C ( 8 9 ) 
CABINET 

## Memoranda

Date 
B r i e f 
D e s c r i p t i o n 
S e r i a l 
No. 
17.1.89 
GREEN PAPERS ON THE LEGAL PROFESSION 
Memorandum by t h e 
L o r d 
C h a n c e l l o r 
24.1.89 
DRAFT WHITE PAPER ON THE REFORM OF THE NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE Note by t h e 
S e c r e t a r y o f 
t h e C a b i n e t 
14.2.89 
ECONOMIC STRATEGY 
Memorandum by t h e 
C h a n c e l l o r o f t h e 
E x c h e q u e r 
15.2.89 
REVIEW BODY REPORTS 
1989 
Note by t h e 
S e c r e t a r y o f 
t h e C a b i n e t 
7.3.89 
THE L E G I S L A T I V E 
PROGRAMME 1989-9 
0 
Memorandum by t h e 
L o r d 
P r e s i d e n t 

THIS DOCUMENT I S THE 
PROPERTY OF 
HER BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT 
uary 
1989 
!• א^׳CABINET 

## Green Papers On The Legal Profession

Memorandum by the Lord Chancellor Green Papers on 
/>׳T^uary 1 ? 0 7 
<- ״
 ©
 ^
 . .a r l^ **r״nt**־incenc l e g a l profession' 
fees. 

Copies of the f r u i t s of my 
ρ 
profession ( E ( C P ) ( 8 8 Committee on Economic 

ancing by authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r s and contingency 
  sed Green Papers are attached. These Papers are 
  colleagues on competition i n the l e g a l 
    i c h was 
            endorsed by the M i n i s t e r i a l Steering 
     y Sub-Committee on Competition P o l i c y ( E ( C P ) ) 
      th meeting). 
                    That paper flowed from my 
        f Lady Marre's committee ("A 
                                      Time f o r 
        e on the Future of the Legal Profession 
           f the Bar and 
                         the Council of 
                                         the 
                                            Law 
            a i l e d to 
                     address the fundamental 
                                              issues 
             ing the profession. 

on 5 October 1988 ( E ( C 
disappointment with the 
                            r e 
Change" - Report of the C* 
presented to 
                the General 
                              Co* 
Society, J u l y 1988). 
                           That r e 
about organisation 
                       and s t r u c t 

## The Work And Organisation Of The

2. 

     I have t r i e d i n my proposed mainXjt'een Paper (The Work 
                                                                        and 
Organisation of 
                   the L e g a l Professionj£rS<6Aamine the s t r u c t u r e 
                                                                           and 
p r a c t i c e s of the p r o f e s s i o n from f i r s t V^p^iples. The 
                                                                    Paper s t a t e s that 
our o v e r a l l o b j e c t i v e i s t o 
                                  see that t h a ^ i u b l i c has 
                                                               the best possible 
access to 
            l e g a l s e r v i c e s and 
                                   that those s e r v i c e s are of the r i g h t q u a l i t y 
for the p a r t i c u l a r needs of the c l i e n t . 
                                                  I t sets competition and the 
maintenance of standards as i t s 
                                       twin approaches to 
                                                              achieving t h i s 
objective. 
              I t t h e r e f o r e promotes the removal o / ^ i ^ e t r i c t i o n s on 
competition, where these serve no u s e f u l purpose, wrfile seeking to ensure 
that there are safeguards, which are suf 
                                                 f 
                                                  i c i e n t ττγ^־׳τκΚ 
                                                                   more, to 
                                                                              maintain 
the standards of 
                     conduct and 
                                    the i n t e g r i t y of 
                                                        the\iej$aA^profession. The 
Paper then seeks to 
                        draw out the s t r u c t u r e which is^־jf/^uited to 
                                                                                  give 
 e f f e c t to 
             these p r i n c i p l e s , against the background 
                                                             ol 
 the public for l e g a l s e r v i c e s today. 

3. 
     The 
          Paper accordingly s e t s out 
                                             possible 
                                                        new arrange 
education and 
                 for the maintenance of 
                                              professional standar 
regard education, q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , t r a i n i n g and 
                                                          standards 
                                                                      as 
i n ensuring the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n i s best structured to 
                                                                    meet 
the public. The 
                     Paper proposes new arrangements i n respect ο 
which should ensure t h a t a l l 
                                    those, but 
                                                  only those, who are d 
trained, s u i t a b l y experienced and subject to 
                                                        codes of 
                                                                   cond 

## ^^^Rofession

1/arious needs of re propgJ^Wv duct which^^V. 

m a i n t a i n s t a n d a r d s , w i l l have r i g h t s of a u d i e n c e . 
                                                                                                   T h e r e a r e s e v e r a l 
c o n s e q u e n t i a l p r o p o s a l s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n r e s p e c t o f a c c e s s t o c o u n s e l , the 
!ppointment o f Queen's C o u n s e l , and appointments t o t h e j u d i c i a r y ; and t h e 
    נer goes on t o h i g h l i g h t a number o f i s s u e s r e l a t i n g t o the 
                                                                                                                           i n t e r n a l 

j n i s a t i o n o f b a r r i s t e r s ' and s o l i c i t o r s ' p r a c t i c e s which I b e l i e v e 

b e n e f i t from a thorough e x a m i n a t i o n . 
                                                                           The Paper a l s o proposes the 
J:on o f t h e monopoly c u r r e n t l y e n j o y e d by s o l i c i t o r s on c a r r y i n g out 

; n t i o u s probate work f o r r e w a r d . 

CON 
       i ^ $ N G BY AUTHORISED PRACTITIONERS 

4. ' TYi&£ff/&r& two s u p p o r t i n g Green P a p e r s . 
                                                The Paper, 
                                                           on c o n v e y a n c i n g by 

a u t h o r i s & A / p ^ a c t i t i o n e r s proposes a new and l e s s cumbersome system f o r 
p e r m i t t i n g o c o n v e y a n c i n g by i n s t i t u t i o n s t h a n t h a t c o n t a i n e d i n s c h e d u l e 

to t h e B u i l d i n g S o c i e t i e s A c t 1986, w h i l e a l s o s e e k i n g t o r e a s s u r e t h e 

p u b l i c t h a t t h e Government remains committed t o t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of a 
c o u n t r y - w i d e n e t w e j ^ . o f l o c a l l e g a l s e r v i c e p r o v i d e r s . 
                                                                                                               I n s t i t u t i o n a l 
c o n v e y a n c e r s w i l f l / D e ) V e q u i r e d t o f o l l o w and e n f o r c e a s t r i c t code o f 
conduct, but w i l N ^ h ^ a ^ b e 
                                                   a b l e t o use t h e i r own employed s o l i c i t o r s or 

l i c e n s e d c o n v e y a n c e s 
                                                ^ o f f e r c o n v e y a n c i n g s e r v i c e s t o the p u b l i c , 

i n c l u d i n g t h e i r 
                                own 

## Contingency Fees

s r e h e a r s e s the arguments f o r and a g a i n s t 
5. 

The Paper on c o n t i n g the i n t r o d u c t i o n of c o n t i n e x p e r i e n c e o f c o n t i n g e n c y t h a t i t would be a p p r o p r i a t e s p e c u l a t i v e a c t i o n s on the mod s u g g e s t s t h a t t h i s might be coup the c o s t s , p a y a b l e t o t h e l a w y e r however, o n l y s e e k s v i e w s on whethe t h i s and i n t r o d u c e c o n t i n g e n c y f e e s awarded, even i f c o n t r o l s were p l a c e f e e s c o u l d be used. 

TIMETABLE 

6. 
      The P a p e r s have been d r a f t e d w i t h the h e l p 
w o r k i n g p a r t y c h a i r e d by one of my 
                                              o f f i c i a l s ; a 

of c o l l e a g u e s ' comments on the d r a f t s . 
                                                        I have 

e a r l y a c t i o n i n mind. 
                                             I propose a t h r e e month c 
p u b l i c a t i o n which w i l l l a s t t o t h e end of A p r i l t h 
s h o r t , but i n my v i e w s u f f i c i e n t , p e r i o d . 
                                                                                    I t s h o u l d 

s u f f i c i e n t time t o t a k e f i r m d e c i s i o n s i n t h e l i g h t ο 
Green P a p e r s and t o announce those d e c i s i o n s i n t h e f o 
both Houses of P a r l i a m e n t b e f o r e t h e summer r e c e s s t h i s y 

the 
     l i n e s e n v i s a g e d i n t h e Green P a p e r s w i l l r e q u i r e prima 

I f we f o l l o w the t i m e t a b l e I have s e t o u t , the n e c e s s a r y le£ 
p r o v i s i o n s c o u l d be i n c l u d e d i n t h e C o u r t s and L e g a l S e r v i c e 
p r o p o s i n g f o r the 1989-90 P a r l i a m e n t a r y s e s s i o n . 

e s , e s p e c i a l l y i n t h e l i g h t of the mixed 
    e U n i t e d S t a t e s . 
                                          The Paper concludes 
    pduce i n t o E n g l a n d and Wales 

a l r e a d y e x i s t s i n S c o t l a n d ; 
                                                         and 
h t h e a b i l i t y t o agree an u p l i f t on 

the event o f s u c c e s s . The Paper, 

I d be a p p r o p r i a t e t o go beyond 

      t o the amount of the damages 
^ ^ ^ e x t e n t t o which c o n t i n g e n c y 

 i n t e r - d e p a r t m e n t a l 
ave had the b e n e f i t 

the Papers w i t h 
 on p e r i o d a f t e r 
     T h i s i s a 

jus j u s t 

ses t o the 
 statement to 
   hanges on 

s l a t i o n . 
   e 

pbp^ 
      am 

## Conclusion

I a c c o r d i n g l y i n v i t e c o l l e a g u e s t o agree t o the p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h e i r e e Green Papers w i t h t h e i n t e n t i o n t h a t we should r e a c h f i r m d e c i s i o n s 

the p r o p o s a l s s e t 
                              out i n t h e s e P a p e r s b e f o r e the summer r e c e s s t h i s 
 - I f 
            c o l l e a g u e s agree t o t h i s a p p r o a c h , I propose t h a t t h e s e 
                                                                                                             Papers 

|rd be p u b l i s h e d by way o f a r e s p o n s e t o a w r i t t e n PQ on Wednesday 

ry 1989. 

 
1 ^ D e ^ j a r t m e n t 

## Contingency Fees Contents

Chapter 1. 
I n t r o d u c t i o n 
Chapter 2. 
Background 
The p o s i t i o n i n England and Wales 
The p o s i t i o n i n Scotland The p o s i t i o n i n the United S t a t e s of America 
Chapter 3. 
Arguments f o r and 
a g a i n s t 
the i n t r o d u c t i o n 
of 
contingency fees 
The r i s k of a c o n f l i c t of 
i n t e r e s t 
P r o t e c t i o n by p r o f e s s i o n a l codes of conduct 
The United S t a t e s experience 
L e v e l s of damages 
The r u l e t h a t c o s t s follow the event Other f a c t o r s i n the US system 
Volume of l i t i g a t i o n 
Access to j u s t i c e Allowing the consumer t o choose 
Product 
l i a b i l i t y 
Summary 
Chapter 4. 
How a system of contingency fees might operate 
A s p e c u l a t i v e b a s i s A r e s t r i c t e d contingency b a s i s 
An u n r e s t r i c t e d contingency b a s i s 

## Chapter 1 - Introduction

1.1 
A contingency fee arrangement i s one whereby a 
lawyer 
agrees t h a t he 
w i l l 
accept 
h i s c l i e n t ' s case on 
the 
b a s i s t h a t he r e c e i v e s no payment i f the case i s l o s t , but t h a t i f i t i s won, 
he w i l l be paid some percentage 
o r 
s h a r e 
of 
t h e 
award made by 
the 
c o u r t . 
Such 
agreements are unenforceable i n England and Wales and 
s o l i c i t o r s 
and 
b a r r i s t e r s 
a r e 
p r o h i b i t e d 
by 
t h e i r 
r e s p e c t i v e p r o f e s s i o n a l codes of conduct from entering i n t o them. 
I n S c o t l a n d , 
s o l i c i t o r s may 
agree 
to 
conduct l i t i g a t i o n on a ' s p e c u l a t i v e ' b a s i s , t h a t i s , 
they w i l l r e c e i v e t h e i r normal taxed c o s t s i f the case 
i s won, 
but nothing i f i t i s l o s t . 
Contingency fees 
are, however, allowed 
i n many of the j u r i s d i c t i o n s of 
the United S t a t e s of America, where the payment made to t h e 
lawyer 
o f t e n 
r e l a t e s 
t o the amount of damages 
recovered by the c l i e n t . 
1.2 
The 
use of contingency fees i n England and Wales has 
always p r e v i o u s l y been r e s i s t e d . 
The main arguments 
a g a i n s t t h e i r use are t h a t : -
( a ) 
they may r e s u l t i n a c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t between lawyer and c l i e n t . 

The lawyer w i l l have a d i r e c t f i n a n c i a l i n t e r e s t i n the outcome of the case and w i l l be u n a b l e t o g i v e the c l i e n t i m p a r t i a l advice. 

T h i s may lead t o : -
( i ) 
the lawyer being tempted t o encourage the c l i e n t to s e t t l e e a r l y to avoid the e f f o r t involved i n f i g h t i n g the case; 

( i i ) 
the lawyer concentrating on c a s e s with a 
high nuisance value where the defendant 
i s more l i k e l y t o be forced i n t o making an o f f e r to s e t t l e ; and 
( i i i ) 
t h e 
l a w y e r 
b e i n g 
tempted 
t o 
t r y to 
enhance h i s c l i e n t ' s chances of success, 
p e r h a p s 
by 
c o a c h i n g 
w i t n e s s e s 
o r 
withholding inconvenient evidence; 
and 
(b) 
experience 
i n the USA 
suggests 
t h a t 
contingency 
f e e s : -
( i ) 
encourage 
j u r i e s to award e x c e s s i v e l y 
high damages; and 
( i i ) 
encourage 
l i t i g a n t s 
t o proceed 
w i t h 
c a s e s with very 
l i t t l e merit, 
leading 
to an explosion of l i t i g a t i o n . 
1.3 
Proponents of 
the 
i n t r o d u c t i o n of contingency 
f e e s 
d i s c o u n t 
t h e s e arguments. 
They point out 
t h a t 
the 
dangers of 
a 
c o n f l i c t 
of 
i n t e r e s t 
may 
be 
guarded 
a g a i n s t 
by 
p r o p e r c o d e s 
o f 
c o n d u c t 
and 
t h r o u g h 
r e s t r i c t i o n s on the amount a lawyer i s able to recover. 
They a l s o note t h a t what a r e c o n s i d e r e d 
t o be 
the 
u n d e s i r a b l e elements of the US 
system go wider than 

c o n t i n g e n c y 
f e e s 
and 
have 
t h e i r 
r o o t s 
i n some 
fundamental d i f f e r e n c e s between the 
j u r i s d i c t i o n s 
i n 
the US and t h a t i n England and Wales. These d i f f e r e n c e s 
are explored more f u l l y i n paras 3.5 to 3.10 below. 

1.4 
Current Government p o l i c y i s , moreover, i n favour 
of 
d e r e g u l a t i o n . T h i s e n t a i l s the removal of 
r e s t r i c t i o n s 
and 
t h e c o n s e q u e n t w i d e n i n g 
o f 
c h o i c e 
f o r 
those 
providing a s e r v i c e and f o r the consumer, u n l e s s there 
are c l e a r p u b l i c i n t e r e s t reasons t o t h e c o n t r a r y . 

The Government a l s o b e l i e v e s t h a t the onus should be on those who want t o maintain a r e s t r i c t i o n t o j u s t i f y i t . 

1.5 
The arguments i n f a v o u r o f t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of 
contingency fees a r e t h a t : -
( a ) 
they would give i n d i v i d u a l s and o r g a n i s a t i o n s 
who 
do not q u a l i f y f o r l e g a l a i d , but who 
cannot 
support expensive l i t i g a t i o n , t h e opportunity of bringing t h e i r c l a i m s to 
court; 
(b) 
t h e y 
w o u l d 
e n c o u r a g e a g r e a t e r 
l e v e l o f 
commitment on the 
p a r t of 
the 
lawyer; and 
( c ) 
they would encourage competition between lawyers, 
as c l i e n t s would be able t o shop around between 
s o l i c i t o r s 
t o s e e k t h e most 
a d v a n t a g e o u s 
agreement. 
1.6 
The R o y a l Commission on L e g a l S e r v i c e s
1 
(Benson) 
considered whether contingency 
f e e s should be allowed 
i n England and Wales, but concluded t h a t any change 
i n 
the law 
which gave lawyers a d i r e c t f i n a n c i a l i n t e r e s t 
i n the 
outcome of 
a case was 
not 
i n 
the 
p u b l i c i n t e r e s t 
on the 
grounds t h a t i t 
would endanger the 
independence 
of the 
l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n . The Royal Commission b e l i e v e d 
t h a t the system would not work w e l l here and would give r i s e to s e r i o u s d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n . 

I t would b e n e f i t only a l i m i t e d c l a s s of l i t i g a n t s and would reward some lawyers d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y . The Royal Commission on L e g a l S e r v i c e s i n S c o t l a n d
2 
(Hughes) a l s o concluded 
11979 Cmnd 7648 *1980 Cmnd 7846 
t h a t c o n t i n g e n c y f e e s should not be Introduced i n Scotland. 

They were p a r t i c u l a r l y concerned about the r i s k t h a t a c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t might a r i s e between a s o l i c i t o r and h i s c l i e n t where t h e r e was an agreement to a c t on a contingency b a s i s . 

1.7 
More r e c e n t l y , however, both the C i v i l J u s t i c e Review
3 
and 
t h e Marre R e p o r t
4 
have recommended 
t h a t 
the 
p o s s i b i l i t y of allowing contingency 
fee 
arrangements 
between l a w y e r s and 
t h e i r 
c l i e n t s 
s h o u l d 
be 
r e -
examined. 
I n s u g g e s t i n g 
t h a t 
the 
p r o h i b i t i o n 
on 
contingency f e e s should be open to re-examination the C i v i l J u s t i c e Review pointed out t h a t there have been 
major advances i n r e g u l a t i o n p o l i c y , and t h a t i t could 
be argued t h a t the r i s k s a r i s i n g out of a contingency 
fee system could be c o n t r o l l e d by s p e c i f i c r e g u l a t i o n s 
r a t h e r than a general ban. 
1.8 
I t i s a g a i n s t t h i s background t h a t the Government has 
concluded t h a t f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n should be given to 
the q u e s t i o n whether 
e x i s t i n g 
b a r s t o t h e use 
of 
c o n t i n g e n c y 
f e e s s h o u l d 
be 
l i f t e d . 
T h i s 
paper 
explores the i s s u e s and examines p o s s i b l e mechanisms 
for the c o n t r o l of contingency f e e s and the scope f o r 
change. 
1.9 
The Government would welcome comments on the 
i s s u e s 
r a i s e d i n t h i s paper by 2 May 1989. Submissions should be addressed t o : 

## Report Of The Review Body On C I V I L J U S T I C E 1988 Cm 394

"A Time f o r Change" - Report of the Committee on the Future of the Legal P r o f e s s i o n presented to the General C o u n c i l of the Bar and the Council of the Law Society, J u l y 1988 (Marre). 

Room 412 
Lord Chancellor'8 Department Trevelyan House 30 Great P e t e r S t r e e t London SW1P 2BY 

## Chapter 2 - Background

The p o s i t i o n i n England and Wales 

2.1 
C o n t i n g e n c y f e e a r r a n g e m e n t s 
h a v e 
a l w a y s 
been 
unenforceable a t 
common law 
i n 
England and Wales. 
2.2 
Maintenance (the g i v i n g of a s s i s t a n c e , encouragement or 
support t o l i t i g a t i o n by a person who has 
no l e g i t i m a t e 
i n t e r e s t i n 
the 
l i t i g a t i o n nor 
any 
motive recognised by 
the court as j u s t i f y i n g the 
i n t e r f e r e n c e ) and champerty 
(the 
maintenance of an a c t i o n i n c o n s i d e r a t i o n of a 
promise t o give the 
maintainer a share i n 
the 
proceeds 
or s u b j e c t matter of the a c t i o n ) were long 
p r o h i b i t e d 
a t common law. I t was considered t o 
be a g a i n s t p u b l i c 
p o l i c y t h a t l i t i g a t i o n should be promoted and supported 
by 
t h o s e 
w i t h no i n t e r e s t i n i t . 
B l a c k s t o n e ' s 
Commentaries record t h a t "This i s 
an offence 
a g a i n s t 
p u b l i c 
j u s t i c e , 
a s i t k e e p s 
a l i v e 
s t r i f e and 
contention, and p e r v e r t s the remedial 
process of 
law 
i n t o an engine of oppression."
1 
2.3 
The C r i m i n a l Law 
Act 
1967 
abolished t h e 
o l d common 
law 
offences of 
maintenance and 
champerty. S e c t i o n 14(2) of 
the same Act provides, however, t h a t a b o l i t i o n of the 
common law 
offences s h a l l not 
a f f e c t any r u l e a s 
t o the 
c a s e s i n 
which a c o n t r a c t i s 
t o 
be t r e a t e d a s contrary 
to p u b l i c p o l i c y or otherwise 
i l l e g a l . Agreements to 
m a i n t a i n 
an a c t i o n 
t h e r e f o r e 
remain 
u n e n f o r c e a b l e 
today. 
1 
Blackstone's Commentaries on the 
Law 
of England 
(1897) 
S.12 
Agreements t o a c t on a contingency b a s i s a r e a l s o 

2.4 
r e s t r i c t e d 
by s e c t i o n 59 of the S o l i c i t o r s Act 1974. 
T h e y a r e p r o s c r i b e d 
c o m p l e t e l y 
i n r e s p e c t 
o f 
proceedings i n England and Wales by r u l e 8 of the S o l i c i t o r s P r a c t i c e Rules 1988. T h i s provides t h a t : -
" ( 1 ) A 
s o l i c i t o r who i s r e t a i n e d 
o r employed t o 
prosecute any a c t i o n , 
s u i t or other contentious 
proceeding 
s h a l l not e n t e r i n t o any arrangement 
to r e c e i v e a contingency f e e i n r e s p e c t of that 
proceeding. 
(2) Paragraph ( 1 ) 
of t h i s Rule s h a l l not apply to an 
arrangement i n r e s p e c t of an a c t i o n , 
s u i t or 
other contentious proceeding i n any country other 
than England or Wales when such arrangement i s 
made between a s o l i c i t o r and a person e n t i t l e d to 
p r a c t i c e as a lawyer i n t h a t other country i n 
r e s p e c t of t h a t proceeding." 
The p o s i t i o n i n Scotland 

2.5 
I n Scotland t h e r e i s a long t r a d i t i o n of the lawyer 
a c t i n g on a s p e c u l a t i v e b a s i s . The s p e c u l a t i v e 
a c t i o n 
i s u s u a l l y an a c t i o n f o r 
damages f o r personal i n j u r y . 
S o l i c i t o r and advocate undertake t o a c t 
f o r 
the pursuer 
on the b a s i s t h a t they w i l l not be remunerated except i n the event of success and t h a t any c o s t s such as c o u r t f e e s w i l l be defrayed by the s o l i c i t o r . The c o u r t s i n Scotland have long recognised t h a t t h i s i s a p e r f e c t l y l e g i t i m a t e b a s i s on w h i c h t o c a r r y on l i t i g a t i o n and t h a t i t i s a reasonable way of enabling people who do not q u a l i f y f o r l e g a l a i d t o finance c o s t l y l i t i g a t i o n : 
X Insurance Co ν A and Β 1936 SC. 

239. Undertaking to a c t on a s p e c u l a t i v e b a s i s imposes on both advocate and s o l i c i t o r s p e c i a l d u t i e s t o s a t i s f y themselves t h a t there 18 a reasonable prospect of s u c c e s s . 

I f a s o l i c i t o r w i s h e s t o i n s t r u c t an 

advocate on a s p e c u l a t i v e b a s i s he must s t a t e the 
f a c t 
e x p l i c i t l y i n h i s i n s t r u c t i o n s and the advocate i s not bound to 
accept. 
2.6 
I n the event of the case being s u c c e s s f u l the 
s o l i c i t o r 
and advocate are paid t h e i r normal f e e . I f the case i s 
l o s t 
t h e y 
a r e 
p a i d 
n o t h i n g . 
T r a d i t i o n a l l y 
t h e 
s p e c u l a t i v e 
a c t i o n 
i s u s e f u l to pursuers who 
have a 
reasonable case, but who 
are not e l i g i b l e f o r l e g a l a i d 
on 
f i n a n c i a l grounds, such as small b u s i n e s s e s . 
At 
a 
time when the arguments i n favour of contingency fees 
as such were f i r m l y r e j e c t e d , the Royal Commission 
on 
L e g a l 
S e r v i c e s 
i n 
S c o t l a n d 
r e c o g n i z e d 
t h a t 
t h e 
s p e c u l a t i v e a c t i o n played an important r o l e i n S c o t t i s h l a w . 
The 
v i e w 
was, 
however, 
t a k e n 
t h a t 
s m a l l 
businesses ought properly to obtain insurance to cover 
t h e i r needs as p o t e n t i a l l i t i g a n t s . 
2.7 
An important feature of t h i s system i s t h a t i t o f f e r s 
no 
p r o t e c t i o n 
to 
the 
pursuer a g a i n s t 
the award 
of 
expenses i n the event of an u n s u c c e s s f u l outcome. 
The 
r u l e t h a t c o s t s follow the event i s thus not 
a f f e c t e d 
by 
a scheme s u c h 
a s 
t h e 
s p e c u l a t i v e 
a c t i o n . 
The 
u n s u c c e s s f u l 
pursuer remains l i a b l e f o r the c o s t s 
of 
h i s s u c c e s s f u l opponent. 
The p o s i t i o n i n the United S t a t e s of America 

2.8 
When t h e 
s u b j e c t 
o f 
c o n t i n g e n c y 
f e e s 
p r o p e r 
i s 
d i s c u s s e d 
the 
f i r s t 
point 
of r e f e r e n c e 
i s i n v a r i a b l y 
the 
USA, 
where the Supreme Court has 
recognised 
the 
v a l i d i t y of contingency fee c o n t r a c t s s i n c e 1850. 
There 
i s , however, a v a r i e t y of schemes operating 
w i t h i n 
the 
50 s t a t e s . Each s t a t e has i t s own 
i n d i v i d u a l p r a c t i c e 
and i t s own c o n t r o l s on contingency f e e agreements between lawyers and c l i e n t s . The S t a t e of Maine, f o r example, p r o h i b i t s contingency f e e s e n t i r e l y . I n New York, Michigan and Delaware, s t a t u t e has o v e r r u l e d i n i t i a l r e s t r i c t i o n s . 

C o n t i n g e n c y f e e s a r e n o t p r o h i b i t e d i n New J e r s e y , A l a b a m a , O h i o and 

C a l i f o r n i a , but they a r e s u b j e c t t o l i m i t a t i o n s and 
c o n t r o l s . 
2.9 
Contingency fees a r e 
most frequently used i n personal 
i n j u r y cases where the p o t e n t i a l award ( o r 
reward) 
i s 
g r e a t e s t . Some lawyers may a l s o agree t o a c t 
on a 
c o n t i n g e n c y 
b a s i s i n o u t s t a n d i n g 
debt, workmen's 
compensation, 
corporate 
b u s i n e s s 
p r a c t i c e , t a x a t i o n , 
land compensation and w i l l c o n t e s t s . 
2.10 
Despite a longstanding and general acceptance of 
the 
contingency b a s i s f o r remuneration, t h e U.S. c o u r t s have p r o s c r i b e d t h e use of t h e contingency f e e 
i n 
c e r t a i n 
a r e a s on t h e grounds of p u b l i c p o l i c y . The 
D i s c i p l i n a r y 
R u l e s o f t h e Code o f P r o f e s s i o n a l 
R e s p o n s i b i l i t y (CPR) 
allow contingency f e e agreements 
only i n c i v i l c a s e s , p r o h i b i t i n g t h e i r use 
i n 
c r i m i n a l 
m a t t e r s . The E t h i c a l Considerations of the CPR a l s o 
a d v i s e 
t h a t contingency f e e s a r e not appropriate i n 
domestic c a s e s . 
2.11 
Across the s t a t e s v a r i o u s methods a r e 
used to f i x 
the 
fee recoverable by the lawyer. For 
example, the lawyer 
may be able t o a s s e s s h i s 
f e e using a formula which 
takes account of the s i z e of the award recovered. I n 
other j u r i s d i c t i o n s the 
"customary r a t e " may be applied 
or the 
r a t e may be f i x e d by the 
Bar 
A s s o c i a t i o n , by 
the 
court 
( p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the case of l i t i g a n t s under a 
d i s a b i l i t y ) , by s t a t u t e p r e s c r i b i n g t h e maximum fee 
t h a t can 
be recovered or 
by an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e agency. 
2.12 
The most common b a s i s of charging f o r contingency 
fees 
i n 
t h e USA 
i s , however, a p e r c e n t a g e 
o f t h e 
sum 
recovered. The 
a c t u a l 
f i g u r e can be c a l c u l a t e d i n a 
number of ways. There may 
be one 
r a t e a p p l i c a b l e 
to 
the whole recovery; decreasing percentage r a t e s as the amount of the recovery i n c r e a s e s ; i n c r e a s i n g percentage 
r a t e s 
a s 
t h e amount o f 
t h e 
r e c o v e r y 
i n c r e a s e s , 
dependent on the expenditure of a d d i t i o n a l 
s k i l l 
and 
e f f o r t ; 
or a s e r i e s of 
i n c r e a s i n g 
percentage 
r a t e s 
applied to the recovery depending on the stage reached 
i n the proceedings before the recovery. The agreement 
w i l l a l s o s t i p u l a t e whether the c o s t s and expenses of 
the a c t i o n are to be deducted from the recovery before 
or a f t e r the lawyer's percentage i s computed. 
2.13 
No 
j u r i s d i c t i o n other than those i n the United 
S t a t e s 
operates an e x t e n s i v e contingency fee system. 

## Chapter 3 - Arguments For And Against The Introduction Of Contingency Fees The R I S K Of A C O N F L I C T Of I N T E R E S T

. 

II. 

The p r i n c i p l e s underlying the p r o h i b i t i o n i n England 

3.1 

and Wales of the use of contingency fees r e l a t e , as has been noted above, to the u n d e s i r a b i l i t y of anyone being allowed i n any way t o encourage or support l i t i g a t i o n i n which he does not have an i n t e r e s t . 

I n p a r t i c u l a r the b e l i e f i s t h a t i t i s u n p r o f e s s i o n a l f o r a lawyer to be paid on a contingency b a s i s . 

The main concern i s t h a t t o a c t on a contingency b a s i s would, f o r the lawyer, produce an unacceptable c o n f l i c t between h i s i n t e r e s t s and those of h i s c l i e n t and encourage him to behave i n an u n p r o f e s s i o n a l manner. 

The c o n f l i c t i s s a i d t o a r i s e from the f a c t t h a t a 

3.2 

l a w y e r a c t i n g on a contingency b a s i s has a d i r e c t i n t e r e s t i n the outcome of the l i t i g a t i o n and t h a t t h i s w i l l prevent him from being an i m p a r t i a l a d v i s e r . 

He w i l l be open t o t h e temptation of encouraging h i s c l i e n t t o accept an e a r l y (and perhaps u n n e c e s s a r i l y low) settlement i n order to avoid the high expense ( f o r the lawyer) of a t r i a l . 

He may concentrate on c a s e s which have l i t t l e m e r i t but a high nuisance value, which w i l l cause the opponent t o s e t t l e even i f h i s chances of s u c c e s s i n any t r i a l would be good. 

The lawyer's d i r e c t i n t e r e s t i n the outcome might lead him to indulge i n u n d e s i r a b l e p r a c t i c e s designed t o enhance h i s c l i e n t ' s c h a n c e s , such a s c o a c h i n g w i t n e s s e s , withholding inconvenient evidence or f a i l i n g t o c i t e l e g a l a u t h o r i t i e s which damage h i s c l i e n t ' s c a s e . 

P r o t e c t i o n by p r o f e s s i o n a l codes of conduct 

3.3 
I t i s not c l e a r t h a t there i s any r e a l b a s i s to these 
f e a r s . 
C l i e n t s probably already expect t h e i r lawyers 
t o be 
f u l l y committed to the case and, s i n c e t h i s i s 
what every c l i e n t 18 l i k e l y t o want, t o winning 
that 
c a s e . 
Wanting s u c c e s s cannot 
be wrong i n 
i t s e l f , 
provided t h a t u n f a i r means a r e not used i n achieving 
i t . 
Any tendency on the p a r t of a lawyer to "improve" 
h i s 
c l i e n t ' s 
c a s e ought t o be c a p a b l e of 
c o n t r o l 
through p r o f e s s i o n a l codes of conduct, and the judges 
a l r e a d y 
p o s s e s s t h e power t o p e n a l i s e 
s o l i c i t o r s 
p e r s o n a l l y i n c o s t s f o r any improper a c t or omission i n 
t h e 
c o n d u c t 
o f 
l i t i g a t i o n
1 . 
Both 
s i d e s 
of 
t h e 
p r o f e s s i o n 
a r e , i n England 
and Wales, 
s u b j e c t 
to 
s t r i n g e n t codes of p r a c t i c e which, i f broken, may l a y 
the lawyer open to d i s c i p l i n a r y proceedings before h i s p r o f e s s i o n a l body which can r e s u l t i n h i s l o s i n g h i s 
r i g h t t o p r a c t i s e . 

To assume t h a t t h e f i n a n c i a l 

i n t e r e s t introduced by a contingency fee w i l l o v e r r i d e 
the s t a n d a r d s of an 
i n d i v i d u a l i n r e l a t i o n t o h i s 
c l i e n t i s to assume an unreasonably 
low standard of 
conduct 
f o r the p r o f e s s i o n as a whole. 
There i s no 
evidence to j u s t i f y t h i s 
assumption. 
3.4 
I t must 
a l s o be remembered t h a t the v a l u e of 
the 
s u b j e c t matter of the lawyer's work can a l r e a d y be 
r e l e v a n t to the f e e s charged. 
Appendix 2 to Order 62 
of the Rules of the Supreme Court s e t s out the f a c t o r s 
which have t o be taken i n t o account i n the e x e r c i s e of 
a t a x i n g o f f i c e r ' s 
d i s c r e t i o n to f i x c o s t s . 
These 
f a c t o r s i n c l u d e , amongst others, "the importance of the 
cause or matter to the c l i e n t " and "where money or property i s involved, i t s 
amount o r v a l u e " . 
The same 
p r i n c i p l e s apply i n r e s p e c t of both contentious and non-contentious matters. 
1 
Order 62 r u l e 11 of the Rules of the Supreme Court. 

## The United S T A T E S Experience

3.5 
C r i t i c s 
o f 
c o n t i n g e n c y 
f e e s 
p o i n t 
t o 
t h e 
U.S. 
experience as f u r t h e r j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r continuing 
the 
ban on t h e i r use i n England and Wales. 
I t i s s a i d that 
the e x i s t e n c e of contingency f e e s encourages j u r i e s i n c i v i l 
c a s e s 
t o award e x c e s s i v e l y h i g h damages 
to 
s u c c e s s f u l 
p l a i n t i f f s , because i t i s known t h a t 
the 
balance 
otherwise 
l e f t a v a i l a b l e a f t e r the lawyer 
has 
taken h i s percentage (which may 
be as high as 50%) 
may 
be 
i n s u f f i c i e n t 
to compensate the 
p l a i n t i f f 
f o r h i s 
i n j u r i e s . 
3.6 
I t i s a l s o s a i d t h a t the a b i l i t y to sue on a contingent 
b a s i s encourages the p u r s u i t of 
low 
merit 
c a s e s 
f o r 
n u i s a n c e 
v a l u e 
a g a i n s t 
o r g a n i s a t i o n s 
w i t h 
s i z e a b l e 
a s s e t s , 
s u c h 
a s 
l a r g e companies 
and 
Government 
departments. The combination of high l e g a l f e e s - which cannot, 
a s 
i n England 
and 
Wales, be 
r e c o v e r e d 
i n 
c o s t s - and 
the f e a r of p u n i t i v e damages i s s a i d 
to 
encourage companies i n p a r t i c u l a r t o s e t t l e out of court, whatever the merits of the case, to save time and money. T h i s causes an i n c r e a s e i n the insurance premiums which have to be paid by l a r g e o r g a n i s a t i o n s w h i c h a r e u l t i m a t e l y p a s s e d on t o t h e consumer. 

F i n a l l y , i t i s s a i d t h a t the e x i s t e n c e of contingency 
f e e s encourages the 
d i s t a s t e f u l p r a c t i c e of 
"bountyhunting" lawyers 
c h a s i n g 
those a f f e c t e d by 
a major 
d i s a s t e r . 

## L E V E L S Of Damages

3.7 
I t i s not 
c l e a r to what extent the e x i s t e n c e of 
the 
j u r y i n U.S. 
c i v i l a c t i o n s leads to e x c e s s i v e awards of 
damages. 
I t i s a t 
l e a s t 
l i k e l y , 
as 
c r i t i c s 
of 
the 
U.S. system suggest, t h a t knowledge of the e x i s t e n c e of a contingency f e e agreement and of the high percentages required by lawyers, w i l l induce c i v i l j u r i e s t o make e x c e s s i v e awards of damages. 

The judge 18, however, able t o reduce the damages i n i t i a l l y awarded by the j u r y and i t may be t h a t e x c e p t i o n a l l y high awards r e s u l t where a judge f a i l s t o give adequate d i r e c t i o n s to t h e j u r y or where there 18 a d e s i r e t o make an example of a defendant i n circumstances g i v i n g r i s e to p u b l i c concern. 

3.8 
Contingency fees ( i f 
introduced i n t o England and Wales) 
would need t o operate w i t h i n the c u r r e n t system of 
awarding damages. 
Here, damages a r e almost 
always 
awarded by t h e judge, and o n l y i n c e r t a i n 
l i m i t e d 
c a t e g o r i e s of a c t i o n s (such as defamation), by a j u r y . 
The 
p r e s e n t method of awarding damages i s a staged 
process i n v o l v i n g the determination of general damages 
for 
the type of i n j u r y s u f f e r e d and s p e c i a l damages 
for 
expenditure and l o s s t o the date of the hearing, 
plus expected l o s s of income and f u t u r e expenses. 
As 
the sum of damages t o be paid remains w i t h i n the power of the judge according t o w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d g u i d e l i n e s , the i n t r o d u c t i o n of contingency f e e s would appear to have l i t t l e bearing on the sums awarded. 

J u s t as there i s no evidence t h a t the a p p l i c a t i o n of the s t a t u t o r y charge t o damages and property recovered by a l e g a l l y aided l i t i g a n t r e s u l t s i n i n c r e a s e d awards of damages, 
8ο i t seems u n l i k e l y t h a t c u r r e n t p r a c t i c e s i n the awards of damages would change i n the event of the i n t r o d u c t i o n of contingency f e e s . 

Even i f i t were thought t h a t t h e r e was a r i s k t h a t judges i n England and Wales would r e a c t i n the way i n which i t i s s a i d t h a t U.S. j u r i e s r e a c t , t h i s c o u l d be avoided by I n t r o d u c i n g a r u l e t h a t the f a c t t h a t the case was b e i n g r u n on a c o n t i n g e n c y b a s i s s h o u l d not be r e v e a l e d u n t i l a f t e r judgment had been given. 

The approach could be s i m i l a r to t h a t taken on payment into court, the e x i s t e n c e of which i s not r e v e a l e d to the j u d g e u n t i l t h e c a s e h a s c o n c l u d e d and he i s c o n s i d e r i n g the award of c o s t s . 

The r u l e t h a t " c o s t s follow the event" 

3.9 
There i s a f u r t h e r s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the 
p o s i t i o n i n the United S t a t e s of America 
and t h a t i n 
England and Wales. 
Here, the l o s i n g party i s u s u a l l y 
required to pay the reasonable c o s t s of h i s s u c c e s s f u l o p p o n e n t . 
T h e r e 
i s no 
s u c h 
r u l e 
i n t h e 
U.S. 
j u r i s d i c t i o n s which allow contingency 
f e e s . 
At 
the 
moment i n England and Wales, the r i s k of having to pay 
c o s t s 
i f u n s u c c e s s f u l c o u l d be 
s a i d 
t o a c t as 
a 
d e t e r r e n t on the 
p l a i n t i f f . 
He 
has t o weigh very 
c a r e f u l l y 
the chances 
of 
l o s s before embarking 
on 
l i t i g a t i o n . 
I f he i s able to avoid the r i s k of paying 
h i s own 
c o s t s under a contingency fee agreement, 
he 
may 
be more w i l l i n g 
than a t p r e s e n t t o embark 
on 
l i t i g a t i o n , even i f he c a n n o t a v o i d a p o t e n t i a l l i a b i l i t y to h i s s u c c e s s f u l opponent. 

S i n c e h i s lawyer i s , however, l i k e l y to have conducted a very rigorous assessment of the prospects of s u c c e s s before t a k i n g a case on a contingency b a s i s , i t i s u n l i k e l y t h a t the i n t r o d u c t i o n of contingency fees, taken together with the r u l e t h a t c o s t s follow the event, would have any r e a l impact on the propensity t o l i t i g a t e . 

C e r t a i n l y i t i s thought t h a t the e x i s t e n c e i n England and Wales of the r u l e t h a t c o s t s follow the event would continue t o have a d e t e r r e n t e f f e c t , even i f contingency fees were to be allowed. 

Any change i n t h i s r u l e would c e r t a i n l y l e a v e defendants unprotected, and t h i s would not be d e s i r a b l e , given t h a t i t i s hard t o see how a defendant to an a c t i o n f o r damages could b e n e f i t from the i n t r o d u c t i o n of contingency f e e s . 

Other f a c t o r s i n the US system 

3.10 
There a r e 
s e v e r a l other 
d i f f e r e n c e s between the 
US 
j u r i s d i c t i o n s and t h a t i n England and Wales which need 
to 
be 
taken i n t o account. United S t a t e s 
s o c i e t y i s 
l i t i g i o u s on a s c a l e not known i n England and Wales. I n the USA, 
t r e b l e damages may 
be awarded i n 
a n t i - t r u s t 
cases and, 
i n other 
c a s e s , p u n i t i v e damages are 
very 
much more widely 
used than they are 
i n England 
and 
Wales. There i s , t h e r e f o r e , a much g r e a t e r i n c e n t i v e i n 
t h e 
USA 
f o r 
p l a i n t i f f s 
t o pursue m a r g i n a l 
c a s e s . 
F i n a l l y , c l a s s a c t i o n s may 
be brought i n the USA 
and 
t h i s , 
combined 
w i t h 
t h e 
o t h e r 
f a c t o r s 
a l r e a d y 
mentioned, encourages "bounty-hunting" by US 
lawyers. 
Volume of l i t i g a t i o n 

3.11 
I t i s i n any event unclear t h a t the mere e x i s t e n c e of 
c o n t i n g e n c y 
f e e s 
would 
l e a d 
t o 
an 
u p s u r g e 
i n 
l i t i g a t i o n . 
Quite apart from any 
r e s t r a i n i n g e f f e c t 
t h a t the c o s t s r u l e s might have, i t i s u n r e a l i s t i c to suppose t h a t lawyers, as p r o f e s s i o n a l people running businesses, would w i l l i n g l y take on c a s e s where there was v e r y l i t t l e r e a l p r o s p e c t of s u c c e s s . 

The s o l i c i t o r i n v i t e d to a c t on a contingency b a s i s w i l l have to make a r i g o r o u s assessment of the l i k e l y chances of success and the p o s s i b l e amount of damages recoverable. 

Cases which w i l l be d i f f i c u l t to prove, perhaps i n v o l v i n g the c o l l e c t i o n of h i g h l y complex e v i d e n c e , w i l l not be t a k e n on u n l e s s t h e l i k e l y rewards are high enough to reward the work t h a t w i l l have to be undertaken. T h i s assessment w i l l have to be undertaken i n more d e t a i l t h a n where t h e work i s undertaken on a time charge b a s i s . So although a l a r g e r s e c t i o n of the community would have a c c e s s t o a means of funding t h e i r l i t i g a t i o n , i n p r a c t i c e s o l i c i t o r s w i l l s i f t out the l e s s v i a b l e c a s e s a s they do a t present. 

The contingency fee would, however, g i v e some people the opportunity of s e e k i n g l e g a l a d v i c e and would g i v e others the choice of how they pay f o r the s e r v i c e s of a s o l i c i t o r . 

## Access To J U S T I C E

3.12 
The main advantage of contingency f e e s i s t h a t 
they 
might g i v e 
" s m a l l " 
p l a i n t i f f s 
the o p p o r t u n i t y 
of 
b r i n g i n g 
t h e i r 
c l a i m s t o c o u r t . 
" S m a l l " i n 
t h i s 
context means those i n d i v i d u a l s and o r g a n i z a t i o n s who do not 
r e c e i v e 
l e g a l a i d but who 
n e v e r t h e l e s s have 
i n s u f f i c i e n t 
means t o 
s u p p o r t 
t h e 
f u l l 
c o s t 
of 
e x p e n s i v e 
l i t i g a t i o n 
and 
who 
cannot 
c a l l 
on, 
f o r 
example, the support of a trade union or do not have 
l e g a l expenses insurance. 

Where t h e r e i s a d e s i r e or 

need t o l i t i g a t e t h e r e i s a l s o a demand f o r the means 
to do so. 

Although l e g a l a i d i s widely a v a i l a b l e i n t h i s c o u n t r y f o r t h o s e whose means f a l l below p r e s c r i b e d l i m i t s , i t i s not a v a i l a b l e to those above those l i m i t s or i n r e s p e c t of c e r t a i n proceedings (such as proceedings before roost t r i b u n a l s ) . 

There may be s e c t i o n s of the population whose means take them above the l e g a l a i d e l i g i b i l i t y l i m i t s who might wish to l i t i g a t e on a contingency b a s i s . 

## Allowing The Consumer To Choose

3.13 
Contingency 
f e e arrangements 
may 
a l s o 
be 
s a i d 
to 
encourage a g r e a t e r l e v e l of commitment on the p a r t of 
the lawyer, who would have a s t a k e i n the outcome of 
t h e p r o c e e d i n g s 
( i f i t c a n 
be 
a c c e p t e d 
t h a t 
the 
e x i s t e n c e o f t h i s s t a k e d o e s n o t p r o d u c e an unacceptable c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t between the lawyer and h i s c l i e n t , nor p l a c e the lawyer's duty to the c o u r t i n j e o p a r d y ) . 

I f c o n t i n g e n c y f e e s were introduced t h i s would be a f u r t h e r i n c e n t i v e f o r the c l i e n t to shop around a v a i l a b l e firms of s o l i c i t o r s , s i n c e the l i k e l y c o s t to him would be i n f l u e n c e d by the c h o i c e between c o n t i n g e n c y o r c o n v e n t i o n a l f e e arrangements, as w e l l as by the p r i c e s t r u c t u r e of d i f f e r e n t f i r m s . 

T h i s w i l l p l a c e p r e s s u r e on the s o l i c i t o r to operate e f f i c i e n t l y , e s p e c i a l l y where the c o n t i n g e n c y b a s i s i s concerned, because the more 

drawn-out the proceedings, the lower the l i k e l y reward 
f o r the s o l i c i t o r and the l a t e r he w i l l get 
i t . 
3.14 
Contingency fee arrangements would a l s o spread the r i s k 
of l i t i g a t i o n f o r "small" l i t i g a n t s who can be expected 
r a r e l y 
to r e s o r t to the c o u r t s f o r the r e s o l u t i o n of 
t h e i r d i s p u t e s . 
The U.S. 
system of contingency f e e s 
s h i f t s the r i s k s of l i t i g a t i o n from the p l a i n t i f f to the lawyer. 
The lawyer i s able to spread those 
r i s k s 
over a number of c a s e s and i s t h e r e f o r e i n a b e t t e r p o s i t i o n to bear them. 
3.15 
Removing the ban on contingency fees would enable the 
c l i e n t who has a cause of a c t i o n to seek out the most advantageous agreement; and allowing t h i s freedom of 
c h o i c e may alone be regarded as grounds f o r l i f t i n g the ban on contingency f e e s . 

## Product L I A B I L I T Y

3.16 
There 
i s a 
s i g n i f i c a n t 
argument i n f a v o u r of 
the 
i n t r o d u c t i o n of contingency f e e s to be drawn from the 
US 
e x p e r i e n c e . I t i s one 
of a number of 
p o s s i b l e 
measures which may 
c o n f i d e n t l y be expected, 
on 
the 
b a s i s of experience i n the United S t a t e s , to s h i f t the present balance of advantage between the l i t i g a n t s i n p r o d u c t l i a b i l i t y c a s e s . Such a s h i f t would make producers more conscious of t h e i r duty t o supply safe products, and induce them to give product s a f e t y higher p r i o r i t y i n the conduct of t h e i r b u s i n e s s . T h i s i n turn would t e n d t o r e d u c e t h e number and s e v e r i t y of i n j u r i e s s u f f e r e d by people as a r e s u l t of d e f e c t i v e and unsafe products. I n the United S t a t e s i n d u s t r y ' s i n c r e a s i n g concern with product s a f e t y , which now makes European producers appear by comparison to be backward, has been f u e l l e d by f e a r of adverse court judgements and awards of damages, r a t h e r than by r e s p e c t f o r the c r i m i n a l l a w w h i c h p r e s c r i b e s c e r t a i n s a f e t y requirements f o r c e r t a i n goods ( s u c h as e l e c t r i c a l equipment) or by any a l t r u i s t i c wish t h a t the r i s k of i n j u r i e s to consumers should be kept to a minimum. 

## Summary

3.17 
I t appears 
t h a t e x i s t i n g 
r e s t r i c t i o n s on the use of 
c o n t i n g e n c y 
f e e s developed 
because 
of the need 
to 
prevent i n t e r f e r e n c e i n the conduct of proceedings i n c o u r t and the encouragement of c a s e s which would not 
otherwise have been brought. 
The adoption of express 
r e s t r i c t i o n s 
i n t o 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
codes 
o f 
p r a c t i c e 
r e f l e c t s the d i s t a s t e with which lawyers, as members of 
a p r o f e s s i o n a l group, viewed the use of such d e v i c e s as contingency f e e s . 
3.18 
Rules which were developed to prevent i n t e r f e r e n c e with 
the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of j u s t i c e i n feudal times may 
no 
longer be appropriate to the demands of the p u b l i c f o r 
t h e d e l i v e r y of 
e f f i c i e n t 
and 
b u s i n e s s - l i k e 
l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s . 
There i s a c l a s s of l i t i g a n t s who may drop 
c l a i m s because they are i n e l i g i b l e f o r l e g a l a i d but do 
not b e l i e v e they have s u f f i c i e n t means to pursue t h e i r c l a i m s unaided, even though t h e y a r e r e a s o n a b l y c o n f i d e n t of s e c u r i n g damages. There a r e , however, w o r r i e s about the c o n f l i c t between the i n t e r e s t s of the c l i e n t and those of the s o l i c i t o r which, t o the extent t h a t t h e y do not c o i n c i d e i n a c o n t i n g e n c y f e e agreement, may put the c l i e n t i n a weaker and l e s s 

advantageous p o s i t i o n . 
3.19 
S o l i c i t o r s and b a r r i s t e r s have had to respond to market 
p r e s s u r e s i n other areas, such as a d v e r t i s i n g . 
The ban 
on the use of contingency 
f e e s could be 
completely 
l i f t e d and a l l 
r e s t r i c t i o n s removed. I t could be argued 
t h a t 
the 
c l i e n t does not need any 
p r o t e c t i o n when 
e n t e r i n g i n t o an agreement with a s o l i c i t o r and that he 
i s 
p e r f e c t l y capable of shopping 
around to seek 
the 
most advantageous terms. 

The s o l i c i t o r does, however, 

have g r e a t e r knowledge o f t h e 
l i k e l y 
c o s t s 
i n a 
p a r t i c u l a r s e t of circumstances. 

He w i l l , t h e r e f o r e , 

be 
i n a s t r o n g e r p o s i t i o n than the 
c l i e n t 
i n the 
n e g o t i a t i o n s leading up to a contingency fee agreement. 
I f 
t h e 
p a r t i e s 
t o t h e agreement 
a r e 
i n 
unequal 
p o s i t i o n s when the bargain i s being s t r u c k then some 
means may 
be r e q u i r e d of 
r e s t r i c t i n g 
the terms 
of 
agreement t h a t the s o l i c i t o r might otherwise be able to 
impose on the c l i e n t . 
3.20 
The l e s s o n s to be drawn from the U.S. 
experience are 
t h a t the u n r e s t r i c t e d use of contingency f e e s appears t o be 
u n d e s i r a b l e . 
The 
d i f f e r e n c e s between 
the 
j u r i s d i c t i o n s 
a r e , however, 
s u c h 
t h a t 
t h e 
w o r s t 
excesses of U.S. 
contingency fee arrangements 
should 
n o t 
d e v e l o p 
i n E n g l a n d 
and 
W a l e s . 
I t i s t h e 
combination 
of such 
f a c t o r s as a j u r y ' s 
a b i l i t y 
to 
award damages, the absence of any r u l e t h a t the l o s e r 
pays the winner's c o s t s , the p o s s i b i l i t y of p u n i t i v e 
damages and the use of c l a s s a c t i o n s , none of which i s p r e s e n t i n England and Wales, which, taken together with the a b i l i t y to use contingency f e e s , g i v e s r i s e to the worries about the U.S. system. I t 18 worth bearing i n mind, moreover, t h a t the t i d e of opinion i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s of America i s t u r n i n g a g a i n s t the u n r e s t r i c t e d use of contingency fee agreements. 

Some s t a t e s a r e now reviewing t h e i r p o l i c i e s i n t h i s area and c o n s i d e r i n g t i g h t e r c o n t r o l s on the way contingency fees are operated. 

## Chapter 4 - H O W A System Of Contingency Fees Might Operate

A s p e c u l a t i v e b a s i s 

4.1 
The f i r s t , and perhaps most obvious, r e l a x a t i o n of 
the 
e x i s t i n g r e s t r i c t i o n s i n England and Wales would be 
to 
allow 
s o l i c i t o r s and counsel to a c t 
on a s p e c u l a t i v e 
b a s i s , a s i s 
already p o s s i b l e i n 
Scotland. 
A s o l i c i t o r 
would be f r e e to agree with h i s c l i e n t t h a t he would 
be paid only i f 
the proceedings were s u c c e s s f u l . I f 
they were, he would, however, recover 
only h i s taxed 
c o s t s and would not be e n t i t l e d to any share i n 
the 
damages or property recovered i n 
the l i t i g a t i o n . 
I f i t 
were necessary t o i n s t r u c t counsel, 
t h i s would 
again 
be on a s p e c u l a t i v e b a s i s , with counsel's 
c l e r k being 
informed of the b a s i s before the b r i e f was accepted. 
Counsel would be f r e e to t u r n i t 
down i f 
he were not 
prepared to a c t 
on a s p e c u l a t i v e b a s i s . 
I t 
would 
not, 
however, be n e c e s s a r y t o obtain a f u l l 
t a x a t i o n i n 
every 
case funded on a s p e c u l a t i v e b a s i s . 
Taxation 
would be required only where, as i s 
the 
case now, there 
i s a dispute between s o l i c i t o r and c l i e n t as t o 
the 
amount t h a t the s o l i c i t o r can reasonably charge i n h i s 
b i l l . 
4.2 
There does not appear t o be any s u b s t a n t i a l argument 
a g a i n s t t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f s p e c u l a t i v e 
a c t i o n s i n 
England and Wales. 
4.3 
The s e c o n d 
r e l a x a t i o n would be t o b u i l d on t h e 
i n t r o d u c t i o n of t h e s p e c u l a t i v e a c t i o n . The obvious 
shortcoming of such a c t i o n s , so f a r 
a s s o l i c i t o r s and 
c o u n s e l 
a r e concerned, i s t h a t 
t h e r e i s no e x t r a 
element t o compensate them f o r the c a s e s which they u n d e r t a k e on a s p e c u l a t i v e 
b a s i s b u t w h i c h a r e 
u n s u c c e s s f u l . 
They w i l l not, t h e r e f o r e , wish to c a r r y 
too great a r i s k and w i l l be concerned t o 
be as sure as 
1 
they can t h a t they accept s p e c u l a t i v e a c t i o n s only where the prospects of success a r e e x c e l l e n t . The f a c t t h a t lawyers a r e l i k e l y t o be p a r t i c u l a r l y cautious i n t h e i r judgment of prospective s p e c u l a t i v e a c t i o n s means t h a t t h e c l a s s of c a s e s which i s c a p a b l e o f being funded i n t h i s way i s l i k e l y t o be v e r y s m a l l . 

