header-logo header-logo

08 December 2023 / John Gould
Issue: 8052 / Categories: Opinion , Regulatory , Profession
printer mail-detail

Axiom Ince, SLAPPs, Dixit Shah…who would be a regulator?

150655
Regulating the legal services industry is not an easy job, as John Gould explains

One of the key challenges faced by legal regulators is how to apply limited resources to achieve the best outcomes in the public interest. Recently two controversies have brought the question of how regulatory risks are prioritised into sharp focus.

Any risk management professional will tell you that the threat posed by a risk is a combination of how likely it is to occur and the impact of the consequences. A nuclear meltdown is less likely to occur than a late running train, but the impact is much greater. Setting priorities must take both into account.

Inevitably different regulatory stakeholders have different priorities but, conventionally, the key interests are those of the regulated profession and the consumers of their services. Each group’s collective interests should largely overlap because both have an interest in ensuring that regulation is cost-effective and maintains high levels of confidence in the regulated profession. But there are other

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll