There is a phrase that has become almost too familiar within the legal profession. A newly called lawyer is called a “baby lawyer.” Sometimes, the expression is used casually. Sometimes, it is used humorously. Sometimes, it is used affectionately by senior colleagues who have spent several years at the Bar. There are also occasions when the newly called lawyer is described as a “legal virgin,” supposedly because the lawyer has not yet accumulated the practical experience that comes with years of legal practice. There may be some truth in the fact that a newly called lawyer is inexperienced. There may be truth in the fact that the lawyer is still learning the practical dimensions of advocacy, drafting, procedure, client management, negotiation and litigation. But there is a point at which professional description becomes professional diminishment. That point deserves serious consideration. A newly called lawyer may be new to legal practice, but the lawyer is not new to being a lawyer.
The distinction is fundamental. A newly called lawyer may not have the courtroom experience of a practitioner who has spent twenty years appearing before the courts. The young lawyer may not have handled hundreds of matters, may not have mastered every procedural complication, may still be learning how different judges conduct proceedings, and may still be developing the confidence required to stand before the court and address the Bench. None of these realities should be denied. Experience matters enormously in legal practice. The wisdom acquired from years of professional exposure cannot simply be downloaded from a textbook. However, there is a difference between acknowledging that someone is inexperienced and suggesting that the person is professionally insignificant. There is a difference between saying, “You are still learning,” and saying, “You are only a baby lawyer.” The first is a statement of professional development. The second, depending on the context, can become an instrument of professional humiliation.
THE DAY A LAWYER BECOMES A LAWYER
There is something profoundly significant about the day a person is called to the Bar. It is not simply another graduation ceremony. It represents the completion of a demanding process of legal education and professional training and the beginning of a new professional identity. A person who has been duly called to the Bar and admitted to practise does not walk away from that ceremony as a half-lawyer. The person does not become a “lawyer in waiting.” The person becomes a lawyer who is beginning the practical journey of legal practice. The distinction is important because professional development does not invalidate professional status. A medical doctor who has recently qualified may need years of experience before becoming a specialist. An architect may require years of professional exposure before becoming highly experienced. An accountant may continue learning throughout a career. The same principle applies to law. Being at the beginning of a professional journey does not mean that the professional identity has not been established.
This is why the phrase “baby lawyer” should be understood carefully. If it is merely friendly professional banter, there may be little reason to object. The legal profession has its humour, traditions, teasing and informal expressions. Lawyers are not strangers to professional jokes. The problem begins when the expression is used to establish a hierarchy of worth rather than a distinction in experience. A lawyer who was called last week is not less of a lawyer because another lawyer was called twenty years ago. The older lawyer has more experience. That should be respected. The newer lawyer has less experience. That should also be acknowledged. But the two statements are not equivalent to saying that one is a lawyer while the other is not. Seniority is a matter of professional chronology. It should never become a measurement of human or professional worth.
SENIORITY IS NOT SUPERIORITY
The legal profession rightly places importance on seniority. The experience of senior practitioners is invaluable. A lawyer who has spent decades in practice has encountered legal problems that a newly called lawyer has probably never seen. Such a lawyer has learned how to manage clients, identify risks, develop litigation strategies, negotiate difficult matters, analyse evidence, prepare arguments, deal with unexpected developments and navigate the realities of the courtroom. There are lessons that only time can teach. A young lawyer who understands this should not treat seniority with contempt. Respect for experience is part of professional maturity. But seniority should never be confused with superiority. A lawyer having more years at the Bar does not make every argument made by that lawyer automatically correct, just as a newly called lawyer having fewer years at the Bar does not make every argument made by that lawyer automatically wrong.
The profession must learn to distinguish between the authority of experience and the abuse of seniority. A senior lawyer should be able to correct a junior lawyer without destroying the junior lawyer’s confidence. A senior lawyer should be able to teach without humiliating. A senior lawyer should be able to say, “I have seen this before, and this is what experience has taught me,” instead of using seniority to silence every contrary view. The best senior practitioners are not necessarily those who constantly remind everyone of how long they have been at the Bar. They are those whose conduct demonstrates the value of their experience. Their presence should make younger lawyers better. Their knowledge should open doors. Their guidance should create competence. Seniority should be a bridge through which knowledge travels from one generation of lawyers to another, not a wall that prevents younger lawyers from finding their voice.
EVERY SENIOR LAWYER WAS ONCE A BEGINNER
There is a simple truth that every lawyer should remember. Every senior lawyer was once a beginner. Every advocate who now speaks confidently before the court once had a first appearance. Every lawyer who now knows exactly what process to file once had to learn the procedural rules. Every lawyer who now drafts impressive pleadings once produced a first draft. Every lawyer who now confidently handles clients once had to learn how to communicate with clients. Every lawyer who now walks into court with complete composure once experienced the nervousness that accompanies the beginning of professional life. Experience did not appear magically. It was accumulated through time, observation, practice, mistakes, corrections, mentorship and persistence. The lawyer who has been at the Bar for thirty years did not arrive at thirty years on the first day. There was a first year. There was a first matter. There was a first argument. There was a first mistake. There was a beginning.
This is why the experienced lawyer should remember what it felt like to be new. A young lawyer may not know what an experienced lawyer knows today, but that is precisely why the young lawyer needs guidance. A newly called lawyer should not be expected to possess twenty years of professional experience after spending only a few months at the Bar. That expectation is irrational. What should be expected is willingness to learn, diligence, integrity, preparation, humility and professional responsibility. The young lawyer must make the effort to become better. The senior lawyer should create an environment in which improvement is possible. If a young lawyer makes an error, correct the error. If a young lawyer misunderstands a procedure, explain the procedure. If a young lawyer makes an inadequate submission, show the lawyer how it could have been stronger. The objective should be to produce a better lawyer, not merely to prove that the young lawyer is inexperienced.
EXPERIENCE IS NOT THE ONLY MEASURE OF A LAWYER
Years of Call are relevant, but they cannot tell the whole story about a lawyer. A lawyer may have been called recently and possess remarkable academic knowledge, research ability, writing skills, technological competence, commercial understanding, or expertise in a specialised area of law. Another lawyer may have decades of experience but may not have encountered a particular emerging legal issue. This is not an insult to the experienced lawyer. It is simply a reflection of the enormous breadth of the law. No lawyer knows everything. The law is too broad, too dynamic and too constantly evolving for that to be possible. A lawyer may be highly experienced in criminal litigation but have limited experience in complex corporate transactions. Another may be an excellent commercial lawyer but have little exposure to criminal procedure. Another may have extensive courtroom experience but limited familiarity with emerging technological issues. Legal practice is too diverse to reduce professional competence to a single number representing years at the Bar.
This is why the better question is not always, “How many years have you spent at the Bar?” Sometimes the better question is, “What can you do?” Can you research? Can you analyse? Can you draft? Can you reason? Can you communicate? Can you advocate? Can you identify the real legal issue? Can you prepare properly? Can you understand your client’s problem? Can you conduct yourself ethically? Can you learn from correction? Can you continue learning after you have been called? These questions reveal far more about a lawyer’s professional potential than the mere date on which the lawyer was called. A young lawyer who cannot do these things must work on them. An experienced lawyer who can do them should continue developing them. In both circumstances, the professional journey continues.
ADVOCACY IS A VOICE
Advocacy is one of the most beautiful aspects of legal practice because it gives a lawyer a voice in the pursuit of justice. The advocate speaks when another person needs representation. The advocate researches when another person needs legal reasoning. The advocate challenges an assertion when a client’s rights are threatened. The advocate stands before the court and attempts to persuade through law, facts, evidence and reason. That voice does not become legitimate only after ten years at the Bar. A newly called lawyer may not yet have a polished advocacy style, but the lawyer has a voice. That voice may tremble during the first appearance. It may become stronger after the tenth appearance. It may become remarkably confident after the hundredth. The important thing is that the lawyer must be allowed to develop it. A profession that constantly tells young lawyers to remain silent because they are inexperienced may eventually produce experienced lawyers who never learned to develop independent professional confidence.
Every advocate who is now considered seasoned once had to learn the art of speaking before a court. Nobody begins with the confidence that comes from hundreds of appearances. Nobody begins with the instinct that comes from years of observing judicial proceedings. Nobody begins knowing how to respond perfectly when a judge interrupts an argument or when opposing counsel raises an unexpected objection. These skills are developed through exposure. The young lawyer should therefore be encouraged to observe experienced advocates, study their techniques, learn courtroom etiquette, understand judicial reasoning, prepare thoroughly and gradually develop a distinct professional voice. The goal should not be to turn every young lawyer into a replica of an older lawyer. The goal should be to help the young lawyer become a competent lawyer in their own right. Advocacy is a voice, and every lawyer deserves the opportunity to find that voice.
DO NOT DISCOURAGE THE NEW LAWYER
One of the most dangerous consequences of excessive emphasis on the “baby lawyer” mentality is the possibility of discouragement. A newly called lawyer is already confronting a significant transition. The structured world of academic study and professional training has given way to the unpredictable realities of practice. Suddenly, there are clients to manage, processes to draft, cases to research, deadlines to meet, courtrooms to navigate, professional expectations to satisfy and ethical responsibilities to understand. The young lawyer is trying to transform theoretical knowledge into practical competence. At such a critical stage, unnecessary ridicule can have consequences. A young lawyer who is repeatedly told that they are incompetent because they are new may eventually become afraid to ask questions, afraid to speak, afraid to make submissions and afraid to take professional initiative. That does not strengthen the profession. It weakens it.
The answer is not to lower professional standards. The answer is to separate professional standards from professional humiliation. Young lawyers should be held to appropriate standards of diligence, competence, integrity and professional conduct. They should be corrected when they make mistakes. They should be taught to prepare properly. They should understand that clients are entitled to competent representation and that negligence cannot be excused simply because someone is new. But correction should be directed at improving the work. Humiliation should not become part of the curriculum. A lawyer can be told that a process is defective without being told that the lawyer is worthless. A lawyer can be told that an argument is weak without being told that the lawyer has no place in the profession. A lawyer can be advised to improve without being made to feel that the lawyer’s youth at the Bar is itself a professional crime.
THE YOUNG LAWYER MUST ALSO ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY
There is, however, another side to this discussion that young lawyers must not ignore. Rejecting the label “baby lawyer” does not mean that newly called lawyers should behave as though they already know everything. There is no dignity in arrogance disguised as confidence. The young lawyer must recognise that legal practice is different from passing examinations. Knowing legal principles is important, but knowing how to apply them in real situations requires practice. A newly called lawyer should therefore remain teachable. Read cases. Study statutes. Understand procedural rules. Watch experienced advocates. Ask intelligent questions. Conduct proper research before making submissions. Learn how to draft. Learn how to interview clients. Learn how to manage time. Learn professional ethics. Understand that the consequences of mistakes in legal practice can be serious. The correct attitude is neither inferiority nor arrogance. It is confident humility. The young lawyer should be able to say, “I am new, but I am willing to learn, and I am determined to become excellent.”
THE LEGAL PROFESSION NEEDS MENTORS, NOT GATEKEEPERS
The legal profession does not need unnecessary gatekeeping. It needs mentorship. There is a difference between protecting the standards of the profession and protecting the ego of individuals within it. Professional standards are necessary because lawyers deal with matters that can determine liberty, property, businesses, family relationships, constitutional rights, reputation and sometimes life itself. The profession must therefore insist on competence, diligence, integrity and ethical conduct. But none of these standards require experienced lawyers to treat younger lawyers as though they are permanently inferior. The purpose of experience should be to create more experienced lawyers. Knowledge that is hoarded dies with the person who possesses it. Knowledge that is transferred becomes institutional strength. A senior practitioner who trains a young lawyer is not losing professional relevance. That practitioner is extending professional legacy.
The most powerful form of professional legacy is not merely the number of cases won, the number of years spent at the Bar, or the number of impressive titles attached to one’s name. It is the number of competent lawyers one helped to develop. A senior lawyer who takes the time to teach a young lawyer how to think, research, draft, advocate and conduct professional affairs contributes something that can outlive individual cases. The young lawyer may eventually become an experienced practitioner and may later mentor another lawyer. In that way, knowledge moves through generations. This is how a profession becomes stronger. The senior lawyer’s greatest achievement may not be proving that the junior lawyer knows less. It may be helping the junior lawyer eventually know more.
THERE IS NO BABY IN THE LAW
Perhaps the expression should therefore be retired from the vocabulary of professional diminishment, even if it remains as harmless banter among colleagues. There are junior lawyers, senior lawyers, young practitioners, seasoned practitioners, experienced advocates and emerging advocates. These distinctions are useful because they communicate differences in professional experience. But there is no baby in the law. A newly called lawyer is not a lesser species of lawyer. The lawyer is simply at an earlier stage of professional development. The lawyer’s experience may be limited. The lawyer’s confidence may still be developing. The lawyer’s advocacy may require refinement. The lawyer may make mistakes. But none of these things make the lawyer professionally invisible. A young lawyer is a work in progress, just as every lawyer remains a work in progress throughout a career that may span decades.
The legal profession itself is a lifelong curve. There is no point at which a lawyer can reasonably claim to have finished learning. The law changes. Society changes. Technology changes. Business changes. Crime evolves. Evidence evolves. Judicial reasoning develops. Legislation changes. New constitutional questions arise. New areas of practice emerge. Legal research itself is being transformed by technology and artificial intelligence. A lawyer who has spent thirty years in practice may possess extraordinary professional wisdom and yet encounter a legal issue that requires entirely new research. This is not a weakness. It is the nature of law. The longer a lawyer remains in the profession, the more apparent it becomes that legal education does not end with Call to Bar. The lawyer remains a student of the law, regardless of seniority.
YOUR YEAR OF CALL IS A DATE, NOT YOUR DESTINY
To every newly called lawyer, understand this clearly. Do not apologise for being new. Do not allow the fact that another lawyer has more years at the Bar to convince you that you have no future. You are beginning, and beginnings are supposed to look different from endings. You may not yet have the experience of the senior practitioner, but experience can be acquired. You may not yet have courtroom confidence, but confidence can be developed. You may not yet have handled complex matters, but opportunities will come. You may make mistakes, but mistakes can become lessons if you are humble enough to recognise them and disciplined enough to correct them. Respect those ahead of you. Learn from them. Seek mentorship. But do not despise yourself because you are at an earlier point on the curve. Your year of Call is a date. It is not your destiny.
And to the senior lawyer, remember something equally important. The lawyer standing before you today as a newly called practitioner may one day become a formidable advocate. The young lawyer you dismiss today may become the lawyer whose argument you admire tomorrow. The person whose nervous first appearance you laugh at today may eventually become the person mentoring another generation of lawyers. Every experienced practitioner was once given an opportunity to grow. If you were fortunate enough to have someone who corrected you, taught you, encouraged you, opened a door for you, or believed in you when you were inexperienced, then you understand the value of mentorship. If someone once gave you room to develop your voice, consider giving that same room to another. The profession does not become weaker because young lawyers are given opportunities. It becomes stronger.
The young lawyer should respect seniority. The senior lawyer should respect potential. The young lawyer should recognise experience. The experienced lawyer should recognise that every career has a beginning. The young lawyer should remain humble enough to learn. The senior lawyer should remain humble enough to teach. The young lawyer should not assume that qualification means perfection. The senior lawyer should not assume that seniority means infallibility. Both are still students of a profession that demands continuous learning. When these principles are understood, the relationship between generations of lawyers becomes one of professional development rather than professional intimidation. The senior lawyer provides the wisdom of experience. The young lawyer brings energy, fresh thinking and new perspectives. Together, they can contribute to a profession that respects its history without becoming trapped by it.
Ultimately, the legal profession should not be a place where young lawyers are constantly reminded of what they do not know. It should be a place where they are taught what they need to know. It should not be a place where seniority is used to silence younger voices. It should be a place where experience is used to strengthen those voices. It should not be a profession in which the newly called lawyer is treated as though professional legitimacy begins after several years of practice. It should be a profession where the newly called lawyer understands that the privilege of being called to the Bar comes with serious responsibility, but also with the right to learn, practise, contribute and grow. The profession must demand excellence without destroying confidence. It must preserve standards without creating unnecessary intimidation. It must honour seniority without worshipping it.
So, is there really a baby lawyer?
Perhaps there is a young lawyer. Perhaps there is an inexperienced lawyer. Perhaps there is a lawyer who is still learning the practical realities of the profession. Perhaps there is a lawyer who has never conducted a trial, never argued a motion, never drafted a particular kind of process, or never handled a complex client matter. But there is no baby in the law. There is simply a lawyer at a different stage of the journey. A lawyer who was called yesterday and a lawyer who was called thirty years ago may stand at different points on the professional curve, but both remain members of the same profession. One has accumulated more experience. The other is beginning to accumulate it. The distinction deserves recognition, but it should never become a justification for disrespect.
The legal profession is a lifelong curve. Seniority should be respected. Experience should be recognised. Competence should be demanded. Ethics should never be compromised. Young lawyers should be willing to learn. Senior lawyers should be willing to teach. But no lawyer should be discouraged, dismissed or distrusted merely because of the year in which that lawyer was called to the Bar. The young lawyer’s voice may be developing, but it is still a voice. The advocate’s experience may be limited, but the potential may be limitless. The beginning may be modest, but the destination is not predetermined.
Every senior lawyer was once junior. Every experienced advocate once had a first appearance. Every confident voice once had to find its courage.
There is no baby in the law.
There are only lawyers at different points on a lifelong curve.
The curve is lifelong.
Learning is continuous.
Advocacy is a voice.
And once duly called to the Bar, a lawyer is a lawyer.
© 2026 Michael A. Akinola, Esq. All Rights Reserved.