I n f o r m a t i o n r e c e i v e d from the F a c u l t y of Advocates i n d i c a t e s t h a t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1 % o f t h e F a c u l t y ' s c a s e l o a d i s conducted on a s p e c u l a t i v e b a s i s , t h e a c t i o n s undertaken being mainly r e p a r a t i o n c a s e s i n the Court of Session. 

4.4 
T h i s d i f f i c u l t y could be overcome by adding an element 
to the taxed 
c o s t s t o r e f l e c t the s p e c u l a t i v e nature 
of t h e agreement and t o reward t h e s o l i c i t o r and 
counsel f o r the r i s k t h a t they undertake i n e n t e r i n g 
i n t o t h e a g r e e m e n t . 
T h i s 
might 
a l s o 
encourage 
s o l i c i t o r s t o be more w i l l i n g t o consider a c t i n g on a 
s p e c u l a t i v e b a s i s than they would be i f 
a l l they could 
recover was t h e i r taxed c o s t s . 
4.5 
The percentage t o be added t o the taxed c o s t s i n 
the 
event of success could be s u b j e c t only t o the agreement 
of the s o l i c i t o r and h i s c l i e n t (which would 
transform 
the s p e c u l a t i v e a c t i o n i n t o something s i m i l a r t o the u n r e s t r i c t e d contingency f e e agreement known i n the USA, which i s 
u n l i k e l y t o be i n 
the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t ) or 
i t 
c o u l d 
be a 
f i x e d 
p e r c e n t a g e 
p r e s c r i b e d i n 
l e g i s l a t i o n or i n a p r o f e s s i o n a l code of conduct. I t 
might be appropriate t o f i x the percentage by reference 
to the amount o f taxed c o s t s recoverable, 
perhaps by 
way of a small u p l i f t , r a t h e r than by r e f e r e n c e t o 
the 
amount of damages or property recovered. 
T h i s would 
mean t h a t the lawyer would not have a d i r e c t 
f i n a n c i a l 
i n t e r e s t i n the l e v e l of damages recovered. The
 
,taxed 
c o s t s ' would not, i n these circumstances, be the amount 
recoverable from the defendant, but the amount t h a t the l a w y e r c a n r e a s o n a b l y e x p e c t t o r e c o v e r from h i s c l i e n t . 

T h i s approach might t h e r e f o r e a l s o minimise the r i s k of the a d d i t i o n a l
 
, s p e c u l a t i v e ' element being passed on t o the u n s u c c e s s f u l defendant. 

Any tendency on the p a r t of the lawyer t o i n f l a t e h i s taxed c o s t s , and thus h i s percentage u p l i f t , could be c o n t r o l l e d through the normal process of t a x a t i o n . 

## A R E S T R I C T E D Contingency B A S I S

4.6 
The next r e l a x a t i o n , which could be i n a d d i t i o n to 
the 
i n t r o d u c t i o n of s p e c u l a t i v e a c t i o n s , would be to allow lawyers and l i t i g a n t s t o agree contingency fees, but on a 
r e s t r i c t e d 
b a s i s . 
The idea here would be t h a t a 
lawyer could agree to be remunerated on a 'no win no 
fee' 
b a s i s , recovering i n the event of s u c c e s s some 
p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e amount o f damages o r p r o p e r t y 
recovered. 
The f e e could be based on a percentage of 
the damages recovered, and t h a t percentage would be 
dependent on the stage the proceedings had reached when 
the c a s e was concluded; f o r 
example, where the case i s 
s e t t l e d : p r i o r t o proceedings being i s s u e d , 25%; a f t e r 
proceedings have commenced but before t r i a l , 33 1/3%; 
during o r a f t e r t r i a l , 40%; on appeal, 50%. 

Another method based on p e r c e n t a g e s would be t o f i x t h e percentage fee i n r e l a t i o n t o the s c a l e of the damages recovered: the l a r g e r the sum recovered, the s m a l l e r the percentage charged. 

D i f f e r e n t methods of f i x i n g the f e e might be a p p r o p r i a t e t o d i f f e r e n t types of a c t i o n . 

Allowing a percentage dependent on the stage r e a c h e d might, f o r example, be a p p r o p r i a t e t o a personal i n j u r y case, whereas a s c a l e r e l a t i n g t o the amount recovered might be more s u i t a b l e i n outstanding debt c a s e s . 

4.7 
R e s t r i c t i o n s on the amounts r e c o v e r a b l e and 
on 
the 
s t a g e 
a t which 
t h e y 
c o u l d 
be 
r e c o v e r e d 
c o u l d 
be 
contained i n primary or secondary 
l e g i s l a t i o n promoted 
by the Government or a l t e r n a t i v e l y i n codes of conduct 
produced by appropriate p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies. (Even i f 
c o n t a i n e d 
i n primary 
o r secondary 
l e g i s l a t i o n , 
the 
r e s t r i c t i o n s might need to be r e i n f o r c e d by 
s p e c i f i c 
p r o v i s i o n s i n codes of conduct). 
4.8 
Even though l e g i s l a t i o n or a code could be used as the 
primary means of introducing r e s t r i c t i o n s on the terms which a lawyer might otherwise wish to 
i n s e r t 
i n a 
contingency 
fee agreement, i t might a l s o be necessary 
t o a l l o w the 
c l i e n t 
(and even p o s s i b l y the 
lawyer) 
a c c e s s to t a x a t i o n i n c a s e s where i t was s a i d t h a t the 
l e v e l of the f e e was 
not 
a 
f a i r 
r e f l e c t i o n of 
the 
amount of work undertaken on the c l i e n t ' s behalf. 
The 
p r o v i s i o n s of the S o l i c i t o r s Act 1974 
r e l a t i n g to the 
c o n t r o l 
o f 
c o n t e n t i o u s 
b u s i n e s s agreements 
c o u l d 
provide a s u i t a b l e model f o r t h i s . 
The High Court has 
j u r i s d i c t i o n under s e c t i o n 61 of the 1974 Act to s e t a s i d e a contentious business agreement i f i t i s of the opinion t h a t the agreement i s i n any r e s p e c t u n f a i r and unreasonable. 

Where such an agreement i s s e t a s i d e the c o s t s covered by i t a r e taxed as i f i t had never been made. 

Powers s i m i l a r to t h i s could, i f i t were thought to be i n the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t , provide a longs t o p a g a i n s t t h e r i s k t h a t t h e p a r t i c u l a r circumstances of an i n d i v i d u a l case might render even the r e s t r i c t e d r a t e of contingency fee unacceptably l a r g e , e s p e c i a l l y where i t i s c o n s i d e r e d t h a t the l a w y e r h a s not i n t h e e v e n t made a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n to the success of the a c t i o n . 

An u n r e s t r i c t e d contingency b a s i s 

1.9 
The u l t i m a t e r e l a x a t i o n would be t o remove a l l e x i s t i n g 
r e s t r i c t i o n s on the use of contingency f e e s and put nothing i n t h e i r p l a c e . 
I t 18 considered t h a t 
t h i s 
would not be i n the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . 
The l i t i g a n t i s 
i n a weaker p o s i t i o n than the lawyer i n 
n e g o t i a t i n g 
the 
terms of a contingency f e e 
agreement s i n c e he does not 
have the l e t t e r ' s expert knowledge of the l i k e l y c o s t s 
of 
l e g a l 
p r o c e e d i n g s . 
I t would be i n a p p r o p r i a t e , 
t h e r e f o r e , t o allow the lawyer t o r e q u i r e payment of unreasonably high f e e s , when the l i t i g a n t ' s d e s i r e t o 
get h i s 
c a s e on and h i s 
ignorance of c o s t s matters may 
together mean t h a t he i s unable t o reach a balanced 
view of t h e l i k e l y 
advantages 
and disadvantages of 
l i t i g a t i n g on a contingency b a s i s . 
Legal a i d 

4.10 
The arguments i n favour o f some r e l a x a t i o n o f t h e 
e x i s t i n g 
r e s t r i c t i o n s on the use of contingency f e e s 
are o f t e n put forward as a consequence of concern about 
the p o s i t i o n of those would-be l i t i g a n t s whose means 
take them out 
of the scope of the l e g a l a i d 
scheme, but 
who a r e n e v e r t h e l e s s unable t o fund t h e c o s t s of 
l i t i g a t i o n . I t 
i s 
f o r 
c o n s i d e r a t i o n 
whether the a b i l i t y 
t o use contingency f e e s , i f 
these a r e permitted, i s t o 
be a v a i l a b l e r e g a r d l e s s of whether t h e l i t i g a n t would 
a l s o q u a l i f y f o r 
l e g a l a i d . 
4.11 
Lawyers who a c t 
under l e g a l a i d c e r t i f i c a t e s a r e paid 
out of the l e g a l a i d fund on what i s known as the 
'standard b a s i s ' . 
A lawyer being paid d i r e c t l y by a 
p r i v a t e 
c l i e n t 
w i l l however, c l a i m h i s f e e s on the 
higher 'indemnity b a s i s ' . 
There are, i t 
i s 
s a i d , some 
lawyers who a r e u n w i l l i n g t o a c t 
on a l e g a l a i d b a s i s . 
I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t these lawyers would, however, be 
prepared t o a c t 
on a contingency b a s i s . 
A l i t i g a n t who 
might otherwise q u a l i f y f o r l e g a l a i d might, t h e r e f o r e , p r e f e r to i n s t r u c t the lawyer of h i s c h o i c e to a c t on a contingency b a s i s . 

4.12 
There are, however, advantages enjoyed by the 
l e g a l l y 
aided 
l i t i g a n t which 
he would l o s e i f he chose 
to 
i n s t r u c t h i s lawyer on a contingency fee b a s i s . 
I t i s 
t r u e t h a t the l e g a l l y aided l i t i g a n t , 
i f s u c c e s s f u l , 
has to meet out of the damages awarded to him the sums p a i d out of the 
l e g a l a i d fund on h i s behalf, but 
although t h e r e i s perhaps 
an analogy 
here with the 
contingency 
fee arrangement, i t must be remembered 
t h a t the l e g a l l y aided lawyer w i l l be paid by the fund 
on the standard b a s i s , which might amount to a s m a l l e r 
sum 
than would be payable under a contingency 
fee 
agreement. 

The l e g a l l y a s s i s t e d l i t i g a n t a l s o r e c e i v e s a c e r t a i n p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t h a v i n g t o pay h i s 

opponent's c o s t s i n the event of the l a t t e r יs s u c c e s s . 
A contingency fee agreement would be more favourable o n l y i f t h e l a w y e r had a l s o a g r e e d t o pay t h e 

opponent's c o s t s i n the event of f a i l u r e . 
There i s , 
t h e r e f o r e , a r i s k of a c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t a r i s i n g where the c l i e n t q u a l i f i e s f o r l e g a l a i d but the s o l i c i t o r would p r e f e r t o a c t on a contingency fee b a s i s . 

I n some circumstances the c l i e n t may, however, p r e f e r to proceed on a contingency b a s i s , f o r example where a high l e g a l a i d c o n t r i b u t i o n i s r e q u i r e d . From the c l i e n t ' s point of view a contingency fee agreement would d e f e r the payment of c o s t s to the end of the c a s e . 

I t i s f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n , t h e r e f o r e , how any arrangements t o i n t r o d u c e c o n t i n g e n c y f e e s should operate alongside the l e g a l a i d scheme. 

The judges 

Consideration 
has already been given i n t h i s paper to 
4.13 
the question whether the e x i s t e n c e of contingency fee agreements would encourage judges to enhance awards of c o s t s 
t o 
s u c c e s s f u l 
p l a i n t i f f s . 
I t i s not 
c l e a r 
whether there i s a r e a l danger of enhanced awards. 
I f 
t h e r e i s , the s o l u t i o n would be, probably through r u l e s of court, to provide t h a t the t r i a l judge was not to be 
t o l d whether the p l a i n t i f f ' s lawyers were a c t i n g on a contingency b a s i s . 
The c o s t s r u l e 

4.14 
One 
s i g n i f i c a n t 
d i f f e r e n c e 
b e t w e e n 
t h e 
U . S . 
j u r i s d i c t i o n s and the p o s i t i o n i n England and Wales i s 
t h a t 
l i t i g a n t s here a r e , 
i f u n s u c c e s s f u l , 
normally 
obliged 
to pay 
t h e i r opponent's c o s t s . 
I t i s l i k e l y 
t h a t 
the 
e x i s t e n c e 
of 
t h i s 
r u l e a l r e a d y 
a c t s as 
a 
d e t e r r e n t a g a i n s t would-be p l a i n t i f f s with 
questionable 
c a u s e s 
o f 
a c t i o n . 
I t i s t h e r e f o r e 
not 
thought 
d e s i r a b l e t h a t i t should be removed, even i f some form of 
s p e c u l a t i v e or contingency fee i s to be 
allowed. 
Given t h a t the i n t r o d u c t i o n of contingency f e e s could be of b e n e f i t only t o p l a i n t i f f s , i t would not be a p p r o p r i a t e to remove the p r o t e c t i o n the c o s t s r u l e a f f o r d s d e f e n d a n t s a g a i n s t b e i n g t h e v i c t i m s of q u e s t i o n a b l e proceedings. 

The defendant to a c i v i l a c t i o n c a n n o t s e n s i b l y r e f u s e t o t a k e p a r t i n proceedings brought a g a i n s t him and may not e a s i l y be able to defend them as a l i t i g a n t i n person. 

The very f a c t , however, t h a t he i s a defendant means 
(except where t h e r e i s the p o s s i b i l i t y of a counter-claim) 
t h a t he w i l l not have access to contingency fees, s i n c e s u c c e s s f o r him means only t h a t he has avoided a claim for damages. 

## Which Proceedings 4.15 There I S No Prospect Of Lawyers Wishing To A C T On A

c o n t i n g e n c y b a s i s i n c r i m i n a l p r o c e e d i n g s 
(97% of d e f e n d a n t s i n t h e Crown Court a r e , I n any event, l e g a l l y a i d e d ) , but even i f any were, i t i s thought t h a t t h i s would be i n a p p r o p r i a t e on grounds of p u b l i c p o l i c y . 

Comments a r e i n v i t e d on whether there are o t h e r t y p e s o f p r o c e e d i n g s i n r e s p e c t o f which s p e c u l a t i v e o r c o n t i n g e n c y f u n d i n g w o u l d be inappropriate. 

## Chapter 5 - Conclusion

5.1 
Examination of the arguments and i s s u e s a r i s i n g i n the 
debate on the i n t r o d u c t i o n 
of contingency f e e s suggests 
t h a t i t i s time to consider a t l e a s t some r e l a x a t i o n of 
e x i s t i n g 
r e s t r i c t i o n s . 
The experience i n the United 
S t a t e s of America, 
however, g i v e s pause f o r thought. 
C o n t i n g e n c y f e e s a r e a r g u e d t o h a v e e n c o u r a g e d l i t i g a t i o n t h e r e ; and they have c e r t a i n l y Imposed 

s i g n i f i c a n t 
c o s t s 
on 
b u s i n e s s i n t h e USA. 
These 
experiences need to be balanced a g a i n s t the argument 
t h a t 
c o n t i n g e n c y 
f e e s make 
j u s t i c e more 
r e a d i l y 
a v a i l a b l e t o a wider s e c t i o n of the population than i s 
the case i n England and Wales. 
5.2 
C l o s e r examination of the systems operating i n England 
and Wales and 
i n the USA 
suggests t h a t 
t h e r e a r e 
d i f f e r e n c e s which may go a long way towards e x p l a i n i n g 
t h e frequency of 
l i t i g a t i o n 
and 
the high 
l e v e l 
of 
awards of damages i n the USA. 
I f contingency f e e s were 
introduced here under the c u r r e n t r u l e s of court, with judges and not j u r i e s determining the amount of damages 
awarded, and w i t h the r u l e 
t h a t 
" c o s t s f o l l o w the 
event" operating as a t present, i t 
might be p o s s i b l e to 
avoid the adverse e f f e c t s of contingency f e e s as they p r e s e n t l y operate i n the USA. 
5.3 
The Government b e l i e v e s 
t h a t i t i s a p p r o p r i a t e to 
c o n s i d e r t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n i n England 
and Wales of 
s p e c u l a t i v e a c t i o n s on the S c o t t i s h model. 
I t i s f o r 
c o n s i d e r a t i o n a l s o whether t h i s should be coupled with 
the a b i l i t y to agree an u p l i f t i n the c o s t s , payable to the lawyer i n the event of s u c c e s s . 
T h i s would o f f e r 
an 
i n c e n t i v e 
t o l a w y e r s t o u n d e r t a k e 
s p e c u l a t i v e 
a c t i o n s . 
T h i s would be a s m a l l , p r e s c r i b e d percentage 
of the c o s t s , which was unrelated to the amount of the 
damages or property recovered i n the a c t i o n . A v a r i a n t on t h i s could be to allow the lawyer t o recover instead a s m a l l , p r e s c r i b e d p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e amount of damages. 

5.4 
The Government does not b e l i e v e t h a t i t i s appropriate 
t o remove a l l e x i s t i n g 
r e s t r i c t i o n s on the use 
of 
c o n t i n g e n c y 
f e e s . 
The 
Government does, however, 
i n v i t e views on the proposals i n the previous paragraph 
and 
on 
the q u e s t i o n whether a 
r e s t r i c t e d 
form of 
c o n t i n g e n c y 
f e e g o i n g 
beyond 
t h a t 
s u g g e s t e d 
i n 
paragraph 5.3 
should be 
i n t r o d u c e d i n England 
and 
Wales. There 
i s no 
o b j e c t i v e evidence 
a v a i l a b l e 
to 
support 
the c o n t e n t i o n t h a t 
the i n t r o d u c t i o n of a 
contingency fee system i n England and Wales would alone 
l e a d 
t o 
t h e problems p e r c e i v e d i n t h e USA. 
The 
Government would, however, welcome comments on 
t h i s 
i s s u e . 

## The Work And Organisation Of The Legal P R O F E S S I O N Contents

Chapter 1 
The purpose of the Green Paper 
Access to l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s 
E f f i c i e n c y of 
s e r v i c e 
Q u a l i t y of 
s e r v i c e 
Competition and standards 
General competition p o l i c y 
Competition and the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n 
Chapter 2 
The p r o v i s i o n of l e g a l s e r v i c e s today 
D e f i n i t i o n of l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s 
Providers of l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s 
Areas of use of l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s 
Funding of l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s 
Chapter 3 
L e g a l 
e d u c a t i o n 
a n d 
t h e 
g r o w t h 
o f 
s p e c i a l i s a t i o n 
The o b j e c t i v e of l e g a l education 

|                       |                       | The                   |  growing   |  importance   |  of s p e c i a l i s a t i o n    |
|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|------------|---------------|------------------------------------|
| E x i s t i n g       | s p e c i a l i s t   | panels                | of         |               | s o l i c i t o r s                |
| Merits                | of                    | s p e c i a l i s t   | panels     |               |                                    |
| I n c r e a s i n g   | the                   | supply                | of         |               | s p e c i a l i s t s              |
| A d v e r t i s i n g | of                    | s p e c i a l i s m s |            |               |                                    |
| E x c l u s i v e     | s p e c i a l i s m s |                       |            |               |                                    |
| Recognition           | of                    | s p e c i a l i s m s |            |               |                                    |

## The Lord C H A N C E L L O R ' S Advisory Committee On Legal Education And Conduct

The maintenance of p r o f e s s i o n a l standards 
Chapter 4 
Standards of conduct 
Complaints and d i s c i p l i n e 
Legal S e r v i c e s Ombudsman 
Advocacy 
Chapter 5 
The c a s e f o r r e s t r i c t i n g r i g h t s of audience Obtaining r i g h t s of audience 
Lay advocacy 
Employed lawyers Role of the Advisory Committee 
Advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e s 
T r a n s i t i o n a l arrangements 
Chapter 6 
Immunity 
from 
a c t i o n s 
i n n e g l i g e n c e i n 
advocacy work 
Attendance on counsel 
Chapter 7 
D i r e c t a c c e s s t o counsel 
Chapter 8 
C o n t r a c t u a l r e l a t i o n s D i r e c t a c c e s s 
Chapter 9 
Queen's Counsel 
The j u d i c i a r y 
Chapter 10 
B a s i s of j u d i c i a l 
appointments 
The House of Lords Supreme Court Judges 
Masters and R e g i s t r a r s 

Chapter 11 
B a r r i s t e r s p r a c t i c e s 

P u p i l l a g e s 
Tenancies 
Chambers 
P a r t n e r s h i p s 
Incorporation 

C l e r k s 
Chapter 12 
M u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y 
and 
m u l t i - n a t i o n a l 
p r a c t i c e s 
M u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s M u l t i - n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s 
Chapter 13 
A d v e r t i s i n g and 
information 
Chapter 14 
Probate 

## Annexes

A 
Competition i n the EC 
Β 
The p r o v i d e r s of l e g a l s e r v i c e s 
C 
Academic and v o c a t i o n a l t r a i n i n g 
D 
Present arrangements of the Bar 
and the Law S o c i e t y f o r handling 
complaints 
Ε 
Rights of audience i n the c o u r t s 
of England and Wales 

## Chapter 1  ־The Purpose Of The Green Paper Objectives

1.1 
Access t o l e g a l s e r v i c e s 
The Government's o v e r a l l o b j e c t i v e i n p u b l i s h i n g 
t h i s 
Green Paper i s t o see t h a t the p u b l i c has t h e best 
p o s s i b l e 
a c c e s s t o l e g a l s e r v i c e s and t h a t 
t h o s e 
s e r v i c e s a r e of the r i g h t q u a l i t y f o r the p a r t i c u l a r 
needs of the c l i e n t . The Government b e l i e v e s t h a t 
t h i s 
i s best achieved by ensuring 
t h a t : -
( a ) a market providing 
l e g a l s e r v i c e s operates f r e e l y 
and 
e f f i c i e n t l y so as to give c l i e n t s the widest 
p o s s i b l e choice of c o s t e f f e c t i v e s e r v i c e s ; and 
(b) 
the p u b l i c can be c e r t a i n t h a t those s e r v i c e s a r e 
being supplied by people who have the necessary 
e x p e r t i s e t o provide a s e r v i c e i n the area i n question. 
1.2 
E f f i c i e n c y of s e r v i c e 
The Government b e l i e v e s t h a t f r e e competition between 
the 
p r o v i d e r s 
of l e g a l s e r v i c e s 
w i l l , 
through the 
d i s c i p l i n e of the market, ensure t h a t the p u b l i c i s 
provided with the most e f f i c i e n t and e f f e c t i v e network of 
l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s a t t h e most e c o n o m i c a l 
p r i c e , 
although the Government b e l i e v e s t h a t the p u b l i c must 
a l s o be assured of the competence of the providers of those s e r v i c e s . 
1.3 
Q u a l i t y of s e r v i c e 
The 
Government 
b e l i e v e s 
t h a t t h e key element i n 
ensuring an adequate q u a l i t y of s e r v i c e to the p u b l i c 
i s t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e e d u c a t i o n , 
t r a i n i n g , 
q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and standards of competence and conduct 
which are appropriate f o r those who p r a c t i s e i n each a r e a of l e g a l s e r v i c e s . 

The e x p e r t i s e r e q u i r e d of p r a c t i t i o n e r s should be n e i t h e r l e s s nor more than the needs of the work demand, so as to ensure both t h a t the p u b l i c can be s a t i s f i e d as t o the competence of the p r o v i d e r s of l e g a l s e r v i c e s and a t the same time t h a t they can choose from the l a r g e s t p o s s i b l e number and spread of such competent p r o v i d e r s . Depending on the area of l e g a l s e r v i c e s i n question, such p r o v i d e r s may or may not need to be lawyers. 

## Competition And Standards

1.4 
Competition does not obviate the need to maintain the 
standards and 
i n t e g r i t y of the 
l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n i n 
order to safeguard the p u b l i c . Safeguarding the p u b l i c 
i n t e r e s t i s p a r t i c u l a r l y important i n r e l a t i o n to the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n , e s p e c i a l l y with regard to work i n the 
c o u r t s . 
The 
q u e s t i o n 
i s what 
b a l a n c e 
b e t w e e n 
competition and r e g u l a t i o n i s most l i k e l y to achieve 
t h i s e f f e c t . The onus should be on those who 
support 
r e s t r i c t i o n s as a way of achieving standards to j u s t i f y 
them. 

The Organisation f o r Economic Co-operation and Development's r e p o r t , 
"Competition P o l i c y and the P r o f e s s i o n s " , published i n 1985, concluded:-
" E x p e r i e n c e i n d i c a t e s t h a t a c t i o n s to promote competition i n some p r o f e s s i o n s do not n e c e s s a r i l y j e o p a r d i s e the q u a l i t y of the s e r v i c e s provided, and t h a t many t r a d i t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s e x c e s s i v e l y r e s t r a i n competition and may promote the i n t e r e s t s of the p r o f e s s i o n and not the p u b l i c . " 
One of the purposes of t h i s Green Paper i s to explore t h e a p p r o p r i a t e b a l a n c e i n r e s p e c t of t h e l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n ; and i t i s a g a i n s t these c r i t e r i a t h a t the e x i s t i n g p r a c t i c e s and s t r u c t u r e of the p r o f e s s i o n should be judged. 

## General Competition P O L I C Y

1.5 
The promotion of competition i s one of the Government's 
fundamental p o l i c i e s . I t i s c e n t r a l to the 
achievement 
of some of the Government's most important 
o b j e c t i v e s . 
C o m p e t i t i o n 
improves 
t h e 
p r o v i s i o n o f goods 
and 
s e r v i c e s i n the i n t e r e s t s of i n d u s t r y , commerce, the 
p r o f e s s i o n s and the consumer to s t i m u l a t e an e f f i c i e n t , 
wealth-producing 
and growing economy which can c r e a t e 
the p r o s p e r i t y e s s e n t i a l to meet the needs and demands of the community. 
1.6 
When e f f e c t i v e competition i s l a c k i n g , c l i e n t s ' choice 
i s 
a r t i f i c i a l l y 
c o n s t r a i n e d . When t h e r e i s e f f e c t i v e 
competition, a customer i s able to choose the goods or 
s e r v i c e s he needs according to what r e p r e s e n t s best 
v a l u e i n h i s c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n terms of q u a l i t y 
and 
p r i c e . S u p p l i e r s have to compete on p r i c e ; and t h i s i n 
t u r n encourages g r e a t e r e f f i c i e n c y and the development 
of new 
markets. 
P r a c t i c e s which d i s t o r t or 
r e s t r i c t 
c o m p e t i t i o n 
c a n 
d e p r i v e 
t h e 
c u s t o m e r 
o f 
t h e s e 
b e n e f i t s . 
I n p a r t i c u l a r 
c l i e n t s need t o know what 
s e r v i c e s are a v a i l a b l e i n order to make an 
informed 
choice between them. 
1.7 
Both the i n c r e a s e d emphasis on allowing market f o r c e s 
to determine the a l l o c a t i o n of resources i n the economy and the changing nature of the market f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s prompt a re-examination of the s p e c i a l s t a t u s 
of the p r o f e s s i o n s i n UK competition law. Although the 
F a i r 
T r a d i n g 
A c t 1973 
l a r g e l y 
a p p l i e s t o 
t h e 
p r o f e s s i o n s , many p r o f e s s i o n s are c u r r e n t l y exempted 
from the r e s t r i c t i v e trade p r a c t i c e s 
l e g i s l a t i o n . 
I n 
March 1988, 
the Government p u b l i s h e d a Green Paper 
"Review of R e s t r i c t i v e Trade P r a c t i c e s P o l i c y " (Cm 
331) 
foreshadowing new l e g i s l a t i o n . The paper s t a t e d that 
"there w i l l be no exemptions f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s a u t o m a t i c a l l y c a r r i e d a c r o s s i n t o new l e g i s l a t i o n w i t h o u t t h e m e r i t s o f each exemption h a v i n g been e s t a b l i s h e d a f r e s h . " 
The c o n s u l t a t i o n period on the March 1988 Green Paper ended i n September 1988, and d e t a i l e d proposals f o r the reform of the r e s t r i c t i v e trade p r a c t i c e s l e g i s l a t i o n w i l l be published s h o r t l y . As t h e new p o l i c y w i l l have a c o n s i d e r a b l e bearing on t h e l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n , i t seems appropriate to c l a r i f y the Government's general i n t e n t i o n s i n the present Green Paper. The Government has concluded that there should be no e x c l u s i o n f o r the p r o f e s s i o n s from the new l e g i s l a t i o n and t h a t the r u l e s of p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies should g e n e r a l l y be s u b j e c t to t h e same t e s t s a d m i n i s t e r e d by a new c o m p e t i t i o n a u t h o r i t y a s o t h e r s e c t o r s o f t h e economy. The Government's view i s t h a t , l i k e A r t i c l e 85 of the T r e a t y o f Rome, t h e l e g i s l a t i o n s h o u l d p r o h i b i t agreements which have t h e e f f e c t of r e s t r i c t i n g or d i s t o r t i n g c o m p e t i t i o n , a l t h o u g h i n t h e c a s e of r e s t r i c t i o n s d i r e c t l y i m p o s e d by s t a t u t e t h e competition a u t h o r i t y would be able only t o o f f e r i t s view on the economic e f f e c t of the r e s t r i c t i o n . Where the a u t h o r i t y found t h a t an agreement i n f r i n g e d t h i s p r o h i b i t i o n , i t could n e v e r t h e l e s s grant an exemption i f i t b e l i e v e d t h e agreement made a s u f f i c i e n t c o n t r i b u t i o n to economic or t e c h n i c a l progress and t h a t consumers shared adequately i n the b e n e f i t s of t h i s . I n due course, t h e r e f o r e t h e Law S o c i e t y and t h e Bar C o u n c i l w i l l have t o examine t h e i r r u l e s and guidance not only i n the l i g h t of the recommendations i n t h i s Green Paper, but a l s o i n the l i g h t of the t e s t s t o be a p p l i e d by the new competition a u t h o r i t y . 

Competition and the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n 

1.9 
I n the law as i n other p r o f e s s i o n s there a r e a number 
of 
r e s t r i c t i o n s . Many of these have been defended on 
t h e ground t h a t they 
p r o t e c t t h e i n t e r e s t s of the 
c l i e n t . 
C o m p e t i t i o n h a s o f t e n 
been 
r e g a r d e d a s 
inappropriate to or even Incompatible 
with p r o f e s s i o n a l 
s t a t u s and standards 
and w i t h consumer 
p r o t e c t i o n . 
Regulation i n the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n has been 
achieved 
through a combination of d i r e c t s t a t u t o r y c o n t r o l and, 
more 
f r e q u e n t l y , 
s e l f - r e g u l a t i o n t h r o u g h t h e 
p r o f e s s i o n ' s own r u l e s . Areas such as establishment i n t h e 
p r o f e s s i o n , 
a d v e r t i s i n g , s e t t i n g of f e e s and 
charges and business s t r u c t u r e and a c c e s s to the p u b l i c have often been c o n t r o l l e d by r e g u l a t i o n r a t h e r than being s u b j e c t to market f o r c e s . 
1.10 
I n recent years there have been a number of changes, 
some r e s u l t i n g from recommendations by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission following r e f e r e n c e s under the 
F a i r Trading Act. For instance, l i c e n s e d conveyancers 
have been allowed t o compete with s o l i c i t o r s i n England 
and Wales f o r c o n v e y a n c i n g work; and a d v e r t i s i n g r e s t r i c t i o n s by s o l i c i t o r s have been c o n s i d e r a b l y r e l a x e d . 

S u r v e y s suggest t h a t t h e r e s u l t of t h i s i n c r e a s e i n competition has been a reduction i n the p r i c e of conveyancing. The Government b e l i e v e s t h a t there i s no reason f o r excluding the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n from the d i s c i p l i n e of competition t h a t a p p l i e s t o the r e s t of the economy, provided t h a t the i n t e r e s t s of j u s t i c e and the needs of those who use or a r e a f f e c t e d by the law a r e safeguarded; and indeed there a r e wide a r e a s of t h e p r o f e s s i o n where c o m p e t i t i o n a l r e a d y operates. 

## Ε C I M P L I C A T I O N S

1.11 
The Government takes the view that, whatever steps may 
be taken to g i v e e f f e c t to the proposals i n t h i s Green 
Paper, the UK must ensure i t 
avoids introducing any new 
r e s t r i c t i o n s which might breach the European Community 
T r e a t y . Annex A d e a l s w i t h t h e p o s s i b i l i t y 
of an 
i n c r e a s e i n competition f o r the p r o v i s i o n of 
l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s from European lawyers which may i n any event 
r e s u l t from the changes to be brought about i n 1992 by 
v i r t u e of the S i n g l e European Act. 

## The Timing Of T H I S Review

1.12 
The Government 
r e a c h e d t h e d e c i s i o n
1 
t h a t 
i t was 
appropriate to undertake t h i s review now i n the l i g h t 
of the Report "A Time f o r Change" 
presented to the 
General Council of the Bar and the Council of the Law S o c i e t y i n J u l y 1988 by the Committee on the Future of the Legal P r o f e s s i o n ( t h e 
Marre Committee), a committee 
which those two bodies had s e t up i n 1986. That Report, 
commissioned by the two major p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies whose members work 
i n l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s , 
was 
t h e 
f i r s t 
r e a p p r a i s a l 
o f 
t h e 
o r g a n i s a t i o n 
o f 
t h e 
l e g a l 
p r o f e s s i o n s i n c e the Royal Commission on Legal S e r v i c e s 
( t h e Benson 
Commission) 
p u b l i s h e d 
i t s R e p o r t
2 i n 
October 1979. The Marre Committee's Report i n d i c a t e d a 
number of areas where change might now be appropriate. The f a c t t h a t the two major p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies had agreed on the need f o r such a study, taken together w i t h the conclusions of the report, i n t u r n l e d the Government to the view t h a t the time was now r i g h t f o r i t to undertake i t s own f r e s h review of the p r o v i s i o n of l e g a l s e r v i c e s to ensure t h a t the needs of c l i e n t s and the i n t e r e s t s of j u s t i c e would best be safeguarded i n the y e a r s ahead. 

1(announced i n Hansard 24 October 1988, c o l 1466) 2(Cmnd 7648) 

## Consultation

1.13 
The Government hopes t h i s examination of the 
l e g a l 
p r o f e s s i o n 
w i l l be p u b l i c l y regarded as a matter of 
great importance. These are not matters of concern only 
to lawyers. The p u b l i c have a v i t a l i n t e r e s t from many 
d i f f e r e n t p o i n t s of view. The Government w i l l t h e r e f o r e 
welcome comment from as broad a range of opinion as 
p o s s i b l e . 
At the same time, the Government r e c o g n i s e s 
t h a t many of the f e a t u r e s of the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n have 
been the s u b j e c t of recent e x t e n s i v e debate. 
I n the 
case of some of these f e a t u r e s the Government 
w i l l , 
t h e r e f o r e , i n t h i s Green Paper a l s o be i n d i c a t i n g i t s 
own p r o v i s i o n a l view on the r i g h t way forward. 
1.14 
The Government would welcome comments on the proposals 
i n t h i s document by 2 May 1989. 
Submissions should be 
addressed to: 
Room 417 
Lord C h a n c e l l o r ' s Department Trevelyan House 
30 Great Peter S t r e e t London SW1P 
2BY 

## Chapter 2 - The Provision Of Legal Services Today

The d e f i n i t i o n of l e g a l s e r v i c e s 

2.1 
A comprehensive 
d e f i n i t i o n of what i s meant by 
l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s 
i s v e r y 
d i f f i c u l t 
to frame, 
but, broadly 
speaking, l e g a l s e r v i c e s are concerned with the advice, a s s i s t a n c e and r e p r e s e n t a t i o n required by a person i n connection w i t h h i s r i g h t s , 
d u t i e s and 
l i a b i l i t i e s . 
These may of course change over the y e a r s 
with the 
p r e v a i l i n g v a l u e s of s o c i e t y , the l e g i s l a t i v e w i l l of 
Parliament and the d e c i s i o n s of the c o u r t s . 
Most 
s e r v i c e s which are "legal'', i n the sense t h a t a lawyer 
o f t e n performs them i n the o r d i n a r y course of h i s 
p r a c t i c e , may 
a l s o be performed 
by non-lawyers. 
I n 
England and Wales the only l e g a l s e r v i c e s which are by 
law reserved s p e c i f i c a l l y to lawyers a r e handling c a s e s i n court and applying f o r grants of probate or l e t t e r s 
of 
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n 
f o r reward. 
These m a t t e r s a r e 
considered f u r t h e r i n Chapters 5 and 14. 
2.2 
I n addition, 
conveyancing f o r reward i s r e s t r i c t e d to 
l a w y e r s , 
l i c e n s e d 
c o n v e y a n c e r s and 
c e r t a i n 
p u b l i c 
o f f i c i a l s . 
S o l i c i t o r s used t o have 
an 
e f f e c t i v e 
monopoly i n the p r o v i s i o n of conveyancing s e r v i c e s but 
t h i s monopoly was abolished by Parliament i n 1985, when 
l i c e n s e d 
c o n v e y a n c e r s were a l l o w e d t o e n t e r t h e 
c o n v e y a n c i n g 
market 
i n d i r e c t 
c o m p e t i t i o n 
w i t h 
s o l i c i t o r s . 
Conveyancing 
by 
s o l i c i t o r s and 
l i c e n s e d 
conveyancers employed by i n s t i t u t i o n s and bodies whose 
main business l a y i n another f i e l d was not, however, 
allowed a t t h a t time, although a framework f o r t h i s was subsequently enacted (which has not y e t been brought 
i n t o f o r c e ) 
i n t h e B u i l d i n g S o c i e t i e s A c t 
1985. 

Accordingly the Government has thought i t r i g h t to r e -
examine t h i s f i e l d as p a r t of t h i s review; 
and a s e p a r a t e c o n s u l t a t i o n p a p e r on t h e s u b j e c t of conveyancing by i n s t i t u t i o n s and other bodies or firms i s t h e r e f o r e being i s s u e d i n p a r a l l e l with t h i s Green Paper. 

The providers of l e g a l s e r v i c e s 

2.3 
The Government b e l i e v e s t h a t a c c e s s t o l e g a l s e r v i c e s 
by those who need them i s 
fundamental t o 
the 
r u l e of 
law and 
the 
p r e s e r v a t i o n o f l i b e r t y . 
I t i s 
important 
t o 
r e c o g n i s e , 
however, 
t h a t s u c h a c c e s s does not 
n e c e s s a r i l y mean access t o 
a lawyer. 
Much depends on 
the l e v e l and 
type of l e g a l s e r v i c e r e q u i r e d . 
I n 
some 
cases a f r i e n d or advice agency may s u f f i c e ; i n others 
a d v i c e by one who i s 
not only a lawyer but a l s o a 
s p e c i a l i s t 
lawyer, 
such a s a patent 
lawyer, may be 
e s s e n t i a l . Annex Β contains background information on 
some o f those who provide 
l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s , i n c l u d i n g 
b a r r i s t e r s and s o l i c i t o r s . 
2.4 
A person r e q u i r i n g advice, a s s i s t a n c e o r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n 
needs t o 
be s a t i s f i e d t h a t the 
p r a c t i t i o n e r or agency 
from whom a s s i s t a n c e i s 
sought i s 
competent to deal 
with the matter i n i s s u e . 

C l i e n t s a r e not u s u a l l y i n the best p o s i t i o n t o judge competence, p a r t i c u l a r l y i f the matter on which advice i s sought i s complex and the p r a c t i t i o n e r whom they have approached i s held out to have e x p e r t i s e i n the area i n question. 

T h i s w i l l be p a r t i c u l a r l y r e l e v a n t where the p r a c t i t i o n e r approached i s a lawyer. 

The Government b e l i e v e s t h a t i t i s a matter of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t t h a t p r a c t i t i o n e r s holding themselves out as p r o f e s s i o n a l lawyers a r e n a t i o n a l l y recognised a s having standards on which t h e p u b l i c can r e l y . 

T h i s means t h a t lawyers must have appropriate q u a l i f i c a t i o n s f o r the work they undertake; 
must abide by recognised standards f o r doing t h i s work; and must be s u b j e c t t o e f f e c t i v e monitoring t o ensure t h a t the work i s properly done. 

## Areas Of Use Of L E G A L S E R V I C E S

2.5 
A few examples of areas where l e g a l s e r v i c e s may be needed a r e s e t out below by way of i l l u s t r a t i o n . 

These are: 

( a ) the 
home; 
(b) the 
family; 
( c ) 
employment; 
(d) 
s o c i a l welfare; 
( e ) 
consumer p r o t e c t i o n ; 
( f ) 
commercial and f i n a n c i a l operations; 
(g) 
a c c i d e n t s and compensation f o r p e r s o n a l 
i n j u r y ; and 
(h) 
involvement with the 
c r i m i n a l 
law. 
(a) The 
home 
C o n v e y a n c i n g s e r v i c e s a r e a v a i l a b l e from a s o l i c i t o r or l i c e n s e d conveyancer 
( s e e para 2.2 
above). 

Advice i n connection with the mortgage and i n s u r a n c e c o v e r may be p r o v i d e d by a s o l i c i t o r , but may a l s o be provided by a b u i l d i n g s o c i e t y , bank, accountant o r o t h e r f i n a n c i a l a d v i s e r . 

Disputes a r i s i n g i n connection with the p r o p e r t y , f o r i n s t a n c e w i t h l a n d l o r d s o r neighbours, can sometimes be r e s o l v e d amicably, p e r h a p s w i t h t h e a s s i s t a n c e o f a f r i e n d a s mediator. 

I f t h i s i s not p o s s i b l e , a c i t i z e n s advice bureau (CAB) 
or law c e n t r e may be able to h e l p . 

I f t h e d i s p u t e i s so s e r i o u s t h a t i t becomes necessary to take l e g a l proceedings i t i s l i k e l y t h a t advice w i l l be r e q u i r e d from a lawyer. 

(b) The family 
A 
p e r s o n may n e e d a d v i c e , a s s i s t a n c e o r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h marriage or d i v o r c e , o r w i t h matters r e l a t i n g t o c h i l d r e n , e l d e r l y r e l a t i v e s , w e l f a r e b e n e f i t s , pensions or w i l l s . 

He or she may i n many i n s t a n c e s t u r n to f r i e n d s , advice agencies such as the CABx or the National S o c i e t y f o r the Prevention of C r u e l t y to C h i l d r e n , t o s o c i a l w o r k e r s o r t o f i n a n c i a l a d v i s e r s . I n more d i f f i c u l t c a s e s , o r where d i s p u t e s may come before the c o u r t s , a person i s l i k e l y to seek the a s s i s t a n c e of a lawyer. 

( c ) 
Employment 
Legal s e r v i c e s may be needed i n connection with a v a r i e t y o f m a t t e r s s u c h a s c o n t r a c t s o f employment, c o n d i t i o n s of work, r a c i a l and sexual d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , i n d u s t r i a l a c t i o n , u n l a w f u l b e h a v i o u r by t r a d e u n i o n s , r e d u n d a n c y o r d i s m i s s a l . 

Employees, p o t e n t i a l . e m p l o y e e s and employers a r e a l l l i k e l y t o need l e g a l s e r v i c e s here. 

Depending on the nature of the advice, a s s i s t a n c e or r e p r e s e n t a t i o n r e q u i r e d they may t u r n , f o r example, t o t r a d e u n i o n s , t r a d e a s s o c i a t i o n s , CABx, t h e Commissioner f o r t h e R i g h t s o f Trade Union Members, t h e A d v i s o r y C o n c i l i a t i o n and A r b i t r a t i o n S e r v i c e , t h e C o m m i s s i o n f o r R a c i a l E q u a l i t y , t h e E q u a l Opportunties Commission or to lawyers. 

(d) 
S o c i a l w e l f a r e 
A p e r s o n 
may 
n e e d 
a d v i c e , 
a s s i s t a n c e o r 
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n connection with e n t i t l e m e n t to 
w e l f a r e b e n e f i t s o r the r e s o l u t i o n of problems 
caused by homelessness or n a t i o n a l i t y . 
Advice 
a g e n c i e s , 
such as t h e CABx, the C h i l d 
Poverty 
Action Group and the United Kingdom Immigrants Advisory S e r v i c e , have developed an e x p e r t i s e i n w e l f a r e areas such as these. 

Help may a l s o be p r o v i d e d by law c e n t r e s , s o c i a l w o r k e r s and lawyers. 

(e) 
Consumer p r o t e c t i o n 
Legal s e r v i c e s here can cover a wide area ranging from r i g h t s and l i a b i l i t i e s i n connection with the 
purchase and 
s a l e of goods and s e r v i c e s and 
the 
whole area of product 
l i a b i l i t y 
a t one end, 
to 
c o u n s e l l i n g f o r debt a t the other. 
Advice 
and 
a s s i s t a n c e may 
be 
a v a i l a b l e from o r g a n i s a t i o n s 
s u c h 
a s 
t h e 
N a t i o n a l Consumer C o u n c i l , 
t h e 
Consumers' A s s o c i a t i o n , CABx and 
o t h e r 
a d v i c e 
agencies and t r a d i n g standards o f f i c e r s . 
As i n 
the other examples, a lawyer i s most 
l i k e l y 
to 
b e c o m e 
i n v o l v e d 
i f c o m p l e x 
c o m m e r c i a l 
documentation i s required or court proceedings are 
contemplated. 
( f ) 
Commercial and f i n a n c i a l operations 
L e g a l 
s e r v i c e s here can cover such matters 
as 
s e t t i n g 
up 
and 
running 
a b u s i n e s s or company, 
t a x a t i o n , bankruptcy and insolvency, i n t e l l e c t u a l p r o p e r t y 
r i g h t s , 
c o m m e r c i a l 
c o n v e y a n c i n g , 
p e n s i o n s , i n s u r a n c e , m a t t e r s of c o n t r a c t , the f i n a n c i a l r e g u l a t i o n of markets and the e f f e c t on t r a n s a c t i o n s of m u l t i - n a t i o n a l operations. A range o f p r a c t i t i o n e r s a r e i n t h e market f o r t h e p r o v i s i o n of l e g a l s e r v i c e s i n some or a l l of these a r e a s , i n c l u d i n g lawyers both general and o f f e r i n g a v a r i e t y o f s p e c i a l i s t s e r v i c e s , l i c e n s e d c o n v e y a n c e r s , p a t e n t a g e n t s , banks, b u i l d i n g s o c i e t i e s , a c c o u n t a n t s , i n s o l v e n c y p r a c t i t i o n e r s and c h a r t e r e d s e c r e t a r i e s . 

(g) 
Accidents and compensation f o r personal i n j u r y 
Accidents may give r i s e to both c i v i l and c r i m i n a l l i a b i l i t y . 

Legal s e r v i c e s a r e l i k e l y to be needed both by any p e r s o n who may have c a u s e d t h e accident and by the person who i s i n j u r e d as a r e s u l t of i t . Legal s e r v i c e s here a r e l i k e l y to be p r o v i d e d by a lawyer, i f the matter seems l i k e l y t o become the s u b j e c t of c o u r t proceedings, but advice and a s s i s t a n c e may a l s o be a v a i l a b l e from other sources such as trade unions or advice agencies. 

Involvement with the c r i m i n a l law 

(h) 
Lawyers a r e the main providers of l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s 
here, e s p e c i a l l y i n 
connection with the 
conduct of 
c a s e s i n c o u r t . 
Advice and a s s i s t a n c e may, 
however, 
a l s o be a v a i l a b l e from, f o r example, 
s o c i a l workers, p r o b a t i o n o f f i c e r s and a d v i c e agencies. 

## Funding Of L E G A L S E R V I C E S

2.6 
T h i s chapter has looked very b r i e f l y a t some of the s i t u a t i o n s where l e g a l s e r v i c e s a r e l i k e l y t o be required and where the p u b l i c need t o have a c c e s s t o them. I t has a l s o mentioned some of the p r a c t i t i o n e r s and a g e n c i e s who may p r o v i d e s u c h s e r v i c e s . The Government t h i n k s i t r i g h t t h a t these s e r v i c e s should be funded i n a v a r i e t y of ways. Those who cannot a f f o r d to pay f o r the l e g a l s e r v i c e s they r e q u i r e can o f t e n get the help they need from o r g a n i s a t i o n s supported by p u b l i c funds; and, where necessary, they can get a c c e s s to lawyers through the l e g a l a i d and advice schemes. 

Those who can themselves a f f o r d t o pay f o r the s e r v i c e s they r e q u i r e want t o be sure they a r e using t h e i r money to obtain the s e r v i c e which i s b e s t s u i t e d t o t h e i r needs. 

2.7 
So 
f a r as 
p u b l i c l y funded work i s concerned, 
the 
Government 
b e l i e v e s 
t h a t 
t h e 
new 
L e g a l 
A i d 
Act, 
together with the 
Legal Aid Board i t has 
c r e a t e d 
to 
take over the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of l e g a l a i d from 1 A p r i l 
1989, 
w i l l 
provide a system t h a t 
i s e f f i c i e n t 
and 
e f f e c t i v e and 
give to a l l concerned the best 
p o s s i b l e 
value i n r e t u r n f o r the money spent on i t , and which 
w i l l have the f l e x i b i l i t y to meet changing demands and 
circumstances. 
2.8 
I n p r i v a t e l y funded work a l s o the Government i s keen to 
encourage new approaches. 
One idea which has a t t r a c t e d 
much a t t e n t i o n i n recent years - contingency fees - i s 
the s u b j e c t of a separate c o n s u l t a t i o n paper i s s u e d i n 
p a r a l l e l 
w i t h 
t h i s Green Paper. 
The 
Government's 
proposals to i n c r e a s e the p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r a d v e r t i s i n g by 
the 
l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n , 
and 
thereby to enable 
the 
p u b l i c to make more informed and c o s t - e f f e c t i v e choices 
among the providers of l e g a l s e r v i c e s , can be found i n Chapter 13 of t h i s Green Paper. 

## Chapter 3  ־Legal Education And The Growth Of Specialisation

The o b j e c t i v e of l e g a l education 

3.1 
The R e p o r t o f t h e Committee on 
L e g a l 
E d u c a t i o n 
published i n March 1971 (Ormrod) (Cmnd. 4595) concluded 
t h a t : -
"Legal education should not attempt t o equip the l a w y e r a t q u a l i f i c a t i o n w i t h a comprehensive knowledge of every s u b j e c t he may encounter i n p r a c t i c e ; 
i n s t e a d , i t s h o u l d c o n c e n t r a t e on p r o v i d i n g him w i t h t h e b e s t p o s s i b l e g e n e r a l i n t r o d u c t i o n so as t o enable him, with the help of e x p e r i e n c e and c o n t i n u i n g e d u c a t i o n a f t e r q u a l i f i c a t i o n , to become a f u l l y equipped member of the p r o f e s s i o n . " 
The Government b e l i e v e s t h i s o b j e c t i v e f o r l e g a l education i s s t i l l v a l i d today. 

3.2 
The Government a l s o b e l i e v e s t h a t i t 
i s c o n s i s t e n t with 
i t s o b j e c t i v e s f o r 
the p r o v i s i o n of l e g a l s e r v i c e s t h a t 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s must be a b l e t o show t h e i r c l i e n t s t h a t 
they possess the necessary competence to perform the p a r t i c u l a r s e r v i c e sought from them, e s p e c i a l l y where t h e s e r v i c e r e q u i r e s t h e p o s s e s s i o n o f s p e c i a l i s t e x p e r t i s e . The Government b e l i e v e s t h a t i t i s not of i t s e l f s u f f i c i e n t f o r p r a c t i t i o n e r s t o belong t o a p a r t i c u l a r branch of the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n , or, i n some c a s e s , t o other p r o f e s s i o n s . 

## Current P O S I T I O N

3.3 
E n t r y to the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n r e q u i r e s completion of 
t h r e e t r a i n i n g stages, an academic, a v o c a t i o n a l and a p r a c t i c a l 
s t a g e . 
E n t r a n t s 
n o r m a l l y complete t h e 
academic s t a g e by t a k i n g a law degree. T h e r e a f t e r , b a r r i s t e r s and s o l i c i t o r s have s e p a r a t e systems of v o c a t i o n a l and p r a c t i c a l t r a i n i n g . 

3.4 
Both branches 
of the p r o f e s s i o n a r e i n the process of 
conducting 
reviews of t h e i r own 
t r a i n i n g arrangements 
w i t h the aim of making these more r e l e v a n t t o the needs 
of p r a c t i c e . 
The Bar intend t o introduce a new 
f i n a l s 
c o u r s e 
i n the autumn of 1989 
which 
w i l l 
emphasise 
p r a c t i c a l 
s k i l l s such as advocacy, d r a f t i n g , a d v i s i n g 
and 
n e g o t i a t i n g ; and 
t h e r e a r e a t present moves to 
f o r m a l i s e the minimum contents of p u p i l l a g e . 
The 
Law 
S o c i e t y are c o n s i d e r i n g i n c l u d i n g a d d i t i o n a l s p e c i a l i s t 
law 
o p t i o n s 
d u r i n g 
t h e 
f i n a l s 
course, 
t r a i n i n g 
i n 
management and communication 
s k i l l s and the extension 
of compulsory p o s t - q u a l i f i c a t i o n 
t r a i n i n g beyond 
the 
f i r s t t h r e e y e a r s , i n order to keep s o l i c i t o r s a b r e a s t 
of developments i n the law. 
The growing importance of s p e c i a l i s a t i o n 3.5 
The t h r u s t o f t h e s e changes i s t o emphasise t h e growing importance, which has been noted over the p a s t decade, of the a c q u i s i t i o n of s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s by p r a c t i t i o n e r s . 

The need f o r t h i s was recognised by the Royal Commission on Legal S e r v i c e s as long ago as 
1979 
when i t recommended t h a t the formal i n t r o d u c t i o n of s p e c i a l i s a t i o n i n t o the s o l i c i t o r s ' p r o f e s s i o n would be of s i g n i f i c a n t b e n e f i t to the p u b l i c (paras 22.55 
and 27.23). 

I n 1987, i n the White Paper 
"Legal Aid i n England and Wales: A New Framework" 
(Cm 118 
para 
58), the Government s t a t e d t h a t i t was d e s i r a b l e t h a t s o l i c i t o r s doing l e g a l a i d work should have s p e c i a l s k i l l s i n the a r e a concerned, and t h a t i t was a t t r a c t e d by the i d e a t h a t l e g a l a i d work should be done by panels of s o l i c i t o r s with s p e c i a l i s t experience i n each category. 

I n 1988 
the C i v i l J u s t i c e Review (Cm 
394 
p a r a 
212) recommended t h a t s p e c i a l i s a t i o n schemes s h o u l d be e s t a b l i s h e d f o r a l l t h e main a r e a s of l i t i g a t i o n ; 
and Marre ( p a r a 16.17) r e c o g n i s e d t h a t 
" s p e c i a l i s a t i o n i s i n e v i t a b l e . " 
E x i s t i n g s p e c i a l i s t panels of s o l i c i t o r s 3.6 
The Law S o c i e t y have a l r e a d y e s t a b l i s h e d s p e c i a l i s t p a n e l s f o r c h i l d c a r e and mental h e a l t h work. 

The C h i l d Care Panel was s e t up i n 1984 and c u r r e n t l y has around 1,500 members. 

The Mental Health Panel was s e t up i n 1983 
and c u r r e n t l y has around 
200 
members. 

Membership of both t h e s e p a n e l s i s dependent on experience i n advocacy before the r e l e v a n t t r i b u n a l s , attendance on approved c o u r s e s and i n t e r v i e w s . Also under t h e d u t y s o l i c i t o r schemes t h e r e a r e some thousands of s o l i c i t o r s 
(and t h e i r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s ) 
who provide duty s o l i c i t o r s e r v i c e s . They need to have a minimum of 12 months' advocacy experience and are i n t e r v i e w e d by l o c a l p r a c t i t i o n e r s to confirm t h e i r s u i t a b i l i t y . 

The Law S o c i e t y a r e a l s o c u r r e n t l y c o n s i d e r i n g the e x t e n s i o n of s p e c i a l i s t panels i n t o other areas of work such as planning, personal i n j u r y and medical negligence. 

## Merits Of S P E C I A L I S T Panels

3.7 
The main advantage of s p e c i a l i s t panels t o the p u b l i c i s to g i v e them an e a s i e r and more informed c h o i c e of p r a c t i t i o n e r s who they can be assured are s k i l l e d i n a p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d of law. 

At the same time, not every a r e a of law r e q u i r e s s p e c i a l i s t e x p e r t i s e . 

Care must be taken to ensure t h a t only those a r e a s of law which need t o be s p e c i a l i s m s are designated as such, and t h a t the c r i t e r i a f o r r e c o g n i t i o n a s a s p e c i a l i s t a r e high enough to ensure competence and maintain standards but no h i g h e r . The c r i t e r i a must not become unnecessary o b s t a c l e s which discourage p r a c t i t i o n e r s from becoming s p e c i a l i s t s , or which a r t i f i c i a l l y l i m i t the supply of l e g a l s e r v i c e s to the p u b l i c i n a p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d . 

Increasing the supply of s p e c i a l i s t s 
3.8 
The Government c o n s i d e r s t h a t the way t o ensure t h a t the e x p e r t i s e of p r a c t i t i o n e r s i s b e s t matched t o the p a r t i c u l a r demands of the work i n question, and t h a t the p u b l i c has the widest p o s s i b l e c h o i c e of competent p r a c t i t i o n e r s i n the v a r i o u s f i e l d s of law, i s f o r a r e a s of s p e c i a l i s t e x p e r t i s e to be developed, with s t a n d a r d s of education, t r a i n i n g , q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and conduct appropriate to each. 

I t may be t h a t some of t h e s e s p e c i a l i s m s w i l l not r e q u i r e the s e r v i c e s of lawyers. 

The f o l l o w i n g questions then a r i s e : 

( a ) 
w h i c h 
a r e a s 
o f work 
r e q u i r e 
s p e c i a l i s t 
e x p e r t i s e ; 
(b) what i s the appropriate l e v e l of 
education, 
q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and t r a i n i n g r e q u i r e d to be a 
s p e c i a l i s t i n any given area; 

( c ) 
who 
i s to provide the necessary 
education, 
q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and t r a i n i n g ; and 
(d) 
how 
are appropriate standards of conduct to 
be 
s e t f o r p r a c t i t i o n e r s 
and 
who 
i s t o 
monitor these standards. 
These questions are addressed i n paras 3.11 
to 
3.13 
below and i n Chapter 4. 

## Advertising Of S P E C I A L I S M S

3.9 
An important purpose of s p e c i a l i s m s i s to provide the 
p u b l i c w i t h more i n f o r m a t i o n to help them choose a 
p r a c t i t i o n e r appropriate f o r t h e i r needs. 
A c c r e d i t e d 
s p e c i a l i s t s 
s h o u l d 
t h e r e f o r e be 
a b l e t o a d v e r t i s e 
themselves as such to the general p u b l i c . 
The Bar and 
the 
Law 
S o c i e t y a l r e a d y operate 
a 
l i m i t e d 
form 
of 
a d v e r t i s i n g 
through 
l i s t i n g s 
i n t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l 
d i r e c t o r i e s ; and t h e Law S o c i e t y permits a l s o t h e c i r c u l a t i o n of l i s t s of members on, f o r i n s t a n c e the Mental Health Panel, t o i n t e r e s t e d o r g a n i s a t i o n s such as CABx, s o c i a l s e r v i c e s departments, p s y c h i a t r i c u n i t s and the c o u r t s . 

Further c o n s i d e r a t i o n should, however, be g i v e n by both i n d i v i d u a l p r a c t i t i o n e r s and t h e r e l e v a n t p r o f e s s i o n a l b o d i e s t o a l l o w i n g t h o s e p r a c t i t i o n e r s who q u a l i f y a s s p e c i a l i s t s ( s e e a l s o Chapter 13 below) t o a d v e r t i s e themselves a s such. T h i s does not mean t h a t n o n - s p e c i a l i s t s s h o u l d not be allowed t o a d v e r t i s e t h e i r s e r v i c e s ; merely t h a t only those who a r e recognised s p e c i a l i s t s i n a p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d should be able t o hold themselves out a s such t o p o t e n t i a l c l i e n t s . 

## Exclusive S P E C I A L I S M S

3.10 
The Government does not b e l i e v e t h a t p r a c t i c e i n an area which has been designated a s a s p e c i a l i s m should 

be 
r e s t r i c t e d t o t h o s e 
r e c o g n i s e d 
a s 
s p e c i a l i s t 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s alone. Such an approach could c r e a t e new e n t r y b a r r i e r s , put up c o s t s , d e p r i v e c l i e n t s of c h o i c e and p r o t e c t those w i t h i n the s p e c i a l i s m from c o m p e t i t i o n from those o u t s i d e i t . An e x c e p t i o n i s advocacy, where the Government b e l i e v e s t h a t the needs of t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f j u s t i c e r e q u i r e s p e c i a l a r r a n g e m e n t s t o be made. 

T h i s i s c o n s i d e r e d i n Chapter 5 below. 

## Recognition Of S P E C I A L I S M S

3.11 
The Government b e l i e v e s t h a t a formal mechanism should 
be 
e s t a b l i s h e d t o advise on the matters o u t l i n e d i n 
para 3.8. The Government b e l i e v e s a l s o t h a t , i n order 
to ensure t h a t the p u b l i c know t h a t r e c o g n i t i o n a s a 
s p e c i a l i s t 
p r a c t i t i o n e r h a s r e a l 
v a l u e , 
t h e 
r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r t h e e d u c a t i o n , t r a i n i n g and q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of recognised providers of s p e c i a l i s t s e r v i c e s should i n f u t u r e be approved by the Lord C h a n c e l l o r , a f t e r he h a s t a k e n a d v i c e from h i s Advisory Committee on Legal Education. The arrangements f o r codes of conduct a r e s e t out i n Chapter 4. 

The Government expects t h e r e w i l l i n f u t u r e be a v a r i e t y of p r o v i d e r s of such s p e c i a l i s t s e r v i c e s . 

## The Lord C H A N C E L L O R ' S Advisory Committee On Legal Education And Conduct

3.12 
The 
Lord C h a n c e l l o r ' s A d v i s o r y Committee on 
L e g a l 
Education ( t h e Advisory Committee) was s e t up i n 1971 
as a r e s u l t of recommendations i n the Report of the Committee on 
L e g a l E d u c a t i o n (Ormrod, Cm 
8595). I n 
o r d e r t h a t i t may c a r r y out the new f u n c t i o n s the Government now proposes f o r i t , the Advisory Committee s h o u l d be r e c o n s t i t u t e d as a v i g o r o u s and a c t i v e s t a n d i n g committee, d e a l i n g with both education and conduct, which would meet r e g u l a r l y . To accord w i t h i t s new r o l e t h i s Committee should i n f u t u r e be known as t h e Lord C h a n c e l l o r ' s A d v i s o r y Committee on L e g a l E d u c a t i o n and Conduct. 

The Committee's t e r m s o f r e f e r e n c e should be: 

( a ) 
To keep under review the education and t r a i n i n g of 
l a w y e r s a t t h e academic, v o c a t i o n a l and 
p o s t -
v o c a t i o n a l stages to ensure t h a t t h a t 
education 
and t r a i n i n g i s r e l e v a n t t o the needs of p r a c t i c e 
and to the e f f i c i e n t d e l i v e r y of l e g a l s e r v i c e s to 
t h e 
p u b l i c . 
(A p o s s i b l e framework 
f o r 
t h e 
academic and v o c a t i o n a l t r a i n i n g of lawyers i s s e t out a t Annex C, which the Advisory Committee would 
be i n v i t e d to c o n s i d e r a t an e a r l y s t a g e ) ; 
(b) 
To consider, whether on i t s 
own i n i t i a t i v e or when 
requested to do so by the Lord C h a n c e l l o r : 
( i ) 
what a r e a s of 
l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s r e q u i r e 
s p e c i a l i s t 
e x p e r t i s e and whether 
t h a t 
s p e c i a l i s t 
e x p e r t i s e n e e d s 
t o 
be 
provided by a f u l l y t r a i n e d lawyer; and 
(11) 
what the education, 
q u a l i f i c a t i o n s 
and 
t r a i n i n g 
o f 
s p e c i a l i s t s , 
both 
l e g a l 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s and o t h e r s , should be i n 
t h e 
v a r i o u s 
a r e a s 
d e s i g n a t e d 
a s 
r e q u i r i n g s p e c i a l i s t e x p e r t i s e ; 
( c ) 
To 
k e e p u n d e r 
r e v i e w , 
w h e t h e r 
on 
i t s 
own 
i n i t i a t i v e or when requested to do so by the Lord 
C h a n c e l l o r , 
the a c c r e d i t e d s p e c i a l i s m s and 
the 
education and t r a i n i n g requirements f o r these to ensure t h a t they continue to meet the needs of the 
p u b l i c 
f o r t h e 
e f f i c i e n t 
d e l i v e r y 
o f 
l e g a l 
s e r v i c e s ; and 
(d) 
To advise the Lord C h a n c e l l o r on the appropriate 
codes o f conduct 
which s h o u l d 
be 
f o l l o w e d 
by 
l a w y e r s and 
o t h e r 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s 
r e c o g n i s e d 
as 
s u i t a b l e t o undertake work i n t h e r e c o g n i s e d s p e c i a l i s m s . 

( I t i s envisaged t h a t a t l e a s t two separate codes of conduct w i l l be needed to cover: 
( i ) 
advice work; and 
( i i ) advocacy. 

T h i s l a s t a r e a i s c o n s i d e r e d f u r t h e r i n Chapter 
4.) 
The Advisory Committee should submit an annual r e p o r t covering a l l these areas t o the Lord C h a n c e l l o r . The annual r e p o r t would be l a i d before Parliament. 

The C o m m i t t e e m i g h t a l s o s u b m i t p r o p o s a l s a n d recommendations to the Bar or the Law S o c i e t y or to o t h e r p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies, where i t c o n s i d e r s t h i s appropriate or where such bodies ask f o r i t s a d v i c e . 

3.13 
F i n a l d e c i s i o n s on whether a p a r t i c u l a r s p e c i a l i s t area 
of e x p e r t i s e should be recognised as such and on what 
standards of education and t r a i n i n g a r e appropriate i n 
e a c h 
c a s e 
s h o u l d 
r e s t 
w i t h t h e L o r d 
C h a n c e l l o r , 
f o l l o w i n g 
a d v i c e from the A d v i s o r y Committee. 
I n 
a d d i t i o n , 
b e f o r e 
r e c o g n i s i n g a n y 
p a r t i c u l a r 
p r o f e s s i o n a l body as competent t o a u t h o r i s e i n d i v i d u a l 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s as s p e c i a l i s t s i n a p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d , the 
Lord C h a n c e l l o r would have t o be s a t i s f i e d 
t h a t the 
p r o f e s s i o n a l body could: 
( a ) 
p r o v i d e t h e a p p r o p r i a t e e d u c a t i o n and t r a i n i n g , e i t h e r i t s e l f or, on a repayment b a s i s , w i t h the a s s i s t a n c e of a p p r o p r i a t e educational establishments; and 
(b) 
provide s u f f i c i e n t c o n t r o l over i t s members t o e n s u r e t h a t s a t i s f a c t o r y s t a n d a r d s of conduct and b e h a v i o u r a r e m a i n t a i n e d and e n f o r c e d 
( T h i s i s c o n s i d e r e d f u r t h e r i n Chapter 4 ) . 

I t would o f c o u r s e be f o r t h e v a r i o u s i n t e r e s t e d p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies to decide what they wished t o o f f e r by way of education, t r a i n i n g and d i s c i p l i n e i n the l i g h t of the standards s e t by the Lord C h a n c e l l o r f o r the v a r i o u s s p e c i a l i s m s . 

3.14 
Under t h e p r o p o s a l s 
o u t l i n e d above, t h e A d v i s o r y 
Committee w i l l i n f u t u r e p l a y an important 
r o l e , both 
i n ensuring the supply of l e g a l s e r v i c e s of q u a l i t y t o the p u b l i c and i n maintaining the standards of conduct 
expected of p r a c t i t i o n e r s . The Government b e l i e v e s t h a t 
t h e 
c o m p o s i t i o n 
o f t h e A d v i s o r y Committee 
s h o u l d 
r e f l e c t t h i s new r o l e by c o n t a i n i n g a m a j o r i t y of l a y 
members. Accordingly the Government proposes t h a t the 
new Advisory Committee should c o n s i s t of 15 members, a l l appointed by the Lord C h a n c e l l o r and comprising:-

( a ) 
a chairman, who should be a judge; 
(b) 
2 b a r r i s t e r s appointed a f t e r c o n s u l t a t i o n 
w i t h the 
General Council of the Bar; 
( c ) 
2 s o l i c i t o r s appointed a f t e r c o n s u l t a t i o n 
w i t h the 
C o u n c i l of the Law S o c i e t y ; 
(d) 
2 academic r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s - a p p o i n t e d 
a f t e r 
c o n s u l t a t i o n 
w i t h 
t h o s e 
r e p r e s e n t i n g 
t h e 
u n i v e r s i t y and p o l y t e c h n i c law s c h o o l s ; and 
( e ) 
8 
l a y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s a p p o i n t e d 
a f t e r 
wide 
c o n s u l t a t i o n . 
The Government proposes 
t h a t the s e c r e t a r i a t of 
the 
3.15 
A d v i s o r y Committee should be provided 
by 
the 
Lord 
C h a n c e l l o r ' s Department. 

## Summary

The Government would welcome views on the proposals i n 
3.16 
t h i s chapter, i n p a r t i c u l a r on: 
( a ) 
the proposed terms of r e f e r e n c e of the Advisory 
Committee; 
(b) 
the proposed membership of the Advisory Committee; 
and 
( c ) 
t h e 
s u g g e s t i o n s 
f o r academic 
and 
v o c a t i o n a l 
t r a i n i n g s e t out a t Annex C. 
4.1 
The Government b e l i e v e s t h a t i t should be the duty of 
any p r o f e s s i o n a l body to ensure t h a t the standards of 
competence and 
p r o f e s s i o n a l conduct among persons 
who 
p r a c t i s e i n t h a t p r o f e s s i o n 
are 
s u f f i c i e n t 
to 
secure 
adequate p r o t e c t i o n f o r c l i e n t s , and t h a t the s e r v i c e s p r o v i d e d 
by 
s u c h 
p e r s o n s 
a r e 
p r o v i d e d 
b o t h 
economically and 
e f f i c i e n t l y . 
4.2 
T h i s means t h a t such a p r o f e s s i o n a l body must ensure 
t h a t : -
( a ) 
p r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s are o f f e r e d e f f i c i e n t l y 
and 
w i t h 
t h e 
r e q u i r e d 
d e g r e e 
o f 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
e x p e r t i s e ; 
(b) 
any 
complaints about 
s e r v i c e s a r e 
i n v e s t i g a t e d 
promptly, thoroughly and i m p a r t i a l l y ; 
( c ) 
matters are put r i g h t as q u i c k l y as p o s s i b l e with, 
where necessary, 
appropriate recompense; 
(d) 
where a p r o f e s s i o n a l man 
or woman f a i l s to meet 
the 
r e q u i r e d 
s t a n d a r d s , 
a p p r o p r i a t e 
a c t i o n 
i s 
taken; and 
( e ) 
w h e r e 
t h e 
f a i l u r e 
amounts 
t o 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
misconduct, appropriate s a n c t i o n s are imposed, i f n e c e s s a r y a m o u n t i n g t o e x p u l s i o n from t h e 

p r o f e s s i o n . 
4.3 
The 
Government b e l i e v e s 
t h a t those who 
provide 
the 
p u b l i c with l e g a l s e r v i c e s must do 
so i n a competent 
and p r o f e s s i o n a l manner. I t should t h e r e f o r e be one 
of 
t h e f u n c t i o n s of the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies to ensure t h i s happens. 

## (A) Standards Of Conduct Present Arrangements

4.4 
At p r e s e n t the Bar and 
the Law 
S o c i e t y provide 
f o r 
standards of conduct i n d i f f e r e n t ways:-

## (A) The Bar

The Bar has a w r i t t e n Code of Conduct. L a s t y e a r i t was thoroughly r e v i s e d . The new v e r s i o n i s due to come i n t o f o r c e on 
1 February 1989. 

I t s e t s out the g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s which apply to a l l b a r r i s t e r s , whether i n independent p r a c t i c e or i n employment, i n c l u d i n g t h e i r g e n e r a l d u t i e s , t h e r u l e s on a c c e p t a n c e o f i n s t r u c t i o n s and on withdrawal from a case, the duty of the b a r r i s t e r to the c l i e n t , the way a case should be conducted both i n and out of court, and what i s to happen when a c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t a r i s e s . 

The Law S o c i e t y 
(b) 
The Law S o c i e t y p u b l i s h e s P r a c t i c e Rules. The c u r r e n t 

4.6 
r u l e s are the 1988 
P r a c t i c e Rules which govern, f o r example, o b t a i n i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s , a c c o u n t i n g f o r 

commissions 
and 
t h e 
s u p e r v i s i o n of 
a 
s o l i c i t o r ' s 
o f f i c e ; and when a s o l i c i t o r may 
a c t f o r both vendor 
and 
p u r c h a s e r . 
R e f e r r a l s and 
i n t r o d u c t i o n s 
and 
p u b l i c i t y are a l s o touched on b r i e f l y i n the Rules but 
are d e a l t with i n more d e t a i l i n separate codes. 
The 
R u l e s do 
not, however, provide 
f o r matters 
of good 
p r a c t i c e such as proper communication with the 
c l i e n t 
and the avoidance of delay. 
4.7 
The 
Law 
S o c i e t y 
p u b l i s h e s 
a g u i d e 
c a l l e d 
"The 
P r o f e s s i o n a l Conduct of S o l i c i t o r s " to deal with these 
matters of p r a c t i c e . T h i s contains d e t a i l e d statements 
of p r i n c i p l e together with an i n d i c a t i o n of best or acceptable p r a c t i c e . Although such an explanation of these p r i n c i p l e s i s obviously h e l p f u l , i t remains odd t h a t what i s intended to l e a d to sound p r a c t i c e does not appear i n the P r a c t i c e Rules, e s p e c i a l l y as any breach of these p r i n c i p l e s might put s o l i c i t o r s a t r i s k of a l l e g a t i o n s of inadequate p r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s or p r o f e s s i o n a l misconduct. 

## Codes Of P R O F E S S I O N A L Conduct And Standards

4.8 
The Government b e l i e v e s 
t h e r e a r e c e r t a i n a r e a s of 
p r a c t i c e which a r e of 
such 
fundamental 
importance 
t h a t : -
( a ) 
there should be c l e a r w r i t t e n 
statements 
of the 
p r a c t i c e which must be followed; 
(b) 
these w r i t t e n 
statements 
should be s e t out i n a 
way which i s e a s i l y a c c e s s i b l e both to lawyers and 
t h e i r c l i e n t s ; and 
( c ) 
f a i l u r e to observe these p r a c t i c e r u l e s should be 
a cause f o r d i s c i p l i n a r y proceedings. 
4.9 
Recommendations on these l i n e s were made by Benson i n 
1979. The 
C i v i l J u s t i c e Review published i n June 
1988 
(Cm 394) a l s o recommended (R 1 8 ( 1 ) ) t h a t both the Bar 
and 
t h e 
Law 
S o c i e t y 
should 
i s s u e 
s p e c i f i c 
w r i t t e n 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
standards r e l a t i n g to the conduct of a l l 
p r i n c i p a l types of l i t i g a t i o n . 
4.10 
The Law S o c i e t y published w r i t t e n standards i n 1985 to 
c o v e r 
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y 
f o r 
t h e 
c l i e n t ' s 
c a s e , 
communication with the c l i e n t and information on c o s t s . 
They appear 
a s 
an appendix 
i n "The 
P r o f e s s i o n a l 
Conduct of S o l i c i t o r s " . The i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e s e standards s t a t e s t h a t : -
"They a r e g u i d e l i n e s . They w i l l be h e l p f u l i n a l l c a s e s . I t w i l l be f o r the s o l i c i t o r t o judge when a standard can be ignored, but a l s o f o r him to j u s t i f y h i s d e c i s i o n s h o u l d t h e c l i e n t f e e l aggrieved." 
The Government i s not c o n v i n c e d t h a t e i t h e r t h i s statement or the p o s i t i o n i n g of the standards i n the Guide adequately u n d e r l i n e s t h e i r importance. 

The Bar has not y e t introduced any standards of t h i s kind, although i t i s about t o do so. 

## The Government'S Proposals

4.11 
The Government now t h e r e f o r e proposes t h a t t h e r e should 
i n 
f u t u r e be w r i t t e n codes which 
s p e c i f i c a l l y s e t 
p r o f e s s i o n a l standards. The Government envisages t h a t 
two separate p r o f e s s i o n a l codes w i l l be necessary. One 
w i l l 
d e a l w i t h t h e p r o v i s i o n of l e g a l 
a d v i c e and 
a s s i s t a n c e 
g e n e r a l l y . The o t h e r 
w i l l 
c o v e r t h e 
p a r t i c u l a r i s s u e s which are 
connected with the handling 
of b r i e f s and the general conduct of c a s e s i n court, 
s i n c e i n advocacy work the maintenance of standards both of s k i l l and i n t e g r i t y has much t o do with the independence of the advocate, h i s r e g u l a r a p p l i c a t i o n to h i s work i n the c o u r t s , and with h i s need t o s a t i s f y the requirements of a c l i e n t able t o make an informed choice of advocate. The areas t o be covered a r e s e t out i n broad terms i n paras 4.14 and 4.15 below. The Lord C h a n c e l l o r w i l l look f o r advice on what should be the p r i n c i p l e s embodied i n these codes from h i s Advisory Committee on L e g a l E d u c a t i o n and Conduct, whose membership and terms of r e f e r e n c e w i l l be broadened so a s t o encompass t h i s f u n c t i o n 
( s e e C h a p t e r 3, p a r a s 3.12-3.15 of t h i s Green P a p e r ) . 

P r o f e s s i o n a l b o d i e s whose members w i s h t o o f f e r a d v i s o r y and advocacy s e r v i c e s w i l l be r e q u i r e d t o submit t h e i r proposed codes of conduct f o r the endorsement of the Advisory Committee whose r o l e i t w i l l be to ensure t h a t such codes of conduct embody the approved p r i n c i p l e s . 

4.12 
The Government proposes t h a t the Lord C h a n c e l l o r should 
p r e s c r i b e by s t a t u t o r y instrument the p r i n c i p l e s which 
must be embodied i n these codes so a s to ensure t h a t 
they have Parliamentary approval. The Government i s not prepared to leave i t to the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n to s e t t l e 
the p r i n c i p l e s which these codes should adopt because they 
w i l l be of such g r e a t importance both to the 
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of j u s t i c e and to the p u b l i c . Moreover, 
i n 
t h e f u t u r e t h e 
l e g a l 
p r o f e s s i o n i s l i k e l y 
t o 
continue t o c o n t a i n a number of d i f f e r e n t p r o f e s s i o n a l 
bodies; and i t i s important t h a t they should a l l be 
s u b j e c t to minimum p r o f e s s i o n a l standards. 
4.13 
A code 
s e t t i n g out the approved 
g e n e r a l 
p r i n c i p l e s 
would 
be a r e q u i r e m e n t f o r any 
p r o f e s s i o n whose 
members o f f e r e d 
l e g a l advice f o r reward; and a code 
d e a l i n g s i m i l a r l y with the conduct of c a s e s i n c o u r t would 
be 
a r e q u i r e m e n t f o r a l l a d v o c a t e s ( s e e 
Chapter 5 below). The 
r e l e v a n t 
p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies 
would be expected to enforce the codes and to s a t i s f y 
t h e 
A d v i s o r y Committee 
t h a t 
t h e y had 
a d e q u a t e 
arrangements i n p l a c e f o r t h i s purpose. 
F a i l u r e to 
comply w i t h any requirement of the codes would render a p r a c t i t i o n e r l i a b l e to a range of s a n c t i o n s i n c l u d i n g a 
reduction i n fees a f t e r proceedings conducted by the 
appropriate p r o f e s s i o n a l body. I n a d d i t i o n a l l c o u r t s 
should have power to r e q u i r e any advocate to pay 
p e r s o n a l l y c o s t s i n c u r r e d by any party to an a c t i o n , i f the court judged t h i s appropriate. 

Code 1 P r o v i s i o n of l e g a l advice and a s s i s t a n c e 
4.14 
A c l i e n t seeking a d v i c e and a s s i s t a n c e should be given f u l l and p r o p e r a d v i c e a b o u t h i s c a s e . 

P o o r communication seems to be the cause of most complaints about s o l i c i t o r s . 

T h i s code w i l l t h e r e f o r e need to provide t h a t : -

(a) 
the 
c l i e n t 
i s given 
a 
f u l l 
explanation 
of 
the 
i s s u e s and what needs to be done; 
(b) 
t h e 
c l i e n t 
i s k e p t 
f u l l y 
informed about 
the 
progress of h i s case; 
( c ) 
the c l i e n t i s given a proper explanation 
of 
the 
f e e s 
and 
c o s t s 
l i k e l y 
t o 
be 
i n c u r r e d : 
t h i s 
explanation should be supplied both o r a l l y and i n 
w r i t i n g ; 
(d) 
the c l i e n t understands who 
i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the 
o v e r a l l s u p e r v i s i o n and the day to day handling 
of 
h i s case; and 
(e) 
t h e 
p r a c t i t i o n e r c o n d u c t s 
t h e 
c a s e 
i n 
an 
e f f i c i e n t manner. 
Code 2 Advocacy and a n c i l l a r y matters 
4.15 
T h i s code w i l l need to ensure t h a t : -

(a) 
incoming work i s managed i n chambers or o f f i c e s i n 
s u c h 
a way 
t h a t 
t h e r e 
i s adequate 
p r e - t r i a l 
preparation of c a s e s ; and t h a t i n p a r t i c u l a r : -
( i ) 
e a r l y c o n f e r e n c e s 
a r e a r r a n g e d when 
necessary; 
(11) 
i n c r i m i n a l c a s e s 
t h e r e 
i s c a r e f u l 
advice about the intended plea, i n order 
to avoid changes of p l e a a t the t r i a l so 
f a r as p o s s i b l e ; 
( i l l ) 
where p o s s i b l e , i s s u e s i n d i s p u t e a r e 
i d e n t i f i e d before 
t r i a l ; and 
( i v ) 
cases are 
properly prepared f o r court; 
(b) 
c a s e s i n court a r e conducted competently and i n 
the l i g h t of c l e a r e t h i c a l standards so t h a t : -
( i ) 
advocates a r e aware of the paramountcy of 
t h e i r duty to the court, t h e i r d u t i e s to 
the 
c l i e n t , to witnesses and to t h i r d p a r t i e s ; 
and 
( i i ) a d v o c a t e s do not waste t h e time o f t h e 
court; 
and 
( c ) 
defence and p r o s e c u t i o n 
advocates a r e aware of 
t h e i r s p e c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n c r i m i n a l c a s e s ; 
i n 
p a r t i c u l a r t h a t 
a d v o c a t e s who 
p r o v i d e 
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n 
the 
more s e r i o u s c a s e s which a r e 
t r i e d i n 
the 
Crown Court should not, i n 
any given 
case, have been involved a l s o i n 
the 
i n v e s t i g a t i o n 
of the evidence. 

## (B) Complaints And D I S C I P L I N E Present Arrangements

(a) 
The 
Bar 
4.16 
A b a r r i s t e r 
i s immune from an a c t i o n f o r 
negligence 
brought by 
a 
c l i e n t 
i n r e s p e c t of 
the conduct 
and 
management of a case i n court (see Chapter 6 below). 
He 
or 
she 
i s not, however, immune from a c t i o n s 
f o r 
negligence 
i n other s i t u a t i o n s . Indeed a l l p r a c t i s i n g 
b a r r i s t e r s are required to have p r o f e s s i o n a l indemnity 
i n s u r a n c e 
of £250,000 f o r each and 
every 
c l a i m . 
A 
b a r r i s t e r 
i s a l s o s u b j e c t to p r o f e s s i o n a l 
d i s c i p l i n e 
i n r e s p e c t of the conduct of a case whether i n or out 
of court. 
4.17 
Complaints a g a i n s t b a r r i s t e r s come l a r g e l y from members 
of 
t h e 
p u b l i c , 
a l t h o u g h some come a l s o from 
the 
j u d i c i a r y 
o r 
m a g i s t r a c y , 
c o u r t 
o f f i c i a l s , 
o t h e r 
b a r r i s t e r s and 
s o l i c i t o r s . 
The 
present machinery 
f o r 
d e a l i n g with complaints i s s e t out i n Annex D, P a r t 1. 
(b) 
The Law 
S o c i e t y 
4.18 
A l l s o l i c i t o r s i n p r a c t i c e are required to be covered 
by 
p r o f e s s i o n a l i n d e m n i t y 
i n s u r a n c e 
a g a i n s t 
l o s s 
a r i s i n g from 
c i v i l 
l i a b i l i t y c l a i m s . I n a d d i t i o n 
the 
Law S o c i e t y administers a fund to provide compensation i n cases of dishonesty by s o l i c i t o r s or t h e i r employers 
or of f a i l u r e by a s o l i c i t o r to account f o r any money 
i n connection 
with any t r u s t of which he or she i s or 
was 
a t r u s t e e . These arrangements go wider than those 
covering 
b a r r i s t e r s , 
but 
b a r r i s t e r s do 
not need such 
w i d e 
p r o t e c t i o n 
b e c a u s e 
t h e y 
do 
n o t 
c a r r y 
out 
t r a n s a c t i o n s on behalf of c l i e n t s or handle c l i e n t s  י
money. 
4.19 
Complaints 
a g a i n s t 
s o l i c i t o r s 
may 
r a i s e 
i s s u e s 
of 
conduct or inadequate p r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s - "shoddy 
work." Such complaints must be made to the 
S o l i c i t o r s ' 
C o m p l a i n t s Bureau where most 
w i l l 
be 
s e t t l e d . 
A 
m i n o r i t y 
of complaints 
w i l l , however, be 
considered 
a l s o by the S o l i c i t o r s ' 
D i s c i p l i n a r y T r i b u n a l , the High Court or the Lay Observer. The d e t a i l s of these arrangements are s e t out i n Annex D, P a r t 2. 

C r i t i c i s m of e x i s t i n g procedures: the Law S o c i e t y 

4.20 
C r i t i c i s m 
of 
t h e c o m p l a i n t s 
p r o c e d u r e s 
has 
been 
d i r e c t e d 
l a r g e l y 
a t t h e 
Law 
S o c i e t y . I t i s not 
s u r p r i s i n g 
t h a t 
t h e r e a r e more c o m p l a i n t s 
about 
s o l i c i t o r s than b a r r i s t e r s . There a r e ten times as many s o l i c i t o r s i n p r a c t i c e . Furthermore, 
s o l i c i t o r s have a 
more d i r e c t 
and 
longer term 
involvement 
w i t h 
t h e i r 
c l i e n t s . I n 1987 the S o l i c i t o r s Complaints Bureau 
(SCB) 
r e c e i v e d i n excess of 17,800 complaints, w h i l e the Bar 
only r e c e i v e d perhaps 1% of t h a t number. 
4.21 
The SCB was s e t up i n 1986. P r e v i o u s l y complaints had 
been 
h a n d l e d 
by 
t h e 
Law 
S o c i e t y ' s 
P r o f e s s i o n a l 
Purposes Department; and t h i s arrangement had a t t r a c t e d 
c r i t i c i s m on the ground t h a t i t could not be shown to 
be s u f f i c i e n t l y i m p a r t i a l . Both the Bar and the Law S o c i e t y c o m b i n e t h e r o l e s o f s u p e r v i s i o n and p r o f e s s i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . I t i s obviously e a s i e r to d e m o n s t r a t e t h e i n d e p e n d e n c e and i m p a r t i a l i t y necessary f o r handling d i s c i p l i n a r y c a s e s when the two r o l e s are s p l i t ( a s f o r example i s the case with the G e n e r a l M e d i c a l C o u n c i l and t h e B r i t i s h M e d i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n ) . The Law S o c i e t y appear t o have hoped t h a t , by s e t t i n g up t h e SCB 
i n a s e p a r a t e e s t a b l i s h m e n t , w i t h a lay-dominated I n v e s t i g a t i o n Committee t o monitor i t s performance, t h e y would, notwithstanding t h a t they fund the SCB, enable i t to be regarded as independent of the Law S o c i e t y . I t i s not c l e a r t h a t they have as y e t been s u c c e s s f u l i n t h i s . 

## Problems With The Law S O C I E T Y ' S Present Arrangements

4.22 
The Government considers t h a t problems l i e p a r t i c u l a r l y 
i n the following a r e a s : 
(a) 
The d e f i n i t i o n 
of shoddy work 
4.23 
The Law S o c i e t y ' s 
i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f c o m p l a i n t s was 
confined t o matters of conduct u n t i l the beginning of 
1987, but i t may now a l s o , under powers granted by 
the 
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n 
o f J u s t i c e A c t 1985, i n v e s t i g a t e 
c o m p l a i n t s about inadequate p r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s , 
w h i c h a r e o f t e n 
d e s c r i b e d a s "shoddy work". The 
Chairman of the Adjudication Committee i n the f i r s t 
r e p o r t of the SCB e x p l a i n e d 
t h a t h i s committee had 
been i n d i f f i c u l t y i n i d e n t i f y i n g what the expression 
"shoddy work" might cover. The Government b e l i e v e s the 
d i f f i c u l t y does not a r i s e only because t h i s i s 
a new 
j u r i s d i c t i o n , 
but a l s o b e c a u s e i t i s a t 
p r e s e n t 
d i f f i c u l t 
t o i d e n t i f y what 
p r e c i s e 
s t a n d a r d s 
s o l i c i t o r s a r e e x p e c t e d t o meet. The Government suggests 
t h a t the adoption of c l e a r 
standards 
i n a 
w r i t t e n code of conduct 
w i l l make the t a s k of the 
Adjudication Committee e a s i e r . 

## (B) Negligence Cases

4.24 
The SCB i s u n w i l l i n g to take a c t i o n where i t appears 
t h a t the complaint r a i s e s a question of negligence as 
opposed to p r o f e s s i o n a l misconduct. I t e x p l a i n s the 
two 
expressions as f o l l o w s : -
(1) 
" N e g l i g e n c e i s a 
c i v i l
 
, o f f e n c e ' 
where t h e 
s o l i c i t o r has been i n a d v e r t e n t l y incompetent. I n 
negligence the s o l i c i t o r i s 
i n 
breach of h i s 
duty 
of c a r e to the c l i e n t and as a consequence the 
c l i e n t has s u f f e r e d l o s s i n 
money terms." 
( i i ) " P r o f e s s i o n a l m i s c o n d u c t i s [ b r o a d l y ] 
w i l f u l misbehaviour by a s o l i c i t o r which may i n v o l v e d i s r e g a r d i n g c e r t a i n r u l e s of conduct or may be of a t y p e t h a t c o u l d b r i n g the p r o f e s s i o n i n t o d i s r e p u t e i n d e a l i n g s with a c l i e n t . I t may now i n c l u d e incompetence f a l l i n g s h o r t of negligence." 

4.25 
The SCB e x p l a i n s t h a t i t cannot a c t i n negligence c a s e s 
because "negligence i s a matter of law, which must be 
s e t t l e d i n the 
l a s t 
r e s o r t by the c o u r t s . " I n s t e a d , 
when the SCB i d e n t i f i e s a p o s s i b l e negligence case, i t 
sends 
the complainant 
to a 
s o l i c i t o r on one 
of i t s 
negligence panels. 
4.26 
I n h i s 1987 report (Cm 626) the Lay Observer comments 
a t para 47:-
"Even i f a s o l i c i t o r might have been negligent, would i t not be appropriate i n some c a s e s to deal with the complaint under the shoddy work powers r a t h e r than by proceedings f o r negligence, f o r example where a reduction i n the b i l l i s l i k e l y to be the appropriate remedy." 
The Government agrees with t h i s and a l s o with the Lay Observer's comment elsewhere i n h i s report t h a t the Law S o c i e t y needs to consider how f a r the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of complaints i s hampered by s o l i c i t o r s who r e f u s e to co-operate on the grounds t h a t t h i s might p r e j u d i c e t h e i r c a s e i n p r o c e e d i n g s . 

Such p r e j u d i c e i s not i n e v i t a b l e . I n some c a s e s , a f i n d i n g of shoddy work w i l l r e s u l t i n f i n a n c i a l recompense and settlement. I n o t h e r s the f i n d i n g w i l l help to demonstrate a poor performance but w i l l not n e c e s s a r i l y imply t h a t the performance was caused by negligence. The p o s s i b i l i t y of court proceedings should not be used as an excuse to prevent or d e l a y making r i g h t what has gone wrong, e s p e c i a l l y when the damage i s p e r f e c t l y c l e a r . 

## (C) Confusion Of Choice

4.27 
A complaint 
may 
r a i s e 
i s s u e s besides shoddy work or 
negligence, where there are s e v e r a l ways to take 
the 
i s s u e 
forward. 
For example, i n some c a s e s where i t 
appears t h a t the s o l i c i t o r ' s f e e s are too high, i t i s 
p o s s i b l e t o apply 
e i t h e r t o the Law 
S o c i e t y f o r a 
remuneration c e r t i f i c a t e or to the Court f o r t a x a t i o n . The Government agrees with the Lay Observer t h a t the 
Law S o c i e t y needs to make more e f f o r t to e x p l a i n to the 
p u b l i c 
t h e 
n a t u r e 
of 
i t s v a r i o u s powers and 
the 
r e l a t i o n s h i p between them. 

## (D) Delay

4.28 
The SCB admits t h a t i t s handling of complaints i s often 
s u b j e c t to delay. This may 
be due p a r t l y to i t s high 
workload and p a r t l y to s o l i c i t o r s f a i l i n g to r e p l y to 
t h e 
B u r e a u ' s 
l e t t e r s . 
The 
a v e r a g e 
shoddy work 
complaint 
a t present takes s i x months to work through 
the system. 
4.29 
The Government expects the Law S o c i e t y to take measures 
t o c u t down the number of c a s e s which need to 
go 
t h r o u g h 
t h e 
f u l l 
SCB 
p r o c e d u r e . 
A 
v o l u n t a r y 
a r b i t r a t i o n procedure 
f o r use 
i n n e g l i g e n c e 
c a s e s 
a l r e a d y e x i s t s , but i t i s r a r e l y used. Attempts to r e a c h a s e t t l e m e n t i n c a s e s where t h e c l i e n t i s concerned p r i n c i p a l l y to get the work done have been more s u c c e s s f u l . The Government would l i k e to see the Law S o c i e t y e n c o u r a g e t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f l o c a l c o n c i l i a t i o n schemes which could cover a l l complaints. There a r e 
127 
l o c a l law s o c i e t i e s . 

The Government b e l i e v e s there i s scope f o r them t o p l a y a more a c t i v e r o l e i n s e t t l i n g disputes between aggrieved c l i e n t s and s o l i c i t o r s . 

## Legal S E R V I C E S Ombudsman

The SCB I n v e s t i g a t i o n Committee hopes t h a t i t s l a y element and i t s independence h e l p t o r e d u c e t h e workload of the Lay Observer, but i t seems c l e a r t h a t the SCB has not y e t developed machinery f o r d e a l i n g with complaints which achieves p u b l i c confidence. The Lay Observer, as explained above, has powers t o examine the way complaints a r e handled but not t o re-examine the complaint. The Government b e l i e v e s , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t t h e L a y O b s e r v e r ' s powers a r e i n a d e q u a t e . The Government c o n s i d e r s t h a t the Lay Observer i s hampered i n h i s work by having l i m i t e d powers t o take c a s e s to the S o l i c i t o r s ' 
D i s c i p l i n a r y T r i b u n a l , no powers of r e f e r r a l to the SCB, and no powers to r e i n v e s t i g a t e the case or to award compensation. 

F i n a l l y i t i s anomalous t h a t there i s no e q u i v a l e n t o f f i c e holder to review the complaints procedure of the Bar. 

A c c o r d i n g l y t h e Government proposes t o a b o l i s h t h e o f f i c e of Lay Observer. Instead, the Lord C h a n c e l l o r w i l l appoint a Legal S e r v i c e s Ombudsman, who w i l l have power t o : -
(a) 
examine a l l e g a t i o n s about the way complaints about 

b a r r i s t e r s , 
s o l i c i t o r s o r any o t h e r new 
l e g a l 
p r o f e s s i o n a l s , who may e s t a b l i s h themselves i n the 
f u t u r e , 
h a v e b e e n 
h a n d l e d by t h e r e l e v a n t 
p r o f e s s i o n a l body; 
(b) 
r e i n v e s t i g a t e 
c a s e s where he c o n s i d e r s 
i t 
necessary; 
( c ) 
r e f e r c a s e s back t o any body which 
o r i g i n a l l y 
i n v e s t i g a t e d the 
complaint or t o any d i s c i p l i n a r y 
t r i b u n a l 
w h i c h 
h a s power t o c o n s i d e r t h e 
complaint ( t h i s would be the 
normal course i n the 
case of d e c i s i o n s of the High Court i n r e s p e c t of s o l i c i t o r s ' conduct or d e c i s i o n s of the V i s i t o r s 
(who are judges of the High Court: see para 3 of Annex D) i n r e s p e c t of b a r r i s t e r s ' conduct); 

(d) 
recommend 
t h e payment 
of compensation 
by 
the 
p r o f e s s i o n a l body concerned; 
( e ) 
recommend 
c h a n g e s 
o r 
i m p r o v e m e n t s 
t o 
t h e 
complaints procedures of the Bar, the Law 
S o c i e t y 
or any other r e l e v a n t supervisory body; and 
( f ) 
p u b l i c i s e h i s d e c i s i o n s . 

## Summary Of Proposals

4.32 
( a ) 
The 
Government intends 
to p r e s c r i b e , 
by 
way 
of 
s t a t u t o r y 
i n s t r u m e n t , 
c l e a r 
p r i n c i p l e s 
and 
standards, 
f o r embodiment i n two codes of conduct 
to be adopted by p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies, 
covering:-
( i ) 
the p r o v i s i o n of l e g a l advice and a s s i s t a n c e ; 
and 
( i i ) the preparation of cases and t h e i r conduct i n 
court. 
F a i l u r e to observe any requirement of the p r i n c i p l e s and standards s e t out i n these codes would be a cause f o r d i s c i p l i n a r y proceedings. 

(b) 
The 
Government b e l i e v e s 
t h a t each 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
body should demonstrate t h a t i t has a 
s u p e r v i s o r y 
body to i n v e s t i g a t e complaints which can be shown 
t o 
be 
both 
i m p a r t i a l 
and 
independent 
of 
the 
p r o f e s s i o n ' s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l body. 
( c ) 
The Government intends t o r e p l a c e the Lay Observer 
by a L e g a l 
S e r v i c e s Ombudsman who would have 
g r e a t e r 
p o w e r s t o examine t h e h a n d l i n g 
o f 
complaints by the Bar, the Law S o c i e t y and any other l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n a l body. 

## Introduction

5.1 
A r i g h t of audience e n t i t l e s a person to address a 
c o u r t of law on b e h a l f of another. I n England 
and 
Wales, r e s t r i c t i o n s a r e a t present placed, e i t h e r 
by 
s t a t u t e or by usage regulated by the judges, on r i g h t s 
of audience i n a l l 
c o u r t s of law. The Government wishes 
t o 
e x a m i n e 
i n t h i s c h a p t e r whether 
t h e 
c u r r e n t 
r e s t r i c t i o n s on r i g h t s of audience before the c o u r t s a r e 
compatible w i t h the key 
p r i n c i p l e s 
o u t l i n e d i n 
Chapter 1, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the l i g h t of the matters d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter 3. 
5.2 
A summary of 
r i g h t s 
of audience i n the c o u r t s of 
England and Wales i s a t Annex E. 
The case f o r r e s t r i c t i n g r i g h t s of audience 

5.3 
Under 
an 
a d v e r s a r i a l 
s y s t e m 
s u c h 
a s 
o u r s , 
t h e 
p r e s e n t a t i o n 
o f 
b o t h 
t h e 
f a c t s 
and 
t h e 
l e g a l 
a u t h o r i t i e s 
on which 
t h e judge's d e c i s i o n 
w i l l 
be 
b a s e d 
i s t h e 
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y 
o f 
t h e 
a d v o c a t e s 
r e p r e s e n t i n g the p a r t i e s concerned. 
Judges 
i n t h i s 
country work l a r g e l y without l e g a l support, and t h e i r judgments are prepared e n t i r e l y by themselves with no a s s i s t a n c e , so f a r as law i s concerned, except the r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of the p a r t i e s . 

They t h e r e f o r e need to be able to r e l y on the s t r e n g t h and adequacy of the r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of the advocates appearing before them. 

An i n e x p e r i e n c e d or incompetent advocate who cannot present a case properly i s not only u n l i k e l y to be able to do j u s t i c e to h i s or her c l i e n t ' s case, but i s a l s o l i k e l y t o waste the time of the court and may by h i s f a i l u r e b r i n g about i n j u s t i c e . 

The ensuing delay, a d d i t i o n a l expense and inconvenience can a f f e c t not only the case i n question but a l s o other c a s e s w a i t i n g t h e i r t u r n to be heard; and indeed the s t a t e of the law g e n e r a l l y . 

I t 
i s not 
o n l y an advocate's competence which i s 
5.4 
important here; 
i t i s a l s o the standards of i n t e g r i t y 
and e t h i c a l p r a c t i c e required of advocates which have 
developed over many y e a r s t o ensure t h a t the q u a l i t y of 
j u s t i c e i s maintained. 
Judges need to be able to 
t r u s t the word of the advocates appearing before them and to r e l y on them not to mislead the c o u r t ; otherwise 
proof of every matter would be required, l e a d i n g to 
unnecessary delay and inconvenience f o r a l l concerned. 
I t 
i s a l s o important 
to r e c o g n i s e t h a t judges give 
5.5 
judgments w i t h reasons which 
can be used 
i n o t h e r 
c a s e s . 
Because of the d o c t r i n e of j u d i c i a l precedent 
(under which d e c i s i o n s of the higher c o u r t s on matters 
of law a r e t r e a t e d as binding on the lower 
c o u r t s ) , 
such judgments, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the higher c o u r t s , play 
a v i t a l r o l e i n the development of E n g l i s h law. 
I t i s 
f o r t h i s reason t h a t the judges look to the advocates 
appearing before them to c i t e a l l r e l e v a n t a u t h o r i t i e s t o the c o u r t , whether or not these a u t h o r i t i e s a r e 
favourable to t h e i r case. 
The p r e s e n t a t i o n of cogent 
l e g a l argument i s a h i g h l y s k i l l e d t a s k r e q u i r i n g not 

only a knowledge of the law but a l s o constant p r a c t i c e 
i n advocacy. 
5.6 
F o r 
t h e s e r e a s o n s 
i t i s n e c e s s a r y t o e n s u r e , 
i n 
c o n s i d e r i n g what the a p p r o p r i a t e c r i t e r i a 
a r e f o r 
g r a n t i n g 
r i g h t s of audience, 
t h a t such 
r i g h t s 
a r e 
given, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the higher c o u r t s , only to those 
who 
w i l l not only give the r i g h t q u a l i t y of s e r v i c e to 
the p a r t i e s i n v o l v e d i n a c a s e , but who 
w i l l 
a l s o 
enable the q u a l i t y of 
j u s t i c e and the standards of 
advocacy to be maintained. 

## Obtaining R I G H T S Of Audience

5.7 
The Government c o n s i d e r s that, f o r the reasons given 
above, 
r i g h t s of audience i n the c o u r t s should be 
r e s t r i c t e d to those who a r e properly t r a i n e d , 
s u i t a b l y 
e x p e r i e n c e d and s u b j e c t to codes of conduct 
which 
maintain standards, although t h i s should not a f f e c t an 
i n d i v i d u a l ' s 
r i g h t 
t o s e l f - r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . The 
Government t h e r e f o r e , as s t a t e d i n Chapter 3, b e l i e v e s 
t h a t advocacy i n the c o u r t s should be an area where recognised p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r t i s e i s r e q u i r e d . Subject 
to that, the Government b e l i e v e s , i n accordance 
with 
the p r i n c i p l e s s e t 
out i n Chapter 1, t h a t the p u b l i c 
should have the widest p o s s i b l e choice among recognised 
advocates who a r e f r e e to compete 
f a i r l y 
w i t h one 
another f o r 
the business a v a i l a b l e from c l i e n t s . 
5.8 
A c c o r d i n g l y t h e Government b e l i e v e s t h a t , f o r 
the 
f u t u r e , 
r i g h t s of audience 
before 
p a r t i c u l a r c o u r t s 
s h o u l d 
depend 
o n l y upon w h e t h e r 
a d v o c a t e s c a n 
demonstrate that they have the appropriate education, 
t r a i n i n g and q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and a r e bound by appropriate codes of conduct. 

Advocates' p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies should have to s a t i s f y the Lord Chancellor that t h e i r members are f i t and proper people to appear as advocates before the court or c o u r t s i n question i n order t o o b t a i n r i g h t s of audience f o r them. 

The n e c e s s a r y requirements would vary, depending on the l e v e l and nature of the court concerned, and would need to be worked out i n d e t a i l f o r each court, but the present d i s t i n c t i o n s i n the treatment by the c o u r t s of t h e d i f f e r e n t b r a n c h e s o f t h e p r o f e s s i o n would disappear. The b a s i c premise i s t h a t the s a t i s f a c t i o n of such requirements should, f o r the future, alone be the t e s t f o r g r a n t i n g r i g h t s of audience; and not whether an advocate happened by i n i t i a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n to be a lawyer, whether a b a r r i s t e r or a s o l i c i t o r , and whether i n p r i v a t e p r a c t i c e or employed. 

## Lay Advocacy

5.9 
Lay r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s already appear i n a wide v a r i e t y of 
proceedings; and the Government t h i n k s t h a t i t may 
now 
be r i g h t f o r l a y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s to be granted 
r i g h t s 
of audience i n the c o u r t s on behalf of others i n some 
i n s t a n c e s . The 
C i v i l 
J u s t i c e Review R.48 
(Cm. 
394) 
recommended t h a t i n small c l a i m s c a s e s and debt 
and 
housing 
c a s e s i n the County Court, 
l i t i g a n t s 
should 
have the r i g h t to be a s s i s t e d or represented by the l a y 
r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e i r choice, although the court, on 
g i v i n g reasons, would have the d i s c r e t i o n to 
r e s t r i c t 
the involvement 
of corrupt or unruly r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , 
and, where necessary, to exclude them e n t i r e l y . 

Any r i g h t s of audience granted to l a y advocates would supplement, and not r e p l a c e , the e x i s t i n g r i g h t s of those who r e p r e s e n t themselves to have a f r i e n d i n c o u r t who a s s i s t s but does not represent them. I n other i n s t a n c e s , s p e c i a l i s t p r a c t i t i o n e r s who are not lawyers should be a b l e t o e x e r c i s e r i g h t s of audience i n perhaps a l i m i t e d range of c a s e s appropriate to t h e i r s p e c i a l i s t e x p e r t i s e i f t h e y c a n s a t i s f y t h e a p p r o p r i a t e t e s t s . 

The aim should be to ensure the widest p o s s i b l e choice of advocate f o r the c l i e n t while a t the same time ensuring t h a t adequate standards of competence and probity are maintained. The whole area of l a y r e p r e s e n t a t i o n should be c o n s i d e r e d by the Advisory Committee. 

## Employed Lawyers

5.10 
The Government a l s o b e l i e v e s t h a t i t should be p o s s i b l e 
f o r appropriate codes of conduct to guard a g a i n s t any 
c o n f l i c t s of i n t e r e s t which might a r i s e i n the case of 
employed 
l a w y e r s ; 
and 
t o 
s e c u r e 
t h e 
d e g r e e 
o f 
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to the court and independence from the p a r t i e s which i s v i t a l i f the court i s to r e l y on t h e i r 
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . A u n i v e r s a l p r o h i b i t i o n on 
r i g h t s 
of 
audience f o r employed lawyers would t h e r e f o r e appear to 
be an unnecessary c o n s t r a i n t . 
5.11 
I n p a r t i c u l a r , 
i n the c a s e of prosecution work the 
Government endorses 
the p r i n c i p l e recommended i n the 
Report 
of the Royal Commission on C r i m i n a l 
Procedure 
(Cmnd 8092) p u b l i s h e d 
i n January 1981 
( t h e 
P h i l i p s 
Report) 
t h a t t h e r e should be a c l e a r s e p a r a t i o n of 
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the conduct of the prosecution from 
the conduct of the i n v e s t i g a t i v e process (paras 7.3 and 
7 . 7 ) . The Crown Prosecution S e r v i c e , c r e a t e d i n the 
wake of 
t h e 
P h i l i p s 
Report, 
c l e a r l y 
f o l l o w s 
t h i s 
p r i n c i p l e s i n c e i t i s both independent of the p o l i c e 
and accountable to the Attorney-General r a t h e r than the 
Home S e c r e t a r y who 
has M i n i s t e r i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r 
the p o l i c e . The Government t h e r e f o r e c o n s i d e r s t h a t i t 
i s l i k e l y to be f e a s i b l e as a matter of p r i n c i p l e for 
lawyers employed by the Crown Prosecution S e r v i c e to 
have r i g h t s of audience 
i n a l l the c r i m i n a l c o u r t s , 
provided t h a t they can s a t i s f y the appropriate advocacy 
requirements 
and 
undertake 
to abide by the r e l e v a n t 
codes of conduct; and provided t h a t i t i s adequately 
recognised by p r a c t i c a l safeguards t h a t t h e i r duty to 
the court must take precedence over any 
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y 
they may have to t h e i r employer. 
5.12 
So f a r as r i g h t s of audience f o r lawyers employed on 
prosecution work by other Government departments are concerned, 
and 
a l s o 
f o r lawyers employed by 
other 
bodies which undertake prosecutions, c o n s i d e r a t i o n w i l l 
need to be given to how 
they might meet the 
P h i l i p s 
p r i n c i p l e , e s p e c i a l l y i n the case of the more s e r i o u s 
cases which are t r i e d i n the Crown Court, before 
any 
changes i n t h e i r r i g h t s of audience are made. I n the case of the prosecution work c a r r i e d out by Government departments, departments would a t l e a s t need to be able to demonstrate a c l e a r s t r u c t u r a l s e p a r a t i o n i n t h e arrangement of the department of t h o s e s t a f f involved i n i n v e s t i g a t i o n s from those r e s p o n s i b l e f o r c o n d u c t i n g p r o s e c u t i o n s ; and, i n some c a s e s , the s o l u t i o n might be to t r a n s f e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the lawyers who have c a r r i a g e of prosecution work from the department concerned to the Attorney-General. 

## Role Of The Advisory Committee

5.13 
The Government proposes 
t h a t the r e c o n s t i t u t e d Lord 
C h a n c e l l o r ' s Advisory Committee on Legal Education and 
Conduct 
( s e e Chapter 3) should 
be 
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r 
a d v i s i n g 
t h e 
L o r d 
C h a n c e l l o r on 
t h e 
e d u c a t i o n , 
q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and 
t r a i n i n g of advocates 
appropriate 
f o r each of the v a r i o u s c o u r t s . 
The Lord C h a n c e l l o r 
should be r e q u i r e d to c o n s u l t the j u d i c i a r y before 

reaching d e c i s i o n s as a r e s u l t of advice tendered 
by 
the Advisory Committee, although the f i n a l d e c i s i o n would be f o r him. 

I t would seem to be appropriate t h a t d e c i s i o n s by the Lord Chancellor on r i g h t s of audience should be put i n t o e f f e c t by means of subordinate l e g i s l a t i o n which i s s u b j e c t to Parliamentary c o n t r o l . 

T h i s would provide the degree of d i r e c t Parliamentary c o n t r o l t h a t would be appropriate i n t h i s important area, d i r e c t l y a f f e c t i n g , as i t does, the p u b l i c ' s access to the c o u r t s . 

## Advocacy C E R T I F I C A T E S

5.14 
The Government proposes, s u b j e c t to any advice i t might r e c e i v e from the r e c o n s t i t u t e d Advisory Committee, t h a t r i g h t s o f a u d i e n c e f o r a l l a d v o c a t e s s h o u l d be dependent on a c e r t i f i c a t e o f competence. 

