Barrister partnerships possible from 2013; BSB set to regulate ABSs
The Bar Standards Board (BSB) is gearing up to allow barristers to form partnerships from autumn next year, with alternative business structures (ABSs) set to come into effect for the profession in 2014.
October 25, 2012 at 08:19 AM
2 minute read
The Bar Standards Board (BSB) is gearing up to allow barristers to form partnerships from autumn next year, with alternative business structures (ABSs) set to come into effect for the profession in 2014.
The moves were discussed at a BSB board meeting last week, with the regulator approving plans to introduce entity regulation for barrister only partnerships and legal disciplinary partnerships (LDPs), which are likely to take effect from next autumn.
Although the ability to create ABSs and LDPs came into force with the Legal Services Act 2007, the issue of how they were to be regulated at the Bar had remained unresolved until now.
As part of the agreed changes, the BSB will apply to the Legal Services Board (LSB) in the New Year to become a licensing authority for ABSs. The LSB has up to one year to decide whether to grant the BSB approval to become a licensing body, with the first licences expected to be approved in 2014.
The news comes as the BSB has been making changes to its handbook, including the barristers' code of conduct, with an amendment to allow barristers to conduct litigation among the alterations.
The BSB has also been in the process of introducing a formal contract between barristers and solicitors for referral work to be known as the Standard Contractual Terms (SCT).
Use of the contract will be optional, with chambers also permitted to draw up their own contracts, however the SCT will take precedence if a solicitor does not want to agree to a set's bespoke terms.
The SCT will include the cab rank rule- a rule forcing barristers to accept a referral unless there is a conflict of interest or they are not available. Previously, the cab rank rule did not apply when instructions were made on a contractual basis.
The implementation of the revised SCT has been delayed from 31 October 2012 until 31 January next year.
The regulatory body expects the new handbook and code of conduct to be finalised with approval from the LSB by next summer.
This content has been archived.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 AllBaker 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 readCanadian Appeal Court Rules Thumbs-Up Emoji Can Constitute a Contract Agreement
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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