*/
Code of Conduct
At its meeting on 18 November 2010, the Board agreed to amendments to the Complaints Rules, which appear at Annexe J of the Code; amendments to the Fitness to Practise Rules in Annexe O and changes to the Interim Suspension Rules at Annexe N.
Changes to the Complaints Rules – Annexe J
The Rules have been revised substantially as a result of the transfer, on 6 October 2010, of the BSB’s jurisdiction over “service” complaints to the Legal Ombudsman. All references to “inadequate professional service”, and any functions or powers related to such complaints, have also been removed; as at 6 October 2010, the Rules contained transitional provisions to cover referral of lay client complaints to the Legal Ombudsman (Rule 14).
The BSB has until 31 March 2011 to determine IPS complaints received prior to 6 October 2010. As a result, the Rules give the BSB interim powers to deal with such complaints between 1 January and 31 March 2011 (Rule 8 and Schedule 2).
The Complaints Commissioner’s role in determining complaints has been removed, and all decisions making powers are now vested in the Complaints Committee. Under Rule 4 of the Complaints Rules 2011, authority will be given by the Committee to staff members of the Professional Conduct Department, and to certain Committee members and groups of the Committee, to take decisions on complaints.
The Rules further clarify the “test” to be applied when deciding whether a complaint should be referred to disciplinary action; the “prima facie” test has been replaced with “a realistic prospect of a finding professional misconduct being made against a barrister”. Criteria for accepting complaints submitted outside the 12 month time limit have also been revised. These amendments took effect from 1 January 2011.
Changes to the Fitness to Practise Rules – Annexe O
The amendments to the Fitness to Practise Rules, in the main, consist of replacing the Commissioner’s powers to refer cases to Fitness to Practise panels with Committee powers to do so. As well as updating terminology used in the Rules, the word “defendant” has been replaced with “barrister”, given that the Fitness Practise process is not disciplinary in nature. The amendments took effect from 1 January 2011.
Changes to the Interim Suspension Rules – Annexe N
The amendments to the Annexe are limited to the removal of the Commissioner’s power to refer barristers to an Interim Suspension panel, updating the Rules to bring them in line with the Disciplinary Regulations, as well as the revised terminology. The amendments took effect from 1 January 2011.
Changes to the Complaints Rules – Annexe J
The Rules have been revised substantially as a result of the transfer, on 6 October 2010, of the BSB’s jurisdiction over “service” complaints to the Legal Ombudsman. All references to “inadequate professional service”, and any functions or powers related to such complaints, have also been removed; as at 6 October 2010, the Rules contained transitional provisions to cover referral of lay client complaints to the Legal Ombudsman (Rule 14).
The BSB has until 31 March 2011 to determine IPS complaints received prior to 6 October 2010. As a result, the Rules give the BSB interim powers to deal with such complaints between 1 January and 31 March 2011 (Rule 8 and Schedule 2).
The Complaints Commissioner’s role in determining complaints has been removed, and all decisions making powers are now vested in the Complaints Committee. Under Rule 4 of the Complaints Rules 2011, authority will be given by the Committee to staff members of the Professional Conduct Department, and to certain Committee members and groups of the Committee, to take decisions on complaints.
The Rules further clarify the “test” to be applied when deciding whether a complaint should be referred to disciplinary action; the “prima facie” test has been replaced with “a realistic prospect of a finding professional misconduct being made against a barrister”. Criteria for accepting complaints submitted outside the 12 month time limit have also been revised. These amendments took effect from 1 January 2011.
Changes to the Fitness to Practise Rules – Annexe O
The amendments to the Fitness to Practise Rules, in the main, consist of replacing the Commissioner’s powers to refer cases to Fitness to Practise panels with Committee powers to do so. As well as updating terminology used in the Rules, the word “defendant” has been replaced with “barrister”, given that the Fitness Practise process is not disciplinary in nature. The amendments took effect from 1 January 2011.
Changes to the Interim Suspension Rules – Annexe N
The amendments to the Annexe are limited to the removal of the Commissioner’s power to refer barristers to an Interim Suspension panel, updating the Rules to bring them in line with the Disciplinary Regulations, as well as the revised terminology. The amendments took effect from 1 January 2011.
Code of Conduct
At its meeting on 18 November 2010, the Board agreed to amendments to the Complaints Rules, which appear at Annexe J of the Code; amendments to the Fitness to Practise Rules in Annexe O and changes to the Interim Suspension Rules at Annexe N.
Sam Townend KC explains the Bar Council’s efforts towards ensuring a bright future for the profession
Giovanni D’Avola explores the issue of over-citation of unreported cases and the ‘added value’ elements of a law report
Louise Crush explores the key points and opportunities for tax efficiency
Westgate Wealth Management Ltd is a Partner Practice of FTSE 100 company St. James’s Place – one of the top UK Wealth Management firms. We offer a holistic service of distinct quality, integrity, and excellence with the aim to build a professional and valuable relationship with our clients, helping to provide them with security now, prosperity in the future and the highest standard of service in all of our dealings.
Is now the time to review your financial position, having reached a career milestone? asks Louise Crush
If you were to host a dinner party with 10 guests, and you asked them to explain what financial planning is and how it differs to financial advice, you’d receive 10 different answers. The variety of answers highlights the ongoing need to clarify and promote the value of financial planning.
Most of us like to think we would risk our career in order to meet our ethical obligations, so why have so many lawyers failed to hold the line? asks Flora Page
If your current practice environment is bringing you down, seek a new one. However daunting the change, it will be worth it, says Anon Barrister
Creating advocacy opportunities for juniors is now the expectation but not always easy to put into effect. Tom Mitcheson KC distils developing best practice from the Patents Court initiative already bearing fruit
Sam Townend KC explains the Bar Council’s efforts towards ensuring a bright future for the profession
The long-running fee-paid judicial pensions saga continues. The current cut-off date for giving notice of election to join FPJPS is 31 March 2024, and that date now gives rise to a serious problem, warns HH John Platt