T h i s c e r t i f i c a t e c o u l d be e i t h e r f u l l , e n t i t l i n g t h e advocate t o r i g h t s of audience i n a l l c o u r t s , or l i m i t e d , e n t i t l i n g the advocate to r i g h t s of audience i n only the lower c o u r t s . (See paras 5.24 to 5.33 below f o r f u r t h e r d e t a i l s of these c e r t i f i c a t e s . ) 

5.15 
The Government suggests t h a t , i n order to obtain a 
f u l l 
advocate's 
c e r t i f i c a t e , those who wish to p r a c t i s e i n 
a l l c o u r t s i n England and Wales should need to: 
( a ) 
undertake an appropriate academic course i n law; 
(b) 
u n d e r t a k e 
a v o c a t i o n a l c o u r s e which i n c l u d e s 
advocacy t r a i n i n g ; 
( c ) 
undertake p r a c t i c a l t r a i n i n g i n advocacy; 
(d) 
obtain a l i m i t e d c e r t i f i c a t e ; and then 
( e ) 
p r a c t i s e with a l i m i t e d c e r t i f i c a t e f o r a c e r t a i n 
period. 
P r o g r e s s i o n t o e a c h s t a g e s h o u l d depend on a s a t i s f a c t o r y completion of the p r e v i o u s one and an a s s u r a n c e t h a t work i s b e i n g c o m p l e t e d t o a s a t i s f a c t o r y standard. 

5.16 
The Government e n v i s a g e s t h a t advocacy 
c e r t i f i c a t e s 
would 
be 
i s s u e d 
and, 
where a p p r o p r i a t e , 
v a r i e d , 
suspended 
o r 
revoked 
by 
t h e r e l e v a n t s u p e r v i s o r y 
p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies. 
The Lord Chancellor would decide, 
on 
a d v i c e from t h e A d v i s o r y Committee, 
and 
a f t e r 
c o n s u l t i n g the 
j u d i c i a r y , which p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies 
should be authorised to grant advocacy 
c e r t i f i c a t e s . 
The 
A d v i s o r y 
Committee would 
be 
e x p e c t e d 
t o 
be 
s a t i s f i e d , 
before recommending t h a t any p r o f e s s i o n a l 
body s h o u l d 
be 
so a u t h o r i s e d , t h a t 
t h a t body 
had 
adequate arrangements i n operation both to ensure 
a 
p r a c t i t i o n e r ' s c o m p e t e n c e and t o m o n i t o r h i s 

performance as a p r a c t i s i n g advocate. 
The Government 
suggests 
t h a t i t i s i n the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t 
t h a t 
a 
v a r i e t y of p r o f e s s i o n a l 
bodies should be so a u t h o r i s e d . 

## Requirements F O R Obtaining An Advocacy C E R T I F I C A T E Academic Course I N Law

This i s d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter 3 and Annex C. 

## Vocational Course

5.17 
The 
b a s i c 
a d v o c a c y 
c o u r s e 
s h o u l d 
i n c l u d e 
b o t h 
t h e o r e t i c a l and p r a c t i c a l i n s t r u c t i o n i n how to present a c a s e . 
T h i s p r a c t i c a l i n s t r u c t i o n should be under the 
s u p e r v i s i o n of p r a c t i s i n g advocates and should take the 
form of demonstrations and r o l e - p l a y i n g 
e x e r c i s e s . 
The 
student would not attend court except as an observer 
during t h i s stage of t r a i n i n g . 

## P R A C T I C A L T R A I N I N G

5.18 
T h i s stage of t r a i n i n g would need to be undertaken 
by 
a l l 
student advocates 
w i s h i n g to a c q u i r e a 
l i m i t e d 
advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e . The purpose of the t r a i n i n g would be 
t o 
i n t r o d u c e s t u d e n t s t o the world 
of 
a c t u a l 
p r a c t i c e 
and 
t o 
e n a b l e 
them 
t o 
g a i n 
f i r s t - h a n d 
e x p e r i e n c e of 
s e e i n g how 
advocacy i s conducted 
by 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s i n court. Students would each be r e q u i r e d 
to be attached throughout 
t h i s stage of t r a i n i n g to an 
e x p e r i e n c e d advocate who would be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t e a c h i n g t h e s t u d e n t t h e t o o l s of the t r a d e and monitoring h i s or her progress. Students should have to keep log books i n which they would record d e t a i l s of t h e i r t r a i n i n g , which would be a u t h e n t i c a t e d by the experienced p r a c t i t i o n e r t o whom they are attached. 

P r a c t i t i o n e r s w i l l i n g t o take s t u d e n t s ought to be c e r t i f i e d as q u a l i f i e d t o do so by t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l body. The length and method of t h i s p r a c t i c a l t r a i n i n g and t h e c r i t e r i a a p p r o p r i a t e f o r i d e n t i f y i n g p r a c t i t i o n e r s q u a l i f i e d to take students are matters on which the Advisory Committee w i l l be i n v i t e d to make p r o p o s a l s . The Government would n e v e r t h e l e s s welcome 

v i e w s now on how t h e s e suggestions 
could be given 
p r a c t i c a l e f f e c t . 
5.19 
The Government envisages t h a t the p r a c t i c a l stage of 
t r a i n i n g i s u n l i k e l y t o l a s t f o r l e s s than s i x months. 
The 
A d v i s o r y Committee would need t o suggest 
what 
p r o p o r t i o n of t h i s p e r i o d should 
c o n s i s t o f a c t u a l 
experience of what happens i n 
c o u r t . 
T h i s experience 
would be gained by watching, t a k i n g notes of evidence 
and general a s s i s t a n c e t o 
the 
p r a c t i t i o n e r t o 
whom 
the 
s t u d e n t i s a t t a c h e d . 
The s t u d e n t would not have 
r i g h t s of audience i n 
court a t t h i s stage, although i t 
might be appropriate to 
encourage him 
or 
her 
t o appear 
as a l a y person i n 
t r i b u n a l s or 
i n 
small c l a i m s c a s e s 
i n the 
County Courts. Students should be able t o 
show, 
p e r h a p s through 
t h e i r l o g books, 
t h a t 
t h e y 
have 
a t t e n d e d 
c o u r t f o r 
a minimum 
p e r i o d 
w i t h t h e 
p r a c t i t i o n e r t o 
whom they a r e 
attached o r with other 
s u i t a b l e 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s i n each of the c a t e g o r i e s of 
case r e l e v a n t to the p a r t i c u l a r 
c e r t i f i c a t e they a r e 
seeking. 
5.20 
The Government suggests 
t h a t t h e r e should be three 
types of l i m i t e d advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e : 
(a) 
general, covering both c r i m i n a l and c i v i l work; 
(b) 
c r i m i n a l only; 
and 
( c ) 
c i v i l only. 
The m a j o r i t y of students would probably wish t o seek a g e n e r a l 
c e r t i f i c a t e , but t h e r e would be some ( f o r 
example, any 
who had already decided 
they wanted t o 
follow a c a r e e r i n 
the 
Crown Prosecution S e r v i c e ) 
who 
would wish t o seek only a c r i m i n a l or, 
a s the case 
might be, a c i v i l 
c e r t i f i c a t e . 
5.21 
T h i s would mean that those students wishing t o acquire 
a l i m i t e d general advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e would need t o 
show t h a t they had attended both c r i m i n a l and c i v i l c a s e s f o r a minimum period. 

Those students wishing to a c q u i r e only l i m i t e d c r i m i n a l advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e s would need to show only t h a t they had attended c r i m i n a l c a s e s f o r a minimum period and those students wishing to a c q u i r e only l i m i t e d c i v i l advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e s would need to show only t h a t they had attended c i v i l c a s e s f o r a minimum period. I n view of the kind of p r a c t i c e t h a t i t i s envisaged would be allowed to a student a f t e r he or she had acquired a l i m i t e d advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e 
(see paras 5.24-5.26 below), the student should be able to show that h i s or her court experience a t t h i s stage had included s i g n i f i c a n t experience i n the lower c o u r t s . 

5.22 
A f t e r a student had gained some general experience of 
p r a c t i c e the Advisory Committee might wish to consider 
o b l i g i n g him or her to undertake a f u r t h e r s h o r t taught 
c o u r s e 
i n a d v o c a c y 
a t 
t h i s 
s t a g e 
i n o r d e r 
t o 
c o n s o l i d a t e what he or she learned a t the v o c a t i o n a l 
s t a g e and 
e x p e r i e n c e d 
during h i s or her 
p r a c t i c a l 
t r a i n i n g . 
5.23 
On 
s a t i s f a c t o r y completion 
of the p r a c t i c a l stage of 
t r a i n i n g , which should be confirmed by the production 
of a c e r t i f i c a t e signed by the s u p e r v i s i n g advocate, the r e l e v a n t p r o f e s s i o n a l 
body would i s s u e the student 
w i t h a l i m i t e d advocacy 
c e r t i f i c a t e which would 
be 
e i t h e r general, covering both c r i m i n a l and c i v i l work, 
or r e s t r i c t e d to e i t h e r c r i m i n a l or c i v i l work. 
Advocacy w i t h a l i m i t e d c e r t i f i c a t e 
5.24 
Those holding a l i m i t e d advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e could be 
granted 
r i g h t s of audience 
i n the c o u r t s l i s t e d 
i n 
para 5.26. 
The Advisory Committee would be expected to 
advise on 
t h i s i n due course. 
Those with a 
l i m i t e d 
general c e r t i f i c a t e would have r i g h t s of audience i n a l l the c o u r t s l i s t e d ; 
those with a l i m i t e d c r i m i n a l or c i v i l c e r t i f i c a t e would have r i g h t s of audience only i n c r i m i n a l or c i v i l c a s e s , as the case might be. 

5.25 
I t should be f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n whether any 
p a r t i c u l a r 
proceedings concerning c h i l d r e n , such as c a r e , wardship 
and adoption, should be excluded from the scope of a 
l i m i t e d advocacy 
c e r t i f i c a t e . 
5.25 
S u b j e c t to 
t h i s 
p o i n t , the c o u r t s proposed 
a r e as 
f o l l o w s : 
(a) 
the Magistrates' Courts - a l l proceedings; 
(b) 
Coroners' Courts; 
( c ) 
the County Courts - a l l proceedings; 
(d) 
the Crown Court 
- a l l proceedings 
except 
j u r y 
t r i a l s ; 
and 
( e ) 
the High Court -
( i ) 
formal and unopposed proceedings; and 
( i i ) proceedings i n chambers. 
5.27 
For some advocates a l i m i t e d advocacy 
c e r t i f i c a t e 
may 
be 
s u f f i c i e n t 
f o r the needs of 
t h e i r 
p r a c t i c e . 
For 
such advocates a f u l l c e r t i f i c a t e w i l l be unnecessary. 
advocacy with a f u l l 
c e r t i f i c a t e 
5.28 
A 
f u l l 
c e r t i f i c a t e would allow an advocate 
r i g h t s of 
audience i n a l l 
c o u r t s i n England and Wales e i t h e r i n 
a l l c a s e s or e l s e i n only c r i m i n a l or c i v i l c a s e s , as the case might be. 
5.29 
I t w i l l be f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n by the Advisory Committee 
whether a s h o r t formal taught course a t the end of the 
l i m i t e d 
c e r t i f i c a t e 
p e r i o d would 
be 
a 
u s e f u l 
requirement before a f u l l advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e could be 
o b t a i n e d . 
The 
c o n t e n t s of any 
such c o u r s e would 
o b v i o u s l y depend on t h e type of f u l l c e r t i f i c a t e sought, but such a course could f o r i n s t a n c e cover j u r y t r i a l s and the d i f f e r e n c e s i n procedure between the County Court and the High Court. 

|      |     |      |        |    |               |                       |       |                       | Full   |  general   |  c e r t i f i c a t e    |
|------|-----|------|--------|----|---------------|-----------------------|-------|-----------------------|--------|------------|---------------------------|
| 5.30 |     | To   | obtain | a  | f u l l       | general               |       | c e r t i f i c a t e | an     | advocate   | would                     |
| need | t o | have | held   | a  | l i m i t e d | c e r t i f i c a t e | f o r | a minimum             |        |            |                           |

p e r i o d and w i t h i n a s e t p e r i o d o f t i m e t o have c o m p l e t e d a p r e s c r i b e d minimum amount o f a c t u a l advocacy i n the Magistrates' Courts, the County Courts and the Crown Court. 

|          |       |                     |    |        |      |         |               | Full            |  c r i m i n a l      |  c e r t i f i c a t e    |
|----------|-------|---------------------|----|--------|------|---------|---------------|-----------------|-----------------------|---------------------------|
| 5.31     |       | S i m i l a r l y , | to | obtain | a    | f u l l |               | c r i m i n a l | c e r t i f i c a t e | an                        |
| advocate | would | need                | to | have   | held | a       | l i m i t e d |                 | c e r t i f i c a t e |                           |

for a minimum period and w i t h i n a s e t 
period of time to 
have completed a p r e s c r i b e d minimum amount of a c t u a l advocacy i n t h e M a g i s t r a t e s ' 
Courts and the Crown Court. 

|         |        |        |             |         |    |               | Full      |  c i v i l            |         | c e r t i f i c a t e    |
|---------|--------|--------|-------------|---------|----|---------------|-----------|-----------------------|---------|--------------------------|
| 5.32    |        | Again, | to          | obtain  | a  | f u l l       | c i v i l | c e r t i f i c a t e | an      | advocate                 |
| would   | need   | to     | have        | held    | a  | l i m i t e d |           | c e r t i f i c a t e | f o r a |                          |
| minimum | period | and    | w i t h i n | a s e t |    | period        | of        | time                  | to      | have                     |

c o m p l e t e d a p r e s c r i b e d minimum amount o f a c t u a l 
advocacy i n 
the 
County Courts. 
5.33 
These time l i m i t s and the minimum amount of a c t u a l advocacy w i l l be m a t t e r s f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n by the Advisory Committee, but they should recognise t h a t the best t e s t of competence i n advocacy i s an advocate' s a b i l i t y to earn a l i v i n g by pleading i n the c o u r t s . 

Amendments to l e g i s l a t i o n and p r a c t i c e r u l e s 

5 . 3 4 
A r e - o r g a n i s a t i o n of r i g h t s of audience on the l i n e s 
s u g g e s t e d above would 
r e q u i r e amendment o f both 
s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s and r u l e s of court. The Bar and 
the Law S o c i e t y would d o u b t l e s s a l s o wish t o amend 
t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l p r a c t i c e r u l e s . 

## Transitional Arrangements

5.35 
The p r i n c i p l e underlying the t r a n s i t i o n a l arrangements 
should be t h a t 
i n d i v i d u a l 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s who 
already 
have r i g h t s of audience before the v a r i o u s p a r t i c u l a r c o u r t s , when the new arrangements come i n t o 
force, 
should r e t a i n those r i g h t s . The new arrangements would 
be intended to apply only to those who q u a l i f i e d a f t e r 
the new arrangements come i n t o operation. I n addition, 
t h e r e f o r e , t r a n s i t i o n a l arrangements would need to be 
made t o ensure t h a t those who can 
demonstrate t h a t they 
already have long experience i n a p a r t i c u l a r f i e l d of advocacy and who a r e c u r r e n t l y 
p r a c t i s i n g i n t h a t 
f i e l d , but who may not be a b l e t o f u l f i l any new 
educational requirements f o r r i g h t s of audience, 
w i l l 
n e v e r t h e l e s s be able to obtain the appropriate r i g h t s of audience. T h i s would be p a r t i c u l a r l y l i k e l y to apply 
t o s o l i c i t o r s who can show t h a t they a l r e a d y have s u f f i c i e n t e x p e r i e n c e of p r a c t i s i n g advocacy i n the r e l e v a n t c o u r t s . 

T r a n s i t i o n a l arrangements f o r b a r r i s t e r s 
5.36 
A l l b a r r i s t e r s who had completed t h e i r p u p i l l a g e s , when the new arrangements were introduced, would be granted f u l l general advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e s . Students c a l l e d t o the Bar or completing p u p i l l a g e a f t e r the i n t r o d u c t i o n of the new arrangements would be required t o obtain the proposed advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e s . 

T r a n s i t i o n a l arrangements f o r s o l i c i t o r s 

5 . 3 7 
A l l s o l i c i t o r s 
i n p r i v a t e p r a c t i c e , when the 
new 
arrangements were introduced, would be granted 
l i m i t e d 
g e n e r a l 
a d v o c a c y 
c e r t i f i c a t e s . 
O b t a i n i n g 
a 
f u l l 
c e r t i f i c a t e 
t h e r e a f t e r would depend on whether 
a 
s o l i c i t o r 
c o u l d 
d e m o n s t r a t e 
t h a t he 
o r 
she 
had 
s a t i s f i e d 
t h e 
n e c e s s a r y 
c o n d i t i o n s . The 
A d v i s o r y 
Committee would be asked to advise as an e a r l y p r i o r i t y 
what t h i s should e n t a i l . As with b a r r i s t e r s , 
students 
completing a r t i c l e s a f t e r the new arrangements were 

introduced would be required to obtain the necessary 
advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e s . 

## Transitional Arrangements F O R Employed Lawyers

5.38 
Employed 
l a w y e r s would be 
g r a n t e d 
l i m i t e d 
g e n e r a l 
advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e s when the new 
arrangements came 
i n t o 
f o r c e . 
An 
employed 
l a w y e r 
would need 
t o 
d e m o n s t r a t e 
t h a t 
he 
o r 
s h e 
had 
s a t i s f i e d 
t h e 
requirements 
f o r a f u l l general advocacy 
c e r t i f i c a t e , 
i n order to obtain one of these. The Advisory Committee 
would be asked to advise as an e a r l y p r i o r i t y what t h i s 
should e n t a i l . Any employed b a r r i s t e r who had not done p u p i l l a g e should f o r t h i s purpose a l s o have to show t h a t he or she had met the requirements of the proposed new p r a c t i c a l t r a i n i n g , although t h i s could be done under the s u p e r v i s i o n of a s u i t a b l y q u a l i f i e d lawyer employed i n the same o r g a n i s a t i o n . 

Procedures f o r d e a l i n g with p o t e n t i a l c o n f l i c t s of i n t e r e s t would, of course, need to be i n p l a c e before these changes could be made, a s would a r r a n g e m e n t s t o e n s u r e t h e i n d e p e n d e n c e o f l a w y e r s h a v i n g t h e c o n d u c t o f prosecutions from those involved i n the i n v e s t i g a t i v e process. 

## T R A N S I T I O N A L Arrangements F O R Others

| 5.39    | A l l those who    | already had   |     | l i m i t e d   |  r i g h t s   |  of    | audience    |
|---------|--------------------|---------------|-----|-----------------|----------------|--------|-------------|

when the new arrangements were introduced (see Annex Ε 
f o r examples) would be e n t i t l e d to r e t a i n these. 

The Advisory Committee would be asked to advise as an e a r l y p r i o r i t y on the appropriate continuing arrangements for g r a n t i n g advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e s t o p r a c t i t i o n e r s of these kinds a f t e r the new arrangements come i n t o f o r c e . 

## Consultation

5.40 
The Government would welcome views on the proposals f o r r i g h t s of audience s e t out above. 

## Chapter 6 - Immunity From Actions In Negligence In Advocacy Work

Recent cases have e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t an advocate, whether b a r r i s t e r or s o l i c i t o r , i s immune from an a c t i o n f o r negligence a t the s u i t of h i s or her c l i e n t i n r e s p e c t of h i s o r h e r conduct and management o f a case i n court. 

T h i s immunity extends t o t h e p r e l i m i n a r y work connected w i t h t h e h e a r i n g such a s t h e drawing of p l e a d i n g s and t o p r e - t r i a l work where t h e a c t i n question i s i n t i m a t e l y connected with the conduct of the case i n court. 

The main r e a s o n s f o r t h i s immunity a r e t h a t t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f j u s t i c e r e q u i r e s b a r r i s t e r s and s o l i c i t o r s t o be able t o c a r r y out t h e i r duty t o the court f e a r l e s s l y and independently and t h a t a c t i o n s f o r n e g l i g e n c e a g a i n s t b a r r i s t e r s and s o l i c i t o r s i n r e s p e c t of advocacy work would make t h e r e - t r y i n g of t h e o r i g i n a l a c t i o n s i n e v i t a b l e and s o m u l t i p l y l i t i g a t i o n . 

The Government a c c e p t s t h e cogency of these arguments and c o n s i d e r s t h a t t h i s immunity from a c t i o n s i n negligence should i n the f u t u r e extend to a l l recognised advocates. 

## Chapter 7 - Attendance On Counsel

7.1 
At present, except i n proceedings i n the Magistrates' 
C o u r t , 
c o u n s e l i s v i r t u a l l y 
always 
a t t e n d e d by a 
s o l i c i t o r or t h e i r r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . The Code of Conduct 
of the 
Bar allows a b a r r i s t e r t o appear unattended i n 
any case i n 
the 
Crown Court provided t h a t he or she i s 
s a t i s f i e d t h a t the i n t e r e s t s of the 
l a y 
c l i e n t and 
the 
i n t e r e s t s of j u s t i c e w i l l not be p r e j u d i c e d . The Law 
S o c i e t y ' s 
P r a c t i c e 
R u l e s a r e l e s s 
r e l a x e d about 
a l l o w i n g 
s o l i c i t o r s not t o accompany b a r r i s t e r s t o 
court. 
7.2 
The c r i t i c i s m frequently l e v e l l e d a t a requirement f o r 
counsel to be attended i n court i s t h a t i t produces unnecessary double manning and t h e r e f o r e i n c r e a s e d c o s t 
to the c l i e n t . I t 
must t h e r e f o r e be considered whether 
the requirement f o r 
a s o l i c i t o r to attend on counsel 
o r , i n t h e l i g h t 
o f t h e p r o p o s a l s 
o u t l i n e d i n 
Chapter 5, to attend on any advocate, can 
be j u s t i f i e d . 
7.3 
The Government c o n s i d e r s t h a t the need f o r 
an advocate 
to be attended i n court depends on the circumstances. 
I n some c a s e s attendance may be superfluous, 
but 
i n 
others i t 
may genuinely be d i f f i c u l t f o r 
an advocate 
to handle both the advocacy and the a n c i l l a r y matters 
without a s s i s t a n c e . 
I n such c a s e s i t 
may w e l l be an 
e f f i c i e n t and c o s t - e f f e c t i v e u s e o f t i m e f o r an 
advocate to 
be attended. 
7.4 
Accordingly, the Government c o n s i d e r s t h a t those who 
a r e paying f o r i n - c o u r t work should be allowed t o 
decide whether a s s i s t a n c e i n court i s r e q u i r e d . Any 
s p e c i f i c requirement, however, i n 
p r o f e s s i o n a l p r a c t i c e 
r u l e s t h a t an advocate must be attended would appear to 
be u n j u s t i f i a b l e . 

## Chapter 8 - Direct Access To Counsel

8.1 
Two separate, but r e l a t e d , 
I s s u e s a r e considered i n 
t h i s chapter: the 
question of c o n t r a c t u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s 
between counsel and those who i n s t r u c t them and the 
question of who can i n s t r u c t counsel. 

## Contractual R E L A T I O N S

8.2 
I t 
has long been e s t a b l i s h e d by case law t h a t t h e r e 
i s 
no 
c o n t r a c t u a l r e l a t i o n s h i p between b a r r i s t e r s and 
those who i n s t r u c t them. A b a r r i s t e r t h e r e f o r e has 
to 
recover h i s 
or her f e e s by other means. 
One way of 
doing t h i s i s 
an arrangement such as the Bar has with 
the Law S o c i e t y whose r u l e s provide t h a t , except i n 
l e g a l a i d 
cases, a s o l i c i t o r i s 
p e r s o n a l l y l i a b l e as a 
matter of p r o f e s s i o n a l conduct f o r the payment of 
counsel's proper 
fees, whether or not he or she 
has 
been put 
i n 
funds by the c l i e n t . 
8.3 
The Government considers t h a t these arrangements are 
a n a c h r o n i s t i c . 
The Government notes t h a t the Bar 
has 
not thought i t 
appropriate to adopt t h i s approach to 
p r a c t i c e overseas and t h a t the Overseas P r a c t i c e Rules 
o f t h e B a r ( s e e C h a p t e r 11 p a r a 11.24) a l l o w a 
b a r r i s t e r t o n e g o t i a t e f e e s d i r e c t l y w i t h non-UK 
c l i e n t s f o r non-UK work and to enforce payment. 

The Government accordingly proposes t h a t t h e r e should be l e g i s l a t i o n to permit b a r r i s t e r s who wish t o do so to e n t e r i n t o c o n t r a c t u a l r e l a t i o n s w i t h t h o s e who i n s t r u c t them i n r e s p e c t of UK work. 

Direct a c c e s s 
8.4 
The f u r t h e r question f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s who those i n s t r u c t i n g p a r t i e s s h o u l d be. 

At p r e s e n t , i n accordance with the p r o f e s s i o n a l r u l e s of conduct s e t out i n the Bar's Code of Conduct, a b a r r i s t e r may accept i n s t r u c t i o n s only from s o l i c i t o r s or, i n some c i r c u m s t a n c e s , from p a r l i a m e n t a r y a g e n t s , p a t e n t agents, trade mark agents, London n o t a r i e s , l i c e n s e d conveyancers, the Government l e g a l s e r v i c e , the l e g a l departments of l o c a l or p u b l i c a u t h o r i t i e s and employed b a r r i s t e r s . 

The Bar has announced r e c e n t l y t h a t i t intends to allow d i r e c t access from other p r o f e s s i o n s such a s a c c o u n t a n t s i n e a r l y 1989 although d i r e c t a c c e s s from the l a y p u b l i c continues t o be p r o h i b i t e d . 

I n a d d i t i o n , i t i s t o be noted t h a t the Overseas P r a c t i c e Rules of the Bar provide t h a t a b a r r i s t e r may: -

(a) 
accept i n s t r u c t i o n s from a f o r e i g n lawyer f o r non-
UK work; 
(b) 
accept 
i n s t r u c t i o n s from any UK l a y c l i e n t f o r 
non-UK l i t i g a t i o n or a r b i t r a t i o n ; and 
( c ) 
accept i n s t r u c t i o n s from a non-UK l a y c l i e n t f o r 
non-UK work. 
8.5 
For many, i f not most, b a r r i s t e r s , the major p a r t of t h e i r p r a c t i c e seems l i k e l y , n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h e proposals elsewhere i n t h i s Green Paper, t o continue to be advocacy and the preparation of c a s e s f o r c o u r t . 

Advocacy i s a s k i l l which r e q u i r e s r e g u l a r and frequent p r a c t i c e i f high standards of performance a r e to be developed and maintained. 

Indeed advocates, who under the present arrangements depend f o r t h e i r l i v e l i h o o d upon the continuing approval of s o l i c i t o r s , who a r e t h e i r independent p r o f e s s i o n a l c l i e n t s , f i n d t h a t i t i s only i n t h i s way t h a t they can maintain a s u c c e s s f u l p r a c t i c e as advocates. Advocates may t h e r e f o r e wish to c h o o s e t o a c c e p t i n s t r u c t i o n s o n l y from o t h e r p r o f e s s i o n a l s who have the e x p e r t i s e to i d e n t i f y the i s s u e s and s i f t out the r e l e v a n t f a c t s f o r them; and to c o n c e n t r a t e themselves on maintaining t h e i r p r a c t i c e and performance as advocates. Moreover, the m a j o r i t y of s o l i c i t o r s , p a r t i c u l a r l y those who p r a c t i s e i n small firms or i n areas d i s t a n t from any major court centre, are l i k e l y to continue to f i n d t h a t i t s u i t s the nature o f t h e i r b u s i n e s s n o t t o p r a c t i s e r e g u l a r l y a s advocates themselves, but r a t h e r , as they do now with much County Court and M a g i s t r a t e s ' Court work, to i n s t r u c t those whose f u l l - t i m e occupation i s advocacy to take t h e i r i n - c o u r t work f o r them. 

At present the Government t h i n k s t h a t i n the future advocates should themselves have the d i s c r e t i o n to decide, i n the l i g h t of the nature of t h e i r p r a c t i c e , whether they wish to take i n s t r u c t i o n s d i r e c t l y from l a y c l i e n t s o r t o r e s t r i c t t h e m s e l v e s t o t a k i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s only from other p r o f e s s i o n a l s . Moreover, i n o r d e r t o promote t h e use of t h e i r s e r v i c e s , advocates who choose only to take i n s t r u c t i o n s through o t h e r p r o f e s s i o n a l s , should be e n t i t l e d , i f they so wish, to belong to a v o l u n t a r y a s s o c i a t i o n , one of whose c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s might be t h a t i t s members take i n s t r u c t i o n s only i n t h i s way, although they would need t o be a b l e t o demonstrate i n due c o u r s e t o t h e competition a u t h o r i t y t h a t t h i s was not operating i n an a n t i - c o m p e t i t i v e way. They could a l s o a d v e r t i s e t h e i r membership of such an a s s o c i a t i o n to those i n s t r u c t i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l s , such as s o l i c i t o r s , who are l i k e l y to want t o continue to use t h e i r s e r v i c e s . 

The prime examples of such bodies are c u r r e n t l y the four Inns of Court, who compete with each other by means of t h e i r s c h o l a r s h i p s , l i b r a r i e s and other c o l l e g i a t e f a c i l i t i e s t o a t t r a c t new e n t r a n t s to the p r o f e s s i o n to t h e i r membership. Other examples might i n the f u t u r e develop on the l i n e s of one or more of the s p e c i a l i s t Bar A s s o c i a t i o n s . 

8.7 
There i s , however, an argument sometimes 
advanced, 
which i s s e t out i n t h i s paragraph, t h a t t o grant to advocates, who p r a c t i s e i n the higher c o u r t s , the r i g h t to have d i r e c t access t o the l a y c l i e n t might lead to fundamental changes i n t h e s t r u c t u r e o f the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n , which would reduce the extent of informed choice c u r r e n t l y a v a i l a b l e t o the l a y c l i e n t through h i s s o l i c i t o r ; 
and would l o w e r t h e s t a n d a r d s of advocacy t o which the c o u r t s have become accustomed. T h i s argument i s that, whereas there a r e c u r r e n t l y some 
50,000 
s o l i c i t o r s who have a v a i l a b l e t o them t h e s p e c i a l i s t s e r v i c e s , both i n advocacy and o t h e r s p e c i a l i s m s , of some 5,500 members of the independent Bar, the r i g h t to d i r e c t access might l e a d more and more a d v o c a t e s t o a t t a c h t h e m s e l v e s , a s 
" t r i a l lawyers", t o firms of s o l i c i t o r s , or t o s e t themselves up as advocates taking t h e i r c l i e n t s d i r e c t from the p u b l i c . The r e s u l t , i t i s s a i d , could be t h a t t h e r e might be a s e r i o u s c o n t r a c t i o n o f t h e c o r p s of 

independent advocates a v a i l a b l e to a l l 
s o l i c i t o r s , and 
an i n c r e a s i n g p r a c t i c e amongst lawyers of a l l 
kinds to 
choose t h e i r own in-house s p e c i a l i s t or t r i a l lawyer 
i n 
preference to the independent s p e c i a l i s t best s u i t e d to 
the 
needs of the p a r t i c u l a r case. I f t h i s happened to 
any s e r i o u s extent, the r e s u l t , i t 
i s 
suggested, could 
be 
t h a t t h e c h o i c e of a d v o c a t e s a v a i l a b l e t o a l l 
c l i e n t s would be s u b s t a n t i a l l y reduced. 
8.8 
The Government, however, hopes and expects t h a t a f r e e 
market f o r t h e p r o v i s i o n of independent 
advocacy 
s e r v i c e s 
w i l l 
f l o u r i s h . 
C e r t a i n l y t h e e x t e n t and 
v a r i e t y of the present demand f o r advocacy leads the 
Government t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h i s w i l l be so. E m p i r i c a l evidence from other common law j u r i s d i c t i o n s and the 
present success of E n g l i s h b a r r i s t e r s i n 
obtaining work 
abroad, e s p e c i a l l y i n Europe, suggest t h a t 
s p e c i a l i s t 
advocates who a c t o n l y as such and do not become involved i n pre-advocacy case work are w e l l able to f l o u r i s h i n t h e market p l a c e i n d i r e c t and open c o m p e t i t i o n w i t h o t h e r l a w y e r s who do not a c t e x c l u s i v e l y as advocates. 

## Consultation

8.9 
The Government would welcome comment on the p r i n c i p l e s s e t out i n t h i s chapter; and on whether i t s views, and i t s p r o p o s a l s i n the l i g h t of E n g l i s h b a r r i s t e r s ' 
e x p e r i e n c e i n other common law j u r i s d i c t i o n s and i n Europe, meet the c r i t e r i a endorsed i n Chapter 1. 

## Chapter 9 - Queen'S Counsel

9.1 
B a r r i s t e r s have h i s t o r i c a l l y been divided 
i n t o 
j u n i o r 
Counsel and Queen's (or King's) Counsel. 
The 
f i r s t 
King's Counsel were appointed by the Crown a t the 
end 
of 
the 
s i x t e e n t h 
century i n order to 
a s s i s t 
the 
law 
o f f i c e r s 
of 
the Crown. By 
the 
e i g h t e e n t h 
c e n t u r y 
appointment had come to be regarded as a mark of 
preeminence i n the 
p r o f e s s i o n . 
Today Queen's Counsel 
comprise about 10 per cent of the p r a c t i s i n g 
Bar. 
9.2 
Queen's Counsel ("QCs" or " S i l k s " ) are appointed by 
the 
Queen 
on 
t h e 
a d v i c e 
o f 
t h e 
L o r d 
C h a n c e l l o r . 
P r a c t i t i o n e r s who wish to be considered f o r appointment 
a r e 
i n v i t e d 
t o 
s u b m i t 
t h e i r names 
t o 
t h e 
L o r d 
C h a n c e l l o r . 
F o l l o w i n g wide 
c o n s u l t a t i o n 
w i t h 
the 
j u d i c i a r y and 
the profession, 
the Lord C h a n c e l l o r then 
s e t t l e s 
the 
l i s t 
of names to 
be recommended to 
the 
Queen. 
9.3 
I n the past the Bar had 
a r u l e t h a t a QC could appear 
i n Court only i f a j u n i o r a l s o were i n s t r u c t e d . 
That 
r u l e has now gone. A QC may, 
however, d e c l i n e to appear 
without a j u n i o r , i f he considers 
t h a t the i n t e r e s t s of 
t h e 
c l i e n t 
r e q u i r e 
t h a t 
a 
j u n i o r 
a l s o 
s h o u l d 
be 
i n s t r u c t e d . He may 
a l s o d e c l i n e i n s t r u c t i o n s to advise 
or d r a f t a non-contentious document without a j u n i o r , 
i f 
he 
c o n s i d e r s 
t h a t 
the 
i n t e r e s t s of 
the 
c l i e n t 
r e q u i r e t h a t a j u n i o r a l s o should be 
i n s t r u c t e d . 
9.4 
C r i t i c s 
of 
the 
system 
say 
t h a t 
i t i s 
i n f l a t i o n a r y 
b e c a u s e 
QCs' 
c h a r g e s 
a r e 
u n n e c e s s a r i l y 
h i g h , 
and 
because j u n i o r s are 
s t i l l u n n e c e s s a r i l y 
i n s t r u c t e d . I t 
has t h e r e f o r e been suggested i n some q u a r t e r s t h a t 
the 
system no longer serves any u s e f u l purpose, and t h a t i t 
should be abolished. 
9.5 
A g a i n s t 
t h a t , t h e Government c o n s i d e r s t h a t t h e 
r e t e n t i o n o f a t w o - t i e r s y s t e m of a d v o c a t e s i s j u s t i f i e d . Appointment t o the rank of QC i s 
made only 
a f t e r very wide c o n s u l t a t i o n by the Lord C h a n c e l l o r . 
I t thereby:-
( a ) 
enables both lawyers and c l i e n t s t o i d e n t i f y the 
l e a d i n g members of the p r o f e s s i o n , and thus to 
e x e r c i s e a more 
i n f o r m e d 
c h o i c e about t h e 
competence of the advocates whom they a r e choosing 
than they would otherwise have been able t o 
do; 
(b) 
a c t s as an i n c e n t i v e f o r advocates to s t r i v e to 
achieve and maintain e x c e l l e n t standards; and 
( c ) 
helps the Lord Chancellor to i d e n t i f y a t an e a r l y 
stage those who are l i k e l y i n due course to be 
candidates f o r 
the 
High Court Bench, and f o r 
other 
forms of p u b l i c 
s e r v i c e such as i n q u i r i e s 
i n t o 
d i s a s t e r s . 
9.6 
The Government c o n s i d e r s , i n 
the l i g h t of the proposals 
i n Chapter 5 on r i g h t s of audience, t h a t i n f u t u r e 
a l l 
who hold 
f u l l general advocacy 
c e r t i f i c a t e s , 
whether 
or not they a r e b a r r i s t e r s , 
should be t r e a t e d as 
e l i g i b l e f o r appointment a s Queen's C o u n s e l . The present p r a c t i c e whereby S i l k i s o c c a s i o n a l l y given, normally on an honorary b a s i s , to people who a r e not p r a c t i s i n g a d v o c a t e s , f o r example d i s t i n g u i s h e d academics, a l s o need not be disturbed, although such honorary appointments need not i n f u t u r e be r e s t r i c t e d t o those who happen o r i g i n a l l y t o have q u a l i f i e d a s b a r r i s t e r s . Appointment to S i l k i s not c o n t r o l l e d by s t a t u t e , so no l e g i s l a t i o n would be required to achieve t h i s . 

9 . 7 
I n the Government's view, however, any p r o f e s s i o n a l 
p r a c t i c e 
r u l e s about access to or r e p r e s e n t a t i o n by 
S i l k s o r about the r e l a t i v e 
s i z e of payments t o S i l k s 
and other lawyers appear to be d i f f i c u l t to j u s t i f y . T h i s w i l l be a matter f o r the proposed new competition a u t h o r i t y . 

## Summary

9.8 
The Government proposes t h a t i n f u t u r e those t r e a t e d as e l i g i b l e f o r S i l k should be:-
(a) 
a l l those who hold f u l l general advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e s ; 
and 
(b) 
on an o c c a s i o n a l and honorary 
b a s i s , lawyers who a r e 
not p r a c t i s i n g advocates, whether or not such lawyers 
are 
b a r r i s t e r s . 

## Chapter 10  ־The Judiciary Summary

10.1 
The Government proposes 
t h a t a l l advocates who have 
h e l d t h e r e l e v a n t advocacy 
c e r t i f i c a t e s f o r 
t h e 
appropriate length of time should i n 
f u t u r e be e l i g i b l e 
f o r j u d i c i a l appointment; and i n a d d i t i o n t h a t judges 
i n a lower court should be e l i g i b l e f o r promotion t o a higher one on the b a s i s of t h e i r j u d i c i a l experience i n 

the lower c o u r t . 

## Basis Of J U D I C I A L Appointments

10.2 
A s t r o n g and independent 
j u d i c i a r y i s one of the 
c e n t r a l supports upon which our l i b e r t i e s a r e 
based and 
upon which the r u l e of law depends. Moreover, our 
a d v e r s a r i a l method of administering j u s t i c e r e q u i r e s the judges a t l e a s t a t t r i a l c o u r t s to be r e c r u i t e d on t h e whole from among s e a s o n e d 
a d v o c a t e s . 
I t i s , 
t h e r e f o r e , important t h a t the a b l e s t p r a c t i t i o n e r s 

should have i n t h e i r 
s i g h t s some a s p i r a t i o n towards 
j u d i c i a l work a t t h e end o f t h e i r c a r e e r s i n p r o f e s s i o n a l p r a c t i c e . No one should be excluded, by v i r t u e of t h e f a c t of choosing one branch of the p r o f e s s i o n r a t h e r than another, from r e a c h i n g the h i g h e s t j u d i c i a l o f f i c e . Over time, t h e i n c r e a s e d competition w i l l enable the Lord Chancellor more e a s i l y to maintain the highest standard of appointments. The Government t h e r e f o r e proposes t h a t , i n f u t u r e , a l l those who have h e l d an advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e f o r an appropriate minimum period f o r the c o u r t s covered by any p a r t i c u l a r j u d i c i a l o f f i c e should be e l i g i b l e f o r appointment to t h a t o f f i c e . As now, l e g a l e l i g i b i l i t y w i l l n o t o f c o u r s e g u a r a n t e e a p p o i n t m e n t . I n p a r t i c u l a r , t h e Lord C h a n c e l l o r sees no reason t o change the now w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d p o l i c y of r e q u i r i n g s a t i s f a c t o r y part-time j u d i c i a l s e r v i c e as a c o n d i t i o n of f u l l - t i m e j u d i c i a l appointment. 

## (A) House Of Lords

10.3 
The Appellate J u r i s d i c t i o n Act 1876 provides t h a t the 
q u a l i f i c a t i o n f o r appointment as a Lord of Appeal i n 
Ordinary i s 
t h a t the i n d i v i d u a l : -
(a) has f o r a t l e a s t two y e a r s held the o f f i c e of Lord 
C h a n c e l l o r or of Judge i n 
one of Her Majesty's Superior 
Courts i n 
Great B r i t a i n and Northern I r e l a n d ; or 
(b) has been f o r not l e s s 
than 15 y e a r s a 
p r a c t i s i n g 
b a r r i s t e r i n 
England and Wales or Northern I r e l a n d or a 
p r a c t i s i n g advocate i n 
Scotland. 
Although the Lords of Appeal i n Ordinary a r e u s u a l l y appointed from among the judges of the s u p e r i o r c o u r t s , the Government proposes to amend (b) above to remove the r e f e r e n c e to a p r a c t i s i n g b a r r i s t e r and t o r e f e r i n s t e a d t o anyone who has held a f u l l general advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e f o r a t l e a s t 
15 y e a r s . The S c o t t i s h p o s i t i o n w i l l be considered s e p a r a t e l y . 

## (B) Supreme Court And C I R C U I T Judges

10.4 
Under the p r e s e n t 
l e g i s l a t i o n some s e n i o r 
j u d i c i a l 
o f f i c e s a r e not open to s o l i c i t o r s ; others, although 
open t o s o l i c i t o r s , impose upon them c r i t e r i a f o r e l i g i b i l i t y w h i c h do n o t a p p l y i n r e l a t i o n t o b a r r i s t e r s . S o l i c i t o r s a r e not e l i g i b l e f o r appointment as Lords J u s t i c e s of Appeal, Heads of D i v i s i o n , High Court Judges or Deputy High Court Judges. 

Although s o l i c i t o r s can now be appointed as C i r c u i t Judges, they a r e required, u n l i k e b a r r i s t e r s , to have served f o r a p e r i o d of a t l e a s t t h r e e y e a r s as Recorders before a p p o i n t m e n t . 

S e c t i o n 9 ( 1 ) o f t h e Supreme C o u r t A c t 1 9 8 1 d o e s , however, p r o v i d e t h a t t h e L o r d C h a n c e l l o r may request a C i r c u i t Judge to s i t as a judge of t h e High Court, so that s o l i c i t o r C i r c u i t Judges may by t h i s means be requested to s i t as High Court Judges from time to time. 

(a) 
J u d i c i a l promotions 
10.5 
At the 
time of the 
Parliamentary passage of 
the 
Supreme 
Court A c t 1981, an attempt was made t o amend t h e p r o v i s i o n s of t h e B i l l so as t o provide t h a t any C i r c u i t Judge could be e l i g i b l e f o r 
appointment to the 
High C o u r t . T h i s would have meant t h a t 
s o l i c i t o r s 
could, by t h a t route, have reached the 
High Court. T h i s 
move was r e s i s t e d a t the time, s u b s t a n t i a l l y on the 
b a s i s t h a t i t 
was considered t h a t only p r a c t i c e as 
an 
advocate i n the High Court equipped anyone t o 
s i t 
j u d i c i a l l y i n that forum. Because s o l i c i t o r s d i d not 
have a r i g h t of audience i n 
the 
High Court, they could, 
t h e r e f o r e , i t 
was argued, never acquire the r e l e v a n t 
experience. 
10.6 
I t i s d o u b t f u l whether t h e arguments 
w h i c h 
were 
s u c c e s s f u l 
i n 1 9 8 1 
s t i l l 
c a r r y 
c o n v i c t i o n . A 
s u c c e s s f u l c a r e e r as an advocate i n 
the 
High Court 
i s 
an e x c e l l e n t way of t r a i n i n g an i n d i v i d u a l t o 
s i t 
j u d i c i a l l y i n t h a t court, but i t does not n e c e s s a r i l y follow t h a t advocacy and advocacy alone i n the higher c o u r t s should be the only route to a j u d i c i a l c a r e e r i n t h e s e c o u r t s . 

J u d i c i a l experience seems an e q u a l l y a c c e p t a b l e q u a l i f i c a t i o n ; and i t seems t o d a y an u n j u s t i f i a b l e c o n s t r a i n t t h a t a s o l i c i t o r C i r c u i t Judge, whatever h i s o r h e r m e r i t s , c a n n e v e r be promoted t o the High Court. I f the law were changed t o permit the Lord Chancellor to recommend the promotion of s o l i c i t o r C i r c u i t Judges to the High Court, there would, of course, be no o b l i g a t i o n on him to do so. 

He would continue, as now, to choose the best a v a i l a b l e candidate f o r each i n d i v i d u a l post, but the pool from 

which he could make that choice would be 
b e n e f i c i a l l y 
enlarged. 
(b) D i r e c t appointments 
10.7 
What i s now 
recommended 
f o r the development of 
the 
p r o f e s s i o n (see Chapter 5) w i l l i n due course c r e a t e a c l a s s of advocates i n the s u p e r i o r c o u r t s who 
may 
be 
e i t h e r 
b a r r i s t e r s or 
s o l i c i t o r s 
or 
lawyers 
who 
are 
n e i t h e r . A wider question t h e r e f o r e a r i s e s whether i t 
can be r i g h t to l i m i t e l i g i b i l i t y to d i r e c t appointment 
to j u d i c i a l o f f i c e i n these c o u r t s to one s i d e of the 
p r o f e s s i o n 
or 
the 
other. 
I t does not appear to 
be 
l o g i c a l to do so. Rather, e l i g i b i l i t y 
f o r appointment 
t o 
the Supreme Court 
and 
C i r c u i t Bench should 
be 
determined 
by 
r e f e r e n c e 
t o whether any 
i n d i v i d u a l 
p r a c t i t i o n e r has 
had 
the necessary 
experience 
as 
an 
advocate i n the r e l e v a n t court. 
(c) 
The Government's proposals 
10.8 
( i ) The 
Government 
t h e r e f o r e 
proposes 
t h a t 
t h e r e 
s h o u l d 
i n 
f u t u r e 
be 
two 
ways 
t o e s t a b l i s h 
e l i g i b i l i t y 
f o r a Supreme Court appointment. 
The 
f i r s t would be by having h e l d a f u l l g e n e r a l a d v o c a c y c e r t i f i c a t e f o r a minimum p e r i o d , probably 
10 y e a r s ; 
and the second would be by h a v i n g h e l d o f f i c e as a C i r c u i t Judge f o r a minimum period, perhaps 2 y e a r s . A l l those who had held a f u l l general advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e f o r the minimum period should be e l i g i b l e a l s o to a c t as Deputy High Court Judges. 

( i i ) A l l those who 
had 
held a 
f u l l 
general 
advocacy 
c e r t i f i c a t e , 
or a t l e a s t e i t h e r a 
f u l l 
c r i m i n a l 
and a l i m i t e d c i v i l or a f u l l 
c i v i l and a l i m i t e d 
c r i m i n a l 
advocacy 
c e r t i f i c a t e , 
f o r a minimum 
period, probably 10 years, should be e l i g i b l e f o r 
appointment to the C i r c u i t Bench. I n addition, a Master or R e g i s t r a r or equivalent j u d i c i a l o f f i c e r who had held o f f i c e f o r a minimum period, perhaps 
2 years, should be e l i g i b l e f o r appointment as a C i r c u i t Judge. The p r e s e n t r e q u i r e m e n t t h a t s o l i c i t o r s must serve as Recorders f o r a minimum of 
3 y e a r s b e f o r e appointment to the C i r c u i t B e n c h s h o u l d be removed. The c r i t e r i a f o r appointment as a Recorder or A s s i s t a n t Recorder s h o u l d be c h a n g e d i n l i n e w i t h t h o s e f o r appointment as a C i r c u i t Judge. 

## (C) Masters And R E G I S T R A R S

10.9 
Only s o l i c i t o r s of a t l e a s t 7 y e a r s ' standing are a t p r e s e n t q u a l i f i e d f o r appointment as County Court R e g i s t r a r s ( s e c t i o n 9 of the County Courts Act 1984). 

The C i v i l J u s t i c e Review recommended t h a t b a r r i s t e r s a l s o should be e l i g i b l e f o r appointment as County Court R e g i s t r a r s ( r e c 
14); and there has been no subsequent o b j e c t i o n to t h i s p r o p o s a l . I n a d d i t i o n , s i n c e the Supreme Court Act 1981 both s o l i c i t o r s and b a r r i s t e r s 

have been 
e l i g i b l e 
f o r appointment as Masters and 
R e g i s t r a r s i n a l l branches of the High Court. 
10.10 
The Government now proposes, i n l i n e with i t s general 
approach to the j u d i c i a r y , 
t h a t i n f u t u r e any person 
who 
h a s 
h e l d 
a t 
l e a s t 
a 
l i m i t e d 
c i v i l 
advocacy 
c e r t i f i c a t e f o r a minimum period, probably 7 years, 
should be 
e l i g i b l e f o r appointment as a High Court 
Master or R e g i s t r a r or as a County Court R e g i s t r a r . 
Obviously advocates who had held f u l l c i v i l or f u l l or 
l i m i t e d general c e r t i f i c a t e s f o r an e q u i v a l e n t minimum 
period a l s o would be e l i g i b l e f o r appointment. These e l i g i b i l i t y conditions would be applied a l s o to p a r t -
time appointments, s i n c e a number of advocates might 
wish t o p r a c t i s e p a r t - t i m e as advocates and to s i t part-time as R e g i s t r a r s . 

## (D) Other Appointments

10.11 
T h i s c h a p t e r has d i s c u s s e d only t h e main 
j u d i c i a l 
appointments a t each 
l e v e l . There a r e a l s o v a r i o u s 
other j u d i c i a l appointments, p a r t i c u l a r l y a t the lower 
l e v e l s , where the e l i g i b i l i t y p r o v i s i o n s w i l l need to 
be amended i n l i n e with the approach s e t 
out i n t h i s 
chapter. 

## Transitional Arrangements

10.12 
T h e 
f o l l o w i n g 
t r a n s i t i o n a l 
a r r a n g e m e n t s 
seem 
appropriate:-
( a ) 
B a r r i s t e r s 
A l l 
b a r r i s t e r s who had been c a l l e d when the new 
arrangements came i n t o force, would be 
e l i g i b l e 
f o r a l l 
appointments f o r 
which they a r e 
a t present 
e l i g i b l e , provided 
they were of or achieved the 
standing required by the present law. I n a d d i t i o n 
they would become e l i g i b l e f o r appointment as 
County Court R e g i s t r a r s , again provided they were 
of o r a c h i e v e d t h e r e q u i r e d number of y e a r s 
standing. 
(b) 
S o l i c i t o r s 
A l l s o l i c i t o r s who were on the r o l l when the new 
arrangements came i n t o f o r c e would be e l i g i b l e f o r 
a l l appointments provided:-
( i ) 
i n the case of appointments t o the House of Lords and t h e Supreme Court, they were of or achieved the standing now required f o r b a r r i s t e r s and acquired the necessary f u l l advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e ; 
(
ϋ
) 
i n t h e c a s e of appointments to the C i r c u i t Bench, they were of or achieved 
10 y e a r s ' standing; and 
( i i i ) 
i n the case of appointments as Masters and R e g i s t r a r s , they were of or achieved 
7 y e a r s ' standing. 

## Conclusion I N Conclusion, Therefore, I T I S Proposed T H A T : 10.13

any 
p e r s o n 
who 
has 
h e l d 
a 
f u l l 
g e n e r a l 
advocacy 
(a) 
c e r t i f i c a t e for a t l e a s t 
15 years should be 
e l i g i b l e 
for appointment as a Lord of Appeal i n Ordinary 
(the 
e x i s t i n g 
p r o v i s i o n f o r the appointment of 
s e r v i n g 
judges would remain); 
any 
p e r s o n 
who 
has 
h e l d 
a 
f u l l 
g e n e r a l 
advocacy 
(b) 
c e r t i f i c a t e for a t l e a s t 10 years or has been a C i r c u i t 
Judge f o r a t 
l e a s t 
2 y e a r s should 
be 
e l i g i b l e 
f o r 
appointment to the Supreme Court; 
( c ) 
any 
p e r s o n 
who 
has 
h e l d 
a 
f u l l 
g e n e r a l 
advocacy 
c e r t i f i c a t e f o r a t l e a s t 10 y e a r s should be e l i g i b l e to 
a c t as a Deputy High Court 
judge; 
any 
p e r s o n 
who 
has 
h e l d 
a 
f u l l 
g e n e r a l 
advocacy 
(d) 
c e r t i f i c a t e , or a t l e a s t e i t h e r a f u l l c r i m i n a l and a 
l i m i t e d 
c i v i l or a f u l l 
c i v i l and a l i m i t e d c r i m i n a l 
advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e , f o r a t l e a s t 10 y e a r s should 
be 
e l i g i b l e f o r appointment to the C i r c u i t Bench; 
any person who has been a Master or R e g i s t r a r or an e q u i v a l e n t j u d i c i a l o f f i c e r f o r a t l e a s t 
2 
y e a r s should be e l i g i b l e f o r appointment to the C i r c u i t Bench; 

( f ) 
the p r o v i s i o n whereby a s o l i c i t o r must serve f o r a 
minimum of 3 y e a r s a s a Recorder 
b e f o r e 
becoming 
e l i g i b l e f o r appointment to the C i r c u i t Bench should be 
removed; 
(g) 
the c r i t e r i a f o r appointment as a Recorder or A s s i s t a n t 
Recorder should be changed i n l i n e with those f o r a C i r c u i t Judge; and 
(h) 
any person who 
has h e l d a t l e a s t 
a l i m i t e d 
c i v i l 
advocacy c e r t i f i c a t e f o r a t l e a s t 7 y e a r s should be 
e l i g i b l e 
f o r appointment as a High Court Master or 
R e g i s t r a r or as a County Court R e g i s t r a r . 

## Chapter 11 - Barristers' Practices Introduction

11.1 
The i n t e r n a l r u l e s and methods of o r g a n i s a t i o n which 
govern b a r r i s t e r s ' p r a c t i c e s a r e a matter f o r the Bar, 
although i t w i l l need to be able to j u s t i f y these to the new competition a u t h o r i t y which i t i s envisaged w i l l be s e t up i n accordance with the Government's proposals s e t out i n the c o n s u l t a t i o n paper "Review of R e s t r i c t i v e Trade P r a c t i c e s " which was published by the Department of Trade and Industry i n March 1988. 

The p u r p o s e o f t h i s c h a p t e r i s t o examine e x i s t i n g arrangements f o r b a r r i s t e r s ' p r a c t i c e s i n the context of the c r i t e r i a of q u a l i t y of s e r v i c e , e f f i c i e n c y , and competition s e t out i n Chapter 1 of t h i s paper, and a g a i n s t the background of the need to p r o t e c t the i n t e r e s t s of c l i e n t s . As a s t a r t i n g point f o r t h a t examination, t h i s chapter s e t s out a number of areas i n w h i c h t h e e x i s t i n g a r r a n g e m e n t s f o r b a r r i s t e r s ' 
p r a c t i c e s might b e n e f i t from c l o s e r s c r u t i n y . 

## Main Areas Of Concern

11.2 
Every b a r r i s t e r who wishes to s e t up i n p r a c t i c e must 
f i r s t go through a period of p u p i l l a g e . 
He must then:-
(a) 
become a member of chambers i . e . 
obtain a tenancy; 
(b) 
p r a c t i s e only as an i n d i v i d u a l ; and 
( c ) 
have the s e r v i c e s of a c l e r k . 
11.3 
These 
s p e c i a l 
r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e B a r have 
been 
c r i t i c i s e d on the grounds, f i r s t , t h a t i t i s o f t e n very 
d i f f i c u l t f o r new b a r r i s t e r s to get themselves i n t o a p o s i t i o n where they may 
s e t up i n p r a c t i c e , 
and, 
secondly, that the p r a c t i c e requirements are themselves 
u n n e c e s s a r i l y r e s t r i c t i v e . 

## Pupillages

11.4 
The Bar has a p o l i c y that anyone who wishes to enter 
p u p i l l a g e should be allowed to do so. 
The present 
system 
of p u p i l l a g e a l l o c a t i o n s , however, has been 
c r i t i c i s e d as u n - s a t i s f a c t o r y , on the grounds t h a t i t 
operates haphazardly and u n f a i r l y , p a r t i c u l a r l y to the 
d i s a d v a n t a g e 
o f 
m i n o r i t y g r o u p s . A l t h o u g h some 
chambers a l r e a d y a d v e r t i s e f o r p u p i l s , 
the Bar, i n 
response to these c r i t i c i s m s , i s a t present c o n s i d e r i n g the establishment of a c e n t r a l information base from 
which p r o s p e c t i v e p u p i l s and 
t e n a n t s may 
f i n d 
out 
e a s i l y what and where v a c a n c i e s e x i s t . 
I t i s a l s o 
c o n s i d e r i n g a r e g i s t e r of approved p u p i l masters and a 
wider range of p u p i l l a g e s , which take more account of 
the 
needs of c e n t r a l and 
l o c a l Government, commerce 
and the EC. 
11.5 
The 
Government 
e x p e c t s 
t h e 
B a r 
t o 
e n s u r e 
t h a t 
p u p i l l a g e s are a l l o c a t e d i n the most e f f i c i e n t and 
f a i r 
way p o s s i b l e . 

## Tenancies

11.6 
Even g r e a t e r d i f f i c u l t i e s can be experienced by those 
who wish to s e t up i n p r a c t i c e , s i n c e t h i s e n t a i l s 

obtaining a tenancy i n chambers. 
Although no 
r e l i a b l e 
f i g u r e s are a v a i l a b l e , i t seems that only between 50% 
and 65% of those completing p u p i l l a g e obtain a tenancy. 

Even though not every new b a r r i s t e r wishes to s e t up i n independent p r a c t i c e , t h i s s t i l l g i v e s c a u s e f o r concern. Moreover i t cannot be assumed t h a t those who do a t present obtain tenancies a r e on the whole the best b a r r i s t e r s , s i n c e i t s t i l l appears to be d i f f i c u l t for a b a r r i s t e r to obtain a tenancy i n a s e t where he has not obtained p u p i l l a g e . 

The s u c c e s s f u l p u p i l i n one s e t may not be as good as an u n s u c c e s s f u l p u p i l i n another s e t . 

11.7 
The Government expects the Bar to introduce a more 
competitive system, covering a l l chambers, which 
w i l l 
r e s u l t i n t e n a n c i e s being granted on a more open and 
f a i r b a s i s i n 
a l l c a s e s . 

## Chambers

11.8 
The u n d e r l y i n g cause of d i f f i c u l t y 
a r i s e s from the 
p r e s e n t 
r u l e 
t h a t a b a r r i s t e r must 
p r a c t i s e 
from 
a p p r o v e d chambers, 
c o u p l e d 
w i t h t h e s h o r t a g e o f 
accommodation i n 
the Inns of Court, which i s 
where the 
overwhelming m a j o r i t y of b a r r i s t e r s i n 
London choose to 
p r a c t i s e . 
I t i s absurd 
t h a t e n t r y t o a p r o f e s s i o n 
depends on whether a person can obtain accommodation. 
11.9 
There i s 
i n f a c t no requirement t h a t a b a r r i s t e r should 
p r a c t i s e from any p a r t i c u l a r place, but a b a r r i s t e r who wishes to open chambers i n c e n t r a l London, otherwise 
than i n premises owned or managed by the Inns, must apply to the Bar Council f o r 
consent. 
A b a r r i s t e r who 
wishes to open a s e t 
of chambers on C i r c u i t must apply 
to the C i r c u i t f o r permission. 
The c r i t e r i a used by 
the Bar when i t c o n s i d e r s a p p l i c a t i o n s i n c l u d e the s u i t a b i l i t y of the a p p l i c a n t , of the c l e r k and of the premises and t h e i r l o c a t i o n . 
I t 
i s , however, e x p r e s s l y 
provided t h a t l a c k of need cannot be a v a l i d ground 
f o r 
r e f u s a l , 
presumably so that leave cannot be refused 
because of a f e a r of p o s s i b l e competition. 
11.10 
The Government b e l i e v e s t h a t the present requirements 
t h a t a b a r r i s t e r must p r a c t i s e from approved chambers 
and t h a t consent must be obtained from the Bar before 
chambers a r e opened outside the Inns a r e u n n e c e s s a r i l y r e s t r i c t i v e and not needed t o p r o t e c t e i t h e r t h e b a r r i s t e r or the c l i e n t . 
There i s 
no obvious 
reason 
why b a r r i s t e r s ought not t o be allowed to p r a c t i s e where they choose. 
11.11 
The 
Government 
a c c e p t s 
t h a t most 
b a r r i s t e r s 
may 
c o n t i n u e 
t o p r e f e r t o s e t up 
i n chambers. 
As 
a 
c o n s e q u e n c e , 
a n y 
i m p r o v e m e n t 
t o 
t h e 
p r e s e n t 
accommodation problem w i l l l a r g e l y depend on members of the Bar i n London being more ready to s e t up chambers 
o u t s i d e the Inns. 

Although there was once a f i n a n c i a l advantage i n having chambers i n the Inns, because r e n t s were lower than r e n t s outside, t h i s i s l e s s so now because the I n n s a r e i n c r e a s i n g l y c h a r g i n g market r e n t s . 

Some s e t s do, however, appear to p r e f e r to remain i n cramped accommodation f o r reasons other than the c o s t s of accommodation outside. 

Proximity to other b a r r i s t e r s , to the Inns' f a c i l i t i e s and to the Courts are c i t e d as f a c t o r s . 

There are a l s o those who are anxious t h a t s o l i c i t o r s w i l l not i n s t r u c t them i f they 

are 
i n p r a c t i c e outside the Inns, because l a y c l i e n t s 
w i l l not regard them as s u f f i c i e n t l y p r e s t i g i o u s . 
11.12 
There are already s e t s of chambers which have s e t up 
and s u r v i v e d outside the Inns. 
Indeed i t i s probably 
not 
n e c e s s a r y 
t o 
go 
f a r away 
t o 
f i n d 
s u i t a b l e 
accommodation. 
I n any case, the t r a d i t i o n a l wish to be 
near 
the Royal 
C o u r t s 
of 
J u s t i c e , 
because 
of 
the 
convenience 
of easy p h y s i c a l a c c e s s , w i l l be of 
l e s s 
s i g n i f i c a n c e 
w i t h 
t h e 
c o n t i n u i n g development 
of 
information technology. 
The Government i s a l s o aware 
t h a t the Inns themselves are now 
beginning to t a c k l e 
the problem. 
I n June 1987 the Inns C o u n c i l r e s o l v e d 
t h a t the Inns should as f a r as p o s s i b l e , and i n coo p e r a t i o n 
w i t h 
one 
a n o t h e r , 
p r o v i d e 
s u f f i c i e n t 
accommodation whether w i t h i n or i f necessary outside t h e 
p r e c i n c t s 
of the 
I n n s of Court 
t o house 
the 
p r a c t i s i n g 
Bar 
i n London. 
I n May 1988 
t h e V i c e -
Chairman of the Inns Accommodation Committee 
i n v i t e d 
those Chambers prepared to move out to l e t him know. 
The Government welcomes t h i s approach but suggests t h a t i t should be made i n a more p o s i t i v e manner. 

The Government considers t h a t the p r o f e s s i o n should take a c t i v e s t e p s t o f i n d s u i t a b l e accommodation f o r b a r r i s t e r s outside the Inns. 

## Partnerships

11.13 
B a r r i s t e r s 
a r e 
n o t 
p e r m i t t e d 
t o 
p r a c t i s e 
i n 
p a r t n e r s h i p . 
A s e t of chambers t h e r e f o r e c o n s i s t s of a 
number of s o l e p r a c t i t i o n e r s p r a c t i s i n g w i t h i n the same 
premises. 
The Head of Chambers i s required to ensure 
t h a t the chambers function properly. 
I n recent 
years 
t h e r e 
has been an 
i n c r e a s i n g tendency 
f o r s e t s 
to 
e s t a b l i s h committees 
of 
b a r r i s t e r s 
r e s p o n s i b l e 
f o r 
matters such as pupillage, recruitment and management. 
There a r e now 
a l s o o f t e n chambers meetings of a l l 
members. 
I n a d d i t i o n the Bar now 
permits 
f e e - s h a r i n g 
agreements. 
I t may 
be wondered why 
the Bar does not 
simply permit p a r t n e r s h i p s . 
11.14 
T h i s i s a question which has often been considered 
by 
the 
Bar 
over the y e a r s . 
The 
p r i n c i p a l argument 
by 
those a g a i n s t appears to be 
t h a t i t would 
s e v e r e l y 
r e s t r i c t c l i e n t freedom of choice because one partner may not a c t f o r a c l i e n t i f h i s partner a c t s f o r an opposing c l i e n t . 

T h i s i s a consequence of s e c t i o n 5 of the P a r t n e r s h i p Act 
1890, which makes one p a r t n e r r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the a c t s and d e f a u l t s of the other partner. 

I f partners acted f o r opposing s i d e s i n a case they would t h e r e f o r e be s u b j e c t to a c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t . 

I t would a l s o be wrong f o r p a r t n e r s to have a f i n a n c i a l i n t e r e s t i n both s i d e s of a case. 

The same c o n s i d e r a t i o n s prevent d i f f e r e n t members of the same firm of s o l i c i t o r s from a c t i n g f o r opposite s i d e s i n a case. The Government would welcome comment on whether these problems are insurmountable; or whether there 

might be ways t o meet the p o i n t about 
c o n f l i c t of 
i n t e r e s t , 
which would e n a b l e p a r t n e r s t o a c t 
f o r 
opposing s i d e s i n 
a case. 
11.15 
The Government 
b e l i e v e s t h a t i t ought t o be f o r 
i n d i v i d u a l groups of b a r r i s t e r s t o decide what i s best 
f o r themselves, although i t 
t h i n k s t h a t , 
p a r t i c u l a r l y 
i n areas of s p e c i a l i s e d p r a c t i c e where there a r e only 
very few s e t s which can o f f e r the necessary e x p e r t i s e , 
b a r r i s t e r s a r e very 
l i k e l y t o decide f o r themselves 
t h a t p a r t n e r s h i p i s 
not a p r a c t i c a l p r o p o s i t i o n . 
I n 
other areas i t may be. 
11.16 
P a r t n e r s h i p could o f f e r b a r r i s t e r s some advantages over 
t h e i r present system. 
I n p a r t i c u l a r i t could:-
(a) 
permit increased f i n a n c i a l s t a b i l i t y f o r 
a s e t of 
chambers; 
(b) 
i m p r o v e t h e f i n a n c i a l 
p o s i t i o n o f t h e new 
entrant; 
( c ) 
encourage proper s u p e r v i s i o n of work undertaken by 
the new entrant; and 
(d) 
ensure g r e a t e r o f f i c e e f f i c i e n c y . 
11.17 
The Government 
t h i n k s 
t h a t 
b a r r i s t e r s 
s h o u l d 
be 
permitted to operate i n p a r t n e r s h i p s i f 
they choose to 
do so, although i t 
recognises t h a t f o r 
many t h i s may 
not be a p r e f e r r e d option. The Government b e l i e v e s t h a t 
the 
r i s k of diminishing 
c l i e n t s ' 
choice, whether i n 
s p e c i a l i s t 
f i e l d s of law or i n the s m a l l e r 
c i r c u i t s 
o u t s i d e London, i s outweighed by t h e advantages of g r e a t e r 
e f f i c i e n c y and of e a s i n g the e n t r y of new 
b a r r i s t e r s i n t o the p r o f e s s i o n . Any r i s k of diminution 
of c l i e n t s ' choice w i l l be met by the f a c t that the f o r c e s o f c o m p e t i t i o n c a n be e x p e c t e d t o f i l l n a t u r a l l y any gaps i n t h e p r o v i s i o n of advocacy s e r v i c e s . 

## Incorpora T Ion

11.18 
S i n c e some chambers have a l r e a d y formed companies f o r 
the ownership of common a s s e t s , 
the Government t h i n k s 
b a r r i s t e r s should probably a l s o be permitted to operate 
i n c o r p o r a t e form i f they so choose, although 
t h i s 
s h o u l d 
not 
a f f e c t 
t h e p e r s o n a l 
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y 
of 
i n d i v i d u a l 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s 
f o r t h e i r 
c l i e n t ' s c a s e s . 
S a f e g u a r d s 
would be needed t o ensure 
t h a t 
c l i e n t s 
r e m a i n e d 
a d e q u a t e l y 
f i n a n c i a l l y 
p r o t e c t e d , 
i f 
b a r r i s t e r s wanted to form l i m i t e d 
l i a b i l i t y companies. 

## Employment Of Others

11.19 
There a l s o seems to be no reason why b a r r i s t e r s should 
not be able to employ others to a s s i s t them with t h e i r 
l e g a l work, i n c l u d i n g other 
b a r r i s t e r s 
( s u b j e c t 
to 
r u l e s about c o n f l i c t s of i n t e r e s t ) . 

## Clerks

11.20 
The 
f u n c t i o n s o f 
a 
b a r r i s t e r ' s 
c l e r k 
have 
been 
described a s : -
( a ) 
o f f i c e administrator and accountant; 
(b) 
b u s i n e s s manager; and 
( c ) 
agent. 
11.21 
H i s 
r o l e 
i n a 
b a r r i s t e r ' s 
l i f e 
i s a powerful 
one 
because of the r u l e that every b a r r i s t e r must have a 
c l e r k and because of a f u r t h e r 
r u l e t h a t the s o l i c i t o r 
must normally negotiate with the c l e r k r a t h e r than the 
b a r r i s t e r about f e e s . 

I n addition the o r g a n i s a t i o n of 

members of chambers as 
a c o l l e c t i o n of 
i n d i v i d u a l s 
r a t h e r than a partnership may impede t h e i r c o l l e c t i v e 

c o n t r o l over t h e i r c l e r k . 
11.22 
C l e r k s 
have been 
c r i t i c i s e d 
a s 
h a v i n g 
too 
much 
i n f l u e n c e over the c a r e e r s of members of chambers 
and 
a s e a r n i n g too much because t r a d i t i o n a l l y they have been paid e n t i r e l y by commission out of the b a r r i s t e r s ' 
f e e s . 
These f e a t u r e s may today already be diminishing. 
As i n d i c a t e d above, chambers management i s i n c r e a s i n g l y 
coming under the c o n t r o l of committees; and c l e r k s are 
tending more and more to r e c e i v e s a l a r i e s p l u s e i t h e r 
i n c e n t i v e s to reward r e s u l t s or smaller commissions. 
11.23 
Of more s i g n i f i c a n c e are 
the 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
r u l e s 
t h a t 
every b a r r i s t e r must have a c l e r k and 
t h a t he 
should 
normally negotiate the 
b a r r i s t e r ' s f e e s . 
B a r r i s t e r s 
w i l l n a t u r a l l y need to have o f f i c e s t a f f to organise 
t h e i r p r a c t i c e s , but t h i s should be a matter f o r them alone to s e t t l e . 

Accordingly the Government agrees with both Benson and Marre t h a t b a r r i s t e r s should not be compelled to have a c l e r k . 

Rather they should be a b l e to negotiate t h e i r own fees, i f they so wish. 

Moreover, they should simply be under a p r o f e s s i o n a l duty to ensure t h a t t h e i r own p a r t i c u l a r p r a c t i c e s are managed i n an e f f i c i e n t and e f f e c t i v e manner. 

11.24 
I t should be 
f o r i n d i v i d u a l b a r r i s t e r s or chambers to 
decide what system of managing t h e i r p r a c t i c e s i s most 
s u i t a b l e 
f o r 
them. 
I t 
w i l l 
be 
o f 
i n c r e a s i n g 
importance f o r b a r r i s t e r s to be able - as Marre pointed 
out - to t a i l o r the o r g a n i s a t i o n 
of t h e i r p r a c t i c e s 
to 
meet the demands of 
the commercial and 
i n t e r n a t i o n a l 
s e c t o r s . 
I n p a r t i c u l a r , the Bar needs to make use 
of 
modern b u s i n e s s methods and 
i n f o r m a t i o n 
technology. 
The r e c e n t r e p o r t by BDI Binder Hamlyn on chambers a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , f o r example, concluded t h a t s t a f f s t r u c t u r e s and management techniques i n b a r r i s t e r s ' 
chambers were inadequate; and the Government hopes t h a t the Bar w i l l encourage i t s members to implement the recommendations i n t h a t report. 

Other r e s t r i c t i o n s 
11.25 
T h i s chapter has sought only to i n d i c a t e those areas of b a r r i s t e r s ' p r a c t i c e s which give p a r t i c u l a r concern. The Government hopes t h a t the Bar w i l l examine a l l t h e i r r u l e s c a r e f u l l y to ensure t h a t they do not impose unnecessary or unhelpful r e s t r i c t i o n s . 

For example i t should a l s o be considered whether:-

( a ) 
the r u l e t h a t every b a r r i s t e r ( o t h e r 
than one 
whose chambers are i n London) should be a member 
of a C i r c u i t or a s p e c i a l i s t 
a s s o c i a t i o n 
s e r v e s 
any p a r t i c u l a r purpose; and 
(b) 
the r u l e t h a t conferences should normally be held 
i n 
chambers 
o r i n some p l a c e o t h e r 
t h a n a 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
c l i e n t ' s 
o f f i c e tends to 
i n c r e a s e 
expense r a t h e r than protect the i n t e g r i t y of the 
b a r r i s t e r . 

## Overseas P R A C T I C E

11.26 
I n s t r i k i n g c o n t r a s t t o t h e r u l e s on p r a c t i c e i n England and Wales, the Bar's r u l e s on overseas p r a c t i c e f o r b a r r i s t e r s are much l e s s r e s t r i c t i v e . 

For example, b a r r i s t e r s : -
( a ) 
can accept i n s t r u c t i o n s d i r e c t from any UK l a y c l i e n t f o r non-U.K. 

l i t i g a t i o n or a r b i t r a t i o n , or from non-U.Κ. l a y c l i e n t s f o r non-U.Κ. work; 

(b) 
can negotiate fees d i r e c t l y with these c l i e n t s and 
enforce payment; 
( c ) 
can employ outside the U.K. 
any person who 
i s not 
a s o l i c i t o r p r a c t i s i n g i n England and Wales; 
(d) 
can p r a c t i s e without a c l e r k ; and 
( e ) 
can 
e n t e r 
a p a r t n e r s h i p with any 
other 
lawyers 
except p r a c t i s i n g U.K. 
s o l i c i t o r s . 
11.27 
No doubt t h i s more relaxed approach was 
prompted 
by 
commercial n e c e s s i t y , but presumably the Bar would not 
have made these r u l e s i f i t thought the p r o f e s s i o n a l 
i n t e g r i t y of b a r r i s t e r s would s u f f e r as a consequence. 
I t 
i s d i f f i c u l t 
t o 
see 
why 
the 
p o s i t i o n would 
be 
d i f f e r e n t i f the same approach were followed i n England and Wales. 

## Summary

11.28 
The Government considers 
t h a t the Bar needs to make 
changes on the l i n e s mentioned above i n order to ensure 
t h a t b a r r i s t e r s ' p r a c t i s i n g arrangements do not 
hinder 
the p r o v i s i o n of l e g a l s e r v i c e s to the p u b l i c i n the 
most 
e f f e c t i v e , 
e f f i c i e n t 
and 
economical ways. 
The 
areas r e q u i r i n g p a r t i c u l a r c o n s i d e r a t i o n a r e : -
( a ) 
obtaining p u p i l l a g e s ; 
(b) 
obtaining tenancies; 
( c ) 
t h e 
r e q u i r e m e n t 
t o 
p r a c t i s e as 
a member 
of 
chambers; 
(d) 
the r e s t r i c t i o n s on p a r t n e r s h i p s ; 
( e ) 
the p o s s i b i l i t y of allowing incorporation; 
and 
( f ) 
the functions of b a r r i s t e r s ' c l e r k s . 

## Chapter 12 - Multi-Disciplinary And Multi-National Practices

(A) M u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s present P o s i t i o n 
(a) 
General 

12.1 
At present s o l i c i t o r s and b a r r i s t e r s a r e 
both prevented 
by p r a c t i c e r u l e or code of conduct from p r a c t i s i n g i n 
conjunction with members of any other p r o f e s s i o n . The 
Law 
S o c i e t y P r a c t i c e Rules p r o h i b i t a s o l i c i t o r from 
sharing f e e s with an u n q u a l i f i e d person 
( i . e . anyone 
not a s o l i c i t o r ) . As f a r 
as contentious business i s 
concerned, 
t h i s p r o h i b i t i o n has s t a t u t o r y backing from 
the combined e f f e c t of s e c t i o n 39 of the S o l i c i t o r s 
Act 1974 and s e c t i o n 5 of the P a r t n e r s h i p Act 1890. I t 
i s a l s o arguable t h a t s e c t i o n 22 of the S o l i c i t o r s Act 
has a s i m i l a r 
e f f e c t i n r e s p e c t o f 
c o n v e y a n c i n g 
s e r v i c e s . 
B a r r i s t e r s a r e p a r t i c u l a r l y c o n s t r a i n e d i n 
t h a t they a r e required by the Bar's Code of Conduct to 
p r a c t i s e only as i n d i v i d u a l s , which thus prevents them, 
u n l i k e s o l i c i t o r s , even from p r a c t i s i n g i n p a r t n e r s h i p 
with each other. 

## (B) S O L I C I T O R S

12.2 
The t r a d i t i o n a l 
l i m i t a t i o n t o s o l e p r a c t i c e , o r 
p a r t n e r s h i p only with other s o l i c i t o r s , of the way i n 
which s o l i c i t o r s may organise t h e i r business 
r e f l e c t s 
the p r o f e s s i o n ' s concern to maintain the independence and the r o l e of the s o l i c i t o r as an o f f i c e r of the 
court, and to avoid c o n f l i c t s of i n t e r e s t . I t 
has been 
argued t h a t such l i m i t a t i o n i s 
necessary t o p r e s e r v e : -
( a ) the p e r s o n a l and f i d u c i a r y r e l a t i o n s h i p between s o l i c i t o r and c l i e n t ; 
(b) t h e safeguards afforded to c l i e n t s by the high s t a n d a r d s o f e t h i c s and e x p e r t i s e o f t h e p r o f e s s i o n , supported by i t s r e q u i r e m e n t s i n r e s p e c t o f p r o f e s s i o n a l i n d e m n i t y i n s u r a n c e , compensation and accounting f o r c l i e n t s ' money, and i t s p r o v i s i o n s f o r handling complaints and 

maintaining p r o f e s s i o n a l d i s c i p l i n e ; 
( c ) 
l e g a l 
p r i v i l e g e 
o f 
c o m m u n i c a t i o n s 
b e t w e e n 
s o l i c i t o r and c l i e n t ; 
and 
(d) 
the proper c a r r y i n g out of functions reserved 
by 
s t a t u t e to s o l i c i t o r s . 
S u p p o r t e r s of t h i s view a r e apprehensive t h a t the m a i n t e n a n c e of s o l i c i t o r s ' 
independence and h i g h s t a n d a r d s of conduct might come i n t o c o n f l i c t with t h e i r d u t i e s to c o l l e a g u e s i n a m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e , s i n c e those colleagues would be s u b j e c t to t h e d i f f e r e n t c o d e s o f c o n d u c t o f t h e i r own p r o f e s s i o n s . 

Some s o l i c i t o r s have a l s o e x p r e s s e d c o n c e r n t h a t m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s might u n f a i r l y a t t r a c t b u s i n e s s away from s o l i c i t o r s ' 
p r a c t i c e s , and t h a t t h i s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i f i t l e d to the development of l a r g e mixed p r a c t i c e s , would so decrease the number of s o l i c i t o r s i n p r i v a t e p r a c t i c e as to reduce s i g n i f i c a n t l y the p u b l i c ' s freedom to choose between a wide v a r i e t y of s o u r c e s of l e g a l s e r v i c e s . 

## Arguments F O R Change

12.3 
Against t h a t , i t has been argued t h a t the p r o h i b i t i o n o f m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s i s a s i g n i f i c a n t r e s t r i c t i o n on the freedom of s o l i c i t o r s to conduct t h e i r b u s i n e s s , which may be expected to r e s u l t i n h i g h e r c o s t s t o c l i e n t s , l e s s e f f i c i e n t use of resources, discouragement of new developments, and a tendency towards r i g i d i t y i n the s t r u c t u r e and methods of s o l i c i t o r s ' businesses. Proponents of t h i s view see advantages to both s o l i c i t o r s and the p u b l i c i f m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s were allowed. They consider that t h i s would enable s o l i c i t o r s t o : -

( a ) compete more e f f e c t i v e l y with 
other 
p r o f e s s i o n s 
and 
b u s i n e s s e s which can and do i n c l u d e 
l e g a l 
advice among the s e r v i c e s they o f f e r ; 
(b) meet more 
c o m p r e h e n s i v e l y 
t h e demand f o r 
o v e r l a p p i n g 
s e r v i c e s from, f o r example, house 
buyers and commercial c l i e n t s ; and 
( c ) 
adapt t o the changing conditions of demand f o r 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
s e r v i c e s , without e i t h e r having to 
employ 
a r t i f i c i a l 
d e v i c e s t o a v o i d 
b r e a c h i n g 
p r a c t i c e 
r e s t r i c t i o n s or being unable to reward 
w i t h 
p a r t n e r s h i p 
s t a t u s s e n i o r employees from 
other p r o f e s s i o n a l d i s c i p l i n e s , i n c l u d i n g f o r e i g n 
lawyers. 
Many other p r o f e s s i o n s , such as accountants, surveyors, e n g i n e e r s and a r c h i t e c t s , permit m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y 

p r a c t i c e s and t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies have 
evolved 
r u l e s 
g o v e r n i n g 
t h e i r 
o p e r a t i o n . 
No 
s i g n i f i c a n t 
problems have been r e p o r t e d 
i n r e l a t i o n t o 
t h e s e 
p r a c t i c e s . 
.4 
The p u b l i c , 
they 
b e l i e v e , would b e n e f i t from t h e 
g r e a t e r 
f l e x i b i l i t y 
which 
s o l i c i t o r s would 
e n j o y 
t h r o u g h 
e f f i c i e n c y 
g a i n s , 
improved 
c h a n n e l s 
o f 
communication between the p r o f e s s i o n s , and an i n c r e a s e d 
choice of l e g a l s e r v i c e s between independent s o l i c i t o r s 
and p r a c t i c e s providing a range of s e r v i c e s . They argue 
t h a t the r i s k s of m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s have 
been overstated i n t h a t : -
( a ) t h e c h o i c e between s m a l l p r a c t i c e s o f f e r i n g a c l o s e personal r e l a t i o n s h i p between s o l i c i t o r and c l i e n t and l a r g e r p r a c t i c e s where t h e r e i s a g r e a t e r d e g r e e o f d e l e g a t i o n a l r e a d y e x i s t s ; 
m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s would do l i t t l e to narrow t h a t choice ( p a r t i c u l a r l y i f , a s expected, only a minority of s o l i c i t o r s would opt f o r mixed p r a c t i c e ) ; 

(b) some s o l i c i t o r s ' 
firms a r e a l r e a d y organised t o 
p r o v i d e 
a r a n g e o f s e r v i c e s 
by e m p l o y i n g 
s p e c i a l i s t s i n o t h e r d i s c i p l i n e s w i t h o u t any diminution i n standards of conduct; 
and 

( c ) 
s a f e g u a r d s can be d e v i s e d which would 
provide 
p r o t e c t i o n t o c l i e n t s o f 
m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y 
p r a c t i c e s s i m i l a r to t h a t afforded to c l i e n t s of 
s o l i c i t o r s ' p r a c t i c e s . 

## History

The q u e s t i o n whether s o l i c i t o r s should be f r e e t o 

12.5 

engage i n p r a c t i c e with other p r o f e s s i o n s was d i s c u s s e d by the Royal Commission on Legal S e r v i c e s ( t h e Benson Commission) i n 1979 and the Royal Commission on Legal S e r v i c e s i n Scotland ( t h e Hughes Commission) i n 
1980. 

Both Commissions c o n s i d e r e d t h e r e s t r i c t i o n i n t h e l i g h t of i t s c a p a c i t y to p r o t e c t the i n t e r e s t s of the p u b l i c and e n h a n c e t h e l e v e l o f l e g a l s e r v i c e s a v a i l a b l e to the p u b l i c . The Benson Commission decided t h a t t h e balance l a y i n favour of m a i n t a i n i n g the r e s t r i c t i o n . 

T h e y a c k n o w l e d g e d t h e p o t e n t i a l c o n v e n i e n c e o f j o i n t p r o v i s i o n o f o v e r l a p p i n g o r c l o s e l y connected p r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s ; but they concluded t h a t demand was l i m i t e d , c o s t savings were questionable, c l i e n t choice might be l i m i t e d , and t h a t p r a c t i c a l d i f f i c u l t i e s would stand i n t h e way of p r o d u c i n g a common code o f c o n d u c t f o r mixed p a r t n e r s h i p s . The Hughes Commission took the opposite view. They thought the r i s k of diminishing c l i e n t s ' 
choice of p r o f e s s i o n a l a d v i s e r would be small and would be outweighed by the prospect of c r o s s - f e r t i l i s a t i o n of a d v i c e and g r e a t e r a c c e s s f o r c l i e n t s t o d i f f e r e n t p r o f e s s i o n a l groups; and they thought the problems of which p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies' r u l e s should apply to mixed p a r t n e r s h i p s could be resolved by d i s c u s s i o n between p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies. Although they found l i t t l e demand a t t h a t time f o r development of m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p a r t n e r s h i p s , t h e y c o u l d s e e no good r e a s o n f o r p r e v e n t i n g t h e i r d e v e l o p m e n t a t a l l ; and t h e y recommended removal of the s t a t u t o r y ban on S c o t t i s h s o l i c i t o r s sharing fees with others. 

## Recent Developments

12.6 
I n 1986, the D i r e c t o r General of F a i r Trading reported on a review, which he had undertaken a t the request of M i n i s t e r s , of r e s t r i c t i o n s on the kind of o r g a n i s a t i o n 

through which members of the p r o f e s s i o n s might o f f e r t h e i r s e r v i c e s . The D i r e c t o r General noted the course 
of debate about m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s i n v o l v i n g 
s o l i c i t o r s 
s i n c e t h e r e p o r t s 
o f t h e two 
R o y a l 
Commissions. He supported t h e view t h a t such mixed 
p r a c t i c e s 
s h o u l d 
be e n c o u r a g e d , 
w i t h 
s u i t a b l e 
s a f e g u a r d s 
f o r t h e m a i n t e n a n c e o f 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
s t a n d a r d s 
and a d e q u a t e consumer 
p r o t e c t i o n . 
He 
t h e r e f o r e recommended t h a t M i n i s t e r s 
should 
consider 
amendment of the S o l i c i t o r s Acts to remove s t a t u t o r y 
p r o h i b i t i o n s on 
s o l i c i t o r s 
s h a r i n g 
f e e s 
w i t h nons o l i c i t o r s , and of any other s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s which 
might prevent s o l i c i t o r s from entering i n t o 
p a r t n e r s h i p 
or any other form of a s s o c i a t i o n with members of other p r o f e s s i o n s . He pointed out t h a t l e g i s l a t i o n to t h i s e f f e c t would be a necessary precursor to corresponding a l t e r a t i o n of the p r a c t i c e r u l e s of the Law S o c i e t i e s . 

12.7 
I n November 1987 
t h e S c o t t i s h Home and H e a l t h Department i s s u e d a d i s c u s s i o n paper on the P r a c t i c e of the S o l i c i t o r ' s P r o f e s s i o n i n Scotland, which s t a t e d t h a t i t seemed to the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e t h a t the weight of argument was c l e a r l y i n favour of permitting mixed p r a c t i c e s of s o l i c i t o r s and other p r o f e s s i o n s . 

The paper i n v i t e d observations i n the l i g h t of which t h e S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e would f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r h i s i n i t i a l view that s e c t i o n s 26 and 27 of the S o l i c i t o r s 
(Scotland) Act 1980 
should be amended so as to permit the Law S o c i e t y of Scotland to allow mixed p r o f e s s i o n a l p r a c t i c e s . 

The S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e i s a t p r e s e n t c o n s i d e r i n g the responses to the d i s c u s s i o n paper. 

## The Government'S View

12.8 
The 
Government c o n s i d e r s 
t h a t the range of 
c h o i c e 
a v a i l a b l e to users of l e g a l s e r v i c e s i n England and Wales should not be l i m i t e d u n l e s s there are strong p u b l i c i n t e r e s t r e a s o n s to the c o n t r a r y , and t h a t r e s t r i c t i o n s on competition between s o l i c i t o r s should be no g r e a t e r than i s necessary adequately to safeguard the i n t e r e s t s of t h e i r c l i e n t s . I n the l i g h t of t h i s and t h e D i r e c t o r G e n e r a l ' s recommendation, t h e Government proposes to amend the S o l i c i t o r s Act 1974 
to remove any s t a t u t o r y i n h i b i t i o n on the freedom of s o l i c i t o r s i n England and Wales to engage i n m u l t i -
d i s c i p l i n a r y and m u l t i - n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s . 

The Government e x p e c t s t h e Law S o c i e t y t o amend i t s P r a c t i c e Rules i n the same way. 

Once the s t a t u t o r y r e s t r i c t i o n s have been removed, the Law S o c i e t y (or any other p r o f e s s i o n a l body) would, of course, have to s a t i s f y the competition a u t h o r i t y t h a t any remaining r e s t r i c t i o n s they imposed were not u n n e c e s s a r i l y a n t i - competitive. 

## Safeguards

12.9 
The question t h e r e f o r e a r i s e s of how to maintain high p r o f e s s i o n a l standards so as properly to safeguard the i n t e r e s t s of c l i e n t s who seek l e g a l s e r v i c e s from m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s . T h i s i s p r i m a r i l y a matter f o r the Law S o c i e t y to consider i n addressing what changes would be required to i t s P r a c t i c e Rules and guidance on s o l i c i t o r s ' conduct. The r u l e s of the C o u n c i l o f L i c e n s e d C o n v e y a n c e r s a l r e a d y p e r m i t l i c e n s e d conveyancers to p r a c t i s e i n p a r t n e r s h i p with other p r o f e s s i o n s , s u b j e c t to the C o u n c i l ' s d e c i s i o n as to the s u i t a b i l i t y of the other p r o f e s s i o n s concerned. These r u l e s might provide the Law S o c i e t y with a model on which to work. There appears to be no reason why mixed p r a c t i c e s s h o u l d be p o s s i b l e o n l y i n t h e p a r t n e r s h i p form; 
a c o r p o r a t e s t r u c t u r e 
( w h i c h 

s o l i c i t o r s i n England and Wales w i l l s h o r t l y be enabled to employ, as S c o t t i s h s o l i c i t o r s now 
c a n ) , even 
one 
where s o l i c i t o r s d i d not c o n t r o l the ownership of 
the 
company, could e q u a l l y provide the v e h i c l e . 
12.10 
The 
e s s e n t i a l need i s to provide 
the same l e v e l 
of 
s a f e g u a r d s 
a s 
p r e s e n t l y 
e x i s t 
i n 
r e s p e c t 
o f 
s o l i c i t o r s ' 
p r a c t i c e s . One 
approach would be 
through 
d i s c u s s i o n s 
b e t w e e n 
t h e 
Law 
S o c i e t y 
and 
o t h e r 
p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies with a view e i t h e r to agreeing 
a 
common code of p r a c t i c e or 
to harmonising 
r e l e v a n t 
aspects of d i f f e r e n t p r o f e s s i o n s ' codes of p r a c t i c e . The Government notes the steps t h a t the Law S o c i e t y has r e c e n t l y taken 
to arrange d i s c u s s i o n s and hopes t h a t 
these w i l l come to a speedy and s u c c e s s f u l conclusion. 
I n e i t h e r event, the Government c o n s i d e r s t h a t 
other 
p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies should, i f necessary, add to the 

requirements imposed upon t h e i r members t o bring them 
up t o the standards of c l i e n t p r o t e c t i o n of the 
Law 
S o c i e t y - a t l e a s t f o r those who opt t o p r a c t i s e j o i n t l y with 
s o l i c i t o r s - on the p r i n c i p l e of aiming 
f o r t h e 
highest common f a c t o r . 
12.11 
U l t i m a t e l y , however, the maintenance of standards and 
safeguards i n any p r o f e s s i o n depends on each of i t s 
members t a k i n g personal 
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r observing 
i t s 
r u l e s and codes of conduct, and on h i s 
or 
her 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
body 
h a v i n g 
e f f e c t i v e 
d i s c i p l i n a r y 
procedures to enforce observance where necessary. The Government t h e r e f o r e considers i t 
e s s e n t i a l t h a t each 
member of a m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e should 
remain 
i n d i v i d u a l l y 
s u b j e c t t o t h e r u l e s of h i s 
o r h e r 
p r o f e s s i o n a l body. The c e n t r a l p r i n c i p l e must be t h a t 
each member should 
remain p e r s o n a l l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r 
t h e 
a c t i v i t i e s o f t h e p r a c t i c e w i t h i n 
t h e i r own 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
f i e l d and should 
p e r s o n a l l y c o n t r o l the 
work i n v o l v e d , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n r e s p e c t of functions reserved by s t a t u t e to any p a r t i c u l a r p r o f e s s i o n . I t w i l l t h e r e f o r e be e s s e n t i a l f o r a s o l i c i t o r ' s personal r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to h i s or her p r o f e s s i o n as a lawyer to override, i n any case of c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t or r u l e , h i s or her r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to the p r a c t i c e as a whole and t o fellow-members o f i t . I f n e c e s s a r y , t h e Government i s prepared t o l e g i s l a t e t o ensure t h e primacy of t h a t p e r s o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . 

Subject to these c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , the Government does not envisage s t a t u t o r y p r e s c r i p t i o n of those with whom s o l i c i t o r s might be allowed to p r a c t i s e j o i n t l y . To do so would, i n the Government's view, be t o impose an unnecessary r i g i d i t y on s o l i c i t o r s ' freedom t o adapt to changing circumstances. 

B a r r i s t e r s 

12.12 
Both the Benson Commission and 
the Hughes Commission 
concluded t h a t there should be 
no 
r e l a x a t i o n of 
the 
p r o h i b i t i o n on 
b a r r i s t e r s and 
advocates r e s p e c t i v e l y 
forming any kind of p a r t n e r s h i p p r a c t i c e . They regarded 
s o l e 
p r a c t i c e as 
c r u c i a l 
to 
the 
i n d i v i d u a l i s m 
and 
detachment of 
e f f i c i e n t advocacy, and were concerned 
t h a t p a r t n e r s h i p p r a c t i c e - whether between b a r r i s t e r s 
or between b a r r i s t e r s and s o l i c i t o r s - would reduce the 
c h o i c e 
a v a i l a b l e to 
c l i e n t s . They d i d not 
t h e r e f o r e 
contemplate the 
p o s s i b i l i t y 
of 
p a r t n e r s h i p s 
between 
b a r r i s t e r s and members of other p r o f e s s i o n s . 

## The Government' S View

12.13 
The 
Government t h i n k s t h a t b a r r i s t e r s should now 
be 
p e r m i t t e d 
to o p e r a t e 
i n p a r t n e r s h i p s , 
should 
they 
choose to do so, f o r the reasons s e t out i n Chapter 11 of t h i s Green Paper at paras 11.13 
to 11.17. 
12.14 
T h i s r a i s e s the p o s s i b i l i t y of b a r r i s t e r s being allowed 
to enter i n t o m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s . I n view of the proposals i n t h i s Green Paper as to l e g a l education 
(Chapter 3 ) , advocacy 
(Chapter 5 ) , d i r e c t a c c e s s 
to 
c o u n s e l 
( C h a p t e r 
8 ) 
and 
j u d i c i a l 
a p p o i n t m e n t s 
(Chapter 10) 
t h e r e appears to be 
no good reason 
to 
d i s t i n g u i s h 
i n t h e 
f u t u r e between b a r r i s t e r s 
and 
s o l i c i t o r s 
i n t h i s 
r e s p e c t . 
The 
advantages i n terms 
both of improving the p r o v i s i o n of l e g a l s e r v i c e s and of the need to maintain safeguards to the p u b l i c are i n 
p r i n c i p l e 
s i m i l a r i n both c a s e s . On 
safeguards, 
the 
c r u c i a l 
requirement must be 
t h a t 
no 
o b l i g a t i o n 
a 
b a r r i s t e r undertakes to p a r t n e r s or to anyone e l s e should take precedence over h i s p r o f e s s i o n a l duty as a b a r r i s t e r to the c o u r t s , to h i s c l i e n t and to the members of h i s p r o f e s s i o n . 

Subject to that, and any n e c e s s a r y l e g i s l a t i v e p r o v i s i o n to e n s u r e t h a t a b a r r i s t e r ' s wider o b l i g a t i o n s would remain paramount over h i s o b l i g a t i o n s to fellow-members of a m u l t i -
d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e , the Government considers that the code of conduct of the Bar should be amended to a l l o w b a r r i s t e r s to choose the form of o r g a n i s a t i o n through which they p r a c t i s e . 

(B) M u l t i - n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s Present P o s i t i o n 
12.15 
At p r e s e n t t h e same r e s t r i c t i o n s w h i c h p r e v e n t 

s o l i c i t o r s 
i n England 
and 
Wales j o i n i n g a 
m u l t i -
d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e a l s o prevent them from p r a c t i s i n g 
i n conjunction with lawyers from another j u r i s d i c t i o n . 

A 
s o l i c i t o r who forms a p a r t n e r s h i p with a f o r e i g n lawyer may not, as a p a r t n e r of the f o r e i g n firm, perform any of the functions reserved by s t a t u t e to q u a l i f i e d persons. 

A 
s o l i c i t o r may, however, perform such functions, i f he e s t a b l i s h e s h i s own firm, while a t the same time being a partner of the f o r e i g n firm. The r e s t r i c t i o n s on b a r r i s t e r s p r a c t i s i n g except independently apply a l s o i n t h i s area. 

## Arguments A G A I N S T Change

12.15 
There are three main arguments a g a i n s t change:-

( a ) 
there are d i f f i c u l t questions about the r e g u l a t i o n 
of firms whose partners are s u b j e c t to d i f f e r e n t p r o f e s s i o n a l 
bodies. 
F e a r s have been 
expressed 
t h a t 
the 
standards 
of 
the 
p r o f e s s i o n 
could 
be 
compromised; 
(b) 
f o r e i g n 
firms might dominate or even take 
over 
domestic firms i n some areas and 
t h i s could 
be 
c o n t r a r y to the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t ; 
and 
( c ) 
the present arrangements permit a wide range of 
forms of a s s o c i a t i o n short of p a r t n e r s h i p . E n g l i s h 
s o l i c i t o r s have taken f u l l advantage of these. 

F u l l p a r t n e r s h i p i s not t h e r e f o r e n e c e s s a r y , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e l i g h t o f t h e d i f f i c u l t regulatory problems. 

## Arguments F O R Change

12.17 
The following points a r e made i n favour of change:-

( a ) the demand f o r m u l t i - n a t i o n a l l e g a l p r a c t i c e s 
i s 
growing a s commercial 
o p e r a t i o n s 
become more 
i n t e r n a t i o n a l . T h i s 
w i l l undoubtedly be given a 
f u r t h e r 
f i l l i p by the completion of the s i n g l e 
market i n Europe. E n g l i s h s o l i c i t o r s should be 
i n 
a p o s i t i o n to meet the market demand, u n l e s s any 
r e s t r i c t i o n s can be j u s t i f i e d on p u b l i c 
i n t e r e s t 
grounds. I f 
the r e s t r i c t i o n s a r e 
not l i f t e d , there 
i s a r i s k that E n g l i s h s o l i c i t o r s w i l l l o s e out 
t o 
f o r e i g n 
l a w y e r s who a r e p e r m i t t e d 
t o be more 
f l e x i b l e ; 
(b) 
some other 
c o u n t r i e s (e.g. 
the Netherlands) and 
other UK p r o f e s s i o n s ( e . g . accountants) 
permit 
m u l t i - n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s . E n g l i s h s o l i c i t o r s a r e 
permitted a l s o to be partners i n f o r e i g n p r a c t i c e s 
s u b j e c t to c e r t a i n r u l e s . T h i s suggests 
t h a t the 
regulatory concern i s 
one t h a t can, i n 
p r i n c i p l e , 
be met; 
( c ) the 
UK's general inward investment p o l i c i e s do 
not 
s u p p o r t 
e x c l u d i n g 
f o r e i g n 
f i r m s f o r f e a r of 
dominance or take over i n a p a r t i c u l a r s e c t o r . Normal competition p o l i c y prevents 
anticompetitive 
mergers or monopolies. The Government endorses 
t h i s argument f o r 
change as long as p r o f e s s i o n a l 
standards a r e 
maintained; and 
(d) t h e EC d i r e c t i v e on t h e mutual r e c o g n i t i o n of p r o f e s s i o n a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n s (which comes i n t o f o r c e i n e a r l y 1991) w i l l a s s i s t lawyers from other member s t a t e s i n gaining a c c e s s t o the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n s i n England and Wales. 

C o n t i n u i n g r e s t r i c t i o n s on E n g l i s h lawyers' 
r i g h t s t o form p a r t n e r s h i p s w i t h c o l l e a g u e s from o t h e r member s t a t e s would be anomalous i n the context of such a move toward a f r e e r Community - wide market i n p r o f e s s i o n a l s e r v i c e s . 

## Safeguards

12.18 
As with m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s , t h e Government i s not persuaded t h a t the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t j u s t i f i e s the m a i n t e n a n c e o f r e s t r i c t i o n s on m u l t i - n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s . Removal of the s t a t u t o r y r e s t r i c t i o n s would p e r m i t m u l t i - n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s i n p r i n c i p l e . The i s s u e would then be whether adequate safeguards can be e s t a b l i s h e d over m u l t i - n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s to maintain 

p r o f e s s i o n a l standards and c l i e n t 
p r o t e c t i o n . 
12.19 
The Government's view i s that, as f a r 
as p o s s i b l e , 
safeguards should be a matter f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l 
s e l f 
r e g u l a t i o n 
r a t h e r than Government c o n t r o l . Once the 
s t a t u t o r y 
r e s t r i c t i o n s 
h a d b e e n 
l i f t e d , t h e 
p r o f e s s i o n s 
would, however, have t o j u s t i f y any 
r e m a i n i n g 
r e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e way 
t h a t 
l e g a l 
p a r t n e r s h i p s a r e 
operated to 
the 
competition a u t h o r i t y . 
12.20 
T h e r e i s a range o f o p t i o n s on t h e o p e r a t i o n of 
s a f e g u a r d s 
w h i c h a r e n o t n e c e s s a r i l y 
m u t u a l l y 
e x c l u s i v e . The p r o f e s s i o n a l 
bodies would presumably 
want 
t h e i r members t o remain s u b j e c t t o t h e i r own 
r u l e s . They could 
r e q u i r e 
r e g i s t r a t i o n of a 
m u l t i -
n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e . A l l p a r t n e r s i n a m u l t i - n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e could then be s u b j e c t t o c e r t a i n s p e c i f i c r u l e s , although t h i s approach might mean t h a t f o r e i g n lawyers were e f f e c t i v e l y being required to be E n g l i s h s o l i c i t o r s r a t h e r than bringing t h e i r own e x p e r t i s e to the p r a c t i c e . An a l t e r n a t i v e option would be f o r the p r o f e s s i o n a l body to allow m u l t i - n a t i o n a l p a r t n e r s h i p s with lawyers who are bound by the r u l e s of p r o f e s s i o n a l 

bodies of s i m i l a r standing. 
12.21 
Once the s t a t u t o r y r e s t r i c t i o n s a r e l i f t e d and the EC 
d i r e c t i v e 
on m u t u a l r e c o g n i t i o n 
o f 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
q u a l i f i c a t i o n s i s 
implemented, the Government 
considers 
t h a t the prevention of p a r t n e r s h i p s 
with EC lawyers 
would be i n c r e a s i n g l y anomalous. The Government 
a l s o 
b e l i e v e s t h a t i t should be p o s s i b l e t o extend 
m u l t i -
n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s to lawyers from other j u r i s d i c t i o n s . 

## The Government'S View

12.22 
I n summary, the Government considers 
t h a t the l e g a l 
p r o f e s s i o n s 
should be as f r e e as p o s s i b l e , 
c o n s i s t e n t 
with the safeguarding of c l i e n t s ' i n t e r e s t s , t o o f f e r 
t h e i r s e r v i c e s i n the ways that they f i n d best meet the demands o f c l i e n t s . 

The same amendments t o t h e S o l i c i t o r s Act 1974 which w i l l remove the s t a t u t o r y i n h i b i t i o n s on m u l t i - d i s c i p l i n a r y p r a c t i c e s w i l l serve to open t h e way f o r m u l t i - n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s . The Government hopes t h e r e f o r e t h a t the p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies w i l l u r g e n t l y review t h e i r own r u l e s governing the establishment of these. 

## Chapter 13  ־Advertising And Information

13.1 
C l i e n t s need adequate information i n order t o make a 
s e n s i b l e choice of a lawyer and to get maximum value f o r money through the lawyer and c l i e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p . 

## Background

13.2 
The l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n , l i k e many other p r o f e s s i o n s , 
has 
t r a d i t i o n a l l y 
p l a c e d 
r e s t r i c t i o n s through 
p r a c t i c e 
r u l e s or codes of conduct on the 
freedom of i t s 
members 
i n d i v i d u a l l y t o inform the p u b l i c about what s e r v i c e s 
they o f f e r and a t what p r i c e . These r e s t r i c t i o n s i n 
p a r t 
r e f l e c t e d a f e e l i n g 
t h a t 
p r a c t i c e s 
s u c h a s 
a d v e r t i s i n g and p r i c e competition, which a r e 
common 
and 
u n o b j e c t i o n a b l e 
i n a c o m m e r c i a l 
c o n t e x t , 
were 
u n d i g n i f i e d i n 
a p r o f e s s i o n a l context and incompatible 
with the s t a t u s and image of the p r o f e s s i o n . I t 
was 
argued t h a t i n d i v i d u a l 
a d v e r t i s i n g - as opposed to 
information about i t s e l f and i t s s e r v i c e s disseminated 
by t h e p r o f e s s i o n c o l l e c t i v e l y - would damage the 
r e l a t i o n s h i p of t r u s t between lawyer and c l i e n t , and t h a t i t 
could be misleading to members of the p u b l i c 
who c o n s u l t a lawyer only o c c a s i o n a l l y and who a r e i n 
any 
c a s e not w e l l p l a c e d t o judge t h e q u a l i t y of 
s e r v i c e o f f e r e d . 

## The Government'S Approach

13.3 
The Government c o n s i d e r s t h a t no f u r t h e r r e s t r a i n t i s 
n e c e s s a r y on the way i n which information i s given 
about the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n beyond the p r i n c i p l e s of 
the 
B r i t i s h Code of A d v e r t i s i n g P r a c t i c e of the 
A d v e r t i s i n g 
Standards Authority, which a r e t h a t a d v e r t i s i n g should 
be l e g a l , decent, honest and t r u t h f u l . I n the opinion 
of the Government these a r e strong safeguards. 
There 
should be no b a r r i e r s to the p u b l i c a t i o n of r e l e v a n t 
information about the p r a c t i c e s of the p r o f e s s i o n and 
the s e r v i c e s i t o f f e r s . T h i s would help g r e a t l y to ensure t h a t : -

( a ) 
i n d i v i d u a l members of the p u b l i c are enabled 
to 
make an informed choice of the l e g a l a d v i s e r most 
s u i t e d to t h e i r needs; 
(b) 
i t becomes e a s i e r f o r newly q u a l i f i e d lawyers to 
enter i n t o and e s t a b l i s h p r a c t i c e ; 
( c ) 
there i s an i n c e n t i v e f o r e s t a b l i s h e d lawyers to 
improve t h e i r e f f i c i e n c y and 
the q u a l i t y of 
the 
s e r v i c e s they o f f e r ; and 
(d) 
there i s an encouragement to lower charges. 
The o v e r a l l b e n e f i t to both lawyers and t h e i r c l i e n t s w i l l , i n the Government's view, improve the access of the p u b l i c to j u s t i c e . 

## Present P O S I T I O N

13.4 
R e s t r i c t i o n s on the freedom to a d v e r t i s e of members of both branches of the p r o f e s s i o n were examined i n r e p o r t s of the Monopolies and Mergers Commission which were p u b l i s h e d i n 
1976. 

The Commission came to d i f f e r e n t conclusions i n the conditions p r e v a i l i n g a t t h a t t i m e . 

C o n s e q u e n t l y t h e p r e s e n t p o s i t i o n on providing information d i f f e r s as between s o l i c i t o r s and b a r r i s t e r s . 

(a) 
S o l i c i t o r s 
13.5 
The Monopolies and Mergers Commission concluded t h a t t h e r e s t r i c t i o n s on s o l i c i t o r s which then e x i s t e d operated against the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . They recommended t h a t Rule 1 of the S o l i c i t o r s ' 
P r a c t i c e Rules, which p l a c e d a g e n e r a l p r o h i b i t i o n on a d v e r t i s i n g and s o l i c i t i n g business, should be terminated, and t h a t i t should be replaced by a r u l e which would permit any s o l i c i t o r to use, whenever he thought f i t , such methods of p u b l i c i t y as he thought f i t provided t h a t they did not:  ־

(a) 
c l a i m f o r h i s p r a c t i c e 
s u p e r i o r i t y over any or a l l 
other s o l i c i t o r s ' p r a c t i c e s ; 
(b) 
c o n t a i n any i n a c c u r a c i e s or misleading statements; or 
( c ) 
possess a c h a r a c t e r t h a t could reasonably be regarded 
as l i k e l y to bring the p r o f e s s i o n i n t o d i s r e p u t e . 
As a r e s u l t of changes made to P r a c t i c e Rule 1 and guidance i s s u e d by the Law S o c i e t y i n 1984, 
1987 
and 
1988, s o l i c i t o r s a r e now f r e e t o a d v e r t i s e t h e i r s e r v i c e s through any medium; and they may s p e c i f y the f e e s they charge f o r p a r t i c u l a r s e r v i c e s or the f a c t t h a t they are prepared to give a quotation. The Law S o c i e t y has a l s o taken a number of s t e p s to p u b l i c i s e the a v a i l a b i l i t y of s o l i c i t o r s ' s e r v i c e s g e n e r a l l y . 

(b) 
B a r r i s t e r s 

13.6 
As to b a r r i s t e r s , the Monopolies and Mergers Commission 
concluded 
t h a t the a b s o l u t e ban 
i n the Bar Council 
r u l e s on 
a d v e r t i s i n g , touting and 
p u b l i c i t y d i d not 
operate a g a i n s t the p u b l i c 
i n t e r e s t . The Commission 
d i s t i n g u i s h e d b a r r i s t e r s ' s e r v i c e s from those of other 
p r o f e s s i o n s i n t h a t the l a y c l i e n t could (and 
s t i l l 
can) approach 
a b a r r i s t e r only through 
a 
s o l i c i t o r . 
They took the view t h a t the c l i e n t was 
- 
almost u n i q u e l y - not disadvantaged by l a c k of information s i n c e he could r e l y on the advice of h i s s o l i c i t o r as to which b a r r i s t e r to i n s t r u c t . The Commission thought t h a t the Bar Council r u l e s concerned d i d not prevent s o l i c i t o r s from o b t a i n i n g s u f f i c i e n t i n f o r m a t i o n adequately to advise c l i e n t s . Moreover they thought the r u l e s d i d not p l a c e any s i g n i f i c a n t o b s t a c l e s i n the way o f e s t a b l i s h e d b a r r i s t e r s i m p r o v i n g t h e i r e f f i c i e n c y and standard of s e r v i c e , or i n the way of new b a r r i s t e r s e s t a b l i s h i n g themselves, given t h a t b a r r i s t e r s w e r e r e q u i r e d t o p r a c t i s e s i n g l y 
( p a r t n e r s h i p being then, a s now, p r o h i b i t e d ) as a member of chambers. Consequently, the Commission d i d 

not recommend any change t o the 
Bar Council r u l e s . 
13.7 
I n 
1988 the 
Bar Council s i m p l i f i e d i t s r u l e s and i s s u e d 
a code of a d v e r t i s i n g and p u b l i c i t y , which permits the 
i s s u e of a c e r t a i n amount of information i n approved 
d i r e c t o r i e s and l o c a l 
newspapers and i n approved 
chambers' 
l e a f l e t s . The p o s i t i o n i s , however, 
s t i l l 
s u b s t a n t i a l l y 
s i m i l a r 
t o t h a t examined by t h e 
Monopolies and Mergers Commission and remains 
v e r y 
r e s t r i c t i v e i n r e l a t i o n t o i n d i v i d u a l 
b a r r i s t e r s , 
e s p e c i a l l y i n regard to g i v i n g information d i r e c t to the p u b l i c . 

