header-logo header-logo

Smaller firms will lose out in LDP race

31 January 2008
Issue: 7306 / Categories: Legal News , Company , Constitutional law , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Small and medium-sized firms will be “disadvantaged disproportion­ately” by the new legal discipli­nary practice (LDP) provisions of the Legal Services Act, the Legal Services Policy Institute claims.

In its response to the Solici­tors Regulation Authority’s (SRA) consultation paper on new forms of practice and regulation, Profes­sor Stephen Mayson, director of the institute, which is part of the , attacks the requirement for a minimum of 75% lawyer ownership and control.

He says: “This disproportion­ately disadvantages small and medium-sized firms currently with three or fewer partners who wish to take non-lawyers into co­ownership.”

Even where firms can take advantage of the new LDP provi­sions, they will face further disin­centive with the costs, time and effort required to convert from an LDP to an alternative business structure (ABS) when the licensing provisions become fully opera­tional in about four years’ time, he says.

“We are urging the SRA to give an early indication of their likely approach to the conversion of LDPs into ABSs. Also, it does not seem to be clear what would happen to an LDP owned by, say, three lawyers and a non-lawyer where one or more of the three lawyers ceases to be an owner. Such a situation could arise beyond the control of the firm, for example, because of the death of one of the lawyers.”

The institute is also unhappy that it will take until 2009 to authorise LDPs. It says: “It is three years since Sir David Clementi’s final report…It is therefore disap­pointing that further anticipatory work was not carried out.”

An SRA spokesman says: “It may be several years since Sir David Clementi reported, but there was potential for significant change to the Legal Services Bill until the closing days of the last Parliamentary session. Detailed preparatory work may have turned out to be a waste of time. In any case, we are obliged to consult on various aspects of the Act, including LDPs. Implementa­tion before 2009 is not practica­ble.”

Jeff Zindani, solicitor and managing director of Forum Law, says it will be business decisions by commercial organisations about whether to invest in law firms and not theoretical analysis that will shape parts of the future legal sector.

“Small and medium sized law firms will not be disadvan­taged by the proposed changes. Ironically, less partners and low gearing may provide the best environment to invest away from the large firms who have business vehicles rooted in the nineteenth century. As an MD of a small incorporated law firm undertak­ing personal injury work, we have seen real interest in joint ventures with blue chip companies.”

Issue: 7306 / Categories: Legal News , Company , Constitutional law , Commercial
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

NLJ career profile: Liz McGrath KC

A good book, a glass of chilled Albarino, and being creative for pleasure help Liz McGrath balance the rigours of complex bundles and being Head of Chambers

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Burges Salmon—Matthew Hancock-Jones

Firm welcomes director in its financial services financial regulatory team

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn

Gateley Legal—Sam Meiklejohn

Partner appointment in firm’s equity capital markets team

NEWS

Walkers and runners will take in some of London’s finest views at the 16th annual charity event

Law school partners with charity to give free assistance to litigants in need

Could the Labour government usher in a new era for digital assets, ask Keith Oliver, head of international, and Amalia Neenan FitzGerald, associate, Peters & Peters, in this week’s NLJ

An extra bit is being added to case citations to show the pecking order of the judges concerned. Former district judge Stephen Gold has the details, in his ‘Civil way’ column in this week’s NLJ

The Labour government’s position on alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is not yet clear

back-to-top-scroll