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’.
18 January 2018
No fees, please
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Boodle Hatfield—Tom McLaughlin
Boodle Hatfield welcomes new employment partner, Tom McLaughlin
Arc Pensions Law—Victoria Thompson-Hill, Jonathan Mason & Georgi Ivanov
National specialist pensions law firm strengthens team with three new appointments
Jurit—Christian Abletshauser
Jurit appoints Christian Abletshauser to lead family law practice
NEWS
Burges Salmon appoints Benn Richards to strengthen Contentious Insolvency offering
A High Court decision has clarified that a home may be unfit for human habitation not only where conditions endanger health or safety, but also where they seriously undermine comfort and convenience
A longer time limit for employment tribunal claims, new charity law thresholds, property tribunal recruitment and appellate guidance on small-claims costs feature in the latest Civil Way round-up
A recent High Court ruling could make issue estoppel considerably more complex in cross-border litigation, requiring parties to consider the foreign law governing the underlying claim
The Supreme Court has overturned Cheshire West’s bright-line test for deprivation of liberty, replacing it with a broader, more contextual assessment that gives greater weight to an individual’s wishes, feelings and apparent consent
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
