header-logo header-logo

Regulation matters: why it’s time to change

09 July 2020 / Chris Bones
Issue: 7894 / Categories: Features , Regulatory , Profession
printer mail-detail
Professor Chris Bones of CILEx explains why the legal profession should not stand in the way of regulatory change
  • Reforming the legal services market: a job half done.
  • Compromises of the Legal Services Act 2007: straining at the seams.
  • Professor Stephen Mayson’s recent independent review of legal regulation: engaging constructively with these new and important proposals.

The job of reforming the legal services market is only half done. Thirteen years on from the Legal Services Act 2007, it has become abundantly clear that the compromise it represented is straining at the seams, and the current COVID-19 crisis has brought this into even sharper relief for both the public and the profession.

Among the regulatory objectives laid down by the Act are protecting and promoting the public interest and the interests of consumers, as well as improving access to justice. Can anyone really claim that a market where the most vulnerable and disadvantaged sections of the public are simply not able to access affordable and effective legal

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
back-to-top-scroll