Build clear civil submissions, organise arguments and respond to judicial questions.
For trainees, paralegals, newly qualified solicitors and junior litigators taking on hearings or greater litigation responsibility. Practise live, receive individual feedback and try again.
Instruction and realistic exercises follow the same curriculum in person or live online. Online cohorts use live discussion and practice rooms.
Day 01
Building the Advocate
From a clear objective to a persuasive submission, then into live applications and judicial questions.
View day schedule
Introduction and advocacy framework
Identify the decision required and build the submission around the outcome sought.
Anatomy of an effective submission
Structure, sequencing, legal propositions, evidence and persuasion.
Break
Advocacy exercise 1
Conduct short civil applications and receive individual tutor feedback.
Lunch
Case theory and selecting arguments
Prioritise the strongest points and leave out what does not advance the order sought.
Advocacy exercise 2
Make more complex applications involving disputed facts or competing submissions, followed by feedback.
Break
Judicial intervention
Respond to questions, interruptions, adverse propositions and indications from the judge.
Practical judicial intervention exercise
Return to the argument under questioning and apply the day’s feedback.
Day 02
Performing Under Pressure
Contested advocacy, reply and costs culminate in a realistic assessed application.
View day schedule
Review and advanced advocacy principles
Identify development points from the first day and set a sharper objective.
Contested application exercise
Advocate against an opponent rather than delivering isolated submissions.
Break
Reply advocacy
Respond to the opposing case without repeating the original argument.
Lunch
Costs advocacy
Make concise submissions on costs and the order sought.
Advanced advocacy exercise
Conduct a simulated contested hearing with judicial questioning and direct feedback.
Break
Final assessed advocacy exercise
Bring structure, persuasion, reply and responsiveness together in a realistic application.
Individual and group feedback
Leave with specific priorities for continued development.
Indicative timetable. Sequence and timings can be agreed to suit your firm and cohort.
Work from a case file.
Civil case files move from a short application to disputed facts, competing submissions and a contested hearing with costs. Participants must decide which arguments deserve the court’s time.
01
Demonstrate
Experienced advocates model a focused approach to the task.
02
Perform
Participants conduct the advocacy themselves, in the room or live online.
03
Develop
Direct individual feedback identifies what to keep, change and practise again.
Learning outcomes.
Participants leave with practical feedback and a clearer method for future hearings. The programme does not substitute for a firm's supervision or rights-of-audience requirements.
Structure submissions around the order sought
Select arguments and build a coherent case theory
Conduct and respond to civil applications
Answer judicial intervention without losing the argument
Make concise reply and costs submissions
Handle weak points with professional judgment
Your instructors.
Practising advocates and experienced tutors lead demonstrations, repeated practice and individual feedback.
Tutor numbers reflect cohort size, with multiple instructors where needed for individual practice and feedback. Faculty and delivery are agreed with the firm before training.
Tailored to your team.
A defined curriculum, with exercises tailored to your firm’s work.
Practice areaParticipant seniorityTypical hearingsClient profileDevelopment objectivesIdentified advocacy weaknesses
