Friday, 11 July 2014

First results Paper C EQE 2014

Some figures for paper C:

Total number of candidates: 1080
Average mark:         40.8
Fails:                      605 candidates, 56%
Compensable fails:  114 candidates, 10.6%
Pass:                      361 candidates, 33.4 %

How does this compare to previous years?
Here a graph:

The conclusion seems to be that, after a slightly easier C 2013, we are back at pretty normal pass rates.
Paper C is not easy.


  1. Thanks for this analysis!

    To me, it looks like this could mean 1 of 2 things:
    - the pre-exam had no effect whatsoever (cfr. 2014 compared to previous years), but 2013 was particularly easy; or
    - the pre-exam provided more well-prepared candidates (cfr. 2013 compared to previous years), but 2014 was particularly difficult (which balanced everything out).

    What does deltapatents think?

  2. The value of an exam is determined by its passing rate and not its content by itself, most of employers does not know what was the content of paper C 2007 or 2013, they do not care about it, they just look at the passing rate and that's it. Even if a lot of candidates are very disapointed by these results, I think it is a very good thing to keep a very low passing rate, between 20 and 30%. A passing rate of 41,7 % in 2013 is not good at all for the value of EQE, I think it is a good thing to try to maintain a very low passing rate and to resist to the external pressures. Additionaly, the job market does not need 3000 of EPA each year, between 500 and 700 seem to be enough, maybe a bit more if the economic crisis ends.

  3. @Anonymous 12 July 2014 08:55: Of course, you are right that amending the exam just for the sake of increasing the passing rate should be avoided. Just as well, however, it is nonsense that an exam having a low passing rate is per se a good exam. The thing that matters, is whether the people passing will make good attorneys in practise. Yes, you may feel good about yourself if you are with the minority that passed, and my congratulations if you are. However, the reason to be happy is only just that: you managed to get yourself an EPA degree. It does not say that you will necessarily make a better attorney than the people that did not pass (for whatever reason), or that you, having passed the EQE in a year with a relatively low passing rate, will make a better attorney than a person having passed the EQE in a year with a higher passing rate. I would find it strange if an employer were to judge an attorney on the passing rate of the year that he did his exam. The thing that matters is, did the person pass, and besides that, any other qualitities the person may have that will make him a good attorney. I guess you too would be surprised if a person having survived a more difficult year would be judged, just for that reason, to be a better attorney than you, if you survided a more easy year. Lastly, if amending the difficulty of the exam to make it more easy to pass is a bad idea, then amending (or keeping the same) the difficulty to match the requirements of the job market is an idea just as bad, if not worse. The only thing that matters is for people to pass to make good attorneys. I surely hope you will be one.