Neuberger MR calls for regulatory reform as ABS timeline is unveiled
The Master of the Rolls Lord Neuberger has called for the regulatory “maze” introduced by the Legal Services Act (LSA) to be simplified by the Legal Services Board (LSB).
Speaking at the Inner Temple’s lecture series on the theme of professionalism Neuberger MR said there was a “strong argument” for the LSB to revisit the “present regulatory maze”, adding: “We’ve moved from simple self-regulation by representative bodies to a more detailed, more complex, and rather more expensive system.”
Neuberger MR’s comments come as the LSB today announced the timetable for alternative business structures (ABS), with businesses able to apply for licenses from next summer and the first licenses due to be awarded on 6 October 2011.
The regulatory structure will see the LSB act as an overarching watchdog for the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and the Bar Standards Board. While the SRA is likely to take responsibility for ABSs it is possible that further regulators could be introduced.
In announcing the timetable for ABSs LSB chairman David Edmonds said: “In getting to this position, we’ve worked closely with the SRA, the Council for Licensed Conveyancers (CLC) and other bodies who are considering applying to regulate alternative business structures. I welcome their ambition and commitment to the process.”
However, Neuberger MR questioned the need for additional regulators. He said: “I think it highly questionable from a financial perspective to duplicate regulatory activity and cost, and to produce further cost by ensuring that the various regulators communicate and cooperate with each other to ensure that they have and apply common standards.”
The LSA was introduced to bring about increased competition in the profession, but this can only happen where the same rules are applied to different sectors of the profession, he said.
The MR predicted that the profession of the future would evolve in such a way that the role of barristers and solicitors would be combined into an overarching lawyer role.
He argued: “It seems to me that one effect of market forces operating in the new regulatory environment will be something which has long been resisted here: de facto or de jure fusion of the profession. A modern truth that dare not speak its name.
“This may lead to the position where, as in other jurisdictions, lawyers are admitted as both solicitors and barristers: as lawyers.”
As the fusion draws nearer, he continued, “the rationale for maintaining professional bodies will probably vanish”.
This is not the first time the MR has warned about the “unintended consequences” of the LSA. Speaking to the BBC last summer ahead of the opening of the Supreme Court he cautioned: “The danger is you muck around with a constitution at your peril, because you don’t know what the consequences of any change will be” (14 September 2009).
Readers' comments (7)
Anonymous | 23-Feb-2010 11:14 pm
There has long been an argument for close working on the contentious side, with solicitors and barristers combining to make an effective team, likely to be divorced from many of the conflicts that beset large law firms. As to the regulatory structure, it seems pretty Gilbertian to me, not least with regulators regulating regulators! It is rather like the early days of the FSA in the insurance industry, with complete overkill. I wonder if it has been designed to employ all the redundant lawyers? Perhaps common sense will break out, as I cannot see Tesco Law, or whoever it is, wanting to pay for this army!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 24-Feb-2010 1:45 am
There is real poverty in the consciousness of members of the Judicia and "officers of the Court": we need to begin right there, if Justice is of interest to anyone. I wonder just how many people in the UK realise the extent of the corruption within our courts ? Armed robbery is a thing of the past - now it is done by pen and paper with solicitors and HMCS, working in tandem. Bent judges are allowing through forged and falsified court documents, on a simply MONUMENTAL scale, and covering up for each other and depriving innocent citizens of any hearing. People are being made bankrupt on just a £1000 "debt" and people all over the country are having their homes stolen by corrupt and criminal solicitors who are not even owing any money but are laundering it all through the courts ! I am sure there are ways the more awake groups of people could help, if there is willingness there. We are seeking to sign up one million people who will join in 'lawful rebellion' of the corruption in our Judiciary system
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 24-Feb-2010 1:35 pm
A good start would be a genuine means of dealing with complaints about these rotten judges so that they are properly accountable for the things that they do.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 25-Feb-2010 1:03 am
hear hear: bring the corrupt judges to book, with penalties so severe because of their mis-use of power. They are NOT 'above the Law' even though that is what they would like to believe and what this government would have you and I believe. The Office for judicial complaints is like a tiger with no teeth, like a car with no engine, it is a waste of time going to those people. The judges have an open runway to commit fraud, theft, organised financial 'mugging', and are overly bloated and full of their own importance.
They look at life through tinted spectacles and have no clue of the suffering of the common man, they are so used to meting out injustice and 'slow torture' to the masses, tending to the Fat Cat lawyers who keep them 'in business' and making BIASED votes on a daily basis in favour of the major financial institutions - who are all in their 'back pockets'. The whole thing is a cesspit of corruption.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Marc Beaumont | 25-Feb-2010 11:03 am
Lord Neuberger is right. We now have excessive regulation of the legal profession. The LSB and BSB purport to be enterprising with regard to ABSs and LDPs, but the truth is that the BSB investigates and prosecutes Barristers for an assortment of petty infringements and seems already to live in fear of the LSB. These bodies have created a sense of fear at the Bar which ultimately works against the interests of clients who need their Barristers to be fearless, self-confident and strong in the face of Government, big corporations and indeed, Judges.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 25-Feb-2010 11:27 am
what a shame to allow your pages to be taken over by some of these subscribers What a lot of nonsense!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 26-Feb-2010 2:53 pm
Rotten judges and fraud on a monumental scale? I think some subscribers may be a little paranoid.
As to Lord Neuberger's comments, he is absolutely right. It is no way to effectively manage a profession by having various regulatory bodies sharing jurisdiction and sometimes at cross purposes.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment