*/
Regulation
Chambers and sole practitioners will be “risk-rated” under a Bar Standards Board supervision scheme from January, which will underpin the new Handbook.
Those identified as “high risk” will be supported by the regulator to reduce the likelihood of serious problems occurring.
“Well-run chambers, which set out and comply with clear policies on matters such as complaints handling and pupillage training, will gain a low risk rating and will have little contact with the BSB,” announced the regulator, so that resources are concentrated on “those who need it most”.
Chambers will be assessed against potential risks of ineffective or dishonest governance; poor client service; insufficient consideration of equality and diversity; inadequate or unfair pupillage or training; and incompetent or dishonest financial management.
The new supervision arrangements were introduced following a consultation earlier this year and replace the monitoring system implemented in 2010, in which chambers were contacted to verify compliance in key areas.
Announcing the new scheme, the Bar Standards Board’s Head of Quality, Oliver Hanmer, said: “We all know that prevention is better than cure. This new approach is about smarter regulation for the Bar and better protection for the public. Working with us to prevent potential risks materialising will mean minimising the amount of supervision chambers receive, and a more targeted use of resources on our part.”
Chambers will receive an impact audit survey next spring to identify the impact that any potential breach of the regulatory rules would have on the public and consumers. Most chambers will then have to complete a Supervision Return form – detailing how effectively potential risks are being managed to help the BSB determine the likelihood of them materialising.
Matthew Nicklin QC, Chair of the BSB’s Standards Committee, assured Bar Conference delegates that this would not be a “Big Brother” style of monitoring (see p22).
“Well-run chambers, which set out and comply with clear policies on matters such as complaints handling and pupillage training, will gain a low risk rating and will have little contact with the BSB,” announced the regulator, so that resources are concentrated on “those who need it most”.
Chambers will be assessed against potential risks of ineffective or dishonest governance; poor client service; insufficient consideration of equality and diversity; inadequate or unfair pupillage or training; and incompetent or dishonest financial management.
The new supervision arrangements were introduced following a consultation earlier this year and replace the monitoring system implemented in 2010, in which chambers were contacted to verify compliance in key areas.
Announcing the new scheme, the Bar Standards Board’s Head of Quality, Oliver Hanmer, said: “We all know that prevention is better than cure. This new approach is about smarter regulation for the Bar and better protection for the public. Working with us to prevent potential risks materialising will mean minimising the amount of supervision chambers receive, and a more targeted use of resources on our part.”
Chambers will receive an impact audit survey next spring to identify the impact that any potential breach of the regulatory rules would have on the public and consumers. Most chambers will then have to complete a Supervision Return form – detailing how effectively potential risks are being managed to help the BSB determine the likelihood of them materialising.
Matthew Nicklin QC, Chair of the BSB’s Standards Committee, assured Bar Conference delegates that this would not be a “Big Brother” style of monitoring (see p22).
Regulation
Chambers and sole practitioners will be “risk-rated” under a Bar Standards Board supervision scheme from January, which will underpin the new Handbook.
Those identified as “high risk” will be supported by the regulator to reduce the likelihood of serious problems occurring.
Chair of the Bar reports back
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
A career shaped by advocacy beyond her practice, and the realities of living with an invisible disability – Dr Natasha Shotunde, Black Barristers’ Network Co-Founder and its Chair for seven years, reflects on a decade at the Bar
The odds of success are as unforgiving as ever, but ambition clearly isn’t in short supply. David Wurtzel’s annual deep‑dive into the competition cohort shows who’s entering, who’s thriving and the trends that will define the next wave
Where to start and where to find help? Monisha Shah, Chair of the King’s Counsel Selection Panel, provides an overview of the silk selection process, debunking some myths along the way
Do chatbot providers owe a duty of care for negligent misstatements? Jasper Wong suggests that the principles applicable to humans should apply equally to machines
There is no typical day in the life as a Supreme Court judicial assistant, says Josephine Gillingwater, and that’s what makes the role so enjoyably diverse