## The Government'S View

(a) 
S o l i c i t o r s 
13.8 
The p r e s e n t 
P r a c t i c e Rules and guidance of the Law 
S o c i e t y on a d v e r t i s i n g by i n d i v i d u a l 
s o l i c i t o r s , 
combined with the a c t i o n taken by the Law S o c i e t y to 
i s s u e information about s o l i c i t o r s ' s e r v i c e s g e n e r a l l y , 
go a long way towards 
r e a l i s i n g the advantages of 
p u b l i c i t y 
s e t o u t i n p a r a 13.3 a b o v e . 
F u r t h e r 
c o n s i d e r a t i o n w i l l , however, be needed about how best 
to b r i n g to p u b l i c a t t e n t i o n the s p e c i a l i s t s k i l l s and 
q u a l i f i c a t i o n s envisaged i n Chapter 3. Although t h e r e 
i s obvious advantage i n making such s p e c i a l i s m s widely known, i t would be counter-productive i f any amendment to t h e P r a c t i c e Rules and guidance were to prevent s o l i c i t o r s from a d v e r t i s i n g t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of s e r v i c e s i n p a r t i c u l a r a r e a s i n w h i c h t h e y a r e e x p e r i e n c e d , b u t do n o t h a v e a s p e c i a l i s t q u a l i f i c a t i o n . 

(b) 
B a r r i s t e r s 

13.9 
I n view of the proposals about advocacy (Chapter 5) and 
d i r e c t a c c e s s by l a y c l i e n t s to b a r r i s t e r s (Chapter 8 ) , 
t h e 
f a c t o r s which l e d t h e Monopolies and 
Mergers 
Commission not to recommend any change i n the Bar r u l e s 
on p u b l i c i t y appear no longer to be r e l e v a n t . I t i s 
t h e r e f o r e envisaged 
that the Bar Council יs r u l e s and 
code w i l l need amendment to put them on the same l i n e s 
as those the Law S o c i e t y now has. 

## The C I V I L J U S T I C E Review'S Recommendation

13.10 
Some a l t e r a t i o n of e x i s t i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l 
p r a c t i c e s w i l l 
be needed i n any event, i n order t o implement 
one 
important 
recommendation 
i n the r e p o r t of the 
C i v i l 
J u s t i c e Review. I n i t s 
chapter on a c c e s s to j u s t i c e , 
t h a t report recognised t h a t f e a r of c o s t s i s a major 
f a c t o r w h i c h i n h i b i t s u s e of t h e C o u r t s ; and i t recommended t h a t s o l i c i t o r s and b a r r i s t e r s should be encouraged and expected to provide information by way of s t a t e d r a t e s per c a s e per hour. The Government e n d o r s e s t h i s f i n d i n g and s t r o n g l y s u p p o r t s t h e recommendation. For s o l i c i t o r s i t may be necessary f o r the Law S o c i e t y to consider how i t s e x i s t i n g r u l e s and guidance might be strengthened i n order to produce more s p e c i f i c d e t a i l s . 

The Code of Conduct of the Bar e f f e c t i v e l y p r o h i b i t s b a r r i s t e r s from p u b l i s h i n g t h e i r charges. Accordingly the Government b e l i e v e s t h a t the code should both be r e l a x e d to permit t h i s and a l s o expanded so as to encourage the r o u t i n e p r o v i s i o n of information about fees i n i n d i v i d u a l c a s e s . 

## Chapter 14 - Probate Introduction

14.1 
I n t h i s chapter the 
Government s e t s out 
why i t 
proposes 
to amend s e c t i o n 23 of the S o l i c i t o r s Act 1974 which 
imposes r e s t r i c t i o n s on those who may draw o r prepare 
f o r 
reward 
c e r t a i n 
papers i n connection 
w i t h nonc o n t e n t i o u s 
a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r probate and l e t t e r s of 
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . 
I t s e e k s 
v i e w s on whether t h e 
r e s t r i c t i o n s should be removed a l t o g e t h e r or whether a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r 
reward should be made only by s p e c i f i c 
c l a s s e s of persons. 

## Existing R E S T R I C T I O N S

14.2 
Under s e c t i o n 23 of the S o l i c i t o r s Act 1974 i t 
i s 
an 
offence f o r 
anyone apart from a s o l i c i t o r , b a r r i s t e r or 
notary to draw or prepare f o r reward the papers on 
w h i c h t o found a g r a n t of probate 
o r l e t t e r s o f 
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . 
14.3 
The papers required 
a r e : -
( a ) 
an a f f i d a v i t by which the a p p l i c a n t f o r the grant s w e a r s t h a t he w i l l a d m i n i s t e r t h e e s t a t e according to the law and 
( i ) 
i f he i s an executor, swears t h a t he i s the 

executor named and i d e n t i f i e s the w i l l as 
the 
l a s t w i l l of the deceased; or 
( i i ) i f t h e r e i s no 
e x e c u t o r 
o r no 
w i l l , 
i d e n t i f i e s h i s 
t i t l e to the grant; 
(b) 
v e r y 
o c c a s i o n a l l y , a f f i d a v i t s 
i n r e s p e c t o f 
c e r t a i n other matters; and 
( c ) 
an Inland Revenue account signed by 
the executor 
or administrator. (However t h i s i s not required i n 
most c a s e s where the e s t a t e i s worth l e s s 
than 
£70,000). 
14.4 
A p p l i c a t i o n s f o r a grant may be made i n person or by a 
s o l i c i t o r . 
The Non-Contentious Probate Rules 
provide 
t h a t only a p p l i c a t i o n s by a s o l i c i t o r do not r e q u i r e personal attendance a t the Probate R e g i s t r y . 

## D I F F I C U L T I E S C R E A T E D

14.5 
I t i s common p r a c t i c e f o r a t e s t a t o r to nominate a bank 
as h i s executor. 
A bank f o r t h i s purpose operates as a 
t r u s t corporation. 
The expression " t r u s t corporation" 
i s defined by s e c t i o n 128 of the Supreme Court Act 1981 
and 
t h e 
Law 
of 
P r o p e r t y 
(Amendment) A c t 1926 
as 
meaning the P u b l i c Trustee, a corporation appointed 
by 
the Court i n any p a r t i c u l a r case to be a t r u s t e e , or a corporation e n t i t l e d under the P u b l i c Trustee Rules to 
a c t as custodian t r u s t e e . 
The 
l i s t 
of 
corporations 
e n t i t l e d to a c t i s l a r g e and v a r i e d . 
I t i n c l u d e s the 
Treasury 
S o l i c i t o r , 
c h a r i t i e s authorised by the 
Lord 
Chancellor, 
l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s , and o r g a n i z a t i o n s 
l i k e 
B r i t i s h Gas, London Regional Transport and the 
B r i t i s h 
Coal Corporation 
i n r e l a t i o n to t h e i r pension 
funds. 
I t 
a l s o 
i n c l u d e s UK 
or 
EEC 
companies w h i c h 
a r e 
empowered to undertake t r u s t business, have a t 
l e a s t 
one 
p l a c e of business i n England and Wales and have 
i s s u e d 
c a p i t a l 
of £250,000 of which not 
l e s s 
than 
£100,000 has been paid up i n cash. 
Examples of 
such 
companies are insurance companies and, as s t a t e d a t the beginning of the paragraph, banks. 
14.6 
A 
t r u s t 
c o r p o r a t i o n 
i s , l i k e 
any 
o t h e r 
e x e c u t o r , 
e n t i t l e d to administer the e s t a t e i n r e s p e c t of which 
i t has been appointed. 
However, as i t r e c e i v e s a fee 
for being executor, i t 
cannot prepare the a f f i d a v i t or 
account. 

Nor can i t make a personal a p p l i c a t i o n f o r probate as i t i s s p e c i f i c a l l y excluded from doing t h i s by t h e N o n - C o n t e n t i o u s P r o b a t e R u l e s . 

I t must 

t h e r e f o r e 
i n s t r u c t a s o l i c i t o r t o prepare the papers 
and make the a p p l i c a t i o n on i t s behalf. 
14.7 
I t 
might appear t h a t i t 
could avoid these d i f f i c u l t i e s 
by 
making t h e a p p l i c a t i o n 
t h r o u g h an 
i n - h o u s e 
s o l i c i t o r . However there i s 
some doubt as t o whether 
t h i s 
would be 
l a w f u l . 
I t i s a r g u e d 
t h a t t h e 
r e s t r i c t i o n s on u n q u a l i f i e d persons ( i . e . 
those who 
are 
not 
s o l i c i t o r s ) cannot be avoided by an u n q u a l i f i e d 
person employing a s o l i c i t o r to a c t 
as h i s 
agent. I f 
t h i s 
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of s e c t i o n 23 i s c o r r e c t , the 
r e s u l t i s i l l o g i c a l , 
bearing 
i n mind t h a t employed 
s o l i c i t o r s a r e a b l e to l i t i g a t e on behalf of 
t h e i r 
employers and w i l l soon be able to provide conveyancing 
s e r v i c e s on t h e i r behalf. 
Nevertheless, the 
wording of 
s e c t i o n 23 can 
be seen as a bar 
on making a p p l i c a t i o n s 
for grants through employed s o l i c i t o r s . 
14.8 
Banks have been arguing f o r 
some time t h a t s e c t i o n 23 
should be amended so that they a r e 
c l e a r l y permitted to 
make a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r grants. 
I n a d d i t i o n 
l i c e n s e d 
conveyancers now argue t h a t they need t o be able to 
make a p p l i c a t i o n s on behalf of c l i e n t s . 
An obvious 
example i s 
where t h e i r c l i e n t s need to obtain a grant 
of probate to obtain a good 
t i t l e . 
At the moment, 
u n l e s s 
c l i e n t s 
a r e w i l l i n g 
t o make 
p e r s o n a l 
a p p l i c a t i o n s , l i c e n s e d conveyancers have to send them 
to s o l i c i t o r s . 
J u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r r e s t r i c t i o n s 

14.9 
The j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r the r e s t r i c t i o n s i n s e c t i o n 23 
would appear to 
be:-
( a ) 
the need to p r o t e c t the e s t a t e . 
The p r o t e c t i o n 
t h a t the s e c t i o n might give could be only 
very 
l i m i t e d . 
I t does not apply to c a s e s where the 
executor 
or h i s agent a c t s without 
reward. 
I t 
does not p r o t e c t the e s t a t e once i t i s i n the hands of the executors which i s the stage a t which most dishonesty would take p l a c e . 
I t b i t e s only 
on the formal a p p l i c a t i o n f o r the grant. 
(b) 
t h e 
need 
t o 
p r o t e c t 
t h e 
c o u r t s 
from 
p o o r l y 
p r e p a r e d 
documents. 
I n c a s e s where 
t r u s t 
c o r p o r a t i o n s a d m i n i s t e r 
e s t a t e s , 
i t i s thought 
t h a t they prepare the documentation so the r o l e of 
the s o l i c i t o r i s purely nominal. 
I n the view of 
the Probate R e g i s t r y , documents prepared by 
t r u s t 
c o r p o r a t i o n s 
a r e a t 
l e a s t 
as w e l l prepared 
as 
t h o s e 
p r e p a r e d 
by 
s o l i c i t o r s . 
The 
P r o b a t e 
R e g i s t r y 
checks 
a l l a p p l i c a t i o n s and 
w i l l 
not 
i s s u e a grant u n l e s s i t i s s a t i s f i e d t h a t a l l i s 
i n order. 
14.10 
The Law S o c i e t y were u n t i l r e c e n t l y f i r m l y a g a i n s t any 
change. The President, however, i n h i s recent 
address 
to the Law S o c i e t y Conference, 
s a i d : -
"We 
are r e a s s e s s i n g the areas of work i n which we 
r e t a i n p r i v i l e g e d p o s i t i o n s . 
For example, 
the 
Council i s looking again a t whether the monopoly we 
enjoy by s t a t u t e f o r taking out probate 
and 
l e t t e r s of administration, i s r e a l l y j u s t i f i e d i n 
the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . 
I w i l l 
t e l l you my 
view. 
Non-contentious probate i s an area of work which 
as a p r o f e s s i o n we have t r a d i t i o n a l l y dominated. 
Where banks or other t r u s t corporations have been 
i n s t r u c t e d as executors to undertake the bulk of 
the winding up of an e s t a t e i s there r e a l l y a p u b l i c safeguard i n r e q u i r i n g only the probate papers themselves to be drawn and lodged by a s o l i c i t o r ? 

We know t h a t o u r c h a r g e s f o r executorship a r e modest compared with those the bank charge, and we should be p u b l i c i s i n g t h i s f a c t to our c l i e n t s . I f we cannot stand on our reputation i n t h i s area and maintain a s u b s t a n t i a l share of the market, we do not deserve t o have i t a r t i f i c i a l l y m a i n t a i n e d f o r us by p r o t e c t i v e l e g i s l a t i o n . " 
The Government welcomes t h i s c o n s t r u c t i v e approach. 

## Relaxation

14.11 
The Government has concluded t h a t i t can no longer j u s t i f y maintaining the present s t a t u t o r y r e s t r i c t i o n on those who may make a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r g r a n t s of probate or l e t t e r s of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n f o r reward i n noncontentious c a s e s . 

However i t wishes to seek views on whether the r i g h t course i s t o widen the c l a s s of people who may apply f o r reward 
- Option A - or w h e t h e r i t i s s a f e t o remove t h e r e s t r i c t i o n a l t o g e t h e r - Option B. 

## Option A

14.12 
Documents have to be completed properly and executors 
need to be aware of any i r r e g u l a r i t i e s i n 
the d r a f t i n g 
of the w i l l . 
There i s a l s o a p o s s i b i l i t y , should the 
r e s t r i c t i o n s 
go a l t o g e t h e r , o f a new b r e e d o f 
unregulated probate p r a c t i t i o n e r . 
The Probate R e g i s t r y 
cannot be expected to pick up every mistake or attempt 
a t 
f r a u d . 
I t might be s e n s i b l e t o p r o v i d e 
t h a t 
a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r 
reward 
s h o u l d o n l y be made by 
s p e c i f i c 
c l a s s e s of p e r s o n who a r e l i k e l y t o be 
reputable and who may w e l l be regulated by s t a t u t e or a p r o f e s s i o n a l body. 

The obvious examples of such c l a s s e s 
( a p a r t from 

14.13 

s o l i c i t o r s , b a r r i s t e r s and n o t a r i e s ) a r e : -

(a) 
t r u s t corporations; 
(b) 
l i c e n s e d conveyancers; 
( c ) 
a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s - as proposed 
i n the 
C o n s u l t a t i o n Paper on Conveyancing 
by Authorised 
P r a c t i t 
i o n e r s ; and 
(d) 
c h a r t e r e d and c e r t i f i e d accountants. 
The l i s t i n para 14.13 i s not intended to be exhaustive 

14.14 

a n d t h e G o v e r n m e n t w o u l d w i s h t o c o n s i d e r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s from any other c l a s s which c o n s i d e r s i t might properly be included. 

As explained i n para 14.4, a t present only s o l i c i t o r s 

14.15 

may make a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r a grant without attending the R e g i s t r y i n person. 

I t would seem to be both s e n s i b l e and simple to put a l l the c l a s s e s which are u l t i m a t e l y accepted i n e x a c t l y the same p o s i t i o n . 

Option Β 
I t i s d i f f i c u l t to a s s e s s the p r a c t i c a l as opposed to 
14.16 

t h e t h e o r e t i c a l p r o b l e m s of u n r e g u l a t e d p r o b a t e p r a c t i t i o n e r s s e t t i n g up i n b u s i n e s s . 

Furthermore, i f t h e r e i s a s p e c i f i c l i s t of a c c e p t e d p e r s o n s , as suggested i n p a r a 14.13, t h e r e w i l l i n e v i t a b l y be a p p l i c a t i o n s from t h o s e who would w i s h t o add themselves. 

Option A may t h e r e f o r e cause more t r o u b l e than i t i s worth i f the r i s k of fraud and e r r o r i s very s m a l l . 

14.17 
On the other hand, where fraud or e r r o r does occur the p u b l i c would be l e s s w e l l protected i n the case of unregulated probate p r a c t i t i o n e r s . 

I n addition, i f anyone were able to apply f o r a grant as agent f o r another, i t would be l e s s j u s t i f i a b l e to r e l a x the requirement t h a t a l l t h o s e e x c e p t s o l i c i t o r s must a t t e n d t h e R e g i s t r y i n person. 

I t would not be s e n s i b l e to remove the requirement a l t o g e t h e r , as i t does help the R e g i s t r y to ensure as f a r as p o s s i b l e t h a t a p p l i c a t i o n s a r e made by the person p r o p e r l y e n t i t l e d . 

On the other hand, any attempt to d e f i n e those who need not attend seems to be a p a r t i a l r e t u r n to Option A. 

The oath 

Under e i t h e r Option A or B, f o r those who do not make 

14.18 

an a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a grant through a s o l i c i t o r or notary, t h e r e i s a f u r t h e r o b s t a c l e i n the way of a one-stop probate s e r v i c e . Only a s o l i c i t o r or notary may administer the oaths r e f e r r e d to i n paras 14.3(a) 
and 
( b ) . T h i s r a i s e s t h e q u e s t i o n w h e t h e r t h e requirement to swear an oath i s too cumbersome and should be removed, on the understanding t h a t making a d i s h o n e s t unsworn statement f o r the purpose of an a p p l i c a t i o n would continue to be a c r i m i n a l offence. The Government would welcome views on t h i s suggestion. 

## Relaxation Confined To Non-Contentious C A S E S

14.19 
A l t h o u g h t h e Government i n t e n d s t o remove t h e r e s t r i c t i o n s i n n o n - c o n t e n t i o u s c a s e s , i t i s not proposing to remove them i n c a s e s which a r e or become contentious. 

Such c a s e s need to conducted by those w i t h t h e n e c e s s a r y s k i l l and t r a i n i n g t o conduct l i t i g a t i o n and appear i n court. 

## Possible S P E C I A L C O N T R O L S (A) Code Of Conduct

14.20 
I n the past i t 
was suggested t h a t there should be a 
code o f conduct i f t r u s t 
c o r p o r a t i o n s 
were t o be 
allowed to apply f o r 
probate. The Government c o n s i d e r s 
t h a t 
t h e r e i s no m e r i t 
i n t h i s 
s u g g e s t i o n . 
As 
p r e v i o u s l y explained, the a p p l i c a t i o n f o r 
probate i s 
a 
very small p a r t of the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of an e s t a t e and 
the code would not apply t o the r e s t . 
I t i s a l s o 
d i f f i c u l t to 
know what i t could provide other than t h a t 
a p p l i c a t i o n s should be made competently and honestly. 
Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of a p p l i c a n t s 
w i l l 
already be s u b j e c t to s t a t u t o r y or p r o f e s s i o n a l 
c o n t r o l s over the 
way 
they conduct themselves. 

## (B) Charges

14.21 
An anxiety 
often expressed about banks i s t h a t 
t h e i r 
c h a r g e s f o r e x e c u t o r s h i p 
a r e too high and a r e 
not 
s u b j e c t t o c o n t r o l s as a r e 
the charges of s o l i c i t o r s . 
( B e n s o n , 
a s a 
q u a l i f i c a t i o n 
t o i t s g e n e r a l 
recommendation about t r u s t corporations, 
proposed t h a t 
c h a r g e s by those who a r e not s o l i c i t o r s 
should be 
s u b j e c t to c o n t r o l . ) 
14.22 
I n the past the banks have argued t h a t one reason why 
t h e i r charges are 
high i s 
because they have had to 
pay 
s o l i c i t o r s to do work which they have v i r t u a l l y done 
already. 
Whether t h i s i s t r u e or not, 
the Government 
b e l i e v e s 
t h a t i n p r i n c i p l e p r i c e s should be s e t 
by 
market f o r c e s and t h a t i t s r o l e i s 
confined t o ensuring 
t h a t 
p r i c e s a r e c l e a r l y and t r u t h f u l l y 
e x p r e s s e d . 
Banks p u b l i s h t a b l e s of f e e s . 
I t 
i s 
up t o 
the t e s t a t o r 
to make h i s choice. 
T h i s now a l s o seems t o 
be the view 
of the 
Law Society. 

## Summary

14.23 
The government would welcome views on whether 
(a) 
anybody should be 
e n t i t l e d to make a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r 
grants of probate or l e t t e r s of administration; or 
(b) 
only s p e c i f i e d c l a s s e s of person and, i f so, who should 
they be? 
( c ) 
the requirement to swear an oath should be a b o l i s h e d . 

## Competition I N The Ec At The Moment:-

( a ) the 
UK 18 already bound by the 
requirement of the 
EC t r e a t y 
to a b o l i s h r e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e freedom o f establishment of 
n a t i o n a l s o f a member s t a t e i n t h e t e r r i t o r y o f another 
member s t a t e and 
by t h e 
requirement t o a b o l i s h r e s t r i c t i o n s 
on freedom to provide s e r v i c e s w i t h i n the Community; 
(b) 
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n on the grounds of n a t i o n a l i t y which might 
prevent lawyers from one member s t a t e p r a c t i s i n g i n another 
i s not permitted; 
(c) UK lawyers, e i t h e r as firms or i n d i v i d u a l s , a r e 
permitted to 
p r a c t i s e under t h e i r home s t a t e 
t i t l e i n EC member s t a t e s 
without a c q u i r i n g a l o c a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n provided t h a t they 
do n o t engage i n work 
r e s e r v e d 
f o r t h e h o s t 
l e g a l 
profession; and 
(d) under t h e Legal S e r v i c e s 
D i r e c t i v e of 1977 a lawyer from 
one member s t a t e has the r i g h t t o plead i n the c o u r t s of 
another member s t a t e provided t h a t he a c t s i n co-operation 
with a l o c a l lawyer who has r i g h t s of audience before the 
court or t r i b u n a l i n question. 
The plans t o achieve a s i n g l e i n t e r n a l market from the end of 
1992 w i l l have f u r t h e r consequences f o r the p r o v i s i o n o f l e g a l services i n EC 
member s t a t e s : -

( a ) The Council D i r e c t i v e on a general system f o r r e c o g n i t i o n of 
h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n d i p l o m a s , adopted by t h e C o u n c i l o f M i n i s t e r s on 21 December 1988, w i l l promote the freedom of 
members of p r o f e s s i o n s to provide s e r v i c e s throughout the 
EC 
and make i t 
e a s i e r f o r 
a p r o f e s s i o n a l i n 
one 
member s t a t e t o 
p r a c t i s e i n other member s t a t e s a s a member of the l o c a l 
p r o f e s s i o n . Member s t a t e s have two years i n which t o take the measures necessary to comply with the D i r e c t i v e . As f a r as lawyers a r e concerned, member s t a t e s w i l l have a choice between r e q u i r i n g an incoming p r o f e s s i o n a l t o t a k e an a p t i t u d e t e s t o r go t h r o u g h a n a d a p t a t i o n p e r i o d . 

Accordingly once he has completed t h e a p t i t u d e t e s t or adaptation period and s a t i s f i e d other r e l e v a n t c o n d i t i o n s , he w i l l be e n t i t l e d t o admission a s a f u l l member of the host s t a t e l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n ; 

(b) 
t h e r e 
w i l l be an i n c r e a s e d demand a s a r e s u l t o f 
t h e 
d i r e c t i v e both f o r host 
s t a t e p r a c t i c e 
(e.g. UK lawyers 
a c q u i r i n g the l o c a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n s i n another member s t a t e ) and f o r 
home s t a t e p r a c t i c e (e.g. UK lawyers p r a c t i s i n g i n 
other member s t a t e s without a c q u i r i n g l o c a l q u a l i f i c a t i o n s ) . 
I t 
w i l l be important 
t o s a f e g u a r d t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of 
establishment under both methods; 
and 
(c) 
there w i l l be an i n c r e a s e d demand to remove r e s t r i c t i o n s on 
m u l t i - n a t i o n a l p r a c t i c e s . 
As f a r a s the law i t s e l f i s concerned there i s l i k e l y by 1992 
to be both an i n c r e a s e d body of E n g l i s h law implementing EC d i r e c t i v e s and an i n c r e a s e d body of EC law. Both business and private c l i e n t s w i l l be a f f e c t e d . Business c l i e n t s e s p e c i a l l y a r e l i k e l y t o become more a c t i v e i n the common market. They w i l l need advice on matters such a s the best p l a c e and form i n which to s e t up b u s i n e s s , whether t h e r e a r e advantages i n h a v i n g t h e i r contracts governed by the law of a p a r t i c u l a r s t a t e , and the proper forum i n which t o b r i n g proceedings. Only those E n g l i s h lawyers prepared t o develop an e x p e r t i s e i n European Community law and p r a c t i c e and t h e law o f EC Member S t a t e s w i l l be i n a position t o o f f e r t h i s advice. E n g l i s h lawyers who do not w i l l lose the opportunity to compete both i n the European market and at home. 

## The Providers Of Legal Services B A R R I S T E R S

1 
The 
General Council of the Bar 
i s the governing body 
of 
t h e B a r . 
I t 
i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r p o l i c y 
m a t t e r s 
a f f e c t i n g the 
Bar 
and f o r 
the 
p r o f e s s i o n a l conduct of 
b a r r i s t e r s . Every b a r r i s t e r must be a member o f 
one 
of 
the four Inns of Court ( L i n c o l n ' s Inn, Inner Temple, 
Middle Temple, and 
Gray's I n n ) . The Inns have the 
s o l e 
r i g h t t o c a l l men and 
women t o the 
Bar 
and t o d i s b a r 
them i n 
the 
event of misconduct. 
Q u a l i f i c a t i o n 

2 
There a r e three stages to q u a l i f y i n g a s a b a r r i s t e r . 
The 
f i r s t , or academic, stage c o n s i s t s of 
a law degree 
or, for non-law graduates, a one year Diploma Course 
i n 
s u b s t a n t i v e law. 
The B a r u s u a l l y 
r e q u i r e s a s a 
minimum a second c l a s s honours degree before 
allowing 
students t o 
proceed t o 
the 
second, or 
v o c a t i o n a l , 
stage 
of 
t r a i n i n g . 
T h i s i s 
r u n by t h e p r o f e s s i o n and 
c u r r e n t l y c o n s i s t s of a 30-week course a t 
the Council 
o f 
L e g a l 
E d u c a t i o n 
l e a d i n g 
t o t h e B a r 
F i n a l 
examination. 

Once the student has passed t h e Bar F i n a l s , and provided t h a t he o r she has kept t h e r e q u i s i t e number of terms a t t h e i r Inn of Court (which normally takes two y e a r s ) , he o r she i s e n t i t l e d t o be c a l l e d t o the Bar. 

He o r she i s not, however, allowed to p r a c t i s e u n t i l he o r she has completed t h e t h i r d stage of t r a i n i n g which i s c a l l e d p u p i l l a g e . 

T h i s l a s t s f o r 12 m o n t h s a n d i s s i m i l a r t o a n a p p r e n t i c e s h i p . 

The p u p i l i s a t t a c h e d t o a p u p i l master, an experienced b a r r i s t e r whose f u n c t i o n i t i s to i n s t r u c t the p u p i l i n the s k i l l s he o r she w i l l need to p r a c t i s e a t the Bar and t o i n s t i l l i n him o r or her the e t h i c s of t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n . 

The Bar introduced 
1 
p r a c t i s i n g c e r t i f i c a t e s and check l i s t s f o r p u p i l s i n the autumn of 1988. 

A f t e r s i x months of p u p i l l a g e the p u p i l must obtain a c e r t i f i c a t e from h i s or her p u p i l master confirming t h a t he or she has s a t i s f a c t o r i l y completed the f i r s t stage of t h e i r p u p i l l a g e . 

The Bar Council w i l l then i s s u e him or her with a p r a c t i s i n g c e r t i f i c a t e e n t i t l i n g him or her to take c a s e s on t h e i r own account. 

On s a t i s f a c t o r y completion of a f u r t h e r s i x months p u p i l l a g e , confirmed by the production of a f u r t h e r s i g n e d c e r t i f i c a t e from h i s o r her p u p i l master, the Bar Council w i l l i s s u e him or her with a F i n a l C e r t i f i c a t e e n a b l i n g him or her t o become a f **u l l y** . r f l e d g e d p r a c t i s i n g b a r r i s t e r e i t h e r i n independent p r a c t i c e or employment. 

There i s no requirement t h a t p u p i l b a r r i s t e r s be p a i d a s a l a r y during t h e i r p u p i l l a g e , although v a r i o u s awards and 

g r a n t s 
a r e 
a v a i l a b l e 
from 
t h e 
C o u n c i l 
of 
L e g a l 
Education, the Inns of Court and an i n c r e a s i n g number o f 
s e t s 
o f chambers. 
( S e e 
p a r a 
4 below 
f o r 
an 
explanation of the chambers system.) 
3 
T h e r e 
i s no 
compulsory 
c o n t i n u i n g 
e d u c a t i o n 
f o r 
b a r r i s t e r s a f t e r p u p i l l a g e , although the Bar has plans 
to introduce t h i s . 
Courses are already organised f o r 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s on, 
f o r instance, the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of 
company accounts, 
EC law and 
matters 
of 
i n t e r e s t 
t o 
the s p e c i a l i s t Bar A s s o c i a t i o n s . 

## Practice A T The Bar

4 
I n order 
t o p r a c t i s e a t the Bar a b a r r i s t e r must, 
according to the r u l e s of h i s or her p r o f e s s i o n , be a 
member of a s e t of chambers which i n c l u d e s having 
the 
s e r v i c e s of a c l e r k . 
There were i n the autumn of 
1988 
about 6,000 b a r r i s t e r s p r a c t i s i n g from a t o t a l of 
359 
s e t s of chambers; 231 of these s e t s were i n London and 
128 were i n the provinces. 
Again, according to h i s or 
her p r o f e s s i o n a l r u l e s , a b a r r i s t e r must p r a c t i s e as an i n d i v i d u a l 
(partnerships a r e not permitted) and, with a few e x c e p t i o n s r e l a t i n g t o other p r o f e s s i o n s , a b a r r i s t e r i s not allowed t o take i n s t r u c t i o n s d i r e c t l y from l a y c l i e n t s but may a c t only on the i n s t r u c t i o n s o f a s o l i c i t o r . 

( D i r e c t a c c e s s t o b a r r i s t e r s i s considered i n Chapter 8.) 

## The Employed Bar

5 
Many b a r r i s t e r s a r e employed i n commerce and i n d u s t r y and by c e n t r a l and l o c a l government. 

The e x a c t number of employed b a r r i s t e r s i s unknown although i t i s l i k e l y to be i n excess of 5,000. 

S p e c i a l p r o f e s s i o n a l r u l e s apply to employed b a r r i s t e r s : f o r i n s t a n c e , such a b a r r i s t e r may not supply l e g a l s e r v i c e s t o the p u b l i c , most employed b a r r i s t e r s a r e not allowed t o i n s t r u c t counsel d i r e c t l y and, by v i r t u e of a combination of s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s and p r a c t i c e r u l e s , the r i g h t s of 

audience of employed b a r r i s t e r s a r e c u r r e n t l y even more 
r e s t r i c t e d than those of s o l i c i t o r s . (See Annex E: 
paras 19-21.) 

## S O L I C I T O R S

6 
The Law Society i s 
the p r o f e s s i o n a l body of s o l i c i t o r s . 
I n 
c o n t r a s t 
t o t h e B a r , many 
a s p e c t s 
o f t h e 
s o l i c i t o r s ' 
p r o f e s s i o n , 
such a s entry, p r a c t i c e and 
conduct and d i s c i p l i n e , a r e regulated by s t a t u t e ( t h e 
S o l i c i t o r s Act 1974, c.47, as amended). 

## Q U A L I F I C A T I O N

7 
As with b a r r i s t e r s , s o l i c i t o r s have s e v e r a l stages to 
t h e i r t r a i n i n g . 
The academic stage i s s a t i s f i e d by a 
law 
d e g r e e , 
o r by p a s s i n g 
t h e S o l i c i t o r s 
F i r s t 
Examination ( f o r 
non-graduates), or by passing the Law 
S o c i e t y ' s Common P r o f e s s i o n a l Examination 
( a one-year law course f o r non-law graduates). 

Completion of the academic stage e n t i t l e s the student to take the 36-week course leading to the S o l i c i t o r s F i n a l Examination. 

As w i t h the Bar, the v o c a t i o n a l stage of t r a i n i n g i s e x c l u s i v e l y under t h e c o n t r o l of t h e p r o f e s s i o n . 

Before being admitted as a s o l i c i t o r , a student must a l s o s e r v e a p e r i o d o f p r a c t i c a l t r a i n i n g o r a p p r e n t i c e s h i p c a l l e d a r t i c l e s . 

The s t u d e n t i s a r t i c l e d to an experienced s o l i c i t o r f o r between two and f i v e y e a r s , depending on h i s or her method of q u a l i f i c a t i o n . 

The Law S o c i e t y p r e s c r i b e s the terms and conditions of a r t i c l e d c l e r k s h i p and i n s i s t s t h a t the a r t i c l e d c l e r k i s paid a t l e a s t the recommended minimum s a l a r y , which i n the autumn of 1988 was £6,000 
i n the provinces, £6,900 i n outer London and £7,200 i n inner London. 

8 
From 
1 August 
1985 
t h e 
Law 
S o c i e t y has 
r e q u i r e d 
s o l i c i t o r s , i n the f i r s t three years a f t e r admission to 
the R o l l , to attend a system of continuing 
education. 
There are compulsory courses i n o f f i c e management and 
communication, 
standards 
of p r o f e s s i o n a l conduct 
and 
e t h i c s and the handling of p r o f e s s i o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y . 
I n 
a d d i t i o n , the 
n e w l y - q u a l i f i e d 
s o l i c i t o r 
has 
to 
attend a c e r t a i n number of voluntary courses over 
the 
three year period. 
Practice as a s o l i c i t o r 9 
S o l i c i t o r s may 
p r a c t i s e as s o l e p r a c t i t i o n e r s or i n 
p a r t n e r s h i p . 
I n the autumn of 1988 there were 50,337 
s o l i c i t o r s 
holding 
p r a c t i s i n g 
c e r t i f i c a t e s . 
Between 
March 1986 
and March 1987, 
the number of 
s o l i c i t o r s ' 
p r a c t i c e s increased by 2.3% 
i n the North (Wales, 
the 
North and Midlands above the Severn  ־Wash L i n e ) , 
3.9% 
i n the South ( i n c l u d i n g Ε Anglia but excluding London), 
and 5.1% I n London (the o l d GLC a r e a ) .

1 When s.9 of the A d m i n i s t r a t i o n of J u s t i c e Act 1985 i s brought i n t o f o r c e 
(which i s expected t o be l a t e r t h i s y e a r ) , s o l i c i t o r s w i l l be able to p r a c t i s e i n corporate form w i t h both l i m i t e d and u n l i m i t e d l i a b i l i t y . 

Over r e c e n t years there has been a tendency f o r firms of s o l i c i t o r s t o amalgamate t o form l a r g e r u n i t s . The l a t e s t f i g u r e s
2 i n d i c a t e t h a t between 1986 and 1987 the number of firms with 11 or more p r i n c i p a l s I n c r e a s e d by 
7.5%. These l a r g e firms can provide a s p e c i a l i s e d range of s e r v i c e s , e s p e c i a l l y i n the commercial f i e l d , and i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t such firms are now providing some of the expert advice which was p r e v i o u s l y given by the s p e c i a l i s t Bar. 

|     |             |       |                     | Employed         |           | s o l i c i t o r s    |
|-----|-------------|-------|---------------------|------------------|-----------|------------------------|
| 10  | I n 1987/88 | 3,258 | s o l i c i t o r s | were employed by | l o c a l | and                    |

n a t i o n a l government and 2,892 s o l i c i t o r s were employed i n commerce and o t h e r employments.

3 
An employed s o l i c i t o r who e i t h e r holds or i s exempted from holding a p r a c t i s i n g c e r t i f i c a t e i s t r e a t e d i n a l l r e s p e c t s as 

any o t h e r 
p r a c t i s i n g s o l i c i t o r 
w i t h 
one 
p r o v i s o , 
namely, t h a t s i n c e he or she has only one c l i e n t - h i s 
or her employer  ־he or she i s g e n e r a l l y p r o h i b i t e d by 
p r o f e s s i o n a l r u l e s from doing work d i r e c t l y f o r the 
p u b l i c . 

## Notaries

11 
Notaries, who a r e often s o l i c i t o r s who have undertaken 
a d d i t i o n a l academic and p r a c t i c a l 
t r a i n i n g , have a 
h i g h l y s p e c i a l i s e d l e g a l function. T h e i r main business 
1The Law S o c i e t y ' s Annual S t a t i s t i c a l Report 1988 2The Law S o c i e t y ' s Annual S t a t i s t i c a l Report 1988 3The Law S o c i e t y ' s Annual S t a t i s t i c a l Report 1988 
18 
to c e r t i f y deeds and other documents under t h e i r o f f i c i a l s e a l , f o r use anywhere i n the world, so t h a t s u c h documents w i l l be a c c e p t a b l e t o j u d i c i a l o r p u b l i c a u t h o r i t i e s as proof of the matters a t t e s t e d . 

For i n s t a n c e , n o t a r i e s c e r t i f y documents t o take e f f e c t abroad, prepare and t r a n s l a t e documents f o r use abroad, t r a n s l a t e documents emanating from overseas, p r o t e s t b i l l s of exchange, c e r t i f y copies, administer oaths and take a f f i d a v i t s , note and draw up s h i p s ' p r o t e s t s and advise on matters of E n g l i s h and f o r e i g n law. 

## Legal Executives

12 
Legal executives have both an academic and 
p r a c t i c a l 
t r a i n i n g 
and work mainly i n s o l i c i t o r s ' 
o f f i c e s 
and 
l e g a l departments of 
l a r g e o r g a n i s a t i o n s , 
i n c l u d i n g 
c e n t r a l and 
l o c a l government, commerce and 
i n d u s t r y . 
I n p r a c t i c e l e g a l executives are able to do 
a l l the 
work of s o l i c i t o r s except the work which i s reserved to 
s o l i c i t o r s by 
s t a t u t e (see Chapter 2 paras 
2.1-2.2). 
T h e r e were 
i n t h e autumn of 
1988 
around 
16,500 
s u b s c r i b e r s to the I n s t i t u t e of Legal E x e c u t i v e s . 

## Licensed Conveyancers

13 
T h i s 
18 
a new p r o f e s s i o n e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e A d m i n i s t r a t i o n of J u s t i c e Act 
1985. 

Standards of competence and p r o f e s s i o n a l conduct are r e g u l a t e d by the Council f o r Licensed Conveyancers. 

There were i n e a r l y 
1989 
approximately 500 
l i c e n s e d conveyancers. 

L i c e n s e d c o n v e y a n c e r s a r e l i c e n s e d t o p r o v i d e conveyancing s e r v i c e s as d e f i n e d by 8.11(3) of the A d m i n s t r a t i o n of J u s t i c e Act 
1985 
and may a c t i n d o m e s t i c and c o m m e r c i a l t r a n s a c t i o n s . 

L i c e n s e d conveyancers have to pass examinations before being a l l o w e d t o p r a c t i s e . 

T h e i r f i n a l e x a m i n a t i o n i s s i m i l a r i n standard to the f i n a l examination taken by s o l i c i t o r s although i t obviously covers a much narrower range of s u b j e c t s namely, conveyancing, l a n d l o r d and tenant law, o r g a n i s a t i o n s and revenue law and accounts. 

I n addition, l i c e n s e d conveyancers have t o complete two 

y e a r s of p r a c t i c a l t r a i n i n g . 
14 
L i c e n s e d c o n v e y a n c e r s 
may 
p r a c t i s e 
on 
t h e i r 
own 
account, although not f o r the f i r s t t h r e e y e a r s a f t e r q u a l i f y i n g , or i n p a r t n e r s h i p . Mixed p a r t n e r s h i p s with 
other p r o f e s s i o n s deemed s u i t a b l e by the C o u n c i l f o r 
Licensed Conveyancers are allowed, although t h e r e are 
no mixed p a r t n e r s h i p s as y e t . 
Licensed Conveyancers 
w i l l 
during 1989 
be 
able to p r a c t i s e i n corporate 
bodies c o n t r o l l e d by l i c e n s e d conveyancers. 
Licensed 
c o n v e y a n c e r s 
may 
be 
e m p l o y e d 
by 
n o n - l i c e n s e d 
conveyancers, but a t the moment ( s e e the c o n s u l t a t i o n paper 
on conveyancing 
s e r v i c e s 
i s s u e d 
today) 
they 
cannot provide conveyancing s e r v i c e s to the c l i e n t s of 
such employers. 

## Patent Agents

15 
Patent agents a r e s p e c i a l i s t 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s who 
d e a l 
w i t h o b t a i n i n g and 
e n f o r c i n g i n t e l l e c t u a l 
p r o p e r t y 
r i g h t s . 
They have both an academic 
and 
p r a c t i c a l 
t r a i n i n g and work e i t h e r i n the patent departments 
of 
l a r g e i n d u s t r i a l o r g a n i s a t i o n s or i n p r i v a t e f i r m s of 
patent agents. 
Patent agents no longer have a monopoly 
on t h e i r p r a c t i c e . 
The Copyright Designs and Patents 
Act 1988 a l l o w s anyone t o p r a c t i s e as a patent agent 
but r e s e r v e s the use of the t i t l e "patent agent" and 
"patent attorney" to those who are on the r e g i s t e r kept 
by the Chartered I n s t i t u t e of Patent Agents. S o l i c i t o r s may a l s o use the t i t l e "patent attorney". 

Insolvency p r a c t i t i o n e r s 

16 
Under the Insolvency Act 1986 insolvency p r a c t i t i o n e r s 
p r a c t i s e a s t r u s t e e s i n b a n k r u p t c y , l i q u i d a t o r s , 
administrators, r e c e i v e r s and s u p e r v i s o r s of voluntary arrangements. 
I n s o l v e n c y 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s a r e u s u a l l y 
accountants, 
s o l i c i t o r s or members of the 
Insolvency 
P r a c t i t i o n e r s A s s o c i a t i o n . 
Insolvency p r a c t i t i o n e r s 
have to be authorised by p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies 
recognised 
for 
t h a t purpose by the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e f o r Trade 
and Industry. 
I f 
the p r a c t i t i o n e r i s 
not a member of a 
recognised body, then a u t h o r i s a t i o n has to be obtained 
from t h e I n s o l v e n c y 
P r a c t i t i o n e r s A s s o c i a t i o n , or, 
f a i l i n g that, the S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e . 
Banks, b u i l d i n g s o c i e t i e s , accountants and c h a r t e r e d s e c r e t a r i e s 

17 
Banks, b u i l d i n g s o c i e t i e s , 
accountants and chartered 
s e c r e t a r i e s give l e g a l advice to t h e i r c l i e n t s on such 
matters as t a x a t i o n , w i l l s , insolvency and company law. 

## Law C E N T R E S

18 
The 
f i r s t 
law c e n t r e was s e t up i n 1970 i n North 
Kensington, London. 
There a r e now around 60 c e n t r e s . 
Most of these a r e concentrated 
i n urban a r e a s . 
Law 
c e n t r e s a r e s t a f f e d by a v a r i e t y of a d v i s e r s i n c l u d i n g 
s a l a r i e d 
l a w y e r s 
and tend t o s p e c i a l i s e mainly i n 
welfare law, immigration and housing. 

## C I T I Z E N S Advice Bureaux

19 
C i t i z e n s 
a d v i c e bureaux 
(CABx) were 
o r i g i n a l l y 
e s t a b l i s h e d i n 1939 t o give emergency s e r v i c e s during the second World War. 
There a r e 
now over a thousand 
such bureaux handling around 6.8 m i l l i o n e n q u i r i e s a 
y e a r . 
CABx g i v e a d v i c e on a v a r i e t y of m a t t e r s 
i n c l u d i n g 
s o c i a l 
s e c u r i t y , 
consumer 
p r o t e c t i o n , 
housing, the family, employment, h e a l t h , education and 
Immigration and n a t i o n a l i t y . 
Most advice 18 given by 
t r a i n e d l a y 
v o l u n t e e r s although most CABx have a c c e s s 
to a s o l i c i t o r on a t l e a s t a r o t a b a s i s . 

## Trade Tin Ions

20 
Trade unions provide advice and a s s i s t a n c e to t h e i r 
members on employment matters and w i l l u s u a l l y arrange 
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n on such matters f o r t h e i r members i n 
t r i b u n a l s and c o u r t s . 
Some trade unions a l s o provide 
general l e g a l advice to members e i t h e r in-house or by r e f e r r a l to 
an outside s o l i c i t o r . 

## The Royal B R I T I S H Legion

21 
The Royal B r i t i s h Legion employs l a y people, 
u s u a l l y 
e x - s e r v i c e m e n , 
t o work 
f u l l - t i m e on a d v i s i n g and 
r e p r e s e n t i n g a p p e l l a n t s before the Pensions Appeals T r i b u n a l . 

These l a y people r e c e i v e on-the-job t r a i n i n g and a r e recognised as having c o n s i d e r a b l e e x p e r t i s e i n t h e i r f i e l d . 

## Academic And Vocational Training

1. 
The appropriate t r a i n i n g f o r 
lawyers w i l l be a matter 
f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n by the 
Advisory Committee. 
I t 
seems 
s e n s i b l e , however, t h a t l e g a l education should c o n t a i n 
t h e 
f o l l o w i n g f o u r s t a g e s : academic, v o c a t i o n a l , 
p r a c t i c a l and c o n t i n u i n g ( i . e . p o s t - q u a l i f i c a t i o n ) 
education. 

## ( I ) Academic Stage

2. 
The c u r r e n t core s u b j e c t s a r e 
as f o l l o w s : 
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e law c o n t r a c t 
t o r t 
land law 
t r u s t s c r i m i n a l law 
3. 
Marre has r e c e n t l y suggested t h a t c o n s i d e r a t i o n should 
be given to teaching t r u s t s and land law 
as a composite 
s u b j e c t ; and t h e A d v i s o r y Committee may w i s h t o 
c o n s i d e r recommending 
t h i s . I n view of the t h r u s t 
suggested f o r 
the v o c a t i o n a l course (see para 4 below) 
t h e Advisory Committee might 
a l s o c o n s i d e r whether 
evidence should be included among the core s u b j e c t s 
to 
be studied a t 
the 
academic stage. I n 
a d d i t i o n , t u i t i o n 
a t t h e academic stage ought perhaps t o r e f l e c t the 
i n c r e a s i n g importance of f i n a n c i a l r e g u l a t i o n and 
the 
EC. The Advisory Committee w i l l be i n v i t e d t o c o n s i d e r 
whether and how t h i s could be covered i n 
core s u b j e c t s 
a t the 
academic stage. 
( i i ) Vocational stage 

4. 
The Government c o n s i d e r s t h a t the emphasis a t the 
v o c a t i o n a l stage should be on the a c q u i s i t i o n of 
the 
p r a c t i c a l 
s k i l l s necessary f o r p r a c t i c e a s a lawyer. 
The Government agrees with the views expressed i n the 
1 
Ormrod, Benson and Marre r e p o r t s that there a r e strong arguments i n favour of a common system of v o c a t i o n a l t r a i n i n g t o cover the whole l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n . 

The Advisory Committee might accordingly wish t o consider g i v i n g a high p r i o r i t y t o the development o f a core of minimum r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r t h e v o c a t i o n a l s t a g e o f t r a i n i n g . 

These minimum requirements could, f o r i n s t a n c e , cover: 
( a ) 
c i v i l procedure i n c l u d i n g probate; 

(b) 
c r i m i n a l procedure and sentencing; 
( c ) 
advocacy; 
(d) 
evidence (but 
see 
para 3 above); 
( e ) 
conveyancing; 
( f ) 
probate; 
(g) 
business accounts; 
(h) 
s o l i c i t o r s ' accounts; 
( i ) 
t h e management o f a l e g a l 
p r a c t i c e i n c l u d i n g 
computerisation; 
( j ) 
n e g o t i a t i o n and communication s k i l l s i n both noncontentious and contentious matters; 
(k) 
l a w y e r - c l i e n t 
r e l a t i o n s 
( c o m m u n i c a t i o n , 
c o u n s e l l i n g and a d v i s i n g ) ; 
(1) 
d r a f t i n g ; and 
(m) 
p r o f e s s i o n a l e t h i c s and conduct ( t o i n c l u d e the 
codes proposed i n 
Chapter 
4 ) . 
Not every p r a c t i t i o n e r would need t o cover a l l these s u b j e c t s : f o r i n s t a n c e , those marked with an a s t e r i s k might be o p t i o n s . 

I t w i l l , of course, be f o r the Advisory Committee t o consider whether t h e suggested s u b j e c t s a r e appropriate. The Committee w i l l a l s o need to consider the a c t u a l content of the courses and take i n t o account the f a c t t h a t students wishing t o cover e v e r y o p t i o n may n e e d an e x t e n d e d p e r i o d o f q u a l i f i c a t i o n . 

( i i i ) P r a c t i c a l and continuing stages 
6. 
Proposals covering the p r a c t i c a l and continuing stages 
of t r a i n i n g f o r advocacy are s e t out i n Chapter 5. 
I t 
w i l l be f o r the Advisory Committee i n due course 
to 
c o n s i d e r 
t h e 
p r a c t i c a l 
and 
c o n t i n u i n g 
s t a g e s 
of 
t r a i n i n g f o r other s p e c i a l i s m s . 
Present arrangements of the Bar and the Law S o c i e t y f o r handling complaints P a r t 1; 
The Bar C a s e s b e f o r e t h e P r o f e s s i o n a l Conduct Committee o f t h e General Council of the Bar 
(PCC) 
The PCC c o n s i s t s of members of the Bar and a number of l a y members nominated by the Lord Chancellor. 

( a ) 
Informal procedure Where the conduct d i s c l o s e d may be 
d e a l t 
w i t h 
i n f o r m a l l y , t h e PCC 
w i l l 
i n f o r m t h e 
b a r r i s t e r i n w r i t i n g of i t s views and may a l s o d i r e c t 
him t o attend on the Chairman of the 
PCC or some other 
person. 
(b) Summary procedure T h i s i s under c o n s i d e r a t i o n but has 
not been introduced. The proposal, however, i s 
t h a t , 
i f 
t h e PCC wished 
t o t a k e a matter 
f u r t h e r 
w i t h o u t 
r e f e r r i n g i t to a D i s c i p l i n a r y T r i b u n a l ( s e e para 2 below) and there was no r e l e v a n t dispute of f a c t , a 
b a r r i s t e r would be afforded the opportunity t o make 
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s , i n w r i t i n g or i n person, a t a s p e c i a l committee of the PCC, which would have the power to 
administer an admonishment and reprimand or give advice 
on future conduct. 

Cases before a D i s c i p l i n a r y T r i b u n a l More s e r i o u s c a s e s o r those where t h e r e i s a r e l e v a n t d i s p u t e o f f a c t a r e p r o s e c u t e d by t h e PCC b e f o r e a D i s c i p l i n a r y T r i b u n a l . A T r i b u n a l i s c h a i r e d by a Judge and has f o u r o t h e r members i n c l u d i n g one l a y member. L e s s s e r i o u s c a s e s r e l a t i n g t o breach of p r o f e s s i o n a l standards are t r e a t e d i n the same way as c a s e s before the PCC. Where, however, a charge of p r o f e s s i o n a l misconduct i s proved, b a r r i s t e r s may be ordered to repay or forego f e e s or may be suspended or d i s b a r r e d . Hearing before the V i s i t o r s Appeal from the D i s c i p l i n a r y T r i b u n a l l i e s to not fewer than three Judges of the High Court nominated by the Lord C h i e f J u s t i c e a f t e r c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h the Lord C h a n c e l l o r and known as the V i s i t o r s . There i s no f u r t h e r i n t e r n a l appeal. 

P a r t 2: The Law S o c i e t y The S o l i c i t o r s ' Complaints Bureau Complaints are f i r s t considered by the s t a f f of the Bureau who prepare the c a s e s f o r f u r t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n or e l s e inform the complainant t h a t t h e r e i s no i s s u e of conduct or shoddy work. The I n v e s t i g a t i o n Committee monitors the way the Bureau handles complaints. The A d j u d i c a t i o n Committee e x e r c i s e s the Law S o c i e t y ' s d i s c i p l i n a r y and other r e l e v a n t powers. 

(a) 
The 
I n v e s t i g a t i o n Committee 
T h i s has 
s e v e n 
l a y 
members, i n c l u d i n g the Chairman, and four s o l i c i t o r members, two of whom a r e a l s o Law S o c i e t y C o u n c i l members. I t s functions a r e : -
( i ) 
t o review c a s e s going t o the A d j u d i c a t i o n 

Committee 
and make recommendations 
f o r 
f u r t h e r 
i n v e s t i g a t i o n , 
i f i t t h i n k s i t 
necessary; 
( i i ) 
t o r e v i e w c a s e s where t h e 
i n v e s t i g a t i n g 
o f f i c e r wishes to terminate an i n v e s t i g a t i o n , 
but the complainant does not; 
( i i i ) 
to review c a s e s before a f i l e i s r e f e r r e d t o 
the Lay Observer and review r e p o r t s of the 
Lay Observer; and 
( i v ) 
to make formal recommendations to the s t a f f for improvements i n procedure. 

(b) 
The A d j u d i c a t i o n Committee T h i s has nine Law S o c i e t y 
member8 i n c l u d i n g the Chairman, t h r e e other 
s o l i c i t o r s 
and s i x l a y members. I t has a l a r g e number of powers 
and i n p a r t i c u l a r 
may:-
( i ) 
t a k e d i s c i p l i n a r y p r o c e e d i n g s a g a i n s t a s o l i c i t o r a t t h e S o l i c i t o r s ' 
D i s c i p l i n a r y T r i b u n a l ; 
( i i ) 
rebuke s o l i c i t o r s ; 
( i l l ) 
d i s c i p l i n e s o l i c i t o r s f o r shoddy work, e.g. 

order r e c t i f i c a t i o n of the mistake or the remission of fees; 
( i v ) 
order an i n s p e c t i o n of accounts; 
(v) 
i n t e r v e n e i n a p r a c t i c e t o p r o t e c t t h e i n t e r e s t s of a c l i e n t ; 
( v i ) 
i m p o s e c o n d i t i o n s on a p r a c t i s i n g c e r t i f i c a t e ; 
( v i i ) 
o r d e r payment o f i n t e r e s t on a c l i e n t ' s money; and 
( v i i i ) 
order payments out of the compensation fund when a p e r s o n h a s s u f f e r e d l o s s a s a consequence of a s o l i c i t o r ' s dishonesty. 

S o l i c i t o r s ' D i s c i p l i n a r y T r i b u n a l T h i s Committee i s e s t a b l i s h e d by s t a t u t e and e x e r c i s e s the delegated powers of the High Court. I t c o n s i d e r s the most s e r i o u s c a s e s of p r o f e s s i o n a l misconduct. 

Complaints a r e u s u a l l y r e f e r r e d by the S o l i c i t o r s ' Complaints Bureau, but they may a l s o be made d i r e c t by the p u b l i c o r i n c e r t a i n c a s e s by t h e Lay Observer. I t normally s i t s with t h r e e members, a t l e a s t one of whom must be l a y . The members a r e appointed by t h e Master of the R o l l s . I t has powers to s t r i k e o f f the r o l l , suspend, f i n e o r reprimand. 

6 
The High Court 
Appeal from the S o l i c i t o r s ' 
D i s c i p l i n a r y T r i b u n a l 
l i e s to 
the 
High Court. I n a d d i t i o n t h e High Court 
r e t a i n s i t s 
g e n e r a l 
s u p e r v i s o r y j u r i s d i c t i o n 
over t h e p r o f e s s i o n . 
A p p l i c a t i o n s may be 
made d i r e c t t o 
the 
High Court t o cause a 
s o l i c i t o r to answer a l l e g a t i o n s . 
7 
The 
Lay Observer 
He i s 
an independent 
o f f i c e - h o l d e r appointed by the Lord 
C h a n c e l l o r . 
S e c t i o n 4 5 ( 1 ) o f t h e S o l i c i t o r s A c t 
1974 
empowers him to examine any w r i t t e n a l l e g a t i o n made by or on b e h a l f o f a member o f t h e p u b l i c c o n c e r n i n g t h e Law S o c i e t y ' s treatment of a complaint about a s o l i c i t o r or h i s employee. The Lay Observer i s only able t o r e p o r t on t h i s treatment and to make recommendations. He has no powers to r e i n v e s t i g a t e the complaint. When a complaint r a i s e s an i s s u e of both conduct and q u a l i t y of s e r v i c e s , he may, i n t h o s e c i r c u m s t a n c e s o n l y , make an a p p l i c a t i o n t o t h e S o l i c i t o r s D i s c i p l i n a r y Tribunal i n respect of t h e q u a l i t y of s e r v i c e s . 

## Rights Of Audience I N The Courts Of England And Wales

1 
A l i t i g a n t i n 
person, t h a t i s 
a party t o proceedings who i s 
not represented by a lawyer, has a r i g h t of audience i n h i s 
or her own cause i n a l l 
c o u r t s and t r i b u n a l s . 
A b a r r i s t e r 
p r a c t i s i n g from chambers has a general r i g h t of audience on behalf of h i s 
or her c l i e n t s . 
The r i g h t s of audience of 
s o l i c i t o r s i n 
p r i v a t e p r a c t i c e a r e 
more l i m i t e d . 
The r i g h t s 
of audience of employed lawyers a r e 
more r e s t r i c t e d 
s t i l l . 
By v i r t u e of the European Communities ( S e r v i c e s of Lawyers) 
Order 1978 ( S I 
1978 No.1910) an EC lawyer may appear before 
any court, t r i b u n a l or p u b l i c a u t h o r i t y i n the UK provided 
t h a t throughout t h e proceedings he or she i s i n s t r u c t e d 
with, and a c t s i n conjunction with, an advocate, 
b a r r i s t e r 
or 
s o l i c i t o r who i s e n t i t l e d t o p r a c t i s e before the court 
t r i b u n a l o r p u b l i c 
a u t h o r i t y 
concerned and who c o u l d 
properly provide the s e r v i c e i n 
question. 

## The Magistrates' Courts

2 
The Magistrates' Courts deal with around 90% of the t o t a l 
c r i m i n a l workload a t f i r s t i n s t a n c e . 
They a l s o d e a l w i t h 
c a r e p r o c e e d i n g s i n r e s p e c t of j u v e n i l e s and 
l i c e n s i n g 
a p p l i c a t i o n s , and have a s i z e a b l e domestic 
j u r i s d i c t i o n . 
D e c i s i o n s on both f a c t and law a r e taken e i t h e r by a bench 
of l a y 
magistrates o r by a s t i p e n d i a r y ( l e g a l l y q u a l i f i e d ) 
magistrate, s i t t i n g without a j u r y . 
3 
Rights of audience a r e 
governed by s t a t u t e , c u r r e n t l y s.122 
of 
t h e M a g i s t r a t e s ' Courts Act 1980. 
T h i s 
p r o v i s i o n 
d e r i v e s from 8.2 of the T r i a l s f o r Felony Act 1836 (6 & 7 
W i l l . 4, c . 114) enacted t o reform the law f o l l o w i n g the 
d e c i s i o n i n C o l l i e r ν Hicks (1831) 2 Β & Ad. 663 i n which 
i t was held t h a t no person had a r i g h t to a c t 
as an advocate 
on the t r i a l of an information before j u s t i c e s of the peace 
without t h e i r permission. 

The Magistrates' Courts Act 
1980 
8.122(1) provides t h a t a party to any proceedings before a magistrates' court may be represented by counsel ( i . e . a b a r r i s t e r ) or s o l i c i t o r . 

I n addition, v a r i o u s s t a t u t e s such as the L o c a l Government Act 1972 8.223 and the Customs and E x c i s e Management Act 1979 8.155, g i v e s p e c i f i e d persons a u t h o r i t y t o conduct p a r t i c u l a r prosecutions, although they may not be counsel or s o l i c i t o r . 

The Magistrates' Court a l s o has a d i s c r e t i o n to allow someone e l s e t o a c t on behalf of e i t h e r party to the proceedings. 

## The Crown Court

4 
The main j u r i s d i c t i o n of the Crown Court i s i n c r i m i n a l 
proceedings. 
Apart from cases committed f o r t r i a l from the 
Magistrates' Courts, the Crown Court d e a l s with appeals from 
the Magistrates' Courts against c o n v i c t i o n and sentence. 
I t 
a l s o hears appeals from d e c i s i o n s of magistrates i n c a r e 
proceedings i n j u v e n i l e c a s e s , appeals from the d e c i s i o n s of 
j u s t i c e s 
i n l i c e n s i n g 
m a t t e r s 
and 
a p p e a l s 
from 
l o c a l 
a u t h o r i t i e s 
and 
c h i e f 
o f f i c e r s of p o l i c e under v a r i o u s 
s t a t u t e s . 

The Crown Court has a s m a l l o r i g i n a l c i v i l 

j u r i s d i c t i o n , 
such as a p p l i c a t i o n s under the R e s e r v o i r s 
( S a f e t y P r o v i s i o n s ) Act 1930. 
I n c r i m i n a l c a s e s , the court 
i s 
p r e s i d e d o v e r 
by 
an 
A s s i s t a n t 
Recorder, 
Recorder, 
C i r c u i t Judge or High Court Judge. 
I n t r i a l s on not g u i l t y 
pleas the judge 
s i t s with a j u r y whose f u n c t i o n i t i s to 
decide whether the charge a g a i n s t the accused person 
has 
been proved. 
Lay magistrates s i t 
with the l e g a l l y q u a l i f i e d 
judges on some c a s e s and appeals. 
5 
B a r r i s t e r s 
p r a c t i s i n g 
from chambers have a 
r i g h t 
o f 
audience 
i n a l l c a s e s i n t h e Crown c o u r t . 
R i g h t s o f 
audience f o r s o l i c i t o r s a r e governed by 8.83 of the Supreme Court Act 1981 
(reproducing the now 
repealed 8.12 
of the 
Courts Act 1971). 
T h i s provides as f o l l o w s : -
"(1) 
The Lord Chancellor may a t any time d i r e c t t h a t s o l i c i t o r s may appear i n , conduct, defend and address the court i n any proceedings i n the Crown Court, or p r o c e e d i n g s i n the Crown Court of any d e s c r i p t i o n s p e c i f i e d i n the d i r e c t i o n . 

(2) 
A d i r e c t i o n under t h i s s e c t i o n may have e f f e c t as r e s p e c t s a l l p l a c e s where the Crown Court s i t s , or as r e s p e c t s a s p e c i f i e d area, region or c i r c u i t , or as r e s p e c t s one or more s p e c i f i e d p l a c e s where the Crown Court s i t s . 

(3) 
I n c o n s i d e r i n g whether t o e x e r c i s e h i s powers under t h i s s e c t i o n a s r e s p e c t s any one o r more s p e c i f i e d p l a c e s where the Crown Court s i t s , the Lord C h a n c e l l o r s h a l l have regard t o any shortage of counsel i n t h e a r e a i n q u e s t i o n , any r i g h t s of audience f o r m e r l y e x e r c i s e d by s o l i c i t o r s a t any c o u r t of quarter s e s s i o n s i n the l o c a l i t y i n question, and to any other circumstances a f f e c t i n g the p u b l i c i n t e r e s t . 

(4) 
Any d i r e c t i o n given under t h i s s e c t i o n may be s u b j e c t to such c o n d i t i o n s and r e s t r i c t i o n s as appear to the Lord Chancellor to be necessary or expedient." 
By v i r t u e of d i r e c t i o n s made by the Lord C h a n c e l l o r on 7 
December 
1971, 
9 F e b r u a r y 
1972 
and 
15 August 
1988, s o l i c i t o r s have r i g h t s of audience i n : -

(a) 
appeals to the Crown Court from a M a g i s t r a t e s ' 
Court or on committal 
f o r sentence, i f the same 
firm appeared i n the court below; 
(b) 
c i v i l proceedings i n the Crown Court on appeal i n 
s i m i l a r circumstances; and 
( c ) 
a l i m i t e d number of c a s e s i n remote a r e a s where 
s o l i c i t o r s 
t r a d i t i o n a l l y 
had 
f u l l 
r i g h t s 
o f 
a u d i e n c e 
a t Q u a r t e r 
S e s s i o n s 
( C a e r n a r v o n , 
B a r n s t a p l e , 
T r u r o , 
D o n c a s t e r 
and 
p a r t s 
o f 
L i n c o l n ) , which have been replaced by the Crown 
Court. 
R i g h t s of audience f o r Crown Prosecutors ( b a r r i s t e r s and s o l i c i t o r s ) employed by the Crown Prosecution S e r v i c e are governed by s.4 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 
1985. 

T h i s g i v e s Crown Prosecutors the same r i g h t s of audience i n t h e Crown C o u r t a s s o l i c i t o r s h o l d i n g p r a c t i s i n g c e r t i f i c a t e s ; 
and the Lord C h a n c e l l o r may g i v e any such d i r e c t i o n s under 8.83 
of the Supreme Court Act 1981 i n r e s p e c t of Crown Prosecutors as he could g i v e i n r e s p e c t of s o l i c i t o r s . 

## The County Courts

7 
These c o u r t s have a wide-ranging c i v i l j u r i s d i c t i o n i n c a s e s 
where, g e n e r a l l y speaking, the amount i n i s s u e does not 
exceed £5,000, covering debt, breach of c o n t r a c t , personal 
i n j u r y , 
r e c o v e r y of l a n d , b a n k r u p t c y 
and i n s o l v e n c y , 
admiralty, family proceedings and miscellaneous matters such 
as mental h e a l t h and sex d i s c r i m i n a t i o n . 
T r i a l s a r e heard 
by A s s i s t a n t Recorders, Recorders or C i r c u i t 
Judges, 
and 
i n t e r l o c u t o r y matters are heard by County Court R e g i s t r a r s . 
8 
R i g h t s of audience i n the County Court a r e governed 
by 
s e c t i o n s 60 and 61 of the County Courts Act 1984. 
The 
m a t e r i a l p a r t of s.60 i s as f o l l o w s : -
(1) 
I n any proceedings i n a county court any of the 
following persons may address the c o u r t : -
( a ) 
any p a r t y t o the proceedings; 
(b) 
a b a r r i s t e r 
r e t a i n e d by or on b e h a l f of any 
party; 
( c ) 
a 
s o l i c i t o r 
a c t i n g 
g e n e r a l l y 
i n 
t h e 
proceedings f o r a p a r t y t o them ( i n t h i s 
subsection r e f e r r e d to as a
 
, s o l i c i t o r on the 
r e c o r d
1 ) ; 
(d) 
any s o l i c i t o r employed by a s o l i c i t o r on the 
record; 
( e ) 
any 
s o l i c i t o r 
a c t i n g 
a s an agent 
f o r a 
s o l i c i t o r on the record; 
( f ) 
any 
s o l i c i t o r employed by a 
s o l i c i t o r 
so 
engaged; and 
(g) 
any other person allowed by l e a v e of 
the 
court to appear i n s t e a d of any party. 
By v i r t u e of 8.61 of the County Courts Act 1984, the Lord C h a n c e l l o r may by d i r e c t i o n confer r i g h t s of audience i n the County Court on persons i n employment c o n s i s t i n g of or I n c l u d i n g g i v i n g a s s i s t a n c e t o s o l i c i t o r s i n the conduct of l i t i g a t i o n . 

Only one such d i r e c t i o n has been made t o date and t h a t was i n 1978 when t h i s power was used t o confer r i g h t s of audience on Fellows of the I n s t i t u t e of Legal E x e c u t i v e s on b e h a l f o f t h e i r s o l i c i t o r employer i n unopposed a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r an adjournment or a p p l i c a t i o n s for judgments by consent. 

## The High Court

9 
The High Court i s divided i n t o three D i v i s i o n s : 
Chancery, Queen's Bench, and Family. 

There i s no upper l i m i t on i t s j u r i s d i c t i o n . 

I t d e a l s with a range of heavy c i v i l work covering matters such as debt, personal i n j u r y , land and p r o p e r t y , b r e a c h of c o n t r a c t , bankruptcy and companies proceedings. 

I n a d d i t i o n the High Court d e a l s w i t h p u b l i c law and v a r i o u s s p e c i a l i s t cases, i n c l u d i n g patents. 

The 

three D i v i s i o n s of the High Court e x e r c i s e a p p e l l a t e as w e l l as 
f i r s t i n s t a n c e j u r i s d i c t i o n : The D i v i s i o n a l Court of the 
Chancery D i v i s i o n hears appeals i n revenue matters from the Commissioners of Taxes and bankruptcy matters from the County C o u r t s ; 
t h e Queen's Bench D i v i s i o n a l C o u r t e x e r c i s e s a p p e l l a t e and s u p e r v i s o r y j u r i s d i c t i o n over the Crown Court (except i n r e l a t i o n t o the conduct of t r i a l s on indictment), i n f e r i o r c o u r t s and t r i b u n a l s and the a c t i o n s and d e c i s i o n s of p u b l i c bodies under the j u d i c i a l review 

procedure; 
the D i v i s i o n a l Court of the Family 
D i v i s i o n 
hears appeals from Magistrates' Courts i n domestic matters. 
10 
The Chancery D i v i s i o n c o n s i s t s of the Lord Chancellor, who 
i s i t s p r e s i d e n t , the V i c e - C h a n c e l l o r and such of the High 
Court judges as a r e f o r the time being attached to i t . 
The 
5 
Queen's Bench D i v i s i o n , which i s much the l a r g e s t , c o n s i s t s of the Lord Chief J u s t i c e , who i s i t s president, and such of the High Court judges as are f o r the time being attached to i t . 

The Family D i v i s i o n c o n s i s t s of the P r e s i d e n t of the Family D i v i s i o n and such of the High Court judges as are f o r the time being attached to i t . Apart from a few c a s e s i n the Queen'8 Bench D i v i s i o n , f o r example i n some a c t i o n s f o r defamation, where j u r i e s s i t t o decide the f a c t s , c a s e s i n the High Court a r e heard by judges who s i t alone and have t o make d e c i s i o n s on both the f a c t s and the law. 

I n t e r l o c u t o r y matters are d e a l t with by Masters and D i s t r i c t R e g i s t r a r s . 

Subject to the 1978 Order mentioned above (para 1 ) , r i g h t s of audience i n t h e High Court have not h i t h e r t o been regulated by s t a t u t e , but by the High Court judges a c t i n g as a c o l l e g i a t e body (Abse ν Smith [1986] 1 QB, 536). 

I t i s an e s t a b l i s h e d r u l e that, save i n an emergency, a s o l i c i t o r cannot appear on h i s c l i e n t ' s b e h a l f i n open c o u r t . 

According to long custom, b a r r i s t e r s have a general r i g h t of audience i n the High Court, whereas s o l i c i t o r s do not. 

S o l i c i t o r s do have a general r i g h t of audience i n the High Court when s i t t i n g i n chambers, whether before a judge or Master, which extends to t h e i r r e s p o n s i b l e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s 
(such as l e g a l e x e c u t i v e s ) . 

S o l i c i t o r s may a l s o appear i n : -

( a ) 
bankruptcy matters, and 
(b) 
f o r m a l o r unopposed m a t t e r s where t h e r e i s 
u n l i k e l y to be any argument and where the c o u r t 
w i l l 
n o t 
be 
c a l l e d 
upon 
t o 
e x e r c i s e 
any 
d i s c r e t i o n . 
A s o l i c i t o r may a l s o represent h i s c l i e n t i n the Supreme Court when judgment i s d e l i v e r e d i n open court f o l l o w i n g a hearing i n chambers a t which t h a t s o l i c i t o r conducted the case f o r the c l i e n t ( P r a c t i c e D i r e c t i o n : S o l i c i t o r s : Rights of A u d i e n c e ) 
[ 1 9 8 6 ] 
1 W.L.R.545 
i s s u e d by t h e L o r d Chancellor, the Lord Chief J u s t i c e , the Master of the R o l l s and the P r e s i d e n t of the Family D i v i s i o n . 

## The Court Of Appeal

12 
The Court of Appeal 18 d i v i d e d i n t o the C r i m i n a l D i v i s i o n 
and the C i v i l D i v i s i o n . 
The judges of the Court of Appeal 
are 
the Lord C h i e f J u s t i c e , who i s the p r e s i d e n t of the 
C r i m i n a l D i v i s i o n , and the Master of the R o l l s , who i s 
the 
p r e s i d e n t of t h e C i v i l 
D i v i s i o n , together w i t h 27 Lords 
J u s t i c e s of Appeal. 
The P r e s i d e n t of the Family D i v i s i o n 
and the V i c e - C h a n c e l l o r a l s o s i t 
i n the Court o f Appeal f o r 
p a r t of t h e i r time. 
The Court of Appeal normally s i t s i n a 
bench of two or three. 
13 
The C r i m i n a l D i v i s i o n of the Court of Appeal hears appeals 
a g a i n s t c o n v i c t i o n and sentence from the Crown Court i n 
England and Wales. 
I n 1987 the number of a p p l i c a t i o n s and 
appeals r e g i s t e r e d was 8,320 - a r i s e of 8% over the number r e g i s t e r e d i n 1986. 
Courts i n the C r i m i n a l D i v i s i o n a r e 
c o n s t i t u t e d 
from t h e Lord C h i e f J u s t i c e and t h e Lords 
J u s t i c e s a s s i s t e d by judges of the Queen's Bench D i v i s i o n of 
the High Court as required. There are 
no j u r i e s . 
14 
The C i v i l 
D i v i s i o n of the Court of Appeal hears appeals 
from the High Court i n c i v i l matters, the County Courts, and 
v a r i o u s t r i b u n a l s . 
Courts i n t h i s D i v i s i o n a r e normally 
c o n s t i t u t e d from t h e Master o f t h e R o l l s and the Lords 
J u s t i c e s . 
15 
Rights of audience i n both D i v i s i o n s a r e governed by the 
judges of the Court of Appeal a c t i n g as a c o l l e g i a t e body 
(Abse ν Smith above). The p o s i t i o n 
on r i g h t s of audience 
18 the same as t h a t i n the High Court. 

## The House Of Lords 16 The House Of Lords I N I T S J U D I C I A L C A P A C I T Y I S The Supreme Court Of Appeal I N Great B R I T A I N And Northern I R E L A N D . I T A D J U D I C A T E S On Matters Of Law Of General P U B L I C Importance.

The main j u d g e s of t h e House o f L o r d s a r e t h e L o r d Chancellor and the Lords of Appeal i n Ordinary. 

An appeal l i e s t o the House of Lords:-

( a ) 
from any order or judgment of the Court of Appeal 
i n England, by l e a v e of t h a t court or the House of Lords, s u b j e c t t o r e s t r i c t i o n s imposed by s t a t u t e 
or by p r a c t i c e i n s p e c i f i c matters; 
(b) 
from any 
o r d e r o r judgment of any 
c o u r t i n 
S c o t l a n d from which 
e r r o r or appeal l a y on 
or 
b e f o r e 
1 
November 1876 
by common law or 
by 
s t a t u t e ; 
( c ) 
s u b j e c t to s t a t u t o r y r e s t r i c t i o n s , i n e x c e p t i o n a l 
c a s e s d i r e c t from a d e c i s i o n of the High Court i n 
England; 
(d) 
from any order or judgment of the Court of Appeal 
i n Northern I r e l a n d by leave of t h a t c o u r t or the 
House of Lords, s u b j e c t to s t a t u t o r y r e s t r i c t i o n s ; 
and 
( e ) 
s u b j e c t t o s t a t u t o r y r e s t r i c t i o n s , i n e x c e p t i o n a l 
c a s e s d i r e c t from d e c i s i o n s of the High Court of 
J u s t i c e i n Northern I r e l a n d . 
17 
Rights of audience are the same as i n the High Court and the 
Court of Appeal. 
I n a d d i t i o n , 
S c o t t i s h advocates 
and 
b a r r i s t e r s from Northern I r e l a n d have r i g h t s of audience and 
s o l i c i t o r s may 
appear before the Appeal Committee of the 
House of Lords when i t i s c o n s i d e r i n g a p e t i t i o n f o r l e a v e to appeal. 
The J u d i c i a l C o - i t t e e of the P r i v y Council 
18 
The J u d i c i a l Committee of the P r i v y Council i s the f i n a l c o u r t of appeal f o r those Commonwealth c o u n t r i e s which 

V. 
r e t a i n the r i g h t of appeal to Her Majesty i n C o u n c i l . 
I t s 
members a r e normally drawn from among the Lord C h a n c e l l o r 
and 
the Lords of Appeal i n Ordinary. 
I n i t s domestic 
j u r i s d i c t i o n , 
the Committee e n t e r t a i n s a p p e a l s a g a i n s t 
schemes by 
t h e Church Commissioners under t h e 
P a s t o r a l 
Measure Act 1983. 
The Committee a l s o hears appeals from 
t h e i r d i s c i p l i n a r y bodies by doctors, d e n t i s t s , 
o p t i c i a n s , 
v e t e r i n a r y surgeons and members of p r o f e s s i o n s supplementary 
t o medicine; i t a l s o hears appeals i n p r i z e c a s e s during and 
a f t e r a period of h o s t i l i t i e s . 
Rights of audience, which 
are governed by custom and not s t a t u t e , 
extend t o E n g l i s h 
and Northern I r e l a n d b a r r i s t e r s , S c o t t i s h advocates and a l l 
advocates duly q u a l i f i e d i n c o u n t r i e s from which appeals l i e 
to the Queen i n C o u n c i l . 

## The R I G H T S Of Audience Of Employed Lawyers

19 
S o l i c i t o r s employed by non-legal employers, who e i t h e r hold 
or a r e exempted from holding p r a c t i s i n g c e r t i f i c a t e s , have 
the same r i g h t s of audience on behalf of t h e i r employer as 
s o l i c i t o r s i n p r i v a t e p r a c t i c e . 
20 
The r i g h t s of audience of employed b a r r i s t e r s are c u r r e n t l y 
more r e s t r i c t e d than the r i g h t s of employed s o l i c i t o r s . 
For 
i n s t a n c e , employed 
b a r r i s t e r s 
a r e p r e s e n t l y allowed 
t o 
appear as advocates f o r t h e i r employers i n the Magistrates' Court and the County Court only i f they a r e given l e a v e to do so by the c o u r t . Employed s o l i c i t o r s , on the other hand, 
can appear i n these c o u r t s as of r i g h t . 
T h i s anomaly i s the 
r e s u l t of the combined e f f e c t of the wording of 8.122(1) of 
the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 and 8.60(1) of the County Courts Act 1984 and the p r o v i s i o n s of the T h i r d E d i t i o n of 
the Bar's Code of Conduct which deny t o employed b a r r i s t e r s 
the s t a t u s of counsel. 
I t w i l l be removed by the p r o v i s i o n s 
of the Fourth E d i t i o n of the Bar's Code of Conduct (due to come i n t o f o r c e on 1 February 1989) which w i l l enable 
an 
employed b a r r i s t e r to appear on behalf of h i s employer as 
c o u n s e l I n c i r c u m s t a n c e s where b a r r i s t e r s i n g e n e r a l p r a c t i c e do not have an e x c l u s i v e r i g h t of audience. 

T h i s a l t e r a t i o n t o t h e Code s h o u l d a l s o e n a b l e employed b a r r i s t e r s t o appear i n the same i n s t a n c e s a s employed s o l i c i t o r s i n the High Court, Court of Appeal and House of Lords . 

21 
Employed 
lawyers do not have r i g h t s o f audience i n the 
Crown Court. 
T h i s 18 the r e s u l t of the combined e f f e c t of 
the p r o v i s i o n s of 8.83 of the Supreme Court Act 1981, the 
c u r r e n t 
D i r e c t i o n s made by t h e L o r d 
C h a n c e l l o r 
and 
p r o f e s s i o n a l p r a c t i c e r u l e s . 

## Tribunals

22 
At present, there are g e n e r a l l y no r e s t r i c t i o n s on r i g h t s of 
audience before t r i b u n a l s . T h i s i s 
because, as recognised by 
the Report of the Committee on Administrative T r i b u n a l s and E n q u i r i e s (1957 Cmnd. 218), the main c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t r i b u n a l s a r e , "cheapness, a c c e s s i b i l i t y , 
freedom 
from 
t e c h n i c a l i t y , 
e x p e d i t i o n 
and e x p e r t knowledge of 
t h e i r 
p a r t i c u l a r s u b j e c t . " 
( p a r a 
3 8 ) . 

B e c a u s e o f t h e s e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i t i s g e n e r a l l y c o n s i d e r e d t h a t most a p p l i c a n t s should be able t o cope with bringing proceedings without the need f o r a s s i s t a n c e from a q u a l i f i e d l e g a l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . 

A s s i s t a n c e may, however, be a v a i l a b l e from other sources; 
f o r instance, trade unions and CABx o f t e n r e p r e s e n t employees before I n d u s t r i a l T r i b u n a l s and a l s o r e p r e s e n t a p p l i c a n t s b e f o r e t h e C r i m i n a l I n j u r i e s Compensation Board. 

CABx are a l s o p l a y i n g an i n c r e a s i n g r o l e i n representing a p p l i c a n t s before Mental Health Review T r i b u n a l s . 

## Conveyancing By Authorised P R A C T I T I O N E R - Contents

I n t r o d u c t i o n 
Chapter 1 
Background 
Chapter 2 
The new approach 
Chapter 3 
The p r o v i s i o n of conveyancing s e r v i c e s by employees of lending i n s t i t u t i o n s Authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r s 
Requirements f o r a u t h o r i s a t i o n Obtaining a u t h o r i s a t i o n 
Summary of proposals 
Chapter 4 
Annex 
Proposed code of conduct: main p r i n c i p l 

## Chapter 1  ־Introduction

1.1 
The Government proposes t o l e g i s l a t e t o p e r m i t a 
simpler system t o be implemented f o r banks, 
b u i l d i n g 
s o c i e t i e s , 
o t h e r 
i n s t i t u t i o n s and I n d i v i d u a l s t o 
provide conveyancing 
s e r v i c e s t o c l i e n t s 
s u b j e c t to 
appropriate safeguards. There i s l e g i s l a t i v e p r o v i s i o n 
f o r a system of t h i s k i n d i n 
Schedule 21 t o the 
B u i l d i n g S o c i e t i e s Act 1986, but t h i s Schedule has 
not 
been implemented. The Government now 
w i s h e s t o 
s u b s t i t u t e an a l t e r n a t i v e 
s t a t u t o r y framework which 
w i l l 
be 
l e s s 
e l a b o r a t e t h a n 
t h a t 
e n v i s a g e d i n 
S c h e d u l e 21 t o t h e 1986 A c t but which 
w i l l 
s t i l l 
provide the necessary c o n t r o l s . These proposals 
w i l l 
a f f e c t only England and Wales. 
1.2 
The new system w i l l provide f o r the a u t h o r i s a t i o n of 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s who w i l l be a b l e t o o f f e r conveyancing 
s e r v i c e s 
t o t h e p u b l i c . 
The 
i d e n t i t y 
o f t h e 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s may vary but they w i l l a l l 
be required to 
comply w i t h a s e t of s t r i c t 
c o n d i t i o n s . These 
w i l l 
i n c l u d e a b i d i n g by a code of conduct and employing 
s u f f i c i e n t 
s o l i c i t o r s o r l i c e n s e d 
c o n v e y a n c e r s t o 
s u p e r v i s e or provide the 
conveyancing s e r v i c e s . 
1.3 
T h e r e 
w i l l 
be no 
p r o h i b i t i o n 
a g a i n s t 
l e n d i n g 
i n s t i t u t i o n s providing conveyancing s e r v i c e s t o t h e i r 
borrowers. The Government i s , however, concerned t o 
see 
t h a t t h e many Independent 
s o l i c i t o r s and l i c e n s e d 
conveyancers throughout the country can compete with 
such i n s t i t u t i o n s on a f a i r b a s i s . I t 
t h e r e f o r e i n v i t e s 
v i e w s on whether 
a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s might be 
r e q u i r e d not 
t o s u b s i d i s e the p r o v i s i o n of conveyancing 
s e r v i c e s 
from 
t h e i r 
o t h e r 
a c t i v i t i e s . 
The same 
r e q u i r e m e n t c o u l d be p l a c e d a l s o upon e x i s t i n g Independent s o l i c i t o r s and l i c e n s e d conveyancers 
80 as t o e n s u r e a l e v e l p l a y i n g f i e l d f o r a l l . The Government would welcome comment on whether t h i s could be achieved, i f i t was provided t h a t , i n order to remain authorised, authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r s had t o : -

( a ) 
o f f e r conveyancing 
s e r v i c e s 
a t not 
l e s s 
than 
t h e i r t r u e c o s t ; and 
(b) 
be a b l e to prove t h a t they were doing t h i s to the 
s a t i s f a c t i o n of t h e i r a u d i t o r s . 
I t i s a l s o f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n whether any authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r , who was a lending i n s t i t u t i o n which had o f f e r e d to add the c o s t of the conveyancing t r a n s a c t i o n t o the loan, should be r e q u i r e d to do t h i s , whether the c l i e n t chose t o use t h a t a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r or an independent conveyancer to c a r r y out the conveyancing t r a n s a c t i o n . 

V i e w s a r e t h e r e f o r e I n v i t e d on whether s u i t a b l e d e t a i l e d arrangements could be made to give e f f e c t to 

these proposals. 
1.4 
I t f o l l o w s from t h i s t h a t t h e r e would a l s o appear no 
longer to be any reason to prevent lending i n s t i t u t i o n s 
o r other p o t e n t i a l a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s from having 
a 
shareholding 
i n incorporated l i c e n s e d 
conveyancers' 
p r a c t i c e s , when t h e s e come i n t o being, 
s i n c e 
such 
companies w i l l be r e q u i r e d to abide by the r e l e v a n t 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
r u l e s 
of conduct 
of 
t h e 
C o u n c i l 
f o r 
L i c e n s e d Conveyancers. **At present such** 
a shareholding 
18 p r o h i b i t e d by the r u l e s of the C o u n c i l , but, i f the 
Government i n due 
c o u r s e c o n f i r m s 
i t s i n t e n t i o n t o 
adopt the proposals s e t out i n t h i s paper, the Council 
may wish to consider amending a c c o r d i n g l y i t s approach to incorporated p r a c t i c e s . The Law S o c i e t y a l s o might w i s h i n the l i g h t of t h i s to review i t s p o l i c y on o u t s i d e shareholdings. Arrangements l i n k i n g s o l i c i t o r s and others a r e considered i n Chapter 12 of the Green Paper on t h e Work and O r g a n i s a t i o n of t h e L e g a l P r o f e s s i o n which i s published today. 

## Chapter 2 - Background

2.1 
At the beginning of the nineteenth century i t appears 
t h a t t h e r e was nothing t o prevent anyone a t a l l 
from 
s e t t i n g up as a conveyancer, but i n 1804 the 
l e g i s l a t u r e made conveyancing the monopoly of the l e g a l 
p r o f e s s i o n . At t h a t time t h e r e was a c o n s i d e r a b l e 
number of branches of the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n , but most 
have s i n c e dwindled away. S t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s g i v i n g 
the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n a monopoly over conveyancing were 
l a s t re-enacted i n the S o l i c i t o r s Act 1974. S e c t i o n 22 
provided t h a t only s o l i c i t o r s and c e r t a i n other excepted c a t e g o r i e s could d r a f t conveyancing documents 
f o r reward; 
and i n p r a c t i c e s o l i c i t o r s had the work to 
themselves. 
2.2 
I n 1983 the Government decided t h a t the e x i s t i n g 
r e s t r i c t i o n s should be modified i n order t o s t i m u l a t e 
competition. I t 
was argued t h a t the s o l i c i t o r s ' 
monopoly was wrong, t h a t t h e i r c o s t s were too high and 
t h a t i t 
was not necessary t o be a s o l i c i t o r t o d r a f t 
conveyancing documents. The Government t h e r e f o r e began 
the process which l e d 
t o the establishment, by the 
A d m i n i s t r a t i o n of J u s t i c e Act 1985, of the new 
p r o f e s s i o n of l i c e n s e d conveyancers, who a r e able t o provide conveyancing s e r v i c e s i n competition with s o l i c i t o r s . I n a d d i t i o n i n December 1983 the S o l i c i t o r General announced t h a t the Government intended t o introduce l e g i s l a t i o n t o extend the r i g h t of conveyancing to s o l i c i t o r s employed by banks and b u i l d i n g s o c i e t i e s , s u b j e c t t o safeguards. 

2.3 
The d e c l a r e d p o l i c y was s e t 
out by the S o l i c i t o r 
General I n a w r i t t e n answer on 6 December 1985, when he r e p l i e d to Mr F o r s y t h MP. 

"The Government i s s u e d a c o n s u l t a t i o n paper l a s t year seeking views on the way i n which c o n f l i c t s of i n t e r e s t and a n t i - c o m p e t i t i v e p r a c t i c e s could be avoided i f b u i l d i n g s o c i e t i e s and other f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s were t o o f f e r conveyancing s e r v i c e s to the p u b l i c . Following t h a t c o n s u l t a t i o n , the Government have concluded t h a t t h e r e i s no d i f f i c u l t y i n p r i n c i p l e i n such i n s t i t u t i o n s providing conveyancing t o persons to whom they a r e not a l s o o f f e r i n g a loan. However, the Government are not s a t i s f i e d t h a t lending i n s t i t u t i o n s could s a f e l y be permitted to o f f e r both conveyancing and a loan i n the same t r a n s a c t i o n . I t i s t h e r e f o r e proposed to p r o h i b i t lending i n s t i t u t i o n s from providing conveyancing, e i t h e r d i r e c t l y or through a s u b s i d i a r y company i n which they hold a m a j o r i t y stake, to those who a r e a l s o borrowing from them. 

"The Government are a l s o examining the p o s s i b i l i t y of e s t a t e agents providing a combined s e r v i c e of s a l e and conveyancing to vendors, and of lending i n s t i t u t i o n s providing conveyancing t o borrowers from them through a s s o c i a t e d companies i n which the lender holds only a m i n o r i t y shareholding. 

C o n s u l t a t i o n on those matters i s not y e t complete. 

" I t i s a l s o proposed to s e t a number of other c o n d i t i o n s to ensure proper consumer p r o t e c t i o n . 

I n p a r t i c u l a r , i n s t i t u t i o n s w i l l be r e q u i r e d t o ensure t h a t t h e i r conveyancing work i s s u p e r v i s e d by a q u a l i f i e d person; and adequate arrangements w i l l have to be made to p r o t e c t the consumer 

a g a i n s t negligence or fraud on the 
p a r t of those 
providing the s e r v i c e " . 
2.4 
The necessary s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s were p l a c e d i n 
s e c t i o n 124 of and Schedule 21 t o the 
B u i l d i n g 
S o c i e t i e s Act 
1986, although these p r o v i s i o n s have 
not 
been implemented. They allow the Lord C h a n c e l l o r t o 
recognise i n s t i t u t i o n s - which a r e 
defined as 
"any 
b u i l d i n g s o c i e t y or other body corporate o r 
any 
unincorporated a s s o c i a t i o n " - and i n d i v i d u a l p r a c t i t i o n e r s as s u i t a b l e t o undertake the 
p r o v i s i o n 
of 
conveyancing 
s e r v i c e s . Recognised 
i n s t i t u t i o n s and 
p r a c t i t i o n e r s a r e 
exempt from s e c t i o n 22 of 
the 
S o l i c i t o r s Act 1974. 
I n 
a d d i t i o n recognised 
i n s t i t u t i o n s which happen t o 
be bodies corporate a r e 
a l s o exempt from s e c t i o n 24 of the 
1974 
Act which 
p r o h i b i t s bodies corporate from providing 
conveyancing 
s e r v i c e s . 
2.5 
The Lord C h a n c e l l o r was given e x t e n s i v e rule-making 
powers, i n 
order t h a t he might c o n t r o l these new 
conveyancers. He may make r u l e s t o p r e s c r i b e 
the 
circumstances i n 
which i n s t i t u t i o n s and p r a c t i t i o n e r s 
may be recognised and the c o n d i t i o n s which must be met i n order t h a t such r e c o g n i t i o n may continue 
(paragraph 
2 ( 1 ) of Schedule 2 1 ) . He may p r e s c r i b e appropriate c o n d i t i o n s f o r p r o t e c t i n g persons f o r whom conveyancing s e r v i c e s a r e provided from c o n f l i c t s of i n t e r e s t 
(paragraph 2 ( 2 ) ( a ) ) and f o r s e c u r i n g t h a t compensation i s payable t o such persons i n r e s p e c t of negligence, fraud or other dishonesty (paragraph 2 ( 2 ) ( b ) ) . The Schedule a l s o permits the Lord C h a n c e l l o r t o make r u l e s f o r the manner, form, period and r e v o c a t i o n of r e c o g n i t i o n on s p e c i f i e d grounds, (paragraph 3 ) ; 
f o r the keeping of a l i s t of recognised i n s t i t u t i o n s o r p r a c t i t i o n e r s (paragraph 4) and f o r the d e l e g a t i o n of a l l the Lord C h a n c e l l o r ' s f u n c t i o n s (except f o r r u l e making) to any o f f i c e r or o f f i c e r s nominated by the r u l e s (paragraph 5 ) . A l l r e c o g n i t i o n r u l e s a r e t o be made by s t a t u t o r y instrument. 

2.6 
The Schedule c l e a r l y envisages t h a t the Lord C h a n c e l l o r 
w i l l : -
( a ) 
provide an e l a b o r a t e s t r u c t u r e of r u l e s and 
g u i d e l i n e s t o govern the conduct of 
recognised 
i n s t i t u t i o n s and p r a c t i t i o n e r s ; and 
(b) 
s e t up a d m i n i s t r a t i v e machinery which w i l l 
oversee 
the granting of r e c o g n i t i o n , ensure t h a t the r u l e s are observed and, where necessary, w i l l revoke 
r e c o g n i t i o n or impose d i s c i p l i n a r y s a n c t i o n s . 
2.7 
The j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r such a s t r u c t u r e would be t h a t 
t h e r e would be i n s u f f i c i e n t p r o t e c t i o n and c o n t r o l 
without i t . The Government, however, now 
c o n s i d e r s 
t h a t adequate a l t e r n a t i v e 
machinery could be s e t up 
bearing i n mind t h a t : -
( a ) 
those o r g a n i s a t i o n s and i n d i v i d u a l s who are most 
l i k e l y to seek and obtain r e c o g n i t i o n a r e a l r e a d y 

regulated by s t a t u t e and/or p r o f e s s i o n a l bodies; and 
(b) 
t h e r e w i l l be a requirement t h a t those who 
c a r r y 
out or s u p e r v i s e the conveyancing s e r v i c e s must be 
s o l i c i t o r s or l i c e n s e d conveyancers. 

## Chapter 3 - The New Approach

(A.) The p r o v i s i o n of conveyancing s e r v i c e - by employees of 
lending 
i n s t i t u t i o n s 
3.1 
Government p o l i c y as s t a t e d i n 1985 was t o p r o h i b i t 
lending i n s t i t u t i o n s from providing conveyancing s e r v i c e s , e i t h e r d i r e c t l y or through a Company i n which 
they had a m a j o r i t y shareholding, t o those who were 
a l s o borrowing from them. 
The p r o h i b i t i o n was the 
r e s u l t of unresolved concerns over c o n f l i c t s of i n t e r e s t which might a r i s e i f a s o l i c i t o r or l i c e n s e d 
conveyancer employed by a lending i n s t i t u t i o n acted both f o r the i n s t i t u t i o n and the borrower. 
The 
c o n f l i c t would be between the s o l i c i t o r ' s duty to h i s employer and the duty to the borrower, who would be h i s c l i e n t . 
Such c o n f l i c t s could a r i s e where the borrower 
r e v e a l e d something to the s o l i c i t o r or l i c e n s e d conveyancer which might reduce h i s chances of obtaining 
a loan. 
I t 
was considered t h a t the s o l i c i t o r or 
l i c e n s e d conveyancer might a l s o be i n d i f f i c u l t y i n 
g i v i n g independent advice about the type of mortgage 
which would be required and the c o n d i t i o n s of the 
loan. 
3.2 
The Government no longer t h i n k s i t 
necessary to follow 
the p o l i c y i t 
announced i n 1985. 
I t 
now b e l i e v e s t h a t , 
although the c o n f l i c t s of i n t e r e s t o u t l i n e d i n paragraph 2.1 above might a r i s e very o c c a s i o n a l l y , 
n e v e r t h e l e s s adequate safeguards can be devised and, i n 
the v a s t m a j o r i t y of c a s e s , the i n t e r e s t s of the borrower and the lender i n the conveyancing t r a n s a c t i o n 
w i l l be i d e n t i c a l . 
Indeed, a t present the same 
s o l i c i t o r s and l i c e n s e d conveyancers f r e q u e n t l y a c t f o r 
both the lending i n s t i t u t i o n and the borrower. 
For 
y e a r s lending i n s t i t u t i o n s have been w i l l i n g to use the 
same s o l i c i t o r (and a r e now w i l l i n g t o use the same l i c e n s e d conveyancer) as the customer a t a s i g n i f i c a n t saving to him. The added r i s k of a c o n f l i c t o f I n t e r e s t where the conveyancer i s a c t u a l l y employed by the lending i n s t i t u t i o n appears to be a matter of degree r a t h e r than substance and to be r e l e v a n t only i n e x c e p t i o n a l circumstances. 

3.3 
The Government t h e r e f o r e does not c o n s i d e r t h a t the 
r i s k s a r e l a r g e enough to outweigh the p o t e n t i a l 
b e n e f i t s of a more r e l a x e d approach, provided t h a t t h e r e a r e s u f f i c i e n t safeguards t o o f f e r the borrower 
an informed c h o i c e . These safeguards w i l l be 
incorporated i n the Code of Conduct proposed i n 
paragraph 3.9. 
A few w i l l be s p e c i f i c to lending 
i n s t i t u t i o n s - and, i t should be pointed out, t o any 
insurance company which might wish t o provide 
conveyancing s e r v i c e s to someone t a k i n g out an 
endowment mortgage. 

Others w i l l be g e n e r a l l y a p p l i c a b l e to a l l a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s . 

On t h i s b a s i s the Government proposes to allow s o l i c i t o r s and l i c e n s e d conveyancers employed by lending i n s t i t u t i o n s to undertake conveyancing work on b e h a l f of t h e i r 

employers  יc l i e n t s . 
(B.) Authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r s 
3.4 
The Lord C h a n c e l l o r no longer i n t e n d s t h a t he w i l l 
c o n s i d e r i n d i v i d u a l a p p l i c a t i o n s from those who wish to provide conveyancing s e r v i c e s to the p u b l i c . 
I n s t e a d 
he proposes to s e t out a number of requirements which 
any person, whether an i n d i v i d u a l , a p a r t n e r s h i p or a 
corporate body, must meet before i t w i l l be allowed to 
provide conveyancing s e r v i c e s . 
A l l those who meet such 
requirements w i l l be known as a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s . 

## Requirements F O R A U T H O R I S A T I O N

3.5 
To o b t a i n a u t h o r i s a t i o n the i n d i v i d u a l p r a c t i t i o n e r 
w i l l have t o s a t i s f y the 
requirements s e t i n t h e 
following 
a r e a s : 
( i ) 
S u i t a b i l i t y t o provide conveyancing s e r v i c e s 
3.6 
The p r a c t i t i o n e r must be f i t 
and proper o r be a 
b u s i n e s s which i s 
run 
by f i t 
and proper people, 
conducting the 
b u s i n e s s i n 
a prudent and competent 
manner. 
P r a c t i t i o n e r s must a l s o have the experience 
and competence t o provide these a d d i t i o n a l s e r v i c e s . 
T h i s means t h a t p r a c t i t i o n e r s must e i t h e r be a u t h o r i s e d under s t a t u t e , l i k e banks o r b u i l d i n g s o c i e t i e s , o r o b t a i n a u t h o r i s a t i o n by a recognised a u t h o r i t y as 
i n d i c a t e d i n 
paragraph 3.18. below. 
( i i ) 
Employment of a s u f f i c i e n t number o f s o l i c i t o r s o r 
l i c e n s e d conveyancers (or both) t o provide or s u p e r v i s e the p r o v i s i o n of the 
conveyancing s e r v i c e s 
3.7 
Although an a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r w i l l be exempt from 
s e c t i o n 22 of the S o l i c i t o r s Act 
1974, i t w i l l remain a 
requirement t h a t the 
conveyancing work must be c a r r i e d 
out by those who have the r e l e v a n t 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
e x p e r t i s e . 
( i i i ) 
P r o t e c t i o n of c l i e n t s ' money from improper use 
3.8 
I n 
order t o reduce the r i s k of dishonesty o r 
the 
improper use 
of c l i e n t s ' money, such money must be paid 
i n t o separate c l i e n t s ' accounts. I n a d d i t i o n , i n c a s e s 
where money i s 
held by an a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r on 
b e h a l f of a c l i e n t , he must p l a c e i t on d e p o s i t and 
pay 
the c l i e n t the i n t e r e s t earned. 
( i v ) 
Compliance with the Lord C h a n c e l l o r ' s Code of Conduct 
3.9 
The Lord C h a n c e l l o r intends t o l a y down i n 
a s t a t u t o r y 
instrument a Code of Conduct t o 
be followed by 
a l l 
a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s . 
T h i s w i l l Impose uniform 
minimum standards on them and provide a measure a g a i n s t which complaints should be judged. 
The main p r i n c i p l e s 
which the 
Government proposes should be covered a r e 
contained i n 
the 
Annex t o t h i s paper. 
(v) 
A b i l i t y t o meet c l a i m s a r i s i n g out 
of conveyancing 
s e r v i c e s 
3.10 
There w i l l i n e v i t a b l y be c l a i m s of f i n a n c i a l l o s s 
a r i s i n g out 
of the 
p r o v i s i o n 
of conveyancing 
s e r v i c e s . 
A bad mistake can r e s u l t i n 
a purchaser a c q u i r i n g 
a 
property which i s 
worth c o n s i d e r a b l y l e s s than he paid 
f o r i t - because, f o r 
example, the conveyancer 
overlooked a r e s t r i c t i o n on use 
or the planning of a 
new motorway. The p r a c t i t i o n e r w i l l be r e q u i r e d 
t o 
have adequate p r o f e s s i o n a l indemnity insurance or other appropriate arrangements to meet such c l a i m s . 
( v i ) 
I n v e s t i g a t i o n of complaints 
3.11 
The a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r must be a b l e t o 
demonstrate, where appropriate t o the s a t i s f a c t i o n of 
the r e l e v a n t recognised a u t h o r i t y ( s e e para 3.18 
below), t h a t i t 
has s u i t a b l e i n t e r n a l mechanisms 
i n 
p l a c e , appropriate t o 
the nature and s c a l e of 
i t s 
o r g a n i s a t i o n , t o d e a l w i t h complaints and d i s c i p l i n a r y 
matters. 

| ( v i l )   |     | S u i t a b l e   |  compensation   |     | arrangements    |
|-------------|-----|-------------------|-----------------|-----|-----------------|

3.12 
I t 
18 not p o s s i b l e f o r 
anyone t o i n s u r e a g a i n s t h i s own 
dishonesty. 
There w i l l i n e v i t a b l y be c a s e s where l o s s 
18 caused by the 
dishonesty of the 
p r a c t i t i o n e r or, i n 
the case of a corporate body, by i t s d i r e c t o r s . The 
p r a c t i t i o n e r w i l l t h e r e f o r e be r e q u i r e d t o 
be covered 
by a s u i t a b l e compensation scheme o r t o have made adequate bonding arrangements. 
( v i i i ) 
Membership of a s u i t a b l e ombudsman scheme 

3.13 
There w i l l be c a s e s where an aggrieved c l i e n t i s e i t h e r 
not s a t i s f i e d about the 
way the 
p r a c t i t i o n e r d e a l t with 
h i s complaint or wishes t o complain about 
p o s s i b l e 
breaches of the 
Code of Conduct by the p r a c t i t i o n e r . 
Every a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r w i l l t h e r e f o r e be 
r e q u i r e d t o belong t o 
a s u i t a b l e ombudsman scheme which 
provides f o r 
an independent a d j u d i c a t o r who must 
a t 
l e a s t have powers t o : -
( a ) 
i n v e s t i g a t e the 
complaint provided i t i s w i t h i n a 
reasonable period of time and i s 
not v e x a t i o u s or 
f r i v o l o u s ; 
(b) 
r e q u i r e production of documents; 
( c ) 
order the 
authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r t o 
pay 
the 
complainant compensation f o r 
the l o s s , expense or 
inconvenience caused by the a c t i o n ; 
(d) 
d i r e c t the 
authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r t o take a c t i o n 
to c o r r e c t the 
complaint ( t h i s could i n c l u d e 
suspending the 
t a k i n g on of 
new b u s i n e s s f o r 
a 
f i x e d period or u n t i l the 
problems have been 
remedied); 
( e ) 
r e q u i r e a p r a c t i t i o n e r 
t o abide by h i e r u l i n g 
w i t h i n a s p e c i f i e d period as a c o n d i t i o n of 
membership of the 
scheme ( i n p r a c t i c e , t h i s means 
t h a t the p r a c t i t i o n e r w i l l e i t h e r have t o accept 
the r u l i n g or r e s i g n from the scheme, thereby 
d i s q u a l i f y i n g himself or i t s e l f from 
a u t h o r i s a t i o n ) ; and 
( f ) 
r e p o r t t o the r e l e v a n t recognised or other 
s u p e r v i s o r y a u t h o r i t y where a complaint a g a i n s t an 
authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r r e v e a l s a p e r s i s t e n t 
breach of the 
code of conduct or a systemic 
f a u l t . 
(ix) 
Adequate arrangements f o r 
p r o t e c t i n g c l i e n t s 
should an a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r cease 
providing conveyancing s e r v i c e s . 
3.14 
An authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r 
may cease, or go out 
of, 
b u s i n e s s f o r 
any number of reasons i n c l u d i n g death, 
i l l n e s s , d i s c i p l i n a r y a c t i o n or bankruptcy. 
I n the 
c a s e of s o l i c i t o r s and l i c e n s e d conveyancers who cease 
p r a c t i c e , t h e r e a r e s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s whereby 
c l i e n t s ' money i s protected, and p r o f e s s i o n a l c o l l e a g u e s may i n t e r v e n e i n the p r a c t i c e i n order t o r e t u r n papers t o c l i e n t s . 

Very o f t e n the i n t e r v e n i n g c o l l e a g u e i s w i l l i n g t o take over the f i l e of any c l i e n t prepared t o i n s t r u c t him. S i m i l a r arrangements w i l l be r e q u i r e d i n the case of a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s so t h a t c l i e n t s a r e properly protected. 

(C.) Obtaining a u t h o r i s a t i o n 
3.15 
Those who may wish t o become authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r s 
may be d i v i d e d i n t o two c a t e g o r i e s . 
( i ) 
Banks and B u i l d i n g s S o c i e t i e s 
3.16 
These b u s i n e s s e s a r e 
a l r e a d y regulated and s u b j e c t t o 
p r u d e n t i a l r e g u l a t i o n : -
( a ) 
Banks An I n s t i t u t i o n wishing t o operate a 
deposit t a k i n g b u s i n e s s - u s t be a u t h o r i s e d by 
the 
Bank o f England under the 
Banking Act 1987; 
and 
(b) 
B u i l d i n g S o c i e t i e s No b u i l d i n g s o c i e t y may r a i s e 
money from i t s 
members u n l e s s i t 
i s 
authorised t o 
do so by the B u i l d i n g S o c i e t i e s Commission under 
the B u i l d i n g S o c i e t i e s 
Act 
1986. 
3.17 
No bank o r b u i l d i n g s o c i e t y i s 
a u t h o r i s e d u n l e s s i t 18 
e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t i t 18 run 
by f i t 
and proper persons i n 
a prudent manner. 
Accordingly the 
Government b e l i e v e s 
t h a t a l l 
banks and b u i l d i n g s o c i e t i e s should be allowed 
t o operate as authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r s 
provided 
they 
c e r t i f y t o t h e i r r e g u l a t o r y a u t h o r i t i e s t h a t they can 
comply with a l l 
the other requirements s e t 
out 
i n 
paragraphs 3.7 t o 
3.14. 

## ( I I ) Others

3.18 
Others wishing t o 
become a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s w i l l 
be r e q u i r e d t o submit themselves t o the s u p e r v i s i o n of 
an a u t h o r i t y which can s a t i s f y the Lord C h a n c e l l o r t h a t i t i s 
a b l e t o impose and enforce the necessary 
requirements s e t 
out i n t h i s paper. 
Such a u t h o r i t i e s 
w i l l be known as recognised a u t h o r i t i e s . Some 
intending p r a c t i t i o n e r s , such as surveyors, v a l u e r s and insurance brokers, may a l r e a d y be r e g u l a t e d by 
a u t h o r i t i e s which w i l l e a s i l y be a b l e t o enforce the 
r e l e v a n t new requirements. 
Others, l i k e e s t a t e agents 
and the 
new mortgage lending companies, may f i n d 
i t 
necessary t o s e t 
up new a u t h o r i t i e s 
or, 
i f 
they wish, a 
s i n g l e new a u t h o r i t y , with a s i n g l e ombudsman scheme. 

Indeed, although there w i l l be no s t a t u t o r y requirement t o t h i s e f f e c t , a l l authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r s , however regulated, might f i n d i t s e n s i b l e t o s e t up a s i n g l e ombudsman scheme r a t h e r than f i n a n c e a number of separate schemes. 

## Chapter 4 - Summary Of Proposals

4.1 
I n summary, the Government t h e r e f o r e proposes:-
( a ) 
t o r e p e a l s e c t i o n 124 of and Schedule 21 t o the 
B u i l d i n g S o c i e t i e s Act 1986; and 
(b) t o Introduce l e g i s l a t i o n which w i l l provide f o r 
the a u t h o r i s a t i o n of p r a c t i t i o n e r s who can s a t i s f y the requirements s e t 
out I n paragraphs 3.6 t o 3.14 
of t h i s Paper. 
4.2 
The Government would welcome comments on these 
proposals. 
They should be sent to a r r i v e not l a t e r 
than 2 May 1989 
t o : -
Room 417 
Lord C h a n c e l l o r ' s Department Trevelyan House 30, Great Peter S t r e e t London SW1P 2BY 

## Proposed Code Of Conduct: Main Principles

(A.) Proper s u p e r v i s i o n of conveyancing s e r v i c e s 
1. 
One i n d i v i d u a l must be r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e 
d i r e c t i o n and 
s u p e r v i s i o n of 
the 
conveyancing s e r v i c e s . 
Each authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r must have one named person, who i s d i r e c t l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r ensuring t h a t the conveyancing s e r v i c e s a r e c a r r i e d out according t o t h i s code. 

2. 
A s u f f i c i e n t number of s o l i c i t o r s o r l i c e n s e d conveyancers 
(or both) must be employed t o 
enable the 
conveyancing 
s e r v i c e s t o 
be provided by s u i t a b l y q u a l i f i e d persons 
o r 
under t h e i r immediate 
s u p e r v i s i o n . 
As explained i n paragraph 3.7 
of the paper, i t w i l l remain a requirement t h a t the conveyancing work must be c a r r i e d out by those who have the r e l e v a n t p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r t i s e . 

(B.) C o n f l i c t s of i n t e r e s t 
3. 
Subparagraphs ( a ) 
and (b) below w i l l apply i n 
any 
c a s e where 
the authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r I s a lending i n s t i t u t i o n ( o r i s a s u b s i d i a r y of 
a lending i n s t i t u t i o n ) and 
wishes t o provide 
conveyancing s e r v i c e s f o r any person t o whom the lending i n s t i t u t i o n has l e n t o r I s proposing t o lend money which was or i s t o be applied i n or towards the a c q u i s i t i o n o f an e s t a t e o r i n t e r e s t i n land. The authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r must:-
( a ) make i t c l e a r t h a t independent f i n a n c i a l advice i s not a v a i l a b l e from the conveyancer; and 
(b) e x p l a i n the terms and c o n d i t i o n s of the loan or o f f e r i n a c l e a r and s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d manner• 
A conveyancer employed by a lending i n s t i t u t i o n ( o r by an insurance company providing an endowment p o l i c y ) would not be able to g i v e independent advice, but i n t h i s he would be no d i f f e r e n t to t i e d agents i n other f i n a n c i a l markets. The v i t a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s t h a t the borrower understands t h i s . As long as he does, he w i l l s t i l l have the option of seeking independent l e g a l advice about a l t e r n a t i v e f i n a n c i a l packages. 

I t i s worth pointing out, however, t h a t under the c u r r e n t system i t seems c l e a r t h a t a s i g n i f i c a n t proportion of home buyers do not approach t h e i r conveyancers u n t i l they have arranged t h e i r mortgage, and do not t h e r e f o r e look to them f o r f i n a n c i a l advice. 

The c l i e n t must be made s p e c i f i c a l l y aware t h a t information d i s c l o s e d by the c l i e n t to the conveyancer may be used by the a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r i n r e s p e c t of any other s e r v i c e i t i s providing or intends to provide. 

An independent conveyancer would have a duty of confidence to the c l i e n t . 

However, an employed conveyancer would a l s o have a duty to h i s employer and must make i t c l e a r to the c l i e n t t h a t no r e l e v a n t information d i s c l o s e d can be kept from the employer. 

Such information could t h e r e f o r e be used by a lending i n s t i t u t i o n i n a s s e s s i n g a borrower's s u i t a b i l i t y f o r a loan or by a f i r m of surveyors i n a s s e s s i n g whether the c l i e n t w i l l be a b l e t o pay f o r an expensive s t r u c t u r a l survey. 

5. 
( a ) A recognised p r a c t i t i o n e r must not provide 
conveyancing 
s e r v i c e s i n 
any case where the i n t e r e s t s of the p r a c t i t i o n e r 
o r any a s s o c i a t e of the p r a c t i t i o n e r may c o n f l i c t w i t h those 
of the 
person making use 
of the s e r v i c e s . 
(b) " A s s o c i a t e " i n sub-paragraph ( a ) would cover p a r t n e r s , s u b s i d i a r y or holding companies, companies of which the p r a c t i t i o n e r i s a d i r e c t o r and, where the p r a c t i t i o n e r i s an i n d i v i d u a l , any members of h i s family. 

C l i e n t s need t o be protected from s i t u a t i o n s where the i n t e r e s t s of the authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r put a t r i s k h i s d u t i e s t o the c l i e n t . 

The obvious example i s where the p r a c t i t i o n e r has a d i r e c t f i n a n c i a l i n t e r e s t because i t owns or i s seeking to buy the property i n question. 

P r i n c i p l e s 6 
and 7 below a r e p a r t i c u l a r examples of where c o n f l i c t i s l i k e l y t o a r i s e and where, s u b j e c t t o c e r t a i n safeguards, i t may be considered t h a t a p o t e n t i a l c o n f l i c t can be 

regarded as overcome. 
6. 
( a ) An authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r must not accept i n s t r u c t i o n s 
from or continue t o a c t 
f o r any person whose i n t e r e s t s 
c o n f l i c t with those of any other person by whom 
the 
a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r i s 
a l s o 
i n s t r u c t e d . 
(b) 
I n p a r t i c u l a r an authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r must not a c t 
f o r both p a r t i e s to a t r a n s a c t i o n except where i t appears 
t h a t there i s 
no c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t between the p a r t i e s 
and both have consented i n w r i t i n g 
( 1 ) t o i t s a c t i n g ; and 
( i i ) t o i t s c e a s i n g t o a c t f o r both p a r t i e s , s h o u l d a c o n f l i c t of i n t e r e s t subsequently a r i s e . 

Subparagraph ( a ) 18 a broad statement of p r i n c i p l e . I t would cover not only a c t i n g f o r both p a r t i e s , but a l s o a s i t u a t i o n where the vendor (V) 
i s s e l l i n g t o purchaser one 
( P I ) who i s s e l l i n g t o purchaser two (P2) 
and the authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r i s i n s t r u c t e d by V and P2. Although a c o n f l i c t may be u n l i k e l y , the p r a c t i t i o n e r needs t o be aware t h a t i t could a r i s e . 

Subparagraph (b) 
i s s p e c i f i c a l l y d i r e c t e d a t a c t i n g f o r both vendor and purchaser. 

I t follows the approach of the Licensed Conveyancers P r a c t i c e Rules which permit l i c e n s e d conveyancers t o a c t f o r both p a r t i e s on these very s t r i n g e n t c o n d i t i o n s . 

One obvious example of where a c o n f l i c t may a r i s e i s where an e s t a t e agent a c t i n g on behalf of a vendor wishes t o provide conveyancing s e r v i c e s f o r both vendor and purchaser. 

A p a r t i c u l a r problem which w i l l need t o be s o r t e d out when the r e l e v a n t r u l e s come t o be d r a f t e d i s how t o deal with a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s who have more than one o f f i c e . T h i s i s obviously the case with most lending i n s t i t u t i o n s . 

I t may be s a f e t o provide t h a t I n most c a s e s where one branch o f f i c e a c t s f o r the vendor and another f o r the purchaser each o f f i c e may be t r e a t e d a s a separate 

p r a c t i t i o n e r , but e q u a l l y there may need t o be p r o v i s i o n s which ensure t h a t they a c t 
independently of one another. 
7. 
When the authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r e n t e r s i n t o an arrangement 
with another person f o r 
the i n t r o d u c t i o n of c l i e n t s t o 
the 
a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r or by the authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r to the other person i t must ensure:-
( a ) t h a t the c l i e n t i s informed i n w r i t i n g of the arrangement and of any commission o r other b e n e f i t the authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r may be r e c e i v i n g o r pay; 
(b) t h a t I t obtains the c l i e n t ' s w r i t t e n agreement as t o the d e s t i n a t i o n of the commission or e l s e i t s h a l l account t o the c l i e n t f o r the commission? and 
( c ) t h a t i t remains able t o advise the c l i e n t r e g a r d l e s s of i t s own i n t e r e s t s . 

A c l i e n t must be e n t i t l e d to know whether the authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r i s making any hidden p r o f i t o r i s paying any t h i r d party who r e f e r r e d the c l i e n t t o the authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r . 

(C.) C o n t r a c t u a l o b l i g a t i o n s 
8. 

An authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r must give to each c l i e n t , before i t may accept i n s t r u c t i o n s t o a c t , an estimate of the t o t a l c o s t which the c l i e n t w i l l or may have t o meet. 

T h i s must 

s e t out 
( a ) the way i n which fees w i l l be c a l c u l a t e d ; 
(b) the circumstances i n which they might be i n c r e a s e d ; 
and 
( c ) the p a r t i c u l a r s of expenses and t a x l i k e l y t o be charged t o the c l i e n t C l i e n t s must be e n t i t l e d t o know before they e n t e r i n t o a c o n t r a c t with the authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r what the l i k e l y c o s t of the t r a n s a c t i o n w i l l be. 

When t h e authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r 
18 a lending i n s t i t u t i o n and o f f e r s t o add the c o s t of the conveyancing t r a n s a c t i o n to the loan, i t must give the c l i e n t an i n d i c a t i o n of what he 18 l i k e l y t o pay over the period of the loan compared to what he would pay i f he net the c o s t on completion. Any such lending i n s t i t u t i o n , which has o f f e r e d t o add the c o s t of the conveyancing t r a n s a c t i o n t o the loan, must a l s o be ready to do t h i s , whether the c l i e n t chooses t o use t h a t lending I n s t i t u t i o n or an independent conveyancer t o c a r r y out the conveyancing t r a n s a c t i o n . 

9. 
When an a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r o f f e r s conveyancing and 
other s e r v i c e s t o a c l i e n t i t 
must ensure t h a t the statement 
required under P r i n c i p l e 8 s e t s out s e p a r a t e l y the c o s t of 
each s e r v i c e . 
The c l i e n t needs t o be a b l e t o make an informed c h o i c e between the c o s t of in-house and independent conveyancing s e r v i c e s . 

10. 
Authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r s must not o f f e r conveyancing 
s e r v i c e s below t h e i r t r u e c o s t and must provide annual proof 
t h a t they a r e 
complying with t h i s requirement 
The Government i s anxious t o ensure t h a t the competitive p o s i t i o n of independent conveyancers i s not put a t r i s k by a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s s u b s i d i s i n g the p r o v i s i o n of conveyancing s e r v i c e s by t h e i r other a c t i v i t i e s . I t t h e r e f o r e r e q u i r e s a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s not t o o f f e r conveyancing s e r v i c e s below t h e i r t r u e c o s t . 

Authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r s must be able t o demonstrate t h i s a t l e a s t once a y e a r t o the s a t i s f a c t i o n of t h e i r a u d i t o r s who must c e r t i f y t h a t t h i s condition i s being met. 

11. An a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r must not make the p r o v i s i o n o f ; -
( a ) conveyancing s e r v i c e s c o n d i t i o n a l on any other s e r v i c e being taken; o r 
(b) any other s e r v i c e c o n d i t i o n a l on conveyancing s e r v i c e s being taken. 

Such a p r o h i b i t i o n a g a i n s t " t y i n g - i n " i s e s s e n t i a l . 

There i s an obvious r i s k t h a t , f o r example, a lending i n s t i t u t i o n w i l l t i e i n the conveyancing s e r v i c e s t o the loan, thus making the borrower accept the whole package. 

S i n c e the loan i s so v i t a l , t h i s would e f f e c t i v e l y prevent the borrower from seeking independent l e g a l or f i n a n c i a l advice. 

S i m i l a r l y , although the c l i e n t would f e e l under l e s s p r e s s u r e to accept, a surveyor might wish a c l i e n t to accept a combined e s t a t e agency/survey/conveyancing package. 

I f t h i s were permitted, i t might w e l l f o r c e independent conveyancers out of business and so reduce competition. 

12. 
An a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r must not c o n t r a c t u a l l y l i m i t i t s 
l i a b i l i t y f o r damage s u f f e r e d by the c l i e n t as a r e s u l t of 
negligence on i t s p a r t . 
13. 
An authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r must s e t out i n w r i t i n g the terms 
upon which i n s t r u c t i o n s w i l l be accepted and give them to 
the c l i e n t before accepting i n s t r u c t i o n s . 

## (D.) Conduct Of Business

14. 
An a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r must d e a l with correspondence 
and 
other matters a r i s i n g i n the course of a conveyancing 
t r a n s a c t i o n with reasonable speed and must not by h i s 
a c t i o n s or omissions cause unnecessary delay. 
Authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r s w i l l be r e q u i r e d to a c t i n a p r o f e s s i o n a l manner. 

These purpose of t h i s and the f o l l o w i n g p r i n c i p l e s i s t o ensure t h a t t h i s happens. 

These p r i n c i p l e s w i l l : -

( a ) 
help t o avoid any c o n f l i c t between the 
authorised 
p r a c t i t i o n e r and the 
employed p r o f e s s i o n a l 
conveyancer by imposing t h e 
same r u l e s o f conduct 
as the 
p r o f e s s i o n a l 
conveyancer would expect t o 
meet i n 
p r i v a t e p r a c t i c e ; 
(b) demonstrate t o independent conveyancers a c t i n g 
f o r 
other p a r t i e s t h a t a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r s a r e not exempt from the 
u s u a l p r o f e s s i o n a l standards; 
and 
( c ) 
o f f e r guidance t o 
ombudsmen and other i n t e r e s t e d 
p a r t i e s i n 
the 
case of complaints. 
15. An a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r must ensure t h a t c l i e n t s a r e kept 
adequately informed of the 
progress of the t r a n s a c t i o n . 
F a i l i n g t o keep c l i e n t s properly informed causes misunderstanding and a n x i e t y . 

I t l e a d s t o mistakes and complaints. 

15. An a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r must t r e a t a l l f a c t s and 
information concerning the c l i e n t obtained by i t i n the 
course of a c t i n g f o r 
the c l i e n t as c o n f i d e n t i a l and must 
not 
a t any time make any unauthorised use 
of such f a c t s or 
information. 
17. An a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r must not delay completion of 
any 
t r a n s a c t i o n s o l e l y on the 
ground t h a t i t s f e e s 
a r e 
outstanding. 
18. An a u t h o r i s e d p r a c t i t i o n e r must comply f u l l y w i t h every 
undertaking given on i t s 
behalf during any conveyancing 
t r a n s a c t i o n . 
19. When an authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r 
18 i n s t r u c t e d by a vendor to 
submit forms of c o n t r a c t to more than one 
p r o s p e c t i v e 
purchaser, i t must obtain the c l i e n t ' s a u t h o r i t y t o d i s c l o s e t h i s f a c t to a l l 
p r o s p e c t i v e purchasers. 
I f t h a t a u t h o r i t y 
i s not given, i t must withdraw from the t r a n s a c t i o n s . 
20. 
An authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r 
must not withdraw from 
t r a n s a c t i o n s without good cause. 
An authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r must not cease t o a c t merely because i t no longer wishes to represent a c l i e n t . 

There should be a good reason f o r i t s withdrawing, f o r example because a c o n f l i c t of I n t e r e s t 18 discovered or the authorised p r a c t i t i o n e r i s unable t o obtain i n s t r u c t i o n s from the c l i e n t . 

CABINET 
DRAFT WHITE PAPER ON THE REFORM 
OF THE NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE 
Note by •the S e c r e t a r y o f t h e C a b i n e t 

The d r a f t White Paper on t h e 
                                 Reform o f t h e 
                                                 N a t i o n a l H e a l t h S e r v i c e 
                                                                            was c i r c u l a t e d t o a l l 
                                    members o f t h e 
                                                                  C a b i n e t under t h e 
                                                                                                      memorandum by t h e 

t l t h - E ( A ) ( 8 9 ) 2. The Sub-Committee on 

i n i s t e r i a l S t e e r i n g Committee on Economic 
     Paper i n 
                        p r i n c i p l e a t i t s 
                                                           m e e t i n g t h i s 

/ i l l be c o n s i d e r e d by t h e 
                                                              C a b i n e t on 

r e - c i r c u l a t e d a s 
                                  a s e p a r a t e C a b i n e t paper. 

S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e 
Economic A f f a i r s ο 
S t r a t e g y approved 
                                  t h e 
morning and 
                        t h e 
                                White 
26 J a n u a r y . 
                          I t i s not 

C a b i n e t O f f i c e 
24 J a n u a r y 1989 
gned ROBIN BUTLER 
THIS DOCUMENT I S 
THE PROPERTY OF HER BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT 
CABINET 

## Economic Strategy

Memorandum by the Chancellor of the Exchequer conomy, which saw above a v e r a g e growth i n 1987, The U n i t e d K f c o n t i n u e d t o gr| boom, but a l s o 

i d l y i n 1988, 
                            l a r g e l y a s 
                                                   a r e s u l t o f 
                                                                            an investment 
 ^.ng c o n t i n u e d 
                               s t r o n g consumer demand. 
                                                                                  With 
    s h i g h e s t l e v e l s s i n c e t h e 
                                                            1960s and w i t h 
                                                                                            c o n t i n u e d 

p r o f i t a b i l i t y now 

t y , companies a r e 
                                          i n 
                                                 a v e r y s t r o n g p o s i t i o n 
                                                                                                     and 
    t o meet f u t u r e demand. 
                                                            Consumers have seen 

r a p i d growth i n p r 
have been i n v e s t i n g 

f i c a n t l y and 
                          have f e l t more c o n f i d e n t about 
have been p r e p a r e d t o f i n a n c e t h e i r spending 

t h e i r r e a l incomes r i 
the f u t u r e ; a s 
                              a r e s u l t 
by borrowing more. 

2. 
     The upshot i s 
                          that t o t a l domestic demand has r i s e n f a s t e r than 
                                                                                                the 
economy's capacity to supply, l e a d ^ g to 
                                                           a re-emergence of i n f l a t i o n a r y 
pressure, manifesting i t s e l f botJ^»kectly i n 
                                                                  a pick-up i n 
                                                                                     the underlying 
increase i n 
                 the R e t a i l P r i c e Ιη<ΛΛ(ΜΙ), and i n d i r e c t l y i n 
                                                                                       a sharp growth 

i n imports and hence a widening e 
                                                                            ;afreet ,account d e f i c i t . 

3. 
     S i n c e the 
                   summer, monetary p o l i c y 
d e a l w i t h t h e 
                   emerging i n f l a t i o n a r y ρ 

s a l e s , from t h e 
                                h o u s i n g market and from 
growth (MO) 
                        i s 
                              t h a t t h i s t i g h t e n i n g i s 
                                                                             s t 
t o a s u s t a i n a b l e path, b u t t h e r e i s s t i l l 

p a r t i c u l a r . 
                          The R P I e x a g g e r a t e s the e x t e n t 
o f t h e 
              p e r v e r s e i n c l u s i o n o f mortgage i n t e r e s 

g e t t i n g i n f l a t i o n on t o 
                                              a c l e a r downward path w i l l mean k e e p i n g 
                                                                                                                              i n t e r e s t 

r a t e s h i g h f o r some time. 
                                                     F i s c a l p o l i c y h a s 
                                                                                        been c o n s i d e r a b l y t i g h t e r 
t h a n f o r e c a s t o v e r t h e 
                                             p a s t y e a r and 
                                                                        we now seem s e t f o r a P u b l i c S e c t o r 
Debt Repayment (PSDR) a p p r e c i a b l y g r e a t e r than t h e 
                                                                                                     £10 b i l l i o n I i n d i c a t e d 

i n the Autumn Statement. 

4. 
     I am s u r e , i n 
                         t h e 
                              c i r c u m s t a n c e s , 
                                                   t h a t we must 
                                                                    aim 
approach t o 
                t h e 
                      Budget. 
                                  Sound and prudent f i n a n c i a l p o l f 

e s s e n t i a l i f 
                         we a r e 
                                        t o 
                                              m a i n t a i n t h e 
                                                                        c o n f i d e n c e o f 
                                                                                                    t h e 
                                                                                                            mark 
the improvement i n 
                                      economic performance o f r e c e n t y e a r s . I 
we succeed i n 
                            r e v e r s i n g the 
                                                        r e c e n t r i s e i n 
                                                                                      i n f l a t i o n , w h i l e c 

p o l i c i e s t o improve t h e 
                                               e f f i c i e n c y and f l e x i b i l i t y o f 
                                                                                                           t h e 
                                                                                                                   econo 
p r o s p e c t 
                  remains a v e r y good 
                                                        one. 

een t i g h t e n e d 
                       s u b s t a n t i a l l y t o 
      The e v i d e n c e from 
                                      r e t a i l 
     rrow i n d i c a t o r s o f monthly 
        t o b r i n g t h e 
                              economy back 
          y t o 
                  go, 
                         on i n f l a t i o n i n 

r i s e i n 
               p r i c e s because 

e n t s . 
             But 
                     even 
                              so, 

## Economic Prospects

,5. As i n 
t h e 
U n i t e d Kingdom, growth i n 
the r e s t of t h e 
w o r l d i n 
1988 was 
r e buoyant t h a n f o r e c a s t a y e a r ago, e x c e e d i n g e x p e c t a t i o n s i n 
each of 
major i n d u s t r i a l c o u n t r i e s , i n 
most c a s e s s u b s t a n t i a l l y s o . World 
e i n 
m a n u f a c t u r e s 
probably grew by 10 per c e n t . 
E v e n those European 
e a 0 M ) i e s 
t h a t have been s l u g g i s h i n 
r e c e n t y e a r s a r e 
now e x p e r i e n c i n g 
raster 
growth. 
P a r t l y a s 
a r e s u l t , consumer p r i c e i n f l a t i o n edged up a 
l i t t l e i n 
a number o f c o u n t r i e s and 
most commodity p r i c e s have r i s e n . 
6. The l a t e s t i n d i c a t o r s suggest t h a t a c t i v i t y i n 
t h e 
major economies 
remains s t u ^ , though i n c r e a s e s i n 
s h o r t term i n t e r e s t r a t e s t o counter 

r i s i n g ί η Α Λ Λ ο η may l e a d t o 
                                                           some slow down through 
                                                                                                          1989. 
                                                                                                                        Gross N a t i o n a l 
Product g ^ i n A ^ y 
                                       f a l l from 4 per cent i n 
                                                                                        1988 
                                                                                                  to 
                                                                                                       a s t i l l h e a l t h y 3 
                                                                                                                                           per 
cent t h i s y e a r . 
                                  World t r a d e growth should 
                                                                                       s t i l l be h i g h . 

s p r o s p e c t i s 
                         t h a t t h e 
                                         p e r s i s t e n c e of s i z e a b l e 
 nces between t h e l a r g e s t economies c o u l d l e a d t o 

c i a l m a r k e t s . 
                              Domestic demand growth i n t h e 

and t h e 
          U n i t e d S t a t e s Government needs t o 

a t the 
                same time, t h e 
                                                   s u r p l u s c o u n t r i e s -
  remove t h e 
                           o b s t a c l e s which 
                                                                 r e s t r i c t the 
                                                                                               growth 

7. 
     One t h r e a t 
c u r r e n t 
           account 
renewed t u r m o i l 
U n i t e d S t a t e s need 
reduce i t s 
               Budget d 
Germany and J a p a n -
of t h e i r domestic mark 

8. 
     The U n i t e d Kingdom has e x p e r i e n c e d a s h a r p e r a c c e l e r a t i o n 
                                                                                      of output 
than most o f i t s 
                       Group of Seven p a r t n e r s , w i t h unemployment f a l l i n g 
                                                                                              f a s t e r 
                                                      . ׳- 
                                                                        · 
                                                                                  1
                                                                                  _ ־1 
                                                                                          1 
                                                                                            _ 
than i n 
           any o t h e r major c o u n t r y 

i n t e r p r e t i n g r e c e n t macroecono 
had two s u c c e s s i v e y e a r s w i t h 
per c e n t , t h e f i r s t 
                                        time 
                                                   t h i s 
Domestic demand p r o b a b l y grew cons 
m a i n l y because o f t h e 
                                             s t r e n g t h 
                                                              of 
c o n t i n u e d r a p i d growth i n 
                                                     consumer 
growth o f t o t a l f i x e d investment 
                                                                   w i l l 

l a s t y e a r - t h e l a r g e s t i n c r e a s e f o r 

f u l l 
           f i g u r e s a r e 
                                      a v a i l a b l e i t i s p o s s i b l e 
s u r p a s s e d t h a t r e c o r d e d i n 
                                                             1964 
                                                                        - h i t h e r t o 
growth s i n c e t h e 
                                      War. At the 
                                                                    same t i m e , pro 
c o n t i n u e d t o grow r a p i d l y . 

9. 
     A p a r t from f i x e d i n v e s t m e n t , t h e 
                                                   h o u s i n g market h a s 
major s o u r c e o f t h e 
                            r a p i d growth i n 
                                                  domestic demand. A 

p r i c e bubble emerged l a s t y e a r and w i t h i t a r a p i d 
                                                                                                    t u 

I t i s 
              l i k e l y 
                              t h i s had 
                                                    a s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on consump 
spending on d u r a b l e s i n p a r t i c u l a r . 

10. As a l r e a d y mentioned, the 
                                     i n c r e a s e i n i n f l a t i o n a r y p r 
countered by t h e 
                     o n l y e f f e c t i v e means: a t i g h t e n i n g o f 
                                                                    mone 
h i g h e r s h o r t term i n t e r e s t r a t e s . 
                                           T h e r e a r e 
                                                        now i n c r e a s i n g 
                                                                           s 

t h i s f i r m a c t i o n h a s 
                                          begun t o check t h e 
                                                                                 growth of spending by 
Growth of t h e 
                            narrow measure of t h e 
                                                                         money s u p p l y , MO, has begun 
down a p p r e c i a b l y . The housing market h a s c o o l e d down markedly, 

p a r t i c u l a r l y i n 
                                t h e 
                                        South E a s t , w i t h both house p r i c e s and l e n d i n g 

s p i t e o f t h e 
                         major problems 
                                                      i n 

t i s t i c s i t l o o k s as i f 
                                               we have now 

l e s t i c Product growth a t about 
                                                                    4 i 
  ed s i n c e t h e m i d - s i x t i e s . 

more q u i c k l y than t h i s i n 1988, 

n t . b u t a l s o r e f l e c t i n g 

I t seems l i k e l y t h a t 
                                               the 

 w e l l i n t o double f i g u r e s 
y e a r s . 
               Indeed once 
                                      t h e 
    owth o f investment even 

t y e a r f o r investment 

'ity i n m a n u f a c t u r i n g has 

been t h e o t h e r 

s i g n i f i c a n t house 

i n 
       h o u s i n g , 
 g e n e r a l and 

house purchase r i s i n g much l e s s r a p i d l y than i n 
                                                  the 
                                                      middle of l a s t y e a r , 
and showing s i g n s of f a l l i n g i n 
                                 some a r e a s . 
                                              The growth o f r e t a i l 
                                                                    s a l e s i n 

e n e r a l has moderated, and s a l e s o f some consumer d u r a b l e s have 
                                                                                                                              f a l l e n , 

d i c a t o r s o f consumer c o n f i d e n c e suggest 
                                                                                t h a t e x p e n d i t u r e growth i n the 

r ahead w i l l be modest. 
                                                  The p e r s o n a l s e c t o r s a v i n g s r a t i o should a s a 

t b e g i n t o r e c o v e r . 

  . Meanwhile, company s e c t o r s a v i n g remains h i g h and t h e s i g n s a r e t h a t 
t h e v e r y s t r o n g investment performance o f t h e l a s t two y e a r s w i l l 
                                                                       c o n t i n u e 

i n 1989, though growth w i l l probably be a t a l e s s heady pace. 
                                                                                                                                         The r a t e of 

r e t u r n on c a p i t a l i s 
                                        a t i t s h i g h e s t l e v e l f o r 
                                                                                         over twenty y e a r s , and 
                                                                                                                                     t h e 

e x t r a i n v e s ^ ^ n t t h a t t h i s i s 
                                                          g e n e r a t i n g w i l l h e l p t o u n d e r p i n the supply 

s i d e i m p r A t K e t s of r e c e n t y e a r s , 

12. The l a t 

e i n 
      t h e 
            mortgage r a t e w i l l almost 
                                                c e r t a i n l y l e a d t o 
     by t h e 
              R P I r i s i n g above 7 per c e n t f o r 
                                                           some months 
   p r t g a g e i n t e r e s t payments the r a t e should remain 
        as the e f f e c t s o f t h e r i s e s i n 
                                                   mortgage r a t e s 
            t o drop o u t , R P I i n f l a t i o n i t s e l f should 
                                                                     f a l l 
           ent by t h e f o u r t h q u a r t e r o f t h i s y e a r . 
                                                                   The 

i n f l a t i o n as 
( a l t h o u g h 
                    e x c l 
below 6 per 
                       c e n 
d u r i n g t h e l a s t y 
back t o w e l l below 

f i r s t 
            h a l f of t h i s y e a r w i l l undoubtedly 

s. 
      We must c l e a r l y do e v e r y t h i n g i n 
                                                            our 
not l e a d t o a pay e x p l o s i o n . 

r i s e i n i n f l a t i o n du 
cause us c o n s i d e r a b l e 
power t o ensure t h a t 
                                        i t 

13. The u n d e r l y i n g r a t e of i n f l a t i o n - whether measured by t h e 
                                                                             R P I l e s s 
mortgage i n t e r e s t payments or by producer p r i c e s - i s 
                                                                   l o w e r , but 
                                                                                 s t i l l 
much too h i g h . 
                   We w i l l have t o m ^ a t a i n t h e p r e s e n t v e r y t i g h t monetary 

p o l i c y long enough to ensure t h a A ^ e i s put f i r m l y on a steady downward 

t r e n d . 
                                                               ^ - ^ 1 

14. The sharp worsening of the c u r r l 
t o some e x t e n t by the p u b l i s h e d 
                                         f i g u H 
p u b l i s h e d f o r 
                  1988 i s 
                            £ 1 4 ^ 4 
                                     b i l l i o n , 

i n t h e b a l a n c e of payments - w h i c h cons: 
U n i t e d Kingdom - f o r 
                                             t h e f i r s t 
                                                                   t h r e e quart 
p e r i o d ) was even g r e a t e r than t h e recorded^ 
c u r r e n t account d e f i c i t remains a l a r g e one. 
demand w i l l l e a d t o i t s r e d u c t i o n , but t h i s 

The c o n t i n u e d 
                       s t r o n g growth of i n v e s t m e n t c o u l d keep i m p o r t s of c a p i t a l 
goods h i g h f o r 
                         the time b e i n g , and i t may t a k e a l i t t l e w h i l e f o r the 

a d v e r s e e f f e c t s on t r a d e performance o f v e r y h i g h c a p a c i t y u t i l i s a t i o n i n 
some i n d u s t r i e s t o unwind. 
                                                        Even though the d e f i c i t c o u l d w e l l 
                                                                                                                                f a l l 
                                                                                                                                          d u r i n g 

the coming y e a r , the o u t t u r n f o r 
                                      1989 as a whole might J > ^ ^ 1 c h the 
                                                                              same as 

t h a t f o r 1988. 

15. To summarise, f o l l o w i n g a prolonged p e r i o d of above a 

l i k e l i h o o d i s 
                            t h a t growth w i l l be w e l l below t r e n d over th£ 
GDP i n 1989 c o u l d 
                                    s t i l l be 2$ per cent h i g h e r than i n 
                                                                                                            1988, 
the s t a t i s t i c s f o r 
                                      t h e r e c e n t p a s t i n such d i s a r r a y and t h e 
                                                                                                                        ec 

t u r n i n g p o i n t the f o r e c a s t i s 
                                                           even more u n c e r t a i n than u s u a l 

ount d e f i c i t may be 
                      exaggerated 
be p r e l i m i n a r y e s t i m a t e 

( p o s i t i v e ) " b a l a n c i n g i t e m " 

f unrecorded f l o w s t o 
                                       t h e 
     he l a t e s t 
                       a v a i l a b l e 

   N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e 
lowdown i n domestic 

e l y t o o c c u r q u i c k l y . 

## Fiscal Prospects

16. I n l a s t y e a r ' s Budget I announced major t a x 
r e f o r m s , i n c l u d i n g c u t s i n 
oth the b a s i c and h i g h e r r a t e s of income t a x . Y e t d e s p i t e 
t h i s 
udgeted f o r 
a PSDR i n 1988-89 of some £3 b i l l i o n , o r 3/^ Q f 
a 
p
e
r 
c
e
n t 
,_P. 
I n 
t h e e v e n t , t h e p u b l i c f i n a n c e s have t u r n e d out c o n s i d e r a b l y 
>trAeer. 
The f o r e c a s t I gave i n 
t h e 
Autumn Statement was f o r 
a PSDR of 
£ ^ Λ ^ 1 ί ο η , o r 2 per c e n t o f GDP. 
L a t e r i n f o r m a t i o n s u g g e s t s t h a t the 
s u r p l u s w i l l c o m f o r t a b l y exceed even 
t h i s . 

17. T h i s r e m a r k a b l e improvement i n 
                                                            t h e f i s c a l p o s i t i o n - no o t h e r major 
c o u n t r y e n j o y s a comparable s u r p l u s - owes much t o t h e 
                                                                                              buoyancy o f 
                                                                                                                   t h e 

as 

1 as somewhat h i g h e r p r i v a t i s a t i o n proceeds t h a n 
                                                                                          o r i g i n a l l y 
 the c o n t i n u i n g s t r e n g t h o f domestic demand, t h e need f o r a 
          p o l i c y , and market e x p e c t a t i o n s , i t 
                                                                             i s e s s e n t i a l to 

f i s c a l s t a n c e . 
                                 I n p r e s e n t c i r c u m s t a n c e s I b e l i e v e we 
    s i z e a b l e PSDR i n 
                                        t h e 
                                                coming f i n a n c i a l y e a r . 

economy, 
planned, 
c a u t i o u s ap 
m a i n t a i n a ρ 
must aim f o r 

18. Thus d e s i t e 

   Budget s u r p l u s t h e scope f o r 
                                 r e d u c t i o n s i n 
be l i m i t e d t h i s y e a r . 
                        I t 
                           may prove b e s t t o do 

t a x a t i o n must i n e v 

n a t u r a l tendency f o r 
                                         the n o n - o i l t a x 
                                                                         burden to 

l i t t l e more t h a n o f 

rag. 
        L o o k i n g 
                    f u r t h e r ahead, t h e r e t u r n t o 
                                                               a 

r i s e as a r e s u l t o f 

             r e l y 
                              t o l e a d t o some r e v e r s a l o f 
                                                                                                                   the 
       . on p u b l i c f i n a n c e s which we have r e c e n t l y 
r e d u c t i o n s i n t a x a t i o n w i l l depend c r u c i a l l y on 

r e s t r a i n t h e growth o f p u b l i c e x p e n d i t u r e . 

s u s t a i n a b l e growth r a t e 
f a v o u r a b l e c y c l i c a l 
                                         e f f e 
e x p e r i e n c e d . 
                            So f u t u r e 
our c o n t i n u e d 
                            a b i l i t y t o 

## Summary And Conclusions

19. Output growth i n 
                          t h e l a s t two 
s u s t a i n i n 
             t h e 
                  medium term. 
                                    Some 
c u r r e n t account 
                    l i k e l y t o improve on 
any r i s k s which damage t h e c r e d i b i l i t 

c a u t i o u s B u d g e t a n d a f u r t h e r y e a r o f s u B ^ Q | i a l 
                                                                                                     b u d g e t 
                                                                                                                    s u r p l u s 

20. I would welcome c o l l e a g u e s ' v i e w s on 
of the f i s c a l and economic p r o s p e c t s I have 

T r e a s u r y 

14 F e b r u a r y 1989 

.has been f a s t e r than we can 

i s i n e v i t a b l e . 
                                  With the 

er s l o w l y , we must a v o i d t a k i n g 

p o l i c i e s . 
                     T h i s means a 

et a g a i n s t t h e background 

|          |             | 1984          |     | 1983    |   1982  | 1981    |
|----------|-------------|---------------|-----|---------|---------|---------|
| !        | *           | S             | ־   | ^5      |      3  | 5       |
| d        |             | GNP,*         | *   | i n     |         |         |
| or       | 7           | economies     |     |         |         |         |
| cent     | change)     |               |     |         |         |         |
| DP, <    |             |               |     |         |         |         |
| 2        |             |               |     |         |         |         |
| >        | - 1         |               |     |         |         |         |
| r        | cent        | change)       |     |         |         |         |
| 1 %      |             |               |     |         |         |         |
|          | 3H          | l h           | 3k  | 3k      |         |         |
|          | 4           |               |     |         |         |         |
| *1       |             |               |     |         |         |         |
|          | Ah          | 2h            |     |         |         |         |
| (2       | \           |               |     |         |         |         |
| 2h       |             | 2k            |     |         |         |         |
|          | 4           | 4%            | 7   |         |         |         |
| 2h       |             |               |     |         |         |         |
| s t i c  | demand,     |               |     |         |         |         |
| v        |             |               |     |         |         |         |
| ' - l h  | 2k          |               |     |         |         |         |
|          | 4%          |               |     |         |         |         |
| r        | cent        | change)       |     |         |         |         |
| i l      | p r i c e s | Q4            | 12  |         |         |         |
| r        | cent        | change)       |     |         |         |         |
| a        | year        | e a r l i e r |     |         |         |         |
| 1235     |             | 10            | 10  | 12      |     11  | 9       |
| 7        |             |               |     |         |         |         |
| / 8      |             |               |     |         |         |         |
| (        | 3           | )             |     |         |         |         |
| erest    | r a t e s   |               | 14  |         |         |         |
| erage    | 3-month     |               |     |         |         |         |
| terbank) |             |               |     |         |         |         |
| 835      |             | 10            | 11  | 11      |     11  | 1 1 %   |

mployment per c e n t o f rking p o p u l a t i o n eluding s c h o o l avers) 

rung i n d e x 
117 
11335 10535 
10035 
100 
9135 
90 
9535 
9 7 %
(
3
) 

(
1 ^ P r o v i s i o n a l pre-Budget f i g u r e s 
( 2 ) 
At c o n s t a n t p r i c e s 

(3) 
F e b r u a r y 6 

|     |    | 1985   |      |   1986 1987 1988 |    1989(1)  |
|-----|----|--------|------|------------------|-------------|
| 335 |    | 2%     | 335  |               4  |          3  |
| 5h  |    | 3h     |      |                  |             |
|     | 4  |        |      |                  |             |
|     | 6h | 5h     |      |                  |             |

## Annex 2: Direct Effects Of Tax Changes A. D I R E C T Taxes: Indexation

The R P I i n c r e a s e d i n t h e y e a r t o December 1988 by 6.8 p e r c e n t . 

With i n d e x a t i o n by t h i s amount and s t a t u t o r y r o u n d i n g , t h e f i g u r e s f o r t h e main a l l o w a n c e s and o t h e r t h r e s h o l d s would be: 
P e r s o n a l a l l o w a n c e s S i n g l e and w i f e ' s e a r n e d income a l l o w a n c e M a r r i e d a l l o w a n c e 

| Tax         |
|-------------|
| 25% r a t e |
| 40% r a t e |

The t o t a l r e v e n u e c o s t o f i n d e x a t i o n o f income t a x ( i n c l u d e d i n t h e f o r e c a s t ) i s £1,455 m i l l i o n i n 
1989-90. 

## Β. I N D I R E C T Taxes: Indexation

The e f f e c t s o f 
6.8 p e r c e n t r e v a l o r i s a t i o n o f t h e e x c i s e d u t i e s 
( i n c l u d i n g VAT e f f e c t s ) a r e a s f o l l o w s : 
VAT i n c l u s i v e p r i c e change Y i e l d i n RPI impact 

|               |               | B e e r                 |                     | 1 . 5 p / p i n t   |     |   140  |
|---------------|---------------|-------------------------|---------------------|---------------------|-----|--------|
| Wine          |               | 6 . 0 p / 7 5 c l       | l i g h t           | wine                |     |    45  |
| S p i r i t s |               | 3 7 . O p / b o t t l e |                     | 65                  |     |        |
| Tobacco       |               | 6.5p/20                 | k i n g             | s i z e             |     |   235  |
| P e t r o l   |               | 7 . 3 p / g a l l o n   |                     | 440                 |     |        |
| Derv          |               | 6 . 1 p / g a l l o n   |                     | 95                  |     |        |
| VED           | £6.80/car     |                         | 155                 |                     |     |        |
| O v e r a l l | e f f e c t , |                         | ( i n c l u d i n g | minor               |     |        |
| d u t i e s ) |               | 1225                    |                     |                     |     |        |

(
1 ^ F i g u r e s do n o t sum due t o r o u n d i n g 

1989-90 
1988-89 
2,785 
2,605 
4,375 
4,095 
19,300 
20,700 
o v e r 19,300 
o v e r 20,700 
1989-90 
£m 
% p o i n t s 
0.07 
0.04 0.04 0.14 
0.12 0.01 0.05 
0.48 ( 1 ) 

## C Ready Reckoners; I L L U S T R A T I V E Tax Changes

|                     | INCOME              |  TAX                |
|---------------------|---------------------|---------------------|
| Allowances          | and                 | Thresholds          |
| 1 %                 | above               | i n d e x a t i o n |
| a l l o w a n c e s |                     | 180                 |
| 1 %                 | above               | i n d e x a t i o n |
| a l l o w a n c e s | and                 | b a s i c r a t e   |
| Rates               |                     |                     |
| Change              | b a s i c r a t e   | by l p              |
| Change              | h i g h e r         | r a t e             |
| CORPORATION         | TAX                 |                     |
| Change              | i n                 |                     |
| Change              | i n                 |                     |
| 1                   | p e r c e n t a g e | p o i n t           |
| VALUE               | ADDED               | TAX                 |
| Change              | i n                 | VAT                 |
| 1                   |                     |                     |
| ^                   |                     |                     |
|                     | 1,300               | 1,830               |

(
1^A 1 % 
change i n t h e VAT r a t e would change t h e R P I 
by 0.45% 

|         | £   |  m i l l i o n    |
|---------|-----|-------------------|
| 1989-90 |     | 1990-91           |

## Taxation, Expenditure And Borrowing

S i n c e t h e Government f i r s t took o f f i c e , t o t a l t a x e s and NICs have r i s e n by 
4 p e r c e n t a g e p o i n t s o f GDP, though t h e r a t i o has f a l l e n from i t s peak i n 
1981-82. 

T h i s has e n a b l e d us t o make n e t repayments o f government d e b t i n t h e l a s t two y e a r s . 

p l u s NICs 
|                    | Non-North   |  Sea    |
|--------------------|-------------|---------|
| T a x e s          | p l u s     | NICs    |
| ( a s              | p e r       | c e n t |
| non-North Sea GDP) |             |         |
| 34.2               |             |         |
| 35.1               |             |         |
| 36.2               |             |         |
| 38.7               |             |         |
| 38.1               |             |         |
| 37 .7              |             |         |
| 37.8               |             |         |
| 37.1               |             |         |
| 37.8               |             |         |
| 37.6               |             |         |
| 1978-              | 79          |         |
| 1979- 80           |             |         |
| 1980-              | 81          |         |
| 1981-              | 82          |         |
| 1982-              | 83          |         |
| 1983-              | 84          |         |
| 1984-              | 85          |         |
| 1985-              | 86          |         |
| 1986-              | 87          |         |
| 1987- 88           |             |         |
| 33                 |             |         |
| 35,                |             |         |
| 36.                |             |         |
| 39,                |             |         |
| 38,                |             |         |
| 38,                |             |         |
| 39.                |             |         |
| 38.                |             |         |
| 38.                |             |         |
| 37.                |             |         |

[ * T r e a s u r y e s t i m a t e s f o r 1986-87 and 1987-88] 

## Personal Taxation

2. 

D e s p i t e r e d u c t i o n s i n income t a x , t o t a l p e r s o n a l t a x e s 
( d i r e c t and i n d i r e c t , i n c l u d i n g employees' NICs and d o m e s t i c r a t e s ) 
i n 
1988-89 
a r e o v e r 
£30 
b i l l i o n h i g h e r i n r e a l terms ( i e 1988-89 
p r i c e s ) t h a n t h e y were i n 1978-79. 

F o r income t a x and n a t i o n a l 

Government 
E x p e n d i t u r e 
( e x c l u d i n g 
p r i v a t i s a t i o n p r o c e e d s ) 
43.3 43.5 
46.1 
46.6 46.8 45.9 
46.2 
44.5 43.7 
41.6 
5 
4. 5, 3, 3, 
3, 3, 1. 
0. 
-0. 

i n s u r a n c e c o n t r i b u t i o n s t h e f o l l o w i n g t a b l e shows how t h e p r o p o r t i o n of g r o s s pay t h e y r e p r e s e n t r o s e up t o 1981-82: 

## T A B L E 2 Income Tax And Nics A S A P E R C E N T O F G R O S S E A R N I N Q S *

h 
a v e r a g e 
a v e r a g e 
2 
a v e r a g e 
e a r n i n g s 
e a r n i n g s 
e a r n i n g s 
1978-79 
16.0 
27.8 
31.4 
1981-82 
20.8 
29.3 
32.2 
1982-83 
20.8 
29.8 
32.3 
1983-84 
20.1 
29.6 
31.7 
1984-85 
19.3 
29.2 
31.5 
1985-86 
18.9 
29.0 
31.5 
1986-87 
18.9 
28.5 
30.9 
1987-88 
19.1 
27.6 
29.9 
1988-89 ( e s t i m a t e ) 
18.5 
26.3 
28.2 
1989-90 ( i n d e x a t i o n ) 
18.6 
26.3 
28.3 

* A d u l t male e a r n i n g s ( a l l o c c u p a t i o n s ) . 

M a r r i e d c o u p l e , w i f e not w o r k i n g : 
t h e c o u p l e a r e assumed t o have no c h i l d r e n , t o a v o i d d i s t o r t i o n o f t h e f i g u r e s from t h e a b o l i t i o n of c h i l d t a x a l l o w a n c e s . 3. 

T h e s e f i g u r e s r e f l e c t t h e r i s e i n t h e s t a n d a r d **employees'** 
NIC 
r a t e from 6h p e r c e n t t o 9 p e r c e n t . 

The l o w e r r a t e s i n t r o d u c e d i n t h e 1985 F i n a n c e A c t do not a f f e c t t h e c a s e s shown. 

So f a r as income t a x i s c o n c e r n e d , p e r s o n a l a l l o w a n c e s have i n c r e a s e d by about 
25 p e r c e n t i n r e a l terms s i n c e 1978-79, s l i g h t l y l e s s t h a n e a r n i n g s . 

The b a s i c r a t e has been r e d u c e d from 33p t o 
25p. 

4. 

Average e a r n i n g s have o f c o u r s e i n c r e a s e d by s u b s t a n t i a l l y more t h a n p r i c e s s i n c e 
1978-79. 

So a m a r r i e d man on a v e r a g e e a r n i n g s has s e e n h i s r e a l take-home pay r i s e by 
£45 p e r week. 

The i n c r e a s e f o r a m a r r i e d man on h a l f a v e r a g e e a r n i n g s has been 
£22 p e r week, and on t w i c e a v e r a g e e a r n i n g s £94 p e r week. 

5. 

As t h e t a b l e shows, i n d e x a t i o n o f a l l o w a n c e s i n t h e Budget, w i t h no r e d u c t i o n i n t h e b a s i c r a t e , would l e a d t o a v e r y s l i g h t r i s e i n t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f incomes t a k e n i n t a x and N I C s . 

T h i s i s b e c a u s e e a r n i n g s a r e assumed t o r i s e by more t h a n t h e i n c r e a s e i n t a x t h r e s h o l d s , w h i c h i s i n d e x e d t o changes i n p r i c e s . 

B u s i n e s s T a x a t i o n 
6. 

F o l l o w i n g t h e s h a r p r i s e i n c o r p o r a t i o n t a x r e c e i p t s o v e r t h e p a s t t h r e e y e a r s , a s a r e s u l t o f t h e s u b s t a n t i a l r e c o v e r y i n company p r o f i t s , t o t a l t a x e s p a i d by b u s i n e s s e s ( o u t s i d e t h e N o r t h Sea) 
a r e now h i g h e r a s a p e r c e n t a g e o f GDP t h a n i n 1978-79. 

W i t h i n t h i s t o t a l , t h e major change has been a f a l l i n e m p l o y e r s ' 
NICs 
( a n d N I S ) a s a " p e r c e n t a g e o f GDP, o f f s e t by i n c r e a s e s i n c o r p o r a t i o n t a x , b u s i n e s s r a t e s and 'other' t a x e s a s t h e f o l l o w i n g t a b l e shows: 
T a b l e 3 
Tax p a i d by B u s i n e s s e s £bn i n 1988-89 p r i c e s 
( f i g u r e s i n b r a c k e t s a r e p e r c e n t o f GDP) 

|                       |    | T a x e s   |  on   |      | Employers    |
|-----------------------|----|-------------|-------|------|--------------|
| C o r p o r a t i o n |    | s e l f     |       | NICs | and          |
| Tax                   |    | employment  |       | NIS  |              |
| incomes               |    |             |       |      |              |
| 2.8                   |    |             |       |      |              |
| 8.3                   |    |             |       |      |              |
| 1978-79               |    |             |       |      |              |
| ( 0 . 7 )             |    |             |       |      |              |
| ( 2 . 2 )             |    |             |       |      |              |
| 3.7                   |    |             |       |      |              |
| 15.9                  |    |             |       |      |              |
| 1988-89               |    |             |       |      |              |
| ( e s t i m a t e )   |    |             |       |      |              |
| ( 0 . 8 )             |    |             |       |      |              |
| ( 3 . 4 )             |    |             |       |      |              |

1 E x c l u d e s N o r t h S e a , b u t i n c l u d e s ACT 
2VED, c a r t a x , r o a d f u e l duty, d u t y on r e b a t e d o i l s , c a p i t a l t a x e s 

| R a t e s   |     | Other•*             |         | T o t a l    |
|-------------|-----|---------------------|---------|--------------|
| 5.5         |     | 4.3                 | 34.4    |              |
| 13.6        |     |                     |         |              |
| ( 1 . 4 )   |     | ( 1 . 1 ) ( 9 . 1 ) |         |              |
| ( 3 . 6 )   |     |                     |         |              |
| 8.1         |     | 7.4                 | 4 8 . 1 |              |
| 13.0        |     |                     |         |              |
| ( 1 . 7 )   |     | ( 1 . 6 )           |         | ( 1 0 . 2 )  |
| ( 2 . 7 )   |     |                     |         |              |

pruary 
1989 
CABINET 

## Review Body Reports 1989

Note by.the S e c r e t a r y of the Cabinet i n i s t e r h a s now r e c e i v e d a l l t h e r e p o r t s from t h e They have recommended t h e f o l l o w i n g i n c r e a s e s from 1 
The P r i i Review bodie! A p r i l 1989: 

|                       | Review          |  Body           |
|-----------------------|-----------------|-----------------|
| Pay                   |                 | b i l l         |
| i n c r e a s e       |                 |                 |
| %                     |                 |                 |
| Armed                 | F o r c e s     | (AFPRB)         |
| D o c t o r s         | &               | d e n t i s t s |
| (DDRΒ)                |                 |                 |
| C l i n i c a l       |                 | academics       |
| (consequence          | o f             |                 |
| P r o f e s s i o n s | a l l i e d     | t o             |
| m e d i c i n e       | (PAM)           |                 |
| N u r s i n g         | s t a f f ,     |                 |
| and                   | h e a l t h     |                 |
| Top                   | s a l a r i e s | (TSRB)          |
| (1                    | )               | The             |
| r e v i e w           | b o d i e s '   | r e p o r t s . |
| w h i c h count       | a s             |                 |

(2) 
I n c l u d e s £39m f o r p r a c t i c e 
expenses of 
(3) 
These 
m a i n l y 
r e p r e s e n t a c r o s s t h e 
board i n c ^ 
6.75%. 
Three 
C h i e f A r e a 
Nurses 
grade 4 
i n 
i n c r e a s e s o f 10-13.6%. 
A l l o t h e r 
n u r s e s anc 
i n c r e a s e s w i t h i n t h e r a n g e s shown. 
(4) 
I n c l u d e s £5m 
recommended f o r f l e x i b l e pay experimen 
new g r a d i n g 
s t r u c t u r e f o r 
e d u c a t i o n a l g r a d e s , 
whic 
Body 
w i l l be a s k e d t o p r i c e 
w i t h i n t h e n e x t fe ( 

| Range           |             | of    |
|-----------------|-------------|-------|
| i n c r e a s e |             |       |
| %               |             |       |
| UK              | p u b l i c |       |
| expenditure     |             |       |
| Cost            |             | ( 1 ) |
| £m              |             |       |
| 272             |             |       |
| 312             |             |       |
| 8.5             |             |       |
| 43              |             |       |
| 420             |             |       |
| (4)             |             |       |
| (5)             |             |       |
| 4.9-10.6        |             |       |

Eer from t h o s e i n t h e bt i n c l u d e some c o s t s p r a c t i t i o n e r s of 7.7% and nd w i l l g e t s w i l l g e t 
( 5 ) Does not a l l o w f o r recommendation t o i n c r e a s e from 25% 
t o 35% t h e quota of c i v i l s e r v a n t s i n Grades 2 and 
3 e l i g i b l e f o r d i s c r e t i o n -
a r y i n c r e m e n t s . 

The f i g u r e f o r * t h e pay b i l l i n c r e a s e does however a l l o w f o r t h i s . 

The f i g u r e g i v e n f o r t h e range o f i n c r e a s e s a l s o e x c l u d e s r e s t r u c t u r i n g f o r 13 I m m i g r a t i o n A d j u d i c a t o r s who r e c e i v e i n c r e a s e s o f 27.1%, and f o r t h e C h i e f immigration A d j u d i c a t o r and t h e V i c e - P r e s i d e n t s o f t h e Immir a t i o n Appeal T r i b u n a l , who g e t 28.3%. 

Β recommendations b r e a k down a s f o l l o w s : 
5% i n c r e a s e f o r a l l groups; 
u d i c i a r y , some minor r e s t r u c t u r i n g which would b r i n g 
11 i n c r e a s e t o 5.2%; 
i i i f o r sen>&or o f f i c e r s i n t h e armed f o r c e s , 2 - s t a r o f f i c e r s would be l i n k e d t o t h e Grade 3 f i r s t performance p o i n t r a t h e r than the t o p o f t h e Grade 3 s c a l e , a s a t p r e s e n t . 

The pay b i l l i n c r e a s e f ׳׳^ע1א0 
s t a r o f f i c e r s would be 10.5% and f o r s e n i o r o f f i c e r s a s ULwsiQie 
8.6%. 

c e , s t r u c t u r a l changes t o r e l a t e pay more e would be d e f e r r e d b u t t h e quota of s t a f f n a r y i n c r e m e n t s would r i s e from 25% 
t o a t t h e whole of t h e proposed i n c r e a s e i n up i n t h e f i r s t y e a r , b u t i f i t were, 
1989-90 
would be about £75,000, and e a r which i s about 1/2% o f t h e pay t h e r w i s e , t h e o n l y e x c e p t i o n t o t h e e t h e r e s t o r a t i o n o f a London 
,000, a p o s s i b i l i t y t o which t h e i v . f o r t h e c i v i l c l o s e l y t o p e r f e l i g i b l e f o r d i s 
35%. 

I t i s u n l i k the quota would be the a d d i t i o n a l c o s about £150,000 i n a b i l l f o r Grades 2 
and 
5% 
b a s i c i n c r e a s e a l l o w a n c e f o r Grade 3 s , Government drew t h e TSRB  י
b i l l f o r Grade 3s would be DDRB r e p o r t 
3. 

The DDRB have recommended a b a s i c ^ ^ i n c r e a s e d e n t i s t s i n t h e NHS, w i t h t h e f o l l o w i n g ^ a d d i t i o n s : 
i . 

an i n c r e a s e o f £1 
,000 i n t h e t o p of J^he c o n s u l t a n t s ' 
s c a l e , t h u s r a i s i n g i t by 10.8%. 

A l l d i s t i A+ 
awards - p a r a g r a p h 3 i i below) 
i n c r e a s e by 10.8%, s i n c e t h e i r s i z e i a n t maximum. 

T h i s recommendation woul pay b i l l 
(£14.6m f o r t h e d i r e c t s a l a r y e f f e c t on d i s t i n c t i o n a w a r d s ) . 

i i . an i n c r e a s e i n 
t h e 
A+ d i s t i n c t i o n award from 9 
c o n s u l t a n t 
s c a l e maximum. 
C o n s u l t a n t s 
e n j o y 
w e l l a s t h e i n c r e a s e a t t h e 
t o p 
of t h e s c a l e 
The c o s t would be £0.3m; 
i i i a s m a l l 
i n c r e a s e i n t h e number o f t h e h i g h e r d i i 
m e r i t o r i o u s 
s e r v i c e 
a w a r d s . 
The c o s t 
would 
n t i o n . 

The i n c r e a s e i n t h e pay and f o r t h e whole group 8.2%. 

>n awards 
( e x c e p t t h e as a r e s u l t a l s o bed t o t h e c o n s u l t -
£17m t o t h e DDRB 
£2.4m f o r t h e 
ρ 100% 
of t h e i s award a s get 
13.6%. 

on and 
^ ^ £ 1 .7m; 
i v . an a d d i t i o n a l p o i n t a t t h e t o p o f t h e S e n i o r House O f f i c e r S c a l e , recommended by both sides*, and c o s t i n g £0.8m. 

Those c o v e r e d would g e t an i n c r e a s e o f 14.1%; 
a r e d u c t i o n i n t h e number o f working hours a t which j u n i o r h o s p i t a l d o c t o r s q u a l i f y f o r i n c r e a s e d o n - c a l l a l l o w a n c e s . 

S i n c e t h i s i s d e s i g n e d t o encourage a u t h o r i t i e s t o r e d u c e t h e p u r s worked, i t i s recommended t h a t i t be t r e a t e d a s a n i l t i t e m . 

,ce movements e l s e w h e r e i W B o d i e s ' recommendations compare w i t h : 
,-year i n c r e a s e i n u n d e r l y i n g •average e a r n i n g s f o r t h e 
!

m y of 8.75% 
i n November; 
an averse l e v e l of s e t t l e m e n t s f o r t h e whole economy s i n c e t h e s t a r t or t h e pay round 
( c o v e r i n g 30% o f employees) o f 6.25%. 

I n t h e p r i v a t e s e c t o r t h e f i g u r e i s 6.5%; 
y e a r - o n - y ^ ? ^ i n c r e a s < 
i n t h e R P I of 6.8% i n December, 
111 a 

## Proposals

srned have d i s c u s s e d what t h e r e s p o n s e o f 
^e Review Body r e p o r t s , t a k i n g account o f 
:e f o r Wales i n a minute t o t h e Prime They h a v e r e a c h e d t h e f o l l o w i n g f o r c o n s i d e r a t i o n by t h e C a b i n e t . 

5. 

M i n i s t e r s d i r e c t l y t h e Government s h o u l d be v i e w s by t h e S e c r e t a r y ο