*/
The Bar Council has published its response to the Legal Services Board’s wide-ranging discussion paper on Alternative Business Structures (ABS).
The response from its Working Group on ABS reflects the Bar Council’s support for a pragmatic and proportionate approach to the liberalisation of the legal services market, as envisaged by Sir David Clementi in his review of legal services in England and Wales.
In its response, the Bar Council broadly welcomes the introduction of Alternative Business Structures for the legal professions, and believes that legal services consumers will benefit from increased competition between the Bar, known for its low overheads and high levels of expertise, and other legal services providers.
The Working Group emphasises the need to recognise that access to justice requires access to fully qualified representation. There is concern expressed that the LSB will support new forms of access to legal services in the mistaken belief that this, in itself, constitutes improved access to justice. The Bar Council argues that it is vital that the liberalisation of the legal services market is proportionate, evidence-based and incremental in order to preserve public confidence in effective access to justice. The response provides comment on elements of the LSB’s approach towards Alternative Business Structures.
In particular the Working Group highlights the tension between the LSB’s belief in the potential benefits from the liberalisation of the market for legal services despite a lack of any real evidence as to how the market might change, and the effect this would in turn have on consumers. The discussion paper also suggests a prioritisation of promotion of access to legal services at the expense of promoting access to justice.
Commenting on the response, Desmond Browne QC, Chairman of the Bar, said:
“The Bar Council welcomes in principle the introduction of Alternative Business Structures and the opportunity to provide innovative solutions to changes in the demand for the provision of legal services. There may, however, be tension between liberalisation of the market, and the core principle of providing effective access to justice. It is right, therefore, to advance with caution. For this reason, the Working Group, in its response to the Legal Services Board’s wide-reaching and thought provoking discussion paper, advocates a pragmatic and proportionate approach to the liberalisation of the market. Such an approach will better enable the licensing regime to adapt to changes in the market as they occur, benefitting both regulators and providers of legal services, whilst that
In its response, the Bar Council broadly welcomes the introduction of Alternative Business Structures for the legal professions, and believes that legal services consumers will benefit from increased competition between the Bar, known for its low overheads and high levels of expertise, and other legal services providers.
The Working Group emphasises the need to recognise that access to justice requires access to fully qualified representation. There is concern expressed that the LSB will support new forms of access to legal services in the mistaken belief that this, in itself, constitutes improved access to justice. The Bar Council argues that it is vital that the liberalisation of the legal services market is proportionate, evidence-based and incremental in order to preserve public confidence in effective access to justice. The response provides comment on elements of the LSB’s approach towards Alternative Business Structures.
In particular the Working Group highlights the tension between the LSB’s belief in the potential benefits from the liberalisation of the market for legal services despite a lack of any real evidence as to how the market might change, and the effect this would in turn have on consumers. The discussion paper also suggests a prioritisation of promotion of access to legal services at the expense of promoting access to justice.
Commenting on the response, Desmond Browne QC, Chairman of the Bar, said:
“The Bar Council welcomes in principle the introduction of Alternative Business Structures and the opportunity to provide innovative solutions to changes in the demand for the provision of legal services. There may, however, be tension between liberalisation of the market, and the core principle of providing effective access to justice. It is right, therefore, to advance with caution. For this reason, the Working Group, in its response to the Legal Services Board’s wide-reaching and thought provoking discussion paper, advocates a pragmatic and proportionate approach to the liberalisation of the market. Such an approach will better enable the licensing regime to adapt to changes in the market as they occur, benefitting both regulators and providers of legal services, whilst that
The Bar Council has published its response to the Legal Services Board’s wide-ranging discussion paper on Alternative Business Structures (ABS).
The response from its Working Group on ABS reflects the Bar Council’s support for a pragmatic and proportionate approach to the liberalisation of the legal services market, as envisaged by Sir David Clementi in his review of legal services in England and Wales.
The Chair of the Bar reports back
By Kem Kemal, CEO, Henry Dannell
By BSK Financial Planning
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs
Susie Griffin on the admin that keeps barristers from billable work
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, explains how global events can influence the performance of pensions and ISAs, and why taking a long-term approach to investing is often the most effective strategy
Kick off your career at the Bar Council’s Pupillage Fair this October – it’s one of the most valuable opportunities for aspiring barristers, says Amelia Clegg
Join us on Saturday 21 November 2026 at Leeds Beckett University and see for yourself why the North continues to be an exceptional place to build a career at the Bar
The golden age of advocacy? David Langwallner pays homage to the filmic if contentious barrister Sir Edward Carson and some of his contemporaries
Henry Fingerhut outlines what the Bar Standards Board AI guidance means for early career barristers
Not yet, says Jacob Turner. Regulation, unlike the technology itself, is a domain the legal profession can still control
