header-logo header-logo

Regulator unveils five-year plan

05 February 2009
Issue: 7355 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services
printer mail-detail

Legal Services Board aims to provide a model of regulatory excellence in legal services

New legal regulator, the Legal Services Board (LSB) has set out its vision for the next five years.

In its “Consultation on draft Business Plan 2009/10”, the LSB sets out how it intends to deliver the changes required by the Legal Services Act 2007. Its goals include more help for those whose incomes exceed legal aid thresholds but who are unable to afford legal services; greater competition in service delivery; “swift and effective redress” for consumers if things go wrong; greater diversity in the professions; and certainty and confidence in the regulatory structures underpinning the market.

Chief executive Chris Kenny said the LSB intends to establish “momentum” on all of these in its first year.

He said the LSB would “give particular priority to regulatory independence, alternative business structures, providing effective redress and working up a model of regulatory excellence in legal services”.

Independent legal consultant Simon Young said: “I think it is very encouraging to see how determined they are to get on with things.

“It is quite a useful practical document in that it sets out clearly what the deliverables are going to be in the next 12 months. I was very pleased to see that ABS’ are being addressed.”

On the LSB’s goal to help those living just above the legal aid threshold, Young said: “That’s an unusual statement for a regulator to make—I couldn’t see how they could achieve that. I can only assume they think that can be addressed by other means.” The Legal Services Board, which launched on 1 January 2009, oversees nine separate legal services regulators including the Law Society and the Bar Council, and the Office for Legal Complaints, which handles consumer complaints about lawyers. Comments must be sent to the LSB by 13 March 2009.

The LSB will issue a discussion paper on the development of Alternative Business Structures for law firms (ABS), hold a round table event on best practice across the profession in complaints handling, and consult on draft rules on approved regulator status, between April and June.

Issue: 7355 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll