Log In | Subscribe | |

Legal Profession

A report in The Law Society's Gazette about a male Judge's comments to a women's group meeting has raised the hackles of working men in the solicitor's branch in England and Wales. So who is to blame? The judge for making the comments that can be rightly regarded as sexist or the Law Society which after decades of being "right on" or whatever the current phrase may have finally gone too far in its apparent approval of the Judge's comments? Or perhaps both.,

Editorial Staff
Publication: 

The Solicitors' Disciplinary Tribunal (which, trendily, omits the apostrophe when it writes its own name) has levied its largest fine ever. Like the previous largest, it's against the London office of a US law firm.

Editorial Staff
Publication: 

Simon Spence wants to be the next Vice Chairman of the Criminal Bar Association of England and Wales. Not only does he stand on a platform of disparaging solicitors, he does it in such a way that he felt the need to clarify his comments. Surely an accomplished advocate should be expected to be clear the first time, to say what he means and to mean what he says? Then the next question is how can someone who fails those basic tests, with a failure he himself demonstrates by his attempts at correction, can be trusted in a position of high-office within a major professional body?

Nigel Morris-Co...
Publication: 

There are two questions to ask about the Solicitors' Regulatory Authority's action in relation to solicitors company Asons: the first is whether it was a "South Korea" moment - where there were so many questions, that they had no choice and secondly, if those questions had merit, how has it taken so long? The bottom line is that suspicious activity and behaviour was utterly rife: why do regulators adopt a lower standard in this area than they expect those they supervise to adopt in relation to money laundering?

Editorial Staff
Publication: 

A firm of solicitors which came to prominence because of its owner's predilection for fast cars, big tax demands, grand expansion plans and a secretive grant from taxpayer's funds (see story) is back in the news, this time for "falsely and systematically" overcharging claims for costs in personal injury (PI) cases.

Editorial Staff
Publication: 

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal has published its November 2016 order that MOHAMMED ZAHIR UDDIN, sole director of Your Right Solicitors Limited, be struck off. His failings are legion and, even, disturbing.

Editorial Staff
Publication: 

A note of personal sadness: long, long ago, this writer was considering his future. At the top of the list of highly professional firms that attracted him was Mallesons in Hong Kong. But a family discussion resulted in staying in London and taking a radically different approach. The hankering remained but the shine is wearing off as the now global association of practices is heavily in debt, shedding staff and trying to hive off offices and teams.

Nigel Morris-Co...
Publication: 

In the UK, there is an epidemic of advertising and other forms of marketing by companies who then pass leads to firms ( which, these days, are often companies not firms) of solicitors. Their advertising is annoying and sometimes misleading; but there are practices that are downright unethical and borderline (or perhaps over the border) illegal. Can the practice be prevented? Perhaps it's time to wind back the clock on fee sharing.

Editorial Staff
Publication: 

...Continued from yesterday

A McKenzie Friend cannot be the representative of record that is he cannot provide a "firm" or an address for service. He cannot be the agent of a litigant in person and so he cannot e.g. issue proceedings on his behalf. He does not have a right of audience, that means he cannot address the court directly, unless, in exceptional cases, the court might grant, on a one-off basis, a right to address the court and to examine witnesses. However, more McKenzie Friends are making applications for rights of audience and are...

Editorial Staff
Publication: 

It's not so long ago that advocates in any court had to be legally qualified. There was a fall-back position for those who were unable to afford their own solicitor or barrister and were, for one reason or another, going to find it difficult to present their own case. The reasons were, for example, that they were not sufficiently literate, or that they were disadvantaged by poor, or no, English or that they were of an exceptionally nervous disposition. But things have gone badly wrong.

Editorial Staff
Publication: 

It used to be that the solicitors branch of the legal profession in England and Wales was compelled to purchase its professional indemnity insurance (PII) from a single, approved, insurer and the cost was very high. Rightly, the profession voted to widen the scheme to permit approved PII to be purchased from third party insurers on a competitive level. But things have not gone according to plan and the latest crisis threatens the future of several firms.

Editorial Staff
Publication: 

 


 

Click the Ad: the link opens in a new page