*/
You can “change, adapt and thrive” as a barrister-led, BSB-regulated entity under a new regime launching this January, suggests Oliver Hanmer.
It is something of a cliché to use the words “a rapidly changing profession”; to describe the “ever-evolving environment” in which the Bar operates; to note that the legal services market is “undergoing unprecedented change”, as if few had noticed.
Nevertheless, the warning, issued in Sir Bill Jeffrey’s independent review of criminal advocacy in England and Wales, was still sharp and stark. He wrote: “... simply carrying on as at present in an effort to keep intact, in radically changed conditions, every aspect of the model as it existed many years ago, does not seem to me to be a viable option.” His message to the Bar was not so much “keep calm and carry on” as it was “change, adapt and thrive”.
Adjusting the way in which the Bar does business is critical to the profession’s posterity. This appreciation spurred the Bar Standards Board (BSB) application last year to the Legal Services Board (LSB) to become a regulator of entities, which would then allow barristers to form companies, become a partnership, or set up an LLP. The LSB approved our application in November 2014. The BSB will start accepting applications for BSB-regulated entities from 5 January 2015 and will start authorising applications from April 2015. As a regulator, it is our job to do what we can to enable barristers to alter and adapt the ways in which they can structure their practice so it better meets clients’ needs.
Tailored to advocacy and litigation
Barristers have been able to set up entities under other Approved Regulators (the Solicitors Regulation Authority, for example) for almost five years. Many have done so. The BSB did not want to replicate existing systems – our view is that, as business models change, the skills and expertise associated with the Bar should be protected and preserved and standards of advocacy must be maintained. This is to the Bar’s benefit and also in the best interests of the public.
Our aim is to give those entities wanting to specialise in advocacy and litigation the option of being regulated by the BSB – under a more niche, focused regime. We will keep our regime simpler to run by restricting the types of entity we regulate. Rather than trying to regulate an entity that wishes to concentrate on, say, licensed conveyancing, we will stick to what we know we are good at. Ultimately, we hope a BSBled entity regulation regime results in giving both barristers and consumers greater choice in the marketplace – including for one-stop advocacy, litigation, and specialist legal advice services.
Seize the opportunity
From my own discussions with members of the profession, I know there is real interest – excitement even – in barrister-led, BSB-regulated entities. It is to be hoped that our entity regulation regime will play some part in opening opportunities to those practitioners for whom self-employment is not an option. Further, the possibility of a more secure practising model may help promote retention and diversity at the Bar and facilitate innovations for consumers.
Individual responsibility is the cornerstone of advocacy’s regulatory foundations. Whether such advocacy is done within an entity or by a barrister working on a self-employed basis does not matter: the advocate’s responsibility to the court and to their client is just the same.
Becoming approved as a regulator of alternative business structure (ABS) entities is also in our sights. More detailed information on our envisaged ABS regulatory regime is for another article, but this is all part of our efforts to help those who want to adopt new business models to deal with the changing market, so as to continue to meet clients’ needs and the best interests of the public.
Sir Bill Jeffrey’s review helped set out some of the new opportunities and possibilities that can open up now under the BSB-led entity regulation regime. Upon reading Sir Bill’s review – limited as it was to criminal advocacy – I was nevertheless struck by the words of another Bill – Clinton – who once said: “The price of doing the same old thing is far higher than the price of change.” Our role as the regulator is to open up these opportunities; it is up to the Bar to seize them or not.
Nevertheless, the warning, issued in Sir Bill Jeffrey’s independent review of criminal advocacy in England and Wales, was still sharp and stark. He wrote: “... simply carrying on as at present in an effort to keep intact, in radically changed conditions, every aspect of the model as it existed many years ago, does not seem to me to be a viable option.” His message to the Bar was not so much “keep calm and carry on” as it was “change, adapt and thrive”.
Adjusting the way in which the Bar does business is critical to the profession’s posterity. This appreciation spurred the Bar Standards Board (BSB) application last year to the Legal Services Board (LSB) to become a regulator of entities, which would then allow barristers to form companies, become a partnership, or set up an LLP. The LSB approved our application in November 2014. The BSB will start accepting applications for BSB-regulated entities from 5 January 2015 and will start authorising applications from April 2015. As a regulator, it is our job to do what we can to enable barristers to alter and adapt the ways in which they can structure their practice so it better meets clients’ needs.
Tailored to advocacy and litigation
Barristers have been able to set up entities under other Approved Regulators (the Solicitors Regulation Authority, for example) for almost five years. Many have done so. The BSB did not want to replicate existing systems – our view is that, as business models change, the skills and expertise associated with the Bar should be protected and preserved and standards of advocacy must be maintained. This is to the Bar’s benefit and also in the best interests of the public.
Our aim is to give those entities wanting to specialise in advocacy and litigation the option of being regulated by the BSB – under a more niche, focused regime. We will keep our regime simpler to run by restricting the types of entity we regulate. Rather than trying to regulate an entity that wishes to concentrate on, say, licensed conveyancing, we will stick to what we know we are good at. Ultimately, we hope a BSBled entity regulation regime results in giving both barristers and consumers greater choice in the marketplace – including for one-stop advocacy, litigation, and specialist legal advice services.
Seize the opportunity
From my own discussions with members of the profession, I know there is real interest – excitement even – in barrister-led, BSB-regulated entities. It is to be hoped that our entity regulation regime will play some part in opening opportunities to those practitioners for whom self-employment is not an option. Further, the possibility of a more secure practising model may help promote retention and diversity at the Bar and facilitate innovations for consumers.
Individual responsibility is the cornerstone of advocacy’s regulatory foundations. Whether such advocacy is done within an entity or by a barrister working on a self-employed basis does not matter: the advocate’s responsibility to the court and to their client is just the same.
Becoming approved as a regulator of alternative business structure (ABS) entities is also in our sights. More detailed information on our envisaged ABS regulatory regime is for another article, but this is all part of our efforts to help those who want to adopt new business models to deal with the changing market, so as to continue to meet clients’ needs and the best interests of the public.
Sir Bill Jeffrey’s review helped set out some of the new opportunities and possibilities that can open up now under the BSB-led entity regulation regime. Upon reading Sir Bill’s review – limited as it was to criminal advocacy – I was nevertheless struck by the words of another Bill – Clinton – who once said: “The price of doing the same old thing is far higher than the price of change.” Our role as the regulator is to open up these opportunities; it is up to the Bar to seize them or not.
You can “change, adapt and thrive” as a barrister-led, BSB-regulated entity under a new regime launching this January, suggests Oliver Hanmer.
It is something of a cliché to use the words “a rapidly changing profession”; to describe the “ever-evolving environment” in which the Bar operates; to note that the legal services market is “undergoing unprecedented change”, as if few had noticed.
As we look ahead to Justice Week 2022, the sustainability of the Criminal Bar remains a critical issue for the government to address
Opportunity for female sopranos/contraltos in secondary education, or who have recently finished secondary education but have not yet begun tertiary education. Eligibility includes children of members of the Bar
Fear of the collection and test process is a common factor among clients, especially among vulnerable adults in complex family law cases. Cansford Laboratories shares some tips to help the testing process run as smoothly as possible
Casey Randall explains how complex relationship DNA tests can best be used – and interpreted – by counsel
Casey Randall, Head of DNA at AlphaBiolabs, explores what barristers need to know about DNA testing for immigration, including when a client might wish to submit DNA evidence, and which relationship tests are best for immigration applications
Julian Morgan reminds barristers of the top five areas to consider before 5 April
The case ofR v Brecanihas complicated matters for defence lawyers. Emma Fielding talks to gang culture expert, Dr Simon Harding about County Lines, exploitation and modern slavery
Barristers are particularly at risk of burnout because of the nature of our work and our approach to it but it doesnt have to be this way. Jade Bucklow explores how culture, work and lifestyle changes can rejuvinate our mental health...
Professionally embarrassed? The circumstances in which criminal barristers may return instructions to appear at trial have become clearer following the Court of Appeal judgment inR v Daniels By Abigail Bright
The Schools Consent Project (SCP) is educating tens of thousands of teenagers about the law around consent to challenge and change what is now endemic behaviour. Here, its founder, barrister Kate Parker talks to Chris Henley QC about SCPs work and its association with Jodie Comers West End playPrima Facie, in which she plays a criminal barrister who is sexually assaulted
Following the launch of the Life at the Young Bar report and a nationwide listening exercise, Michael Polak and Michael Harwood outline the Young Barristers Committees raft of initiatives designed to address your issues of concern