header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Room for improvement?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
16 December 2016 / Jonathon Bray
Issue: 7727 / Categories: Features , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-detail

Jonathon Bray discusses ABS authorisation pain points

The history of alternative business structures (ABSs) starts in March 2001 when the Office of Fair Trading produced a report that recommended that unjustified restriction on competition should be removed. The government consultation paper and report on the legal services market that followed concluded the framework was outdated, inflexible and too complicated.

Sir David Clementi was appointed in July 2003 to carry out an independent review of the regulatory framework for legal services. One of the recommendations of his report was the establishment of ABSs that could see different types of lawyers and non-lawyers managing and owning legal practices.

The government accepted the majority of Clementi’s recommendations and in May 2006 published its draft bill, including ABSs.

What eventually followed was the Legal Services Act 2007 (LSA 2007) that received Royal Assent on 30 October 2007. LSA 2007 also established the Legal Services Board (LSB) to implement the Act, and the Office for Legal Complaints, now better known as the Legal Ombudsman.

Approval to license ABS applications was

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

Read All
Sponsored by
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
Read All
NLJ this week: The insider returns
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
NLJ this week: Drawing the line on contempt
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
NLJ this week: Stop and search by the numbers
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
NLJ this week: Looking back on the prorogation that never was
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
NLJ this week: How not to plead a schedule of loss
A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll