*/
Barristers will be able to refuse work where there is an “unacceptable risk” that they will be not be paid, after the Legal Services Board (LSB) approved plans submitted to it by the Bar Standards Board (BSB).
The reform removes from the BSB’s rules the statement that the cab rank does not apply if a solicitor is on the list of defaulting solicitors. BSB guidance states that the list can provide evidence that a solicitor poses a non-payment risk. The Bar Council will therefore continue to maintain it.
In the decision notice, the LSB’s chief executive, Richard Moriarty, welcomed the removal of the list from the BSB’s rules.
He said it “risks compromising” the BSB’s regulatory independence and he predicted that the new provisions “may widen the circumstances in which barristers can refuse a client”.
Before refusing work, barristers will be expected to consider alternatives, such as obtaining payment in advance or using a third party payment service.
The change followed a review by the BSB of the decision to retain the existing cab rank rule following the introduction of standard contractual terms between barristers and solicitors in 2013.
The BSB reviewed the regime after an LSB investigation found the Bar Council had interfered with the BSB’s independence in relation to the controversial contract and cab rank changes.
Commenting, BSB director of regulatory policy, Ewen MacLeod, said, “We are pleased that the Legal Services Board has approved our changes to the regulatory arrangements relating to the cab rank rule,” which came into effect from 2 September.
Barristers will be able to refuse work where there is an “unacceptable risk” that they will be not be paid, after the Legal Services Board (LSB) approved plans submitted to it by the Bar Standards Board (BSB).
The reform removes from the BSB’s rules the statement that the cab rank does not apply if a solicitor is on the list of defaulting solicitors. BSB guidance states that the list can provide evidence that a solicitor poses a non-payment risk. The Bar Council will therefore continue to maintain it.
In the decision notice, the LSB’s chief executive, Richard Moriarty, welcomed the removal of the list from the BSB’s rules.
He said it “risks compromising” the BSB’s regulatory independence and he predicted that the new provisions “may widen the circumstances in which barristers can refuse a client”.
Before refusing work, barristers will be expected to consider alternatives, such as obtaining payment in advance or using a third party payment service.
The change followed a review by the BSB of the decision to retain the existing cab rank rule following the introduction of standard contractual terms between barristers and solicitors in 2013.
The BSB reviewed the regime after an LSB investigation found the Bar Council had interfered with the BSB’s independence in relation to the controversial contract and cab rank changes.
Commenting, BSB director of regulatory policy, Ewen MacLeod, said, “We are pleased that the Legal Services Board has approved our changes to the regulatory arrangements relating to the cab rank rule,” which came into effect from 2 September.
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