BSB to regulate barrister-driven businesses post Legal Services Act
The Bar Standards Board (BSB) will apply to become an official regulator for advocacy-focussed business structures (ABSs) when they are permitted under the Legal Services Act later this year. At a board meeting late last month the BSB decided it will apply to regulate certain barrister and advocate-led structures in the future, as well as permit those entities and other self-employed barristers to conduct litigation.
May 03, 2011 at 08:35 AM
3 minute read
The Bar Standards Board (BSB) will apply to become an official regulator for advocacy-focussed business structures (ABSs) when they are permitted under the Legal Services Act later this year.
At a board meeting late last month the BSB decided it will apply to regulate certain barrister and advocate-led structures in the future, as well as permit those entities and other self-employed barristers to conduct litigation.
Contingent on acceptance by the Legal Services Board, the BSB will regulate advocacy-focussed alternative business structures (ABSs), legal disciplinary practices and barrister only entities as part of the shake up of legal services.
However; it has placed a number of conditions on the entities it will regulate, ensuring they retain advocacy at their heart. The BSB will limit its powers to businesses where the majority of owners/managers are barristers or other advocates with higher rights of audience, and will not regulate entities with more than 25% non-lawyer owners/ managers or multi-disciplinary practices.
Barristers will also be allowed to have ownership interests in ABSs subject to the development of rules and guidance on managing any conflicts of interest, while having the additional option to become owners/managers of an entity. However; barristers and entities regulated by the BSB will not be permitted to hold client money
A consultation on developments permitted under the Act has been ongoing since November 2009, with the BSB expected to be set up to regulate by early 2013. It is expected to cost around £400,000 for the BSB to set-up the regime, which broken down, sits at around £25-30 per barrister.
BSB chair, Baroness Ruth Deech, said: "Nearly 75% of respondents to our consultation agreed that BSB regulation of entities would be in the public interest.
"We intend to target our regulation on advocacy focussed entities, taking a risk-based and proportionate approach. We hope that this decision will allow barristers the freedom to react to changes in the legal market and permit them to devise new ways of working in order to remain competitive and better serve the public."
Fountain Court's Patricia Robertson QC, who has been leading the consultation, said: "It is unlikely that we will see barristers setting up business entities with the kind of numbers of paralegals needed to carry out big litigation cases and simply replicating what is already on offer from existing Solicitors Regulation Authority regulated firms.
"Rather, what I think we will see is barristers doing work at either end of the legal services spectrum: cases where the amount at stake can't bear the overheads of traditional firms, so a firm of solicitors would not want to take it on, or high end cases where a company has a big in-house legal team already and does not need to pay for the services of firm of solicitors, but needs an expert to lead the litigation team."
The BSB is now building a regulatory framework with draft rules which it will issue for consultation this autumn.
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 AllMore than Half of South Australian Lawyers Report Suffering Harassment
3 minute readKing & Spalding, Weil, Gotshal & Manges Launch Pro Bono Legal Initiative for Tennis Players
2 minute readTrump Ordered to Pay Legal Bill Within 28 Days After Rejecting Costs Order
2 minute readTrending 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