Dispute Erupts as UK Firms' Brexit Plans Are Thrown Into Doubt
High stakes discussions with The Law Society of Ireland centre on the ability to practice Irish law from outside of the country.
July 22, 2019 at 07:25 AM
3 minute read
A dispute has erupted between The Law Society of England and Wales and The Law Society of Ireland over the rights of solicitors on the Irish roll to practise law outside of the jurisdiction.
The Law Society of Ireland imposed a condition on practitioner certificates for lawyers outside of Ireland and Northern Ireland in January that effectively stopped them practising Irish law from another jurisdiction, according to Mickael Laurans, head of international at The Law Society of England and Wales.
Following a backlash from U.K. firms, a High Court case ensued and the decision was reversed in May, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The Law Society of Ireland then issued new unconditional practising certificates as well as a set of guidelines on Irish solicitors' rights to practise when overseas.
But people close to the situation say the guidelines are unclear and The Law Society of England and Wales is now seeking clarification over the freedoms of lawyers on the Irish roll.
The talks have profound implications for the Brexit plans of the U.K.'s largest law firms, many of which have ensured they have lawyers admitted to the Irish roll as a pre-emptive move ahead of the U.K.'s exit from the European Union.
Last year, some 2,011 lawyers were admitted to the roll to secure their ability to continue practising EU law and stand in front of the European Court of Justice post-Brexit.
Laurans said: "This is an important issue for U.K. firms but also, I would suggest, for Irish law firms involved in international practise."
He added: "We have constructively engaged with the Law Society of Ireland to understand their regulatory framework and what Irish solicitors can and cannot do when practising overseas. We would welcome further engagement over the next few months."
The Law Society of Ireland responded, saying it is a "legally complex matter", and adding that "in brief, there has been no change in the Law Society's policy".
In a statement, it said: "An Irish practising certificate entitles a solicitor practising in Ireland to provide legal services as defined by, and subject to the provisions of, the Solicitors Acts 1954-2015 and the rules and regulations made under those Acts.
"An Irish practising certificate does not entitle a solicitor to practise outside the jurisdictions that are permitted by Irish and EU law. Practice outside the EU is dependent on the law of the relevant jurisdiction where the practice is carried out."
One partner at an Irish law firm said there was confusion over the guidelines. He said he believes there might be an exemption for Irish law firms and the motivation may have been to protect the local firms.
Alternatively, he said the need to be 'physically in Ireland' could apply to the brand as opposed to the individual, meaning solicitors employed by a law firm that has a physical presence in the region would be safe to practise Irish law externally.
However, the partner stressed that it remains unclear and there is a great deal of uncertainty due to the potential implications.
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 AllDentons Australian Chair Doug Stipanicev Back At Work After Investigation
4 minute readA&O Shearman Luminary, Former US Co-Chair, to Leave Partnership
Mayer Brown’s Hong Kong Split to Take Effect in the Coming Week
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
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