header-logo header-logo

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

Regulator unveils five-year plan

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

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Firm expands in London and Leeds with dual merger

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Private wealth and real estate firmpromotes two to partner and five to senior associate

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Agile firm expands employment team with two partner hires

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll