Watchdog surprises Bar with launch of root and branch rulebook review
The Bar Standards Board (BSB) has embarked on an ambitious three-year project to rewrite the Bar's rulebook. The project was kicked off this week with the publication of a consultation paper that calls for views on how the Bar's Code of Conduct should be updated in the light of the Legal Services Bill and claims by the Office of Fair Trading that parts of the code may be anti-competitive.
June 13, 2007 at 10:44 PM
3 minute read
The Bar Standards Board (BSB) has embarked on an ambitious three-year project to rewrite the Bar's rulebook.
The project was kicked off this week with the publication of a consultation paper that calls for views on how the Bar's Code of Conduct should be updated in the light of the Legal Services Bill and claims by the Office of Fair Trading that parts of the code may be anti-competitive.
Up for review will be a host of rules, including the 'cab rank' rule, which is designed to prevent barristers from turning down unpalatable cases, and the ban on barristers forming partnerships either with themselves or other professionals.
Also highlighted for scrutiny are barristers' duties to the court, the rules governing complaints and disciplinary actions and the heavy restrictions currently imposed on barristers wishing to comment publicly on cases.
The launch of the review comes a year after the BSB was established as part of the Bar Council's efforts to anticipate the Legal Services Bill, which contains provisions requiring the professional bodies to ring-fence their regulatory arms.
Commenting on the move, BSB director Mark Stobbs said: "We need to take a proper look at whether the code is fit for purpose and up to date. We want to check there is a good reason for each rule, to see whether each rule is proportionate and to see whether they are based on evidence."
He added: "There is a lot to look at in three years and we are going to have our work cut out. The code has not really been looked at in its entirety before, but the profession is evolving and some changes need to be addressed."
Once the responses to the general consultation have been received, the BSB will launch a series of investigations into different aspects of the rulebook, with the regulation of alternative business structures at the front of the queue.
The BSB envisages holding the first in-depth consultation on this area towards the end of the year, with any decisions on changes to be made in the second half of 2008. Changes to the code will be introduced in tranches.
However, some barristers criticised the move, saying the BSB is conducting too many reviews. One senior clerk at a leading chambers commented: "The profession at the moment feels there is too much change for change's sake. I do not see what is wrong with the code as it stands and even if there is something wrong with it, it will be years before it is changed."
He added: "The Bar is a cost effective, specialist and self-regulating body. If they keep over-regulating, they risk putting people out of business."
In a separate move, the BSB has published its annual report for 2006, covering the first year of its establishment. Since 2005, the total cost of regulation has risen from £3,051,243 to £3,480,690. The body attributes this for the most part to increased staff costs.
Talkback: Is the Bar facing review fatigue? Click here to have your say.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![X Ordered to Release Data by German Court Amid Election Interference Concerns X Ordered to Release Data by German Court Amid Election Interference Concerns](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/international-edition/contrib/content/uploads/sites/392/2023/10/AdobeStock_627004176_Editorial_Use_Only-767x633.jpg)
X Ordered to Release Data by German Court Amid Election Interference Concerns
![German Court Orders X to Release Data Amid Election Interference Concerns German Court Orders X to Release Data Amid Election Interference Concerns](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/international-edition/contrib/content/uploads/sites/392/2023/10/AdobeStock_627004176_Editorial_Use_Only-767x633.jpg)
German Court Orders X to Release Data Amid Election Interference Concerns
![US Sued Over Trump Administration's USAID Stop-Work Orders US Sued Over Trump Administration's USAID Stop-Work Orders](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/16/79/000bb9704808a73fcde73947ecfd/trump-oval-office-767x633.jpg)
![India Firm Engaged as Volkswagen Sues Local Authorities Over $1.4B Tax Bill India Firm Engaged as Volkswagen Sues Local Authorities Over $1.4B Tax Bill](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/international-edition/contrib/content/uploads/sites/401/2022/06/VW-Cypress.jpg)
India Firm Engaged as Volkswagen Sues Local Authorities Over $1.4B Tax Bill
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250