Law Society rejects proposals to reform legal profession

THE Law Society of Ireland has rejected radical proposals by the Competition Authority to reform the legal profession, including the creation of a new independent regulatory body.

It has also rejected the recommendation to grant the general public direct access to barristers. Nor is it in favour of the authority’s recommendation of ending the monopoly on education exercised by the Law Society in the case of solicitors and the King’s Inns in the case of barristers.

The proposals were outlined by the authority last February and included a recommendation that the ‘sole trader’ rule for barristers be abolished. Barristers must operate out of the Law Library as individual service-providers, briefed by solicitors. It recommended they be permitted to form partnerships with solicitors and with other professionals in multi-business partnerships.

In a statement on the proposals, the Law Society said while it welcomed the authority’s recognition of the importance of the role of solicitors and the services they provided, the case had not been made for the effective merging of both professions.

It also objected to the authority’s central proposal advocating a new independent regulating body - the Legal Services Commission - to replace the regulatory role of the Law Society and the Bar Council.

This proposal, and most of the others in the report, are “based more on ideology than on evidence”, according to the Law Society’s director general, Ken Murphy.

The society has again highlighted Justice Minister Michael McDowell’s description of the current system of regulation as “exemplary”.

A statement from the society said the proposal was an exact replica of one made last December for England and Wales.

“That review was conducted because of the persistent and public failure of the system of regulation of the solicitors’ profession in that jurisdiction,” the statement said.

Mr Murphy said the authority failed to produce any evidence that the regulatory body would have any effect on competition for solicitor services.