header-logo header-logo

08 June 2015
Issue: 7656 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Separate businesses ban lifted

The prohibition on solicitors owning or having connections with outside businesses is to be abolished, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Board has decided.

The board voted last week to change the separate business rule, which prevents solicitors having links to separate businesses providing non-reserved legal services and therefore outside the remit of regulation. This means law firms will be able to compete on a level playing field with alternative business structures (ABSs) by owning, being owned by, actively participating in or developing links with separate businesses.

The board also voted to reform the rules on what activities law firms can undertake, which will make it easier for them to create one-stop shops for professional services. Instead, the regulator will focus on ensuring outcomes that protect the consumer.

The reforms were consulted on from November to February. They now need to be approved by the Legal Services Board and, if agreed, will become part of the Solicitors Handbook on 1 November.

David Greene, partner at Edwin Coe, says: “The policy lying behind the Separate Business Rule is to forestall confusion on the part of the consumer as to what part of a solicitor’s service is regulated.  

“We presume that another method will be prescribed to resolve that issue. For solicitors, the removal of the Separate Business restriction is undoubtedly good news. We have faced fierce competition for legal advice that falls outside reserved activities, such as will writing.  

“The removal of the restriction will go some way to redress the position; allowing solicitors to establish businesses offering ‘legal services’ that benefit from the branding of solicitor but fall outside the regulated environment.”      

Paul Philip, SRA chief executive, says: “We are levelling the playing field for all types of law firms, encouraging innovation and growth, while ensuring appropriate consumer protection. 

“This follows on from changes we made last year to open up the market to different business models and ‘one-stop shop’ services. We are now looking into what more we should do to give solicitors even more flexibility in future.”

 

Issue: 7656 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Kennedys—Milan Devani

Chief information officer appointment strengthens technology leadership

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Maguire Family Law—Hannah Barlow & Sophie Hughes

Firm strengthens Wilmslow team with two solicitor appointments

DWF—Ian Plumley

DWF—Ian Plumley

Londoninsurance and reinsurance practice announces partner appointment

NEWS
The Supreme Court has delivered a decisive ruling on termination under the JCT Design & Build form. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Singer KC and Jonathan Ward, of Kings Chambers, analyse Providence Building Services v Hexagon Housing Association [2026] UKSC 1, which restores the first-instance decision and curbs contractors’ termination rights for repeated late payment
Secondments, disciplinary procedures and appeal chaos all feature in a quartet of recent rulings. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, examines how established principles are being tested in modern disputes
The AI revolution is no longer a distant murmur—it’s at the client’s desk. Writing in NLJ this week, Peter Ambrose, CEO of The Partnership and Legalito, warns that the ‘AI chickens’ have ‘come home to roost’, transforming not just legal practice but the lawyer–client relationship itself
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
back-to-top-scroll