*/
The BSB’s current consultation on entity regulation is asking fundamental questions about how barristers will work in the future, and how they should be regulated, writes Samuel Condry.
The BSB proposes that it is in the public interest to continue to have a specialist regulator of advocacy and related services; and that, given its experience and expertise as a regulator in this field, it is well placed to regulate entities as well as individuals. It recognises that the future for advocacy services may lie in business entities, as well as in the referral Bar.
More importantly, the consultation is about barristers’ permissions to practise. Barristers can already work in businesses as employees and as managers of law firms and recognised bodies (LDPs) and the BSB has already decided in principle to allow barristers to work in Barrister Only Entities (BOEs) – partnerships or limited companies. The question is whether the remaining restrictions on conducting litigation should be removed so that barristers can provide a “one stop shop” service, direct to lay clients. The majority of barristers recently surveyed by the BSB wanted more direct access.
New business structures may well be an opportunity for the Bar to become more competitive. However, barristers, clerks, and all those involved in the supply of advocacy services, will need to make some important judgement calls – whether clients will need barristers to conduct litigation as well as doing advocacy and giving advice, how clients can be expected to pay for these services, and how they can manage conflicts and preserve the principles of non-discrimination and the cab-rank rule.
A key question is how clients should pay for services and receive money from court awards and settlements, if barristers are permitted to conduct litigation, but are not permitted to hold client money. The current regulatory regime for holding client money, overseen by the SRA, is enormously costly and complex and the BSB will not be able to replicate it. Instead, the BSB is developing an alternative proposal, which will involve money held in a “custodian” arrangement, allowing more streamlined, cheaper regulation.
Whilst it is not the BSB’s role to find commercially viable solutions to the enormous pressures facing today’s barristers, it is the role of the regulator to find a solution which can work with any commercial plans that barristers may have. This is partly why the BSB commissioned a YouGov survey earlier this year, to find out the future business intentions of barristers and clerks. The BSB will continue to work closely with the Bar Council to ensure entity regulation would be both workable and desirable for the Bar, and for those who use its services. The BSB’s autumn “roadshow” events will be a chance for barristers and their colleagues to find out more about entity regulation whilst feeding back their views.
For more information visit www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/consultations/OpenConsultations/regulatingentities/
Samuel Condry, Senior Policy Officer, Bar Standard Board
The BSB proposes that it is in the public interest to continue to have a specialist regulator of advocacy and related services; and that, given its experience and expertise as a regulator in this field, it is well placed to regulate entities as well as individuals. It recognises that the future for advocacy services may lie in business entities, as well as in the referral Bar.
More importantly, the consultation is about barristers’ permissions to practise. Barristers can already work in businesses as employees and as managers of law firms and recognised bodies (LDPs) and the BSB has already decided in principle to allow barristers to work in Barrister Only Entities (BOEs) – partnerships or limited companies. The question is whether the remaining restrictions on conducting litigation should be removed so that barristers can provide a “one stop shop” service, direct to lay clients. The majority of barristers recently surveyed by the BSB wanted more direct access.
New business structures may well be an opportunity for the Bar to become more competitive. However, barristers, clerks, and all those involved in the supply of advocacy services, will need to make some important judgement calls – whether clients will need barristers to conduct litigation as well as doing advocacy and giving advice, how clients can be expected to pay for these services, and how they can manage conflicts and preserve the principles of non-discrimination and the cab-rank rule.
A key question is how clients should pay for services and receive money from court awards and settlements, if barristers are permitted to conduct litigation, but are not permitted to hold client money. The current regulatory regime for holding client money, overseen by the SRA, is enormously costly and complex and the BSB will not be able to replicate it. Instead, the BSB is developing an alternative proposal, which will involve money held in a “custodian” arrangement, allowing more streamlined, cheaper regulation.
Whilst it is not the BSB’s role to find commercially viable solutions to the enormous pressures facing today’s barristers, it is the role of the regulator to find a solution which can work with any commercial plans that barristers may have. This is partly why the BSB commissioned a YouGov survey earlier this year, to find out the future business intentions of barristers and clerks. The BSB will continue to work closely with the Bar Council to ensure entity regulation would be both workable and desirable for the Bar, and for those who use its services. The BSB’s autumn “roadshow” events will be a chance for barristers and their colleagues to find out more about entity regulation whilst feeding back their views.
For more information visit www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/consultations/OpenConsultations/regulatingentities/
Samuel Condry, Senior Policy Officer, Bar Standard Board
The BSB’s current consultation on entity regulation is asking fundamental questions about how barristers will work in the future, and how they should be regulated, writes Samuel Condry.
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
