SRA puts forward new regulatory regime for international firms
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has proposed a new series of measures for the regulation of UK law firms' international activities. The SRA launched a consultation process yesterday (8 November) to gauge the profession's views on how to regulate international practice under the new outcomes-focused regulatory regime.
November 09, 2011 at 07:46 AM
2 minute read
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has proposed a new series of measures for the regulation of UK law firms' international activities.
The SRA launched a consultation process yesterday (8 November) to gauge the profession's views on how to regulate international practice under the new outcomes-focused regulatory regime.
The proposals include allowing overseas branches of foreign law firms – which currently have to register and comply separately with SRA regulations – to fall under a single international firm 'passport to practice'.
If implemented, foreign firms would be able to choose to have the SRA as its lead regulator outside of England and Wales, provided that it has an operation in either country.
SRA chief executive Antony Townsend (pictured) said: "Our proposals will help support the further development of England and Wales as a hub for global legal services.
"Foreign law firms with offices in England and Wales – mostly large US ones – would find their regulatory burdens reduced where they have branch offices or partners in other countries that are linked by a corporate structure to their headquarters in this jurisdiction."
The SRA is also set to replace the Registered Foreign Lawyers (RFL) scheme to give it a greater focus on individual suitability and greater flexibility in terms of who can work in partnership with solicitors.
The consultation, which closes on 15 February 2012, comes in the wake of the regulatory shift to outcomes-focused regulation, replacing the prescriptive rules-based regulation in place to date.
Click here for the consultation on the regulation of international practice.
This content has been archived.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
‘Are You Not Profiting From Postmasters’ Misery?’—Politicians Grill HSF, Dentons on Post Office Conduct
'Not a Good Look'—FCA Fines Barclays £40M But Accused of Incompetence
Gibson Dunn Sued by Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
Australian Corporations More Concerned About Class Actions Risk, HSF Report Finds
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
- 2Warner Bros. Accused of Misleading Investors on NBA Talks
- 3FTC Settles With Security Firm Over AI Claims Under Agency's Compliance Program
- 4'Water Cooler Discussions': US Judge Questions DOJ Request in Google Search Case
- 5Court rejects request to sideline San Jose State volleyball player on grounds she’s transgender
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
