*/
Lauren Fullerton examines the how, what and why of setting up a second chambers base
Having taught and practised across multiple jurisdictions at various stages for more than 17 years, both as a solicitor and as a barrister, I have become increasingly conscious that a barrister’s practice is not static. It evolves with experience, geography and the types of disputes one becomes trusted to handle. For me, door tenancy has been less about expansion for its own sake and more about alignment: aligning where I practise with the shape my work has taken and where I see it continuing to develop. I have always practised with a degree of professional mobility. Door tenancy sits naturally within that framework. It allows barristers to deepen their presence in a particular location without relinquishing the professional relationships and reputation built elsewhere.
In my area of practice – property, private client and public law – disputes are inherently place sensitive. Housing cases turn on local authority practices; education disputes are shaped by regional decision-making; property litigation often has a distinctly local dimension. A second chambers base enables me to be closer, both practically and perceptually, to the courts, institutions and solicitors most closely connected to the work I do.
Being clerk-supported, listed and physically present in a second location sends a clear signal of commitment. It also reduces the friction that comes with distance: long travel days, diary inflexibility and the sense that one is perpetually ‘visiting’ rather than embedded.
While sometimes used as an honorary title (e.g. former members of chambers who have joined the judiciary, academia, government or retired), door tenancy is most often a commercial and professional arrangement that must earn its place within a practice.
Understanding how clerking arrangements interact, how diaries are managed and how conflicts are handled is essential. Door tenancy only works where expectations are explicit and communication is consistent. One should be equally mindful of cultural fit: chambers’ ethos, professional standards and working practices matter profoundly – particularly when balancing multiple roles and responsibilities.
As someone who combines practice with academia, administrative efficiency is not a luxury but a necessity. Door tenancy must support, rather than complicate, an already demanding professional life.
One of the most significant advantages of door tenancy has been its role in diversifying my workflow while preserving a coherent practice identity. My core work in property and private client law, particularly multi-generational disputes involving estates, trusts, and family assets, remains central. However, my developing education and public law practice benefits enormously from exposure to different solicitor networks and institutional clients.
Door tenancy has enabled that development organically. It has opened up opportunities to accept instructions across education law, judicial review, safeguarding matters, and special educational needs and disability disputes, while preserving the expertise I have spent years developing. Rather than fragmenting my practice, it has strengthened its resilience by reducing reliance on a single funding model or referral stream.
Perhaps the most important lesson I have learnt is that door tenancy only works when treated as an active practice decision. Turning up, engaging with clerks, contributing to professional life and being clear about the work one wants to do are all essential. Door tenancy is not about visibility alone; it is about participation.
In my case, it has been a means of exercising greater control over how and where I practise, as a barrister, trust and estate practitioner, academic and external examiner. Used deliberately, door tenancy is not an adjunct to practice; it is a strategic tool that allows experience, geography and professional development to move forward together.
Having taught and practised across multiple jurisdictions at various stages for more than 17 years, both as a solicitor and as a barrister, I have become increasingly conscious that a barrister’s practice is not static. It evolves with experience, geography and the types of disputes one becomes trusted to handle. For me, door tenancy has been less about expansion for its own sake and more about alignment: aligning where I practise with the shape my work has taken and where I see it continuing to develop. I have always practised with a degree of professional mobility. Door tenancy sits naturally within that framework. It allows barristers to deepen their presence in a particular location without relinquishing the professional relationships and reputation built elsewhere.
In my area of practice – property, private client and public law – disputes are inherently place sensitive. Housing cases turn on local authority practices; education disputes are shaped by regional decision-making; property litigation often has a distinctly local dimension. A second chambers base enables me to be closer, both practically and perceptually, to the courts, institutions and solicitors most closely connected to the work I do.
Being clerk-supported, listed and physically present in a second location sends a clear signal of commitment. It also reduces the friction that comes with distance: long travel days, diary inflexibility and the sense that one is perpetually ‘visiting’ rather than embedded.
While sometimes used as an honorary title (e.g. former members of chambers who have joined the judiciary, academia, government or retired), door tenancy is most often a commercial and professional arrangement that must earn its place within a practice.
Understanding how clerking arrangements interact, how diaries are managed and how conflicts are handled is essential. Door tenancy only works where expectations are explicit and communication is consistent. One should be equally mindful of cultural fit: chambers’ ethos, professional standards and working practices matter profoundly – particularly when balancing multiple roles and responsibilities.
As someone who combines practice with academia, administrative efficiency is not a luxury but a necessity. Door tenancy must support, rather than complicate, an already demanding professional life.
One of the most significant advantages of door tenancy has been its role in diversifying my workflow while preserving a coherent practice identity. My core work in property and private client law, particularly multi-generational disputes involving estates, trusts, and family assets, remains central. However, my developing education and public law practice benefits enormously from exposure to different solicitor networks and institutional clients.
Door tenancy has enabled that development organically. It has opened up opportunities to accept instructions across education law, judicial review, safeguarding matters, and special educational needs and disability disputes, while preserving the expertise I have spent years developing. Rather than fragmenting my practice, it has strengthened its resilience by reducing reliance on a single funding model or referral stream.
Perhaps the most important lesson I have learnt is that door tenancy only works when treated as an active practice decision. Turning up, engaging with clerks, contributing to professional life and being clear about the work one wants to do are all essential. Door tenancy is not about visibility alone; it is about participation.
In my case, it has been a means of exercising greater control over how and where I practise, as a barrister, trust and estate practitioner, academic and external examiner. Used deliberately, door tenancy is not an adjunct to practice; it is a strategic tool that allows experience, geography and professional development to move forward together.
Lauren Fullerton examines the how, what and why of setting up a second chambers base
The age of criminal responsibility, extreme weather and conflict resolution – plus, new protocol for reporting bullying at the Bar
By David Green
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs, examines the forensic science underpinning hair drug testing, its evidential scope and limitations, and why it remains the gold standard for evidencing patterns of drug use in family proceedings
Unlocking your aged debt to fund your tax in one easy step. By Philip N Bristow
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, discusses the upcoming changes to pensions and Inheritance Tax and the potential impact on your financial future
Save the Children UK is the latest charity to benefit from a £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
Barrister apprenticeships – shortly to provide the fourth pathway to the Bar – are an ideal opportunity to support local talent and ‘grow your own’, say Tim Coulson and Dr Jane Dennehy
Oliver Lewis spotlights an overlooked yet rapidly evolving area of law – coercive and controlling behaviour within care contexts
Solicitor General Ellie Reeves KC MP discusses her decade as a trade union and employment law barrister, the demands of life as a Law Officer and the number one priority shaping her work. Interview by Anthony Inglese CB
A decade of reviews and research has disrupted accepted thinking in the search for causality. Suicides following abuse have overtaken domestic homicides. Is the law keeping up? Professor Susan Edwards KC (Hon) examines recent cases and the obstacles to successful prosecution
At least not that way, says Richard Paige
