header-logo header-logo

No fees, please

18 January 2018
Issue: 7777 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Barristers present a ‘very low risk’ when it comes to money laundering and should not have to pay fees for an Office for Professional Body Anti-Money Laundering Supervision (OPBAS), the Bar Council has argued. In a robust response to the Financial Conduct Authority’s proposal that barristers pay fees towards the proposed regulatory body, the Council questions why it should pay for ‘a supervisor’s supervisor’ that is required because of ‘the activities of estate agents and accountants’. It points out that ‘there are no historic examples in the public domain of barristers engaging in money laundering or terrorist financing activities on behalf of their clients’. 

Issue: 7777 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll