header-logo header-logo

27 April 2007
Issue: 7270 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-detail

LSC backs down in duty solicitor battle

The Legal Services Commission (LSC) has agreed to extend its consultation exercise on planned changes to the way duty solicitor slots are allocated following threats of legal action by the Law Society.

The society issued a pre-action protocol letter to the LSC challenging the way it is consulting on changes to the original plans to award duty solicitor slots to law firms as part of its market stability measures.

A society spokeswoman says that before Easter, the LSC decided to change the new basis for duty solicitor rota allocations for 2007–08. Having decided on one option for doing this in February, it then decided to propose an alternative option and planned to allow just two weeks to consult with representative bodies.

“Following pressure from the Law Society, the LSC has conceded that its recent proposal for a further, brief consultation on market stability measures was seriously flawed. It will now conduct a full and proper consultation on the matter,” she adds.
Derek Hill, director of the Criminal Defence Service at the LSC says: “In keeping with requests from the Law Society, we will be writing to providers to ask their opinion about methods to allocate duty slots up until October. Therefore, we are extending our current consultation exercise until 17 May.”

This means, he says, that until at least the end of June duty slots will continue to be allocated on the current rotas. The old duty solicitor arrangements will apply until then.

Meanwhile, the society claimed another victory last week when the government announced plans to retain the current small claims limits of £1,000 for personal injury and housing disrepair claims.

Society chief executive, Desmond Hudson, says: “I’m pleased the government has accepted the evidence in the Law Society’s ‘Fast and Fair’ campaign that an increase in the small claims limit for personal injury cases would deprive many people injured as a result of someone else’s negligence of compensation. We agree with the government that the right approach is to improve the process for dealing with lower value cases rather than depriving people of help from a solicitor.”

The government is also proposing an increase to the fast track limit to £25,000 and the introduction of a streamlined claims process for personal injury claims under £25,000.
 

Issue: 7270 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

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