Silk – building your case

You know you are worthy of ‘silk’ appointment – but how are you going to convince the Selection Panel? What will you need to do to satisfy them that your work at the Bar is consistently of such a high standard that you merit recognition at the peak of your profession, as a ‘KC’? Unlike judicial appointment, where every selection exercise has a fixed number of vacancies, there are no quotas in the annual silk competition. In fact, it’s not a competition at all. You are not competing against anyone else. Rather, it is your opportunity to evidence the excellence of your work by example, consistently, over a prolonged period of time. Examples, evidence and excellence are key. Keep these in mind throughout the application process and you will be on the right track. The panel want to see your evidence and examples. They are not interested in assertions and comparisons.

The process comprises two parts: written application and panel interview. They are separated by about six months. All applicants reaching the required standard of excellence in their written application will be offered an interview. And in the 2025 Report of the KC Selection Panel, we are told that 66% of those interviewed were appointed. More about the interview on another occasion. Your current challenge, if you are thinking about applying in the 2026 selection exercise, is how to go about submitting your strongest possible written application. It can be a daunting prospect. Where to start?

First, pull together the ‘long list’ of cases you have handled during the past three years which have the potential for you to demonstrate the competences in The KC Competency Framework. All need to be cases of substance, complexity or particular difficulty or sensitivity. Leaving aside the ‘Integrity’ competence, which is a given, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, you will want to focus, very hard, on the other four competences: ‘Understanding and using the law’; ‘Written and oral advocacy’; ‘Working with others’; and ‘Diversity action and understanding’. Which of your cases will best provide strong evidence of your up-to-date legal knowledge, and your effective use of that knowledge, in its application to the facts? Have you successfully applied your research of a recently developed area of law to one of your cases? Has the strength of an argument you put forward been recognised on appeal?

Demonstrating the excellence of your written and oral advocacy is obviously key to a successful silk application. The competency framework helpfully provides a list of bullet pointed examples, illustrating some of the ways in which advocacy excellence can be articulated. Study them. Refer back to your cases to see which provide the best examples of effective advocacy. How did you advance your client’s case to secure the best possible outcome? Where and when did you find yourself quickly having to assimilate the implications of new evidence and responding equally rapidly and appropriately? And remember that oral advocacy is not restricted to courts and tribunals. Examples can also be drawn from arbitration, mediation and negotiation.

Working with others, the third competency in the framework, often provides challenges because as a busy practitioner you may not have been able to make time to reflect on this aspect of your work. Think back to how you work with your clients – lay and professional – and with your own team. Try to recall good, practical examples. You need specifics – not generalities – and that is a rule to apply to the whole of your written application. Expressing your opinion of what you do and being too general are common errors. Avoid them at all costs. Words are precious and limited. Don’t waste a single one.

‘Diversity action and understanding’ – the fourth competency – requires you to show an understanding of diversity and cultural issues, without necessarily having to rely on your cases. You can offer examples from other areas of your life, work-related or personal. Showing an understanding of difficulties accessing the law, whether as prospective professionals, witnesses or court users and taking positive action to promote diversity through widening access and participation can be a source of sound examples – if you can show your personal responsibility in practice.

In putting together your list of 12 cases, the aim should be not only to show a good variety, but also to ensure that between your chosen cases, they will have the capacity to cover all aspects of the competency framework – and importantly, with an eye to who your assessors might be. You would be well advised to think strategically. In whittling down your ‘long list’ of possible cases, analyse carefully which competences each case helps to demonstrate – and at the same time consider the assessors who will be identified in the cases. Talk to your proposed nominated assessors, in advance – and preferably in person. You might want to refresh their memories. One misconception is that the ‘List of 12’ (cases) is sacrosanct. You are permitted to provide fewer than 12 cases, provided you have good reason, typically because of the nature of your practice or perhaps due to career breaks. There is no point in padding out your list with cases that do not meet the standard of excellence, just in order to reach the target number of 12. Sub-standard cases will simply reduce your chances of being invited to interview. You may also consider going further back than three years. If so, explain why. But keep in mind that older cases carry the risk that the memories of your assessors are more likely to have faded in the intervening period.

Your chosen cases need to be cases of substance – and your role in each case must also be substantial – so make sure you explain your role clearly. Opinions of your assessors will be critical. The KCA website states that appropriate cases are likely to be those which involve unusual, novel or unforeseen complexities or have consequences beyond the case itself. The website helpfully provides examples of cases in this category, including: a substantive appeal in the Court of Appeal; a case reported in one or other set of law reports; a test case on a point of law or a planning or other public inquiry raising complex issues of law. The important thing is that, taken as a whole, your list should provide the breadth and consistency of evidence needed for appointment.

It is sometimes surprising how barristers who have a keen awareness of the importance of evidence in their daily working practice, do not grasp the importance of evidence in a Silk application. The most effective way of deducing evidence in the context of your Silk application is to provide good, solid examples with a clear link to a framework competency. Focus on the competency and omit anything which will not help to achieve this objective. Remember too that those screening your application will not read between the lines and make the assumptions you might expect. Readers won’t do that. They will make their judgements on the basis of what is on the page in front of them. Even if it is obvious to you, you must explain what, why and how.

I began by saying that with the written application part of the process, Examples, Evidence and Excellence are fundamentally important. Your aim is to gain an opportunity, verbally to supplement, further illustrate and enhance the written evidence contained in your application and provided by your assessors. A strong written application remains the core and key to your success – followed hopefully by an invitation to interview. But that is another story! 

References and links

Report of the KC Selection Panel 2025

The KC Competency Framework

kcappointments.org