header-logo header-logo

The referral fee conundrum

27 May 2010 / David Greene
Issue: 7419 / Categories: Opinion , Profession , Costs
printer mail-detail

Referral fees have always been a contentious subject for all those involved in the provision of legal services.

Referral fees have always been a contentious subject for all those involved in the provision of legal services. The concept of touting for business has always struck a nerve among the profession this side of the Atlantic. The question of paying third parties referral fees often gives rise to similar feelings and, as advertising has in the past, referral fees divide the profession.

Advertising or touting by solicitors was prohibited until 1987. While the ban for advertising was then lifted (much against the passionate efforts of many), solicitors were still prohibited from paying referral fees to third parties. That ban was partially lifted in 1988 but there remained a ban on paying referral fees to reward introducers of business. There were some slight amendments in 1991 but referral fees remained in the main banned until March 2004. 

In 2001 the Office of Fair Trading published

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

Weightmans—Nigel Adams & Rehman Noormohamed

Weightmans—Nigel Adams & Rehman Noormohamed

Insurance and corporate teams in London announce double partner hire

Fieldfisher—Chris Cartmell

Fieldfisher—Chris Cartmell

Technology and data practice bolstered by partner hire

South Square—Tony Beswetherick KC

South Square—Tony Beswetherick KC

Set strengthens civil fraud and insolvency offering with new member

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
The long-awaited Getty Images v Stability AI judgment arrived at the end of last year—but not with the seismic impact many expected. In this week's issue of NLJ, experts from Arnold & Porter dissect a ruling that is ‘historic’ yet tightly confined
back-to-top-scroll