*/
As a result of cases referred to the BSB for consideration recently, it has come to our attention that there appears to be a gap in the understanding of the relationship between the regulatory scheme overseen by the Office of the Immigration Commissioner (OISC) and the Code of Conduct of the Bar of England and Wales (the Code of Conduct).
This appears to be in relation to both the knowledge of barristers and those immigration advisers seeking to instruct them.It appears that it is thought that if an immigration adviser is accredited to Level 2 or 3 by the OISC, that is sufficient for them to be entitled to instruct a barrister (for advice or to attend court). That of course is not the only requirement. An immigration adviser seeking to instruct counsel must:
a) Be registered to Level 2 or 3 by the OISC (depending on whether it includes an instruction to appear at a hearing); AND
b) Be a Licensed Access Client within the meaning of paragraph 401 and Annex F1 of the Code of Conduct. It is noted that the OISC website does state, under the heading “OISC Level 3: Advocacy and Representation” that work permitted at Level 3 includes:
This appears to be in relation to both the knowledge of barristers and those immigration advisers seeking to instruct them.It appears that it is thought that if an immigration adviser is accredited to Level 2 or 3 by the OISC, that is sufficient for them to be entitled to instruct a barrister (for advice or to attend court). That of course is not the only requirement. An immigration adviser seeking to instruct counsel must:
a) Be registered to Level 2 or 3 by the OISC (depending on whether it includes an instruction to appear at a hearing); AND
b) Be a Licensed Access Client within the meaning of paragraph 401 and Annex F1 of the Code of Conduct. It is noted that the OISC website does state, under the heading “OISC Level 3: Advocacy and Representation” that work permitted at Level 3 includes:
As a result of cases referred to the BSB for consideration recently, it has come to our attention that there appears to be a gap in the understanding of the relationship between the regulatory scheme overseen by the Office of the Immigration Commissioner (OISC) and the Code of Conduct of the Bar of England and Wales (the Code of Conduct).
Now is the time to tackle inappropriate behaviour at the Bar as well as extend our reach and collaboration with organisations and individuals at home and abroad
A comparison – Dan Monaghan, Head of DWF Chambers, invites two viewpoints
And if not, why not? asks Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Head of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, discusses the many benefits of oral fluid drug testing for child welfare and protection matters
To mark International Women’s Day, Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management looks at how financial planning can help bridge the gap
Casey Randall of AlphaBiolabs answers some of the most common questions regarding relationship DNA testing for court
Maria Scotland and Niamh Wilkie report from the Bar Council’s 2024 visit to the United Arab Emirates exploring practice development opportunities for the England and Wales family Bar
Marking Neurodiversity Week 2025, an anonymous barrister shares the revelations and emotions from a mid-career diagnosis with a view to encouraging others to find out more
David Wurtzel analyses the outcome of the 2024 silk competition and how it compares with previous years, revealing some striking trends and home truths for the profession
Save for some high-flyers and those who can become commercial arbitrators, it is generally a question of all or nothing but that does not mean moving from hero to zero, says Andrew Hillier
