A vision for the future: the Bar in 10 years' time
There comes a point when change is swirling around with such force that the only thing to do is to stand back and look beyond the storm. This has been my reaction to the crisis in public affairs which has beset Government as a result of the recession and growth in public debt. This impacts prejudicially not only upon legal aid spend but also on the private sector which, directly and indirectly, is hit by the contraction in the purchase of goods and services.
November 23, 2010 at 02:22 AM
4 minute read
There comes a point when change is swirling around with such force that the only thing to do is to stand back and look beyond the storm. This has been my reaction to the crisis in public affairs which has beset Government as a result of the recession and growth in public debt.
This impacts prejudicially not only upon legal aid spend but also on the private sector which, directly and indirectly, is hit by the contraction in the purchase of goods and services.
A crisis is a very good time to take a long hard look at oneself. My starting point has been to ask where the Bar ought to be in 10 years' time. The next task is to identify what needs to be done to get the Bar from here to there, and with an end and starting point we can map out the steps to be taken.
In 10 years I see the Bar as a low-cost, high-quality provider of litigation and specialist advisory services. We will not have modified our rules to move into traditional solicitor work; we will, however, have entrenched our core skills.
What does this mean in practice? It means that we will have moved fully into direct access and entity regulation. In 10 years, numerous sets of chambers will in effect be fully-functioning litigation units. There will still be a strong focus upon advocacy but much more of the preparatory work will be done by the Bar. Further, we will use many more commercial and corporate vehicles to organise ourselves.
A key characteristic of the business models we are working on is that they do not undermine the traditional chambers model. This is a key advantage of the Bar, namely the independence of its practitioners. We owe our duty to the court first and the client second but not to our colleagues in chambers. These characteristics are a major selling point. Moreover, if chambers turned into partnerships or companies then the conflicts rule would apply to the unit as a whole and not to the individual barrister. The Bar would hence lose work.
The challenge will be in controlling costs, which will surely rise as the business model becomes more complex. But I have little doubt there are numerous new ways of working which can manage costs without compromising quality.
In my frequent discussions with partners in solicitors firms I know there is real concern that the traditional law firm structure is under threat. All sorts of new practice models will emerge and since the Bar starts from the very low-cost end of the picture we have the opportunity to explore new models.
I have spent a lot of time this year making the Bar Council more responsive to the professional needs of members. We are centre stage in the modernisation process. The impression of the fusty barrister is being shrugged off very rapidly. The typical barrister is fleet of foot and technically savvy.
I do not even recall the last set of instructions I received wrapped in ribbon. Wigs and gowns have been replaced in most commercial and civil courts with business suits. Chambers are setting up outposts across the world.
Finally, in 10 years, how will we work with solicitors? Certainly there is some repositioning going on but this will not weaken old friendships and working relationships. In future we will still appreciate that we are largely complementary and value each others' skills. The end result will be greater symbiosis.
Nicholas Green QC is the Bar Council chairman.
For more, see:
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 AllIs KPMG’s Arizona ABS Strategy a Turning Point in U.S. Law? What London’s Experience Reveals
5 minute readKPMG Moves to Provide Legal Services in the US—Now All Eyes Are on Its Big Four Peers
International Arbitration: Key Developments of 2024 and Emerging Trends for 2025
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1South Florida Attorney Charged With Aggravated Battery After Incident in Prime Rib Line
- 2'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 3Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 4‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 5State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
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