header-logo header-logo

26 March 2015
Issue: 7646 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Bar regulator lays down its terms

Minimum £500,000 terms to apply to all BSB-regulated entities

Barrister-owned entities will need to have at least £500,000 indemnity cover per claim, the Bar Standards Board (BSB) has confirmed.

The minimum terms apply to all BSB-regulated entities. Entities are businesses owned and managed by lawyers, which concentrate on activities such as advocacy, client representation in court and giving specialist advice. The BSB, which is due to start regulating entities next month, has received more than 75 expressions of interest and 16 completed applications so far. Providing confirmation about the necessary insurance arrangements is expected to encourage further interest.

The BSB has emphasised that barristers who have professional indemnity insurance in place, covering their practice as a self-employed barrister, can continue to practise in this capacity while they are waiting for entity insurance cover.

Frank Maher, partner, Legal Risk, says the terms are broadly similar to those applying to solicitors. “The cover is only £500,000 as against solicitors’ £2m (sole practitioners and partnerships)/£3m (incorporated practices). That is in line with the Bar Mutual cover which applies to barristers at present.

“This was the figure proposed by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) which the Legal Services Board rejected last year—not enough in my view, because it includes claimants’ costs, so if a case goes to trial it leaves only half that or less for the claimant.

“There are a few other quirks which are potentially detrimental to consumers and not in the SRA Minimum Terms and Conditions, though they are already in the current Bar Mutual terms.”

These include (at 6.7) that if the insured refuses to settle against the insurer’s recommendation then the insurer’s liability is capped at that amount, and (at 6.8) there may be no cover if the insured offers to settle without the insurer’s authority.”

Maher says the terms contained successor practice provisions “broadly similar” to those for solicitors, which could “cause problems”.

All prospective BSB-regulated entities are urged to contact their insurer as soon as possible so as to start the process of obtaining the appropriate cover.

Issue: 7646 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll