The Lawyer Asia Pacific 150 is the only research report to provide a ranking of the top 100 independent local firms and top 50 global firms in the region. The report offers critical review of some of the fastest growing firms and their strategies, a country-by-country guide to leading legal advisers and legal services market trends, plus exclusive insight into the current business development opportunities in the Asia Pacific. Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
A GOVERNMENT minister's comment that legally privileged material should not normally be intercepted by the police has prompted a renewed bid by the Law Society to secure a tightening up of the Police Bill.
As the Bill stands, a chief police officer can authorise interception of material covered by legal professional privilege so long as prior consent is obtained from a commissioner. Prior consent is not needed in an emergency.
But at committee stage in the House of Commons last week, David Maclean, minister of state for the Home Office, said the Government's intention was that legally privileged material should not be intercepted unless there were reasonable grounds to suspect that the solicitor was involved in a criminal enterprise with his client.
The Law Society will now be pressing for an amendment so that this intention is made clear in the Bill. It is also pressing for clarification of the status of interviews between solicitors and clients which take place in police cells or prisons.
Maclean said such conversations were not covered by the Bill. This means that, although inadmissible as evidence in court, the conversations could be bugged and might get into the hands of the CPS.