header-logo header-logo

12 March 2009 / John Randall
Issue: 7360 / Categories: Features , Profession
printer mail-detail

Intolerable strain

The single regulatory framework is out of step with today’s marketplace.
John Randall explains why

For the last quarter of a century, regulation of the solicitors’ profession has been guided by Lord Diplock’s dicta in Swain v The Law Society [1983] 1 AC 598, [1982] 2 All ER 827 that rules should be made in the interests of “that section of the public that may be in need of legal services”. Today, that section of the public is no longer homogeneous, and its diverging interests place intolerable strains on a single regulatory regime. Public interests not only diverge, but can collide.

The rule on conflict that protects the interests of the private client in a matrimonial matter, or a small business dealing with its landlord, can act against the interests of sophisticated corporate clients, wishing to instruct a particular firm because of the scale, expertise, quality and global reach of its specialist services. For corporate clients information barriers may be sufficient to protect their interests. A rule that is appropriate to protect an unsophisticated client may

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll