Bar report flags huge start-up costs of LSB as 'a major issue for the future'
The Bar has highlighted funding obligations to set up the Legal Services Board (LSB) and the Office for Legal Complaints (OLC) as key concerns for the profession. The Bar Council and Bar Standards Board's joint annual report, published earlier this month (13 June), highlights the major challenges facing the Bar, with the organisations particularly concerned about meeting the costs of the profession's new regulator and complaints body.
June 25, 2009 at 04:42 AM
2 minute read
Annual report raises concerns about hefty expense involved in setup of LSB and OLC
The Bar has highlighted funding obligations to set up the Legal Services Board (LSB) and the Office for Legal Complaints (OLC) as key concerns for the profession.
The Bar Council and Bar Standards Board's joint annual report, published earlier this month (13 June), highlights the major challenges facing the Bar, with the organisations particularly concerned about meeting the costs of the profession's new regulator and complaints body.
The total cost of setting up the LSB and the OLC is expected to be £19m. Payments will be spread over a three-year period, with the first 70% instalment expected to be paid by the end of February 2010. This will see the Bar contributing £494,000 for the LSB and up to £1.17m for the OLC.
In his introductory statement, Bar Council chairman Desmond Browne QC commented: "The Government has made it clear that it is the profession that must fund these bodies [LSB and OLC], so how the cost is to be levied is a major issue for the future."
He added: "As the shadow of severe economic recession deepens into depression, with all that implies for public expenditure, it is clear that there has never been a more challenging time for the Bar and its members."
Other areas highlighted in the report include changes coming into effect through the Legal Services Act (LSA), with the bar still divided as to whether to embrace partnerships with solicitors.
The report also highlighted running costs, with the Bar Council's representation costs rising to £3.01m in 2008 compared with £2.8m the previous year, while regulatory costs through the Bar Standards Board rose to £4.5m in 2008 compared with £3.9m in 2007.
Staff costs, including temporary staff and recruitment, rose to £499,000 from £310,000, with average employee numbers increasing to 101 from 95.
This content has been archived.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 AllApple Subsidiaries in Belgium and France Sued by DRC Over Conflict Minerals
2 minute readBaker McKenzie, Norton Rose & Other Top Litigators Foresee Rise in AI, Data & ESG Disputes
Freshfields Takes on Syria's Brutal Legacy, But Will Victims Ever See Compensation?
5 minute readECJ Ruling Upholds German Ban on Pure Private Equity Investment in Law Firms
4 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