header-logo header-logo

18 February 2011
Issue: 7453 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

The future for reserved legal activities

Will writing, conveyancing and immigration services should become reserved legal activities, according to a legal think tank.

Reserved legal activities can only be carried out by appropriately authorised persons and currently include rights of audience, conduct of litigation, reserved instrument activities, probate activities, notarial activities, and the administration of oaths.

In a paper published last week, the Legal Services Institute (LSI) proposed that probate be extended to include the administration of estates, and that conveyancing services be added to the property-related reserved instrument, in the Legal Services Act 2007.

It proposed that insolvency practice and claims management services be excluded.

The paper, The Regulation of Legal Services: What Is The Case For Reservation?, argues that authority to practise reserved activities should be conferred by accreditation and not confined to legally qualified practitioners.

LSI director, Stephen Mayson says: “If the reserved activities are anachronistic or lacking an articulated public interest justification—which we believe they currently are—there is a significant risk that the Legal Services Act 2007 will have promoted (and the Legal Services Board will be overseeing) an increasingly irrelevant regulatory infrastructure that does not secure sufficient public benefit or consumer protection.”

Issue: 7453 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde & Co—Suriya Ashok

Clyde Co strengthens energy transition and construction offering with hire of Suriya Ashok

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit—Nicole Gallop Mildon

Jurit appoints rare dual-qualified lawyer to expand Anglo-French private wealth expertise

NEWS
The Supreme Court has settled a long-running dispute over part-time workers: unfavourable treatment need be a significant or effective cause, not the sole cause
Arbitration may be private, but its confidentiality is no impenetrable shield. Writing in NLJ this week, James Glaysher of Kingsley Napley examines when courts will permit arbitral material to surface in open litigation
The Financial Reporting Council’s revised Audit Enforcement Procedure will alter the balance of power in corporate investigations
A telecoms operator may be able to hold over under the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954, yet still be unable to secure a renewal: an outcome described as a legal ‘paradox’

Safety fears do not automatically justify shutting an interested person out of a statutory will application

back-to-top-scroll