Law Society leadership in chaos as solicitors pass no-confidence vote

  • Print
  • Comments (23)

Readers' comments (23)

  • While I sympathise with the Law Society on one hand, I still question its needs to exist. As the representative body it should be independent of both the regulator and the MoJ, then maybe it could grow a backbone and put across its point in a fair and balanced manner. As it is, the Law Soc and its senior management are operating with one hand behind their back. I am just surprised it has taken this long to get a vote, this should have all been sorted out years ago when the SRA was first suggested.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The profession should voice a collective 'thank you' to James who has had the courage to take a stand and to all those who made the effort to attend and support the motion.

    I am sure that there are many practitioners who would have liked to attend and support the motion were either unable to do so or took the view that so doing would not be consequence free.

    There are I suspect (if the sample in the Dog & Duck is representaive) few who have any confidence in the senior management of The Law Society at all.

    If the president of a Rugby or Cricket club suffered such a defeat I have no doubt that their resignation would follow by return; have we now sunk to such depths that a no confidence motion can be brushed off with such insiouciance?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Today's vote will prove to be a pyrrhic victory for legal aid practitioners and a serious blow to The Law Society in its attempts to negotiate a decent deal for them -and to represent the interests of an increasinly fragmented profession. It is a sad day for all lawyers - not just solicitors - who, more than ever before, need to work together to defend the rule of law, access to justice and the future viability of the profession as a profession. James Parry and his accolytes have done themselves - and all of us - a terrible disservice. Truly a bonfire of the vanities...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I respectfully suggest that Mr Hudson sees this unprecedented action as the writing on the wall for his leadership. The noble thing to do is re-sign and agree to work sufficient notice for a New CEO to be found who can be more effective in role.

    If you choose to remain it will only attract more negative attention, because let's be honest you are not coming back from this one are you.

    If you remain I suggest a full ballot of the profession will reveal the animosity that is held for the Law Society that you lead and you ineffective leadership.

    Because its not just about legal aid is it! It's scandal after scandal from heavy handed SRA actions to PII . You just haven't represented us have you.....

    So go quietly and close the door gently behind you.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Rarely can any profession have been as badly lead as we are by the Law Society.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • £80 grand to organise a profession-wide electronic postal vote? Have they not heard of Survey Monkey ffs?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Makes sense to me that negotiation is the right way to go here and that this negotiation needs to be by the representative body. All that has happened today is that lawyers look like they are all about safeguarding their own interests. Self-interested factions will not get a credible seat at the table. The upshot of this is that the reforms will be worse as the MoJ sees a self-interested divided profession.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Resignations should have been immediate.

    So much for the ethics and standards the leadership constantly preach-apparently they are only for the "plebs", not the rulers.

    Unsurprising, but typical.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Congratulations to the no confidence voters, you have done the legal profession proud. This was a brave display of the democratic right to hold a membership organisation to account. For too many years the LawSoc has been home to a culture of fecklessness and unaccountability. Now its members, who pay for its existence, have given it a bloody nose for not listening to their legitimate concerns.

    Whether the LawSoc's leadership will survive this or not is still unclear, but either way professionals in this country have shown they will not be sold down the river by a self-serving quango that doesn't even ask their opinion.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • When has the Law Society not been a shambles in the last say 30 years?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page | 20 per page | 50 per page

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (23)