New LSB rules on regulators’ fees will increase transparency for lawyers
The Legal Services Board (LSB) has published new Rules and Guidance to increase transparency on how legal services regulators spend practising certificate fees (PCF).
Increased transparency will help empower those who pay the PCF to hold their regulator accountable for its expenditure. The proposals are designed to lead to a more meaningful debate on the purpose, benefits, costs, and value of regulation, improve standards across the sector and promote the regulatory objectives.
Each year individual lawyers and legal firms must pay a PCF to their approved regulator to practise. Regulators can only collect a PCF if the LSB has approved the level of the fee. The new PCF Rules and Guidance are proportionate and they improve the framework for the practising fee application and approval process.
Share
Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, Nick Robinson explores two case studies outside the United States the United Kingdom and Australia where reforms aimed at improving access to justice, among other things, have opened the market for legal services to the ownership, investment, and management of individuals without legal training. Robinson examines the ethical dimensions of these changes as well as the limitations on our ability to draw definitive conclusions from these case studies based on what data is and is not available (for more on tracking the impacts of regulatory reform, see “Quality Metrics for Regulatory Reform”). Notwithstanding these qualifications, Robinson explores some significant implications of these reforms, such as their capacity to improve access to and affordability of legal services. Below, we briefly review the cases of regulatory reform in the United Kingdom and Australia and highlight Robinson’s observations on their impact on access. For a comp
Sir Christopher Bellamy QC (Chair):
Sir Christopher is a former judge with a wealth of legal experience. He has recently stepped down as Chairman of Linklaters global competition practice and joined Monckton Chambers to focus on mediation and arbitration. Sir Christopher will lead a dedicated review team within Government and will have close oversight of the work to ensure it meets these terms of reference and delivers robust, evidence-based recommendations.
Professor Sue Arrowsmith QC:
Sue Arrowsmith is Professor Emerita of Law at the University of Nottingham, where she was formerly Director of the Public Procurement Research Group and leader of the EU Asia Link project to establish procurement research centres globally. She was appointed Queen’s Counsel (honoris causa) in 2019 and in 2007 received the CIPS Swinbank Medal for thought innovation in purchasing and supply. She is currently a member of the Government’s Thematic Trade Advisory Group on procurement and also served
Expert and Advisory Panel appointed for the Independent Review of Criminal Legal Aid
A panel of experts has been appointed to support Sir Christopher Bellamy QC (Chair) in examining the long-term sustainability of the criminal legal aid system.
From:
28 January 2021
The Expert and Advisory Panel, appointed by the Lord Chancellor, will provide support by testing and challenging the review’s emerging findings and recommendations.
Sir Christopher, who was appointed by the Lord Chancellor on 21 December 2020 will chair monthly meetings of the expert and advisory panel, beginning in February. Sir Christopher will submit his recommendations to the Lord Chancellor later this year and it is intended that the report will be published by the end of this year alongside the government’s response.
The Office of Legal Complaints is
consulting on a business plan and budget for 2021/22 which includes a 19% rise in spending to £15.26m. That figure, according to the OLC’s figures, would then rise again in 2022/23, to £16.16m.
A similar appeal to increase the budget was made – and subsequently rejected - in 2020 and in its response to the consultation the Law Society has publicly questioned how the ombudsman can ask for more funding at such a precarious time for so many in the profession.
David Greene, president, said: ‘Like all of us LeO is operating in a challenging environment because of the pandemic but with incomes hit due to the decline in the economy LeO seems out of step to request an increase in resources on this scale. Especially when LeO’s performance over the last year is a real concern, with a steep rise in its backlog and decline in the number of cases closed, even taking into account the impact of the pandemic.’