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.
My attention has been drawn to a piece in The Lawyer (8 September) which refers to an article under my name in the magazine Solo - published by the Sole Practitioners Group for its members.
The Lawyer piece implied that I was suggesting that sole practitioners are most guilty of negligence and incompetent conveyancing.
However, I would like to make clear that nowhere in the original article do I suggest that is my view. Indeed, it is most certainly not.
I understand that the journalist who wrote your commentary had only seen a draft of my article and perhaps the following statement was not included. But I think it is very important that your readers should see the statement included in the final Solo article, namely that: "I believe the first objective is to find out where the faults lie in incompetent, not to say, negligent conveyancing."
In another part of the article I said "all solicitors who do conveyancing work should be required to adopt standards". This makes it clear that I was not only talking about sole practitioners.
I do not know the London sole practitioner who suggested that the article was aimed at sole practitioners. I suspect that he or she had not actually read the Solo piece.
In my article I said I could complain against seven "firms" who I thought fell below required standards. Of the seven, only one is a sole practitioner. The rest are larger firms and I have no doubt that it is these, not sole practitioners, who are most likely to use unqualified staff. Those staff are often not properly supervised on conveyancing work - work which I feel many firms consider "throw-away".