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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll