*/
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
Far-ranging month for the Chair of the Bar
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the most recent data on alcohol misuse in the UK, and the implications for alcohol testing in family proceedings
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, explains how tailored financial planning can help barristers take control of their finances and plan with confidence
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
In this wide-ranging interview, Professor Jo Delahunty KC, Family Law KC of the Year, talks to Anthony Inglese CB about the values that shaped her, the moment she found her vocation and, in an intensely personal call to arms, why time is running out for the legal aid Bar
Is the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office process fit for purpose? Women barristers’ experiences of bullying are not being reported or, if they are, they are not making it through the system, says Tana Adkin KC
Thomas Roe KC and Andrew O’Kola respond to an article by Dr Leonardo Raznovich (Counsel , October 2025) – ‘Privy Council colonialism? Piercing the constitutional veil’
Chair of the Bar reports back
The client’s best interests could be well-served by sharing the advocacy with junior counsel more often than you might think – Naomi Cunningham and Charlotte Eves explore some less orthodox ways to divide the speaking role
