header-logo header-logo

15 November 2007 / Simon Young
Issue: 7297 / Categories: Features , Risk management
printer mail-detail

Risk management focus

SOLICITORS CODE OF CONDUCT 2007 >>
MINIMUM INTERRUPTION TO CLIENT BUSINESS >>
ABSENCES WITHIN FIRMS >>

 What’s all this about having to make a plan under the new rules for what happens to the firm in the event of a disaster? How on earth do I know what might happen?

You’re quite right, there is a provision in the Solicitors Code of Conduct 2007 which is relevant. You can find it in rule 5.01(1)(k). You’ll remember that rule 5.01 generally makes it a collective responsibility of all partners to ensure there are effective processes for various things.

Well, for this one, the idea is simple enough: it just says you have to make arrangements for the continuation of the practice of the firm in the event of absences and emergencies, with the minimum interruption to clients’ business.

Well, of course I want to protect the partners, but why should this be a matter for the regulators?

You’re missing the point. This isn’t a rule for your benefit; it’s for the benefit of the client. What it is designed to avoid is danger to the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll