and is grateful to publishers for engaging with us. BLG's first in person meeting post-pandemic will be held in October 2022 and I am particularly grateful to Rob Hodgson, Margaret's successor at Inner Temple Library for inviting us back to our former IT venue.
PERSONAL REFLECTIONS
In March 2013 just after the ten-year anniversary of BLG Margaret circulated the minutes of the inaugural meeting to the group for comparison. The group concluded that it was interesting to see that problems noted in 2002 were still concerns in 2013. Ten years later the landscape has shifted further. Some things undoubtedly remain the same but ‘change’ has certainly occurred.
The following list is a personal view only which outlines eight ways in which I feel my role as chambers librarian to three sets, two commercial and one criminal, has most changed since ‘Of Barristers and Books’Footnote 19 in 2002.
(1). The shift from print to online means greater centralisation of library services and greater concomitant responsibilities.
Even in sets which formerly favoured private member libraries over centralised library services, centralisation is now more common because online subscriptions are evidently more cost effective on that basis. The corollary of centralising online library services means bearing responsibility not just towards those choosing to subscribe but towards all members of chambers as contributors to funds. These funds are not low cost; a chambers librarian may oversee one of the largest facility budgets in chambers. This shift in responsibility is in my opinion the biggest change since 2002 and refers back to the opening point that changes at today's high-tech, commercially minded Bar have necessarily impacted on the chambers librarian.
(2). ‘The sheer volume of the work exceeding its complexity’ is no longer quite so true.
I included the above line in ‘Of Barristers and Books’Footnote 20 when print duties, loose-leafing in particular, formed the bulk of a heavy workload in a set where I serviced the libraries of many individual barristers. Today, the sheer volume of work is no longer the main issue. Overlapping with (1) above, the main issue is the responsibility of managing high value online subscriptions across the whole of chambers. This does not deny the responsibilities of my original print era duties, but the sheer volume of work has been replaced by something else altogether. That ‘something’ may not necessarily be complex but it is certainly multi-layered as today's chambers librarian must evaluate new online products, propose then institute them into chambers, train, troubleshoot and review them from inception to renewal. This is the main but by no means the only part of a revised job description. There are many other challenges, some unpredictable; for example, in the summer of lockdown I sold a member's set of Lloyd's Law Reports to an overseas buyer keen to obtain copies for people working away from libraries but without online subscriptions. Who might have foreseen that?
(3). ‘Demanding, but in a mostly menial way’ no longer applies to handling print but to frequent online access queries.
In 2019 Daniel Greenberg CB wrote an article for LIMFootnote 21 fully supportive of the role of the law librarian in which he said that in the era of the printed book, ‘maintenance of the legal landscape was demanding, but in a mostly menial way’. I can but agree with him, although these days it applies to something different. Today it may appear a menial task when a user reports a forgotten online password or difficulty registering for a service but it can be demanding too if urgent and especially if the user is not internet confident. Some access problems may be more fraught; for example, Westlaw now requires additional registration keys for barristers buying personal books on top of a chambers subscription. This process has not always worked smoothly. The occasion when a barrister e-mailed me because his sole user Westlaw book had mysteriously become inaccessible during a trial is commonly known as ‘heartsink’. It may be a menial task to call or e-mail customer services but the job of ensuring seamless access at all times is a demanding one for the chambers librarian.
(4). The renewal of annual Practice manuals has become generally easier.
Many chambers librarians continue to effect bulk buy purchases of the White Book, Archbold and Blackstone's. There was a time when choices between print, CD, ebook or online were nothing short of bamboozling. Enquiries over the various formats were common around the time of new edition orders making it one of the busiest periods of the year. Subscribers found eBooks in particular difficult to receive and download. In my experience those taking eBooks have now familiarised themselves with the functionalities and publishers have made some improvements. Subscribers have therefore settled down into preferences which makes renewals easier, although eBook uptake remains low. Birmingham BLG members however report a different experience and an increase in eBook uptake. It is difficult to know whether this is an entirely coincidental regional variation or not, but the comparison shows the value of our networking group in sharing our experiences and conducting discussions to make further discoveries.
(5). If pupil barristers have to impress, the process is now two-way.
Twenty years ago, there was little suggestion that I should help new pupils in any way. Today, I am given advance notification of the pupils’ arrival and am asked to supply them with the requisite online facilities. ‘Barristers spend time and money attracting good pupils’ says Kramer.Footnote 22 This is to be anticipated in today's competitive market and chambers wish to cater for them. Some pupils might even ask at interview what library and information services are available, so I am told; others will assume that a set of good reputation will not be lacking. Either way I am instructed that pupils and indeed any newly joining tenants must have access to all our library and Information services. A good library induction is called for and the necessity to project numbers of future online users is all part of a subscription renewal negotiation especially one for a multi-year period.
(6). There is much less print but it is not dead.
This theme is familiar to us all. Barristers still do buy print as a personal preference sometimes even in addition to an online subscription or because a title is not available online. In October 2021 BLG minutes record loose-leafing points from two chambers librarians. Loose-leafing carries on! Bulk buys of the annual practice manuals are also still effected. I was happy to hear from one Birmingham librarian that textbooks are called for from barristers of all levels. However, I wonder whether anybody could beat the case of the junior barrister who has recently asked me to acquire a printed set of English Reports for him?
(7). There is little work left in criminal law chambers librarianship but for good reason.
The criminal bar differs from the commercial bar not least in a very real lack of funding (criminal barristers are striking at the time of writing in July 2022) and also in that working hours are spent more in courtrooms than in chambers. A frequent need to travel and the small window of time counsel sometimes have to prepare cases overnight meant that the agreement to put everything online eventually became a ‘no-brainer’ for my criminal law set in the interest of portability and 24/7 reference. A representation to chambers to go entirely online, which I drafted together with a member of chambers, was painstakingly done including how to part-fund the transaction through the sale of the print library. The result was a fully comprehensive online package which chambers jested (many a true word) might be attractive to new tenants. The effect for the barristers has been transformational. As a result, the work which remains at my criminal law set centres mainly around renewals and bulk Archbold/Blackstone orders. It has to be said that criminal law work is anchored more in practice and in advocacy than in legal research and its library materials are finite. I am not aware of any other librarians in dedicated criminal law sets, although Birmingham librarians in multi-disciplinary sets all perform work in that department.
(8). It is harder to encourage people to undertake training but persistence is important.
Prior to 1st January 2017 members of the Bar were motivated to attend training sessions in order to meet CPD requirements as set out by the Bar Standards Board. This was helpful to chambers librarians responsible for instructing and educating barristers on our online subscriptions. Since CPD requirements became less prescriptiveFootnote 23 it has become difficult to persuade busy barristers to attend sessions. Our duty is only to respond to user needs. However, if subscribers resist attending training it makes it more difficult for us to evaluate the usefulness of new functionalities and to know that the expense on our subscriptions is being optimised. Notably, pupils who spoke to me all confessed disinterest in training, unsurprisingly perhaps as they are millenials with an excellent grasp of internet use. With an average age at the commencement of pupillage of 28.5, pupils come to chambers often having acquired legal research skills in previous roles. This confirms earlier research reported in LIM by MA Student Anne Binsfeld that new barristers adopt ‘self-led practice’ or even ‘trial and error’ in preference to formal training.Footnote 24 This pattern could well eradicate the need for future training but with ever more complex functionalities available I see all the more need to keep users informed and to encourage them to train.
LOOKING TO THE FUTURE
Reflections on the past and speculation over the future is nothing new amongst librarians serving the Bar, witness a 1999 paper in The Law Librarian by Guy Holborn of Lincoln's InnFootnote 25 in which he in turn referred to an article in Law Times as long ago as 1923 speculating on the future of the Inn libraries.Footnote 26 The writer of that article, known only as JDC, was occupied with opposing the amalgamation of the libraries of the Inns. Interestingly in 2009 the BLG was briefed on a feasibility study for the merger of two Inn libraries which however did not proceed.
More recently in 2008, Guy gave further projections including the question as to whether online chambers libraries might become self-sufficient and so depend less on Inn libraries.Footnote 27 However, chambers continue to have many needs both print and online which we simply cannot meet ourselves. The complementary manner in which chambers and the Inn libraries work is something I have sensed at BLG and it is pleasing that we have established a connection; all BLG members doubtless use the Inn libraries on occasion not just those of us in London but in Birmingham too.
In conclusion, two points have jumped out at me whilst writing this update on chambers librarianship. First, the workload, for me at least, is not as great as it was 20 years ago when the sheer volume of print-based work was overwhelming. However, print libraries have largely been replaced by high value online libraries which bring repeated new management challenges. I see no reason why these challenges will not continue well into the future; the publishers are unlikely to stand still on the development and upgrades of their online products and they are likely to compete – who amongst us has not wondered about the comparisons between PLC and LexisPSL?
The second point reverts to the quote made by Chantal-Aimée Doerries KC on how chambers present themselves to the outside world today.Footnote 28 In its prescience, a question was minuted by BLG in January 2003 as to whether anybody's chambers library was included in marketing. I am not sure of the current answer to that, but a search on ‘library’ in Chambers UK Bar Guide 2022 Footnote 29 reveals that just one set classed as ‘leading’ mentions a library in its entry. It may be that we as chambers librarians should not shy away from securing a place in marketing literature. I am hoping that this article has helped demonstrate why we are surely worth the mention.
