Exclusive legal profession poll: 75% want to stay in EU

By on

Survey of 1,000 lawyers and law students shows massive opposition to Brexit


The overwhelming majority of the legal profession wants to remain within the EU — but there is notably more willingness to countenance a Brexit among barristers than solicitors.

Legal Cheek‘s survey of over 1,000 lawyers and law students has shown that overall 75.22% (753) want to stay in the EU and 24.78% (248) want to leave.

Overall results: Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?


Law students are the most Europhile, with 80.65% backing a remain vote on 23 June.


Barristers, meanwhile, are the most inclined to back a Brexit — 65% want to stay and 35% want to go.


And solicitors are somewhere in between, with 75.27% favouring a continuation of the UK’s current European Union membership.


The preferences of trainee solicitors and pupil barristers were similar, so we have lumped them into a single group: 75.93% are pro-remain and 24.07% pro-Brexit


Other groups which answered in smaller numbers — and so were excluded from the headline findings — include judges (60% remain), paralegals (83% remain) and legal apprentices (50% remain).



So 5 judges and 2 legal apprentices responded?



Hehe, I responded as a judge.



Hehe, twice.



Of course it makes a lot of sense for legal professionals to wish UK remain in the EU! Much of UK’s national law was amended to reflect the union law, so when UK leaves the union, not only law degrees will pretty much be wasted, but judges will need to amend the majority of laws AGAIN! And it’s A LOT OF LAW, believe me!



Wouldn’t that mean just more business for lawyers?



Lawyers do not care just about the money, law and justice is our passion and we understand the negative impact it would have on our justice system


Not Amused

Can you stop pretending you talk for a large class of people with wildly differing opinions?



Shut up you mug! Friggin turncoat!



Only about 1/7th of the law I studied was related to the EU. The vast vast majority was domestic law. We won’t need to relearn and rewrite everything after Brexit.


Not Amused

Lawyers are risk averse and often badly informed.

Sadly that means far too many have yet to open their eyes to the dangers of staying in the EU. This morning the Economist put the risks of staying in the EU as moderate risk:high impact and 4th and 5th on current global risks:

4th Biggest Global Risk – Beset by external and internal pressures, the EU begins to fracture
5th Biggest Global Risk – “Grexit” is followed by a euro zone break-up

I think people need to stop assuming the EU is doing ‘super’. It isn’t. It’s ****ed


Slightly amused

Well if we’re going to take the Economist as a bible, you should probably consider ‘The Brexit Delusion’ from a couple of weeks ago:

I think it’s telling that barristers are the group most likely to want to stay. Solicitors mostly face the same challenges as other businesses, whereas barristers’ practices thrive on confusion, ambiguity, and litigation. None of the City firms have institutionally backed Brexit whereas the remain campaign has several big endorsements. Commercial solicitors depend on a thriving economy and a place at the centre of a huge market. You don’t, so you have the luxury of making a preconceived judgment on the EU and backing it up with a fact from the Economist taken out of context.


Corbyn. Sympathiser.

I can’t find the article you are referring to, but do you not think that a ‘Brexit’ (or the risk thereof) is a contributory factor to number four on this list?

If the fracturing or break-up of the EU is listed as part of a list of global risks, why would Britain escape the consequences of its demise, were it to already have seceded? The word ‘global’ here implies (to me, at any rate) that nations across the world will be adversely affected – why would Britain be different, and how would accelerating a break up help?



The Economist is thoroughly pro-EU. He almost certainly misrepresented the article.


Corbyn. Sympathiser.

Excuse me, I seem to have found a report on the risk list you mentioned. Whilst I am having trouble loading the report itself, I note that the Guardian’s summary lists a ‘Brexit’ as a potential danger on this list, as well. It goes on to quote from the EIU:

“If Britain did leave the EU it would have negative ramifications for the UK – still the fifth biggest economy in the world, and whose exporters would struggle in the face of regulatory and tariff uncertainty, and whose position as a leading global financial services hub would be imperilled.”




In legal cheek comments over the last few weeks, pro-leave comments have been the loudest (and most obnoxious). Despite that, this poll shows that the stay camp is the silent majority. I think this trend will also be seen in the referendum.


Not Amused

A large proportion of people backing remain are only doing so because they believe that if they are seen to back leaving then people will consider them stupid. That is because remain is being sold as the ‘sensible’ option and remain is being sold in an underhand way.

As I have, for various personality reasons, no real interest in whether people think I’m stupid or not, I am free to make my choice on a different basis.

For me, the fact that the EU (and particularly the Eurozone) is about to collapse on its own (without any help from Britain) is a huge motivating factor to get out before my tax money is spent trying to keep it alive. I remember the ERM fiasco – and oh look, what a surprise, shackling all the European economies together has caused another problem.

It is absolutely fine to disagree with me. But the tactics being used by people supporting remain (and let’s remember here that I used to be a federalist) are pretty low. The remain side are only arguing: 1) remaining is safer, and 2) anyone who wants is to leave is mentally deficient. That is low. It is morally reprehensible and it is a poor way to argue.

It is also wrong – because it is by no means clear which choice is safer. I shall leave it for others to consider privately quite how deficient my faculties are – it isn’t a topic a decent person uses to win a debate.


Slightly Amused

No, NA, the problem is that you took a single fact from an Economist article, twisted it to fit your narrative, and then completely ignored the two posts that called out your total nonsense. It’s fine to be pro-Brexit but the way you argue it is astoundingly arrogant. You seem to think that you are pro-Brexit because you are some enlightened free thinker and are incapable of accepting that A) you might have ingrained preconceptions; and B) that everyone on the remain side is almost certainly as well informed as you. In fact, statistically people on the remain side are almost universally better informed than the Brexit side.

You’re not going to win any favour by coming in here and telling us that 75% of solicitors and 65% of barristers are only backing Brexit in an anonymous poll because they think they should. This was anonymous, as is polling, as is the referendum. So appearances are meaningless.

That plus the EU is not going to collapse you total numpty. I trust the Economist far better than I trust you, given your uninformed ravings about the EU, and you seem to trust it too, and the Economist says nothing of the sort, rather stating that Brexit would be a massive detriment to Britain. Deal with these or stop posting – you’re only making the leave side look even worse.


Edward Bernays

Referring to stupid articles instead of thinking for yourself! I think this, because the BBC said so… I think that, because everyone is saying so … It is obvious what the EU is up to and all you stupid clowns are sleepwalking into a superstate, while consumed with your silly selfish preoccupations and self interests: “Oh they will have to change the law”, “Oh we will need a visa to go to another EU country”.

Like a 2-year-old with a with a roll of £50 notes in your hand, ready to trade them for a lollipop!

Wake up and start thinking for yourselves!



Wake up sheeple!



8 out of 10 members of the Confederation of British Industry said #REMAIN the Chairman said “the view of our membership and our view based on the huge project we carried out over the last 10 months, in detail, with the help of McKinsey, with all the interviews, the view of businesses large and small is that it is overwhelmingly in our interests to remain in the European Union. It is a massive marketplace where we NEED to be engaged”

85% of British manufacturers want us to remain in the EU, according to a 2014 survey by the British manufacturers’ association EEF.

77% of the members of the Society of Motor manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) say that remaining in the EU is good for their businesses in the UK where over 700,000 Brits are employed. Overwhelming support for EU membership across the board, with 88% of large SMMT member companies and 73% of SME members in favour of remaining.

Over half of members of the Federation of Small Business said they would want to stay in the EU. Just 4 in 10 said they want to leave.

The head of the UK government’s export credit guarantee agency reports EU membership is “critical” for exporting around the world.

British Chambers of Commerce members overwhelmingly want the UK to stay in the EU, and think withdrawal would have “a bad impact on their future”

1% of the top 500 companies in the UK think that leaving the EU would be a good thing for the UK.

8% of finance industry leaders in the City want the U.K. to remain a member of the EU.

Foreign manufacturers in the UK from Nissan, Toyota, Honda, Huawei, Hitachi and other employers have all said they want the UK to remain in the EU.

Who wants you to vote to Leave the EU? Boris Johnson, George Galloway, Nigel Farage, Vladiir Putin and some disgruntled Conservative MPs and former MPs.

If I were a betting man, I would look at the odds, weigh up the levels of evidence about who might know more about the UK economy, and my vote would definitely go to REMAIN IN the EU.

You will make up your own minds, but I am certain who I am most convinced by!


Wonko the Sane

I am with you, but I think there is probably a typo in the line “8% of finance industry leaders in the City want the U.K. to remain a member of the EU.”



You are correct. Many thanks. It’s been corrected.


@ GetTheBrexitFacts

Yes and all the credit agencies gave AAA ratings to junk bonds and then we had a financial meltdown.

Nick Clegg, Ken Clarke and Tony Blair, Mervyn King, the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) and the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) all back the Euro in 2003, and guess what … they were all wrong!

I quote “the BCC’s Deputy Director General, says the majority of the 110,000 companies which are members of his organisation, had come to the conclusion that “the benefits of Emu outweigh the disadvantages for the UK economy as a whole. Firms of all sizes will benefit.”

When reviewing the latter, it seems you are renewing the same arguments used before by idiots that think they know but don’t!

Monkey – You are the type of person that is happy with nice car, nice house, family and good holidays, and not concerned with anything more. Not capable of thinking outside the bubble you have been placed in. Oblivious to what is happening around you and why. Bloody serf.



Yes, democracy is for sale, at the right price of course! All about the money! If all the business people said that we should stay in then it must be gospel! Foreign companies say we should stay in, Obama said we should stay in (yes and they are foreigners). Idiot!


Derp de derr

This is the UK equivalent of a Trump voter.



And you are the equivalent of a Nazi collaborator or Cambridge Five! Your mind has been molded to sellout your own country and think its for the best. That is if your are British, if not then your view is of no concern to me!


Corbyn. Sympathiser.

I think comparing someone to a Soviet spy or a Nazi collaborator is a bit of an over-reaction. I hardly think that commentator Derp de derr is hoping that Britain will remain in the EU in order to bring about appalling war atrocities, or to give British secrets to a state which no longer exists.



Comparing the male/female to a trump voter because they love their country and patriotic is also an overreaction. You obviously did not get the point, which is the problem with lawyers coming into the profession these days. Giving away power in return for economic/personal gain or to give into threats at the expense of democracy has the same underlying factors at play. Sod it, why don’t we give full power to the EU and dilute influence as to what happens in this country! Lets go from 100% concentration of influence to 10%.

Corbyn, says it all doesn’t it! Totally inept and only selected to appease the unions and supported by vapid public automatons!


Loving your country means wanting the best for it and its citizens. If that is achieved by being part of international institutions then so be it.

Also, people can have multilayered identities. They can love their country, but also see themselves as Europeans, or as global citizens. It’s ridiculous to suggest that the only way to be patriotic is to turn away from globalisation and become an isolated, xenophobic island. It’s even more ridiculous to suggest that being pro-EU makes you a traitor. It’s like being back in the McCarthy witchhunts.


“the ultimate creation of a European federal state, with a single currency. All the basic instruments of national economic management (fiscal, monetary, incomes and regional policies) would ultimately be handed over to the central federal authorities. The Werner report suggests that this radical transformation of present Communities should be accomplished within a decade”. (PRO/FCO 30/789)

Such a political and economic union, possibly also including a common defence policy, would thus involve a massive loss of national sovereignty, which would ultimately leave member states with somewhat less power

“than the autonomy enjoyed by the states of the USA”. But what alarmed the Foreign Office was not the contents of the Werner Report. Mr Heath and his ministers did not throw up their hands in horror and say “good heavens, we had no idea this was what the Common Market is about. We could not possibly accept such a thing”. On the contrary, when Geoffrey Rippon, the minister in charge of our negotiations, went to see M. Werner on October 27, the minutes of their discussion show that Rippon went out of his way to congratulate him on his report, which he said “well stated our common objectives”. Privately, Her Majesty’s Government had no objection to the political union Werner was proposing. (PRO/CAB 164/771)

“that the aim of the Community was not merely harmonisation but the unification of policies in every field of the economic union, i.e. economic policy, social policy, commercial policy, tariff policy and fiscal policy. That this was not just pie in the sky needed to be made clear to the politicians”. (based on PRO/FO 371/150363, Bell p.22)

All of the above was written in the 60’s. This was engineered for a political Union without the peoples consent or knowledge. What was sold as a trade agreement has now become a political union and idiots like you are easily sold. You do not love your country, you love money. You do not want to make the difficult choices in the name of freedom and democracy.

You write as if you know what your talking about, but you don’t. All your thoughts are manufactured. You talk but no research done of your own. Like the clowns in the audience of Question Time: “Give us the facts so we can make an informed decision…” i.e. BBC please tell us how to think! Knowingly deceiving the people while collaborating to create a federal state treacherous, to say the least. And if you were unaware of the intention of those trying to secretly take us into a superstate then why are you trying to argue from a position of ignorance? Did you do your homework, as a proper lawyer would do when preparing for an important case? If you did know, and support them, then you are the same as they are: traitors!

Adding ‘xenophobic’ to your uninformed statement demonstrates the level your on, I did not make any statement of hatred to another county/culture! Witch hunting who?

Comments are closed.