*/
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.
In the battle of ideas and values which the maintenance of the rule of law involves, lawyers remain in the frontline
An update by Rachel Cooper of Coram Chambers
There is still time to submit your entries for the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2022, with entries closing on Friday 26 November!
Leading alcohol testing provider AlphaBiolabs is now offering SmartMobile™, a new and highly innovative portable breath alcohol testing device with a built-in camera for personal identification, as well as optional GPS tracking capabilities.
Like it or loathe it, admin is a part of work and life but it can start to dominate and feel a burden. Here is a checklist of tips to help you feel calm about your inbox, from the virtual assistants who keep barristers organised
AlphaBiolabs enhances its SCRAM CAM® continuous alcohol monitoring service
Upskilling courts with a more forensic approach to domestic abuse, Professor Monckton-Smith talks to Laurence Cooper about her groundbreaking research, identifying patterns of coercive control and use of the homicide timeline
Dropping hearings into Zoom is not the end game, writes Professor Richard Susskind OBE
The court backlog, remote hearings and exodus of criminal advocates due to poor remuneration are all linked and so must be the solutions, writes HH Nigel Lithman QC
Racial disparity and racism can impact experiences in the courtroom; Abimbola Johnson has some constructive solutions on how we can effectively challenge it
Zira Hussain shares a family barristers day in the life breaking barriers, turning disadvantage into advantage, and fighting for abuse victims
.tmb-carlisting.jpg?sfvrsn=709676a_1){kind=logo}