Giles Murphy: Embracing outside influence in LSA revolution
For most people, the structures available under the Legal Services Act (LSA) still seem to be a distant development. However, from 31 March, 2009, under the new rules up to 25% of a firm's partners can now be non-lawyers. This marks the first phase of deregulation under the Act, potentially changing the landscape of the legal profession forever. Those that sit and wait for the introduction of alternative business structures in 2011-12 risk being left behind in the competition, irrespective of whether they are a multinational practice or a small partnership. So, firms with a truly strategic outlook now have an opportunity to gain a commercial advantage.
April 01, 2009 at 08:03 PM
3 minute read
For most people, the structures available under the Legal Services Act (LSA) still seem to be a distant development. However, from 31 March, 2009, under the new rules up to 25% of a firm's partners can now be non-lawyers. This marks the first phase of deregulation under the Act, potentially changing the landscape of the legal profession forever. Those that sit and wait for the introduction of alternative business structures in 2011-12 risk being left behind in the competition, irrespective of whether they are a multinational practice or a small partnership. So, firms with a truly strategic outlook now have an opportunity to gain a commercial advantage.
Undoubtedly, some solicitors may question the introduction of non-solicitors as decision-makers within their firms. Accepting that there may be potential conflicts of interest within a firm and perceived cultural issues between professions, there could be significant benefits of welcoming non-solicitors and non-lawyers into a firm.
One of the most immediate effects is likely to be for in-house senior personnel, whereby, for example, the head of finance or human resources may be made a (true) partner of a law firm. The opportunity for such appointments will allow firms to embrace non-lawyers in their partner team. The change in the rules will also pave the way for the promotion of existing in-house senior barristers, law costs draftsmen, legal executives and other non-lawyers. Although this may surrender some management control to non-lawyers, it will arguably improve the quality of decision-making, help to incentivise staff and encourage key players to stay for the long term.
Many law firms have existing ties with firms of surveyors, accountants, patent agents and barristers among others, and the change in rules offers an additional opportunity to set down the foundations for building the diverse law firm of the future by appointing some of these professionals as partners. As well as fresh ideas and business know-how, such appointments give access to new client networks, helping to provide greater insulation from economic change and facilitating the move towards a fully multi-disciplinary practice. We are beginning to see a future when law firms will offer non-legal services alongside their existing advisory skills under the guise of alternative business structures.
One of the financial benefits of appointing non-solicitor partners is the potential for additional capital to be brought in to the firm. Moreover, if making in-house appointments at partner level, both the firm and individual can benefit from making valuable National Insurance savings.
However, for those non-lawyers seeking appointment as partners, the incentives must be sufficient to outweigh any additional risks they may face. Those firms that have not yet transferred to limited liability partnership (LLP) status and cannot demonstrate limited liability as part of their offering are unlikely to get as much buy-in from non-lawyers, particularly in the current economic environment. Similarly, those firms without modern partnership agreements, profit-sharing arrangements or capital structures may struggle to attract non-lawyers as partners.
While many will be waiting until 2011-12, it is clear that the LSA has arrived, complete with its promise of deregulation and opportunity. However, two key questions remain: first, whether the legal sector is ready to take advantage of the LSA; and second, if those who embrace the early opportunities gain a significant lead over their competitors, will others be able to catch up? We live in interesting times.
Giles Murphy is head of assurance and business services at accountancy and financial services group Smith & Williamson.
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
© 2024 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'Almost Impossible'?: Squire Challenge to Sanctions Spotlights Difficulty of Getting Off Administration's List
4 minute read'Never Been More Dynamic': US Law Firm Leaders Reflect on 2024 and Expectations Next Year
7 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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