header-logo header-logo

15 November 2007 / Simon Young
Issue: 7297 / Categories: Features , Risk management
printer mail-detail

Risk management focus

SOLICITORS CODE OF CONDUCT 2007 >>
MINIMUM INTERRUPTION TO CLIENT BUSINESS >>
ABSENCES WITHIN FIRMS >>

 What’s all this about having to make a plan under the new rules for what happens to the firm in the event of a disaster? How on earth do I know what might happen?

You’re quite right, there is a provision in the Solicitors Code of Conduct 2007 which is relevant. You can find it in rule 5.01(1)(k). You’ll remember that rule 5.01 generally makes it a collective responsibility of all partners to ensure there are effective processes for various things.

Well, for this one, the idea is simple enough: it just says you have to make arrangements for the continuation of the practice of the firm in the event of absences and emergencies, with the minimum interruption to clients’ business.

Well, of course I want to protect the partners, but why should this be a matter for the regulators?

You’re missing the point. This isn’t a rule for your benefit; it’s for the benefit of the client.

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—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis will mark the 80th anniversary of Shawcross and Beaumont on Air Law with a live podcast exploring the evolution of aviation law from the Chicago Convention to the challenges facing modern aerospace, taking place on Tuesday 29 September
Harmony Christian Ministries is the latest charity to benefit from a £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
Indemnity costs remain exceptional, but parties cannot ignore a case that deteriorates around them. In Lawrence v Associated Newspapers, Mr Justice Nicklin ordered the claimants to pay indemnity costs after finding their conduct, viewed cumulatively, fell ‘well outside the norm’
Public law is in flux following reversals and robust appellate intervention, according to the latest public law update by the team at HSFK for NLJ
Neurotechnology is turning the human mind into an operational domain, exposing gaps in the laws of war
back-to-top-scroll