SILE CPD: Why Singapore’s Junior Lawyers Owe the Most

Most continuing professional development schemes that vary by seniority ask more of senior practitioners, or ask the same of everyone. Singapore's scheme for lawyers does the opposite. A lawyer with under five years' standing carries the heaviest annual requirement in the profession, and the reform now running to 2028 closes the gap by raising the senior groups rather than relieving the juniors.

Three groups, defined by years of standing

The Singapore Institute of Legal Education divides practitioners into groups by seniority, expressed as admission-date cut-offs that roll forward each CPD year. For CPD Year 2026 the groups are: Group 1, lawyers of less than five years' standing, admitted to the Singapore Bar on or after 2 January 2021; Group 2, five to fifteen years' standing, admitted between 1 January 2011 and 1 January 2021 inclusive; and Group 3, more than fifteen years' standing, admitted on or before 31 December 2010. Foreign lawyers registered under section 36B form a fourth category.

Because the cut-offs move annually, the dates are only meaningful alongside the CPD year they belong to. An earlier notice used entirely different dates for the same groups, so any reference to these definitions should state the year it describes.

The points, and the inversion

For a lawyer holding a practising certificate for more than eight months of CPD Year 2026, the requirements are 16 points for Group 1, of which at least 8 must be Public; 13 points for Group 2, at least 6.5 Public; and 10 points for Group 3, at least 5 Public. Section 36B foreign lawyers sit at 13 points, at least 6.5 Public.

A newly qualified lawyer therefore owes 60 per cent more CPD than a lawyer of twenty years' standing. The logic is defensible — the early years are when structured development does most — but it is the reverse of what most practitioners assume, and it is the reverse of what several other professions do.

Shorter certificate periods are pro-rated in bands rather than by the month. A lawyer holding a certificate for more than five months and up to eight owes half the full figure: 8 points for Group 1, 6.5 for Group 2, 5 for Group 3. At five months or less there is no minimum at all.

The ethics component is the one thing that does not vary

All four categories owe 3 Mandatory Ethics Component points, of which at least 1.5 must be Public. Unlike the totals, the MEC is not graded by seniority, and it counts within the overall requirement rather than on top of it.

That makes the ethics share meaningfully different in practice depending on group. For a Group 3 lawyer, 3 of 10 points are ethics — nearly a third of the obligation. For a Group 1 lawyer it is 3 of 16, under a fifth. The same absolute requirement lands very differently.

Convergence to 2028 levels upward

The scheme is mid-transition, and the direction is the part worth noting. Group 1 sits at 16 points in every year from 2025 through 2028 — it does not move. Group 2 and section 36B foreign lawyers run 10, then 13, then 16, then 16. Group 3 runs 7, then 10, then 13, then 16.

By 2028 every group is at 16 points with at least 8 Public. The junior requirement is the benchmark the reform is converging on, not a concession being withdrawn, and the whole burden of the change falls on senior practitioners — Group 3's requirement more than doubles across four years.

For anyone planning to supply this market, that is a demand curve rising on a published schedule, concentrated in the most senior and historically lightest-obligation segment.

Teaching counts, but the cap depends on seniority

Teaching and speaking earn 2 CPD points per hour with effect from CPD Year 2025, reduced from 3 previously. A cap applies: no more than half a lawyer's required points may come from teaching. That cap binds Group 1 and Group 2 but not Group 3 or section 36B foreign lawyers.

So the most senior practitioners, who have the smallest requirement and are the most likely to be asked to teach, are also the only ones who can satisfy the whole of it by teaching. The asymmetry runs consistently in one direction.

Records: three years, in statute

Retention is not a recommendation here. Rule 10(2) of the Legal Profession (Continuing Professional Development) Rules 2012 requires a solicitor or foreign practitioner to maintain the record and evidence of CPD activities undertaken in a calendar year "for a period of 3 years after 31st December in that calendar year".

Note that the clock runs from the year end rather than from each activity, so activity completed in January is covered for nearly four years while activity in December is covered for three. Regulators that count in cycles rather than anniversaries catch practitioners out this way in both directions, and the spread of approaches is set out in our comparison of CPD record retention periods across UK regulators.

How it compares in the region

Singapore's lawyers face a graded, converging, statutorily-backed scheme. Malaysia's advocates and solicitors face a mandatory scheme that is not tied to the right to practise, as set out in our guide to Bar Council Malaysia CPD being mandatory but not licence-linked. And within Singapore itself the professions diverge sharply: dentists face 70 points per two-year cycle with a verifiable floor and a shortfall that blocks certificate renewal, as explained in our guide to Singapore Dental Council CPE.

The figures above are from SILE's notice for CPD Year 2026, published 9 December 2025. Group definitions and totals are reset annually and the transition schedule runs to 2028, so check the current year's notice on the Singapore Institute of Legal Education site rather than relying on a figure quoted for an earlier year.