header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
18 June 2009 / Simon Young
Issue: 7374 / Categories: Features , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-detail

A hard Act to follow

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Part two: Simon Young reports on the pick & mix approach of the Legal Services Act 2009

The first article in this short series looked at the various institutions created by the Legal Services Act 2007 (LSA 2007) (see NLJ, 17 April 2009, p 554).This second offering deals with the first practical opportunity for changing businesses under LSA 2007, namely legal disciplinary practices (LDPs); the third will look at the ultimate in opening up of the legal services market, alternative business structures (ABSs).

The concept of LDPs was one first raised by Sir David Clementi, in his seminal report: Review of the Regulatory Framework for Legal Services in England and Wales. The final nature of them, however, went through substantial change in the last few days of political horse trading before the Legal Services Bill was passed into law late in 2007. The concept is simple, but its working out in practice is not.

Services on offer

At base, the idea is that businesses providing legal services need not only

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll