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.
Criminal lawyers were due to launch a barristers' charter at the weekend to improve standards and to cut down on last-minute changes in counsel.
The proposal put foward by Manchester solicitor Michael Hopkinson, of Bridgwood & Hopkinson, at a conference of the Criminal Lawyers Solicitors Association (CLSA), follows a report on Bar standards which highlighted similar problems.
But Michael Jones, of Sheffield's Rodgers & Howe, who helped to draw up the charter, says the CLSA's measures go further than the recommendations by the Bar Standards Review Body.
The review body concluded that in many cases the Bar could not be held responsible for briefs being returned late. It recommends that barristers should be obliged to provide written explanations if quizzed by solicitors about the return of briefs. It also suggests that barristers returning a brief should be responsible for ensuring as little disruption as possible to the case.
But the review came out against "contracts" arguing that the natural caution of those entering them would "tend towards the lowest possible commitment".
Hopkinson's charter is a quasi-contract which seeks to put the solicitor-barrister relationship on a more formal footing. He says the main problems are last-minute changes in counsel, lack of preparations and senior counsel refusing cases "not considered appropriate".