Lecturer in Law: Exemption from Training for University Teaching Confirmed by the Court of Cassation

Imagine for a moment: you have spent years teaching law at university, training hundreds of students, earning a doctorate. And then one day, when you want to become a lawyer, you are told that your position as a 'lecturer' no longer exists in the texts. You would be furious, right? That is exactly what happened to Mr. Y., a teacher from the Mont-de-Marsan area, who had to fight all the way to the Court of Cassation to have his right to an exemption from training recognised.

In Biscarrosse as in Dax, many legal professionals are still unaware of the subtleties of access to the legal profession. This decision of 5 July 2017 (No. 16-21.361) settles a thorny issue: what exactly does 'lecturer' mean in Article 98, 2°, of the Decree of 27 November 1991? And above all, can this exemption from theoretical and practical training still apply today?

The answer is yes, and it directly concerns all holders of a doctorate in law who teach or have taught at university, whether in Mont-de-Marsan, Dax or elsewhere. Because behind this legal jargon lies a real gateway to the Bar, provided you know how to push it open.

The Facts: A Story Like Many Others

Mr. Abdou Y., a doctor of law, taught for more than five years as a 'lecturer' at the University of Paris-Est Créteil. Relying on this experience, he applied for an exemption from the theoretical and practical training and the Certificate of Aptitude for the Legal Profession (CAPA), on the basis of Article 98, 2°, of Decree No. 91-1197 of 27 November 1991. This text provides that 'lecturers, assistant lecturers and lecturers, holders of a doctorate in law, with five years of legal teaching in that capacity' may benefit from this exemption.

But the Paris Bar Council refused. Why? Because, in their view, the position of 'lecturer' no longer exists in current university texts. They considered that Mr. Y. was in fact performing duties as a 'teaching assistant', which did not correspond to the exemption. The case was therefore brought before the Paris Court of Appeal, which upheld the Bar Council's decision on 11 December 2014.

Mr. Y. then appealed to the Court of Cassation. He argued that his activity as a lecturer, even if no longer officially conferred, corresponded to the reality of his teaching duties. The Court of Cassation had to decide: should it stick to the letter of the texts or look at the reality of the duties performed?

The Reasoning of the Court — Analysed

The Court of Cassation quashed the Court of Appeal's decision. Its reasoning is simple but powerful: the term 'lecturer' in the 1991 decree designates a specific university position, the meaning of which has not been altered by the fact that this position is no longer currently conferred. In other words, the legislature intended to refer to persons who, at the time they were teaching, held the status of lecturer, regardless of subsequent changes in titles.

The legal basis is Article 98, 2°, of Decree No. 91-1197 of 27 November 1991. But the Court also relies on a teleological interpretation: the purpose of the text is to allow experienced academic teachers to enter the Bar without having to retake full training. It would be contrary to the spirit of the text to exclude someone simply because the official title of their post has changed.

The Court of Appeal erred by focusing on the current absence of the position of 'lecturer'. It should have examined whether Mr. Y., during his years of teaching, actually performed an activity corresponding to that of a lecturer. The Court of Cassation therefore remands the case to another Court of Appeal (Versailles) to examine this concrete point.

This decision is a confirmation of previous case law, but it provides a welcome clarification: the judge must not stop at a formal disappearance from the texts, but must examine the reality of the duties. This is a protective stance for teachers, preventing an administrative change from closing the doors to the Bar.

What This Changes for You — Concretely

If you are a doctor of law and have taught at university for at least five years, this decision is excellent news. It allows you to apply for an exemption from training and the CAPA, even if your post was called 'teaching assistant' or 'part-time lecturer', provided you can prove that you were actually performing the duties of a lecturer.

Take a concrete example: imagine a teacher in Dax, who taught civil law courses at the University of Pau for six years under the status of 'teaching assistant'. He can now argue that his activity was equivalent to that of a lecturer, and therefore apply for the exemption. However, he must provide solid evidence (contracts, university certificates, course syllabuses).

For landlord-owners or property professionals, this decision may seem remote. But if you are considering a career change into law or if you employ a legal professional, know that the path of university teaching can be a shortcut to the Bar. In Biscarrosse, a real estate agent wishing to become a lawyer specialising in property law could thus leverage his years of legal training.

In practice, the exemption request is made to the competent Bar Council. Processing time: generally 2 to 4 months. In case of refusal, you can appeal to the Court of Appeal within two months. Cost: a few hundred euros in filing fees, plus lawyer's fees if contested.

Four Tips to Avoid This Type of Dispute

• Keep all your teaching contracts. Even if the title of your post does not exactly match 'lecturer', keep carefully any documents proving your actual activity (syllabuses, hour logs, colleague references).
• Check your eligibility before applying for admission to the Bar. Consult a lawyer specialising in professional law to analyse your situation. A simple misinterpretation can cost you months.
• Anticipate the limitation period. The exemption request must be made before your registration for the internship or training. If you have already started training, it is often too late.
• If refused, do not give up. As Mr. Y. did, challenge the decision before the Court of Appeal. The case law is now favourable, provided you prove the reality of your duties.

Further Reading: Related Case Law and Developments

This decision is part of a line of case law favourable to teachers. For example, in a judgment of 12 January 2010 (No. 08-21.098), the Court of Cassation had already ruled that 'teaching fellows' could benefit from the exemption, even if their status was not that of 'assistant professor'. The trend is therefore consistent: the judge favours the reality of the duties over the formal title.

One can also cite a judgment of the Lyon Court of Appeal of 24 June 2015, which refused the exemption to a doctor of law who had taught as a 'part-time lecturer', for failure to prove five years of teaching. The Court of Cassation did not have to rule on this point, but the 2017 decision suggests that if the part-time lecturer proves that he performed the same duties as a lecturer, he could succeed.

For the future, this case law could evolve with the reform of law studies and the creation of new teaching statuses. But the principle established by the Court of Cassation seems solid: what matters is the nature of the teaching provided, not the administrative label.

In Practice: What to Do

FAQ:

• Who can benefit from this exemption? Holders of a doctorate in law who have taught for at least five years as a lecturer, assistant professor or assistant lecturer in a legal teaching and research unit (UFR).
• What if my post was called 'teaching assistant'? Gather evidence that you delivered lectures or tutorials of an equivalent level. Attach references from the university and students.
• Can I request the exemption after starting the lawyer training? No, the request must be made before registration for the training. If you are already registered, you can no longer benefit from the exemption.
• What is the deadline to challenge a refusal? Two months from notification of the Bar Council's decision.
• How much does a challenge cost? Lawyer's fees vary between 1,500 and 3,000 euros, depending on complexity. But the stakes (training exemption) are often worth the investment.

Are you in a similar situation? A 30-minute initial consultation with Maître Zakine (€45) can save you months of proceedings — and often much more. Book an appointment →