header-logo header-logo

20 September 2012 / Dr Jon Robins
Issue: 7530 / Categories: Opinion , Risk management , Profession
printer mail-detail

A breed apart

Jon Robins considers how the profession is addressing a fundamental shift in regulation

The contrasting attitudes towards COLPs/ COFAs speak volumes about a divided profession. On the one hand, according to a recent survey, some three quarters of law firms expressed alarm as to the additional level of personal responsibility of taking on the role of compliance officers for legal practice (COLP) or compliance officers for finance and administration (COFA); and on the other some 800 law firms failed to nominate new style compliance officers by last month’s deadline.

To complete an unlovely trio of new style legal service acronyms, COLPs and COFAs are essential to the new world of OFR, or outcomes-focused regulation. OFR is the move to a principles-based system away from prescriptive detailed rules under the old code of conduct. The COFA is responsible for ensuring a firm complies with the Solicitors Regulation Authority’s (SRA’s) accounts rules and the COLP for compliance with other rules. This puts a particular burden of responsibility on the one or two employees chosen for

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

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Pandemic, sanctions, armed conflict, blocked shipping corridors, transport disruption... in these uncertain times, every successful commercial entity must ensure they have an effective force majeure clause in place. But how exactly do you ensure this? 
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 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
back-to-top-scroll