header-logo header-logo

A class Act

08 November 2007 / John Ludlow
Issue: 7296 / Categories: Opinion , Legal services
printer mail-detail

A flawed Bill has been transformed into a good Act, says John Ludlow

It has been a long and winding and, at times, bumpy road but the Legal Services Bill is finally on the statute book. This is a big piece of legislation. Big not only in length—it runs to almost 500 pages, covering 200 plus sections and 24 schedules—but also in the profound impact it will have on the legal profession and on the delivery of legal services.

The Legal Services Act 2007 does a number of important things:
- It creates the Legal Services Board (LSB), to provide oversight of the approved regulators, such as the Bar and the Law Society, in place of the patchwork of supervision which currently exists.
- It establishes a wholly independent Office for Legal Complaints (OLC) to deal with all consumer complaints against lawyers.
- It gives the go-ahead for alternative business structures (ABSs), which will allow lawyers to form partnerships with non-lawyers and to accept outside investment or even ownership.

There is much more to this than the need to learn

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

NLJ Career Profile: Francis Ho, City of London Law Society

NLJ Career Profile: Francis Ho, City of London Law Society

Francis Ho, Charles Russell Speechlys partner, was recently appointed chair of the Construction Law Committee of the City of London Law Society. He discusses the challenges of learning to lead, the importance of professional ethics, and the power of the written word, withNLJ

Slater Heelis—Chester office

Slater Heelis—Chester office

North West presence strengthened with Chester office launch

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Firm grows commercial disputes expertise with partner promotion

NEWS
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
In this week's NLJ, Bhavini Patel of Howard Kennedy LLP reports on Almacantar v De Valk [2025], a landmark Upper Tribunal ruling extending protection for leaseholders under the Building Safety Act 2022
Writing in NLJ this week, Hanna Basha and Jamie Hurworth of Payne Hicks Beach dissect TV chef John Torode’s startling decision to identify himself in a racism investigation he denied. In an age of ‘cancel culture’, they argue, self-disclosure can both protect and imperil reputations
back-to-top-scroll