*/
The government has published proposals to loosen the ‘onerous and prescriptive’ rules for new legal businesses.
Announcing the consultation, Legal Services: Removing the barriers to competition, justice minister Lord Faulks said that since their introduction in the Legal Services Act 2007, contrary to the fears of many, alternative business structures (ABSs) ‘have not been shown to attract any greater regulatory risk than traditional law firms’.
Since 2010, when ABSs were first licensed, more than 600 have been formed.
Faulks said that their introduction, particularly those that have access to external investment and business and commercial expertise, has benefited the market more widely.
‘These new, innovative providers have increased competition in the market, which we believe encourages the market to provide a wider variety of legal services that are more accessible and affordable to consumers,’ he said.
As a result of concerns raised at the time about the potential risks of these ‘new and unknown business models’, Faulks said the legislative framework for ABS regulation is more ‘onerous and prescriptive’ than for traditional law firms, which acts as a ‘deterrent and an unnecessary barrier’ to firms wanting to innovate or enter the market.
‘The proposals set out in this consultation aim to enable legal services regulators to reduce regulatory burdens on ABSs, while taking a more effective risk-based approach to regulation,’ he said.
Meanwhile, in its interim report on legal services, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) provisionally found that, despite some positive developments, such as the increased use of fixed fees and more commoditised services, competition in legal services for individual and small business consumers is ‘not working as well as it might’.
It suggested that competition is hampered by a lack of upfront information about price and quality.
The CMA noted the ‘complexity’ of the current regulatory framework, but said that it does not create ‘significant’ barriers to entry or distort competition.
It said that it is ‘open to more fundamental change’ of the legal regulatory regime, but doing so risked increased regulation, cost and uncertainty.
The Bar Council and Bar Standards Board welcomed the report and said they would engage with each other and the CMA to consider ways in which information about the services provided by the Bar might be improved for the benefit of consumers.
Bar Chairman, Chantal-Aimée Doerries QC said: ‘It is important that the market for legal services functions efficiently, in the interests of access to justice, and in a way which ensures that consumers’ needs are met.’
The government has published proposals to loosen the ‘onerous and prescriptive’ rules for new legal businesses.
Announcing the consultation, Legal Services: Removing the barriers to competition, justice minister Lord Faulks said that since their introduction in the Legal Services Act 2007, contrary to the fears of many, alternative business structures (ABSs) ‘have not been shown to attract any greater regulatory risk than traditional law firms’.
Since 2010, when ABSs were first licensed, more than 600 have been formed.
Faulks said that their introduction, particularly those that have access to external investment and business and commercial expertise, has benefited the market more widely.
‘These new, innovative providers have increased competition in the market, which we believe encourages the market to provide a wider variety of legal services that are more accessible and affordable to consumers,’ he said.
As a result of concerns raised at the time about the potential risks of these ‘new and unknown business models’, Faulks said the legislative framework for ABS regulation is more ‘onerous and prescriptive’ than for traditional law firms, which acts as a ‘deterrent and an unnecessary barrier’ to firms wanting to innovate or enter the market.
‘The proposals set out in this consultation aim to enable legal services regulators to reduce regulatory burdens on ABSs, while taking a more effective risk-based approach to regulation,’ he said.
Meanwhile, in its interim report on legal services, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) provisionally found that, despite some positive developments, such as the increased use of fixed fees and more commoditised services, competition in legal services for individual and small business consumers is ‘not working as well as it might’.
It suggested that competition is hampered by a lack of upfront information about price and quality.
The CMA noted the ‘complexity’ of the current regulatory framework, but said that it does not create ‘significant’ barriers to entry or distort competition.
It said that it is ‘open to more fundamental change’ of the legal regulatory regime, but doing so risked increased regulation, cost and uncertainty.
The Bar Council and Bar Standards Board welcomed the report and said they would engage with each other and the CMA to consider ways in which information about the services provided by the Bar might be improved for the benefit of consumers.
Bar Chairman, Chantal-Aimée Doerries QC said: ‘It is important that the market for legal services functions efficiently, in the interests of access to justice, and in a way which ensures that consumers’ needs are met.’
Update from the Chair of the Bar
By Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group
Modernising communication and collaboration at a leading Chancery set. A Zexi case study
How to build profile without compromising professional duties. By Naumaan Farooq, Co-Founder of Inked PR
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the role of cut-off levels, and the wider range of factors that must be considered when interpreting results for family court proceedings
Endometriosis Awareness North, a charity raising awareness of endometriosis and supporting those affected across the North of England, has received a £500 boost from AlphaBiolabs via the company’s Giving Back initiative
A decade of reviews and research has disrupted accepted thinking in the search for causality. Suicides following abuse have overtaken domestic homicides. Is the law keeping up? Professor Susan Edwards KC (Hon) examines recent cases and the obstacles to successful prosecution
The case against judge-only justice – and why efficiency is not enough. By Professor Leslie Thomas KC
Jemima Coleman and Zoë Leventhal KC on the evolving global movement seeking to reframe how we view nature: to recognise that nature possesses inherent rights and to enshrine these rights in law
Heritage as an anchor and a compass, finding our common humanity and embracing the power of the outsider – Melina Antoniadis’s lessons learnt
Lauren Fullerton examines the how, what and why of setting up a second chambers base