header-logo header-logo

10 June 2011 / Mike Willis
Issue: 7469 / Categories: Features , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-detail

On the edge

istock_000007756417small_4

Let’s go & fly this regulatory kite…but carefully, says Mike Willis

On 6 April 2011, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) published its new Handbook, six months ahead of what it fanfares will, from next October, be “the advent of a new type of law firm, alternative business structures, and a radically new approach by the SRA to its work”. Like all regulators, its role is dual purpose:

  • to steer and control behaviours by its brand projection and presence in the industry it polices; and
  • to catch and discipline offenders.

Most commentators have been cautiously optimistic for the shift of focus away from proscriptive codifications, with a new Code of Conduct for solicitors confined to just 47 pages and Guidelines which invite a partnership with the profession targeted to prevent outcomes demonstrably damaging to victims, rather than censoring behaviours of unproven negativity. Most firms with proper procedures in place can hope to be able to run their businesses according to their own circumstances, without need for regulatory intervention.

Rather less has been

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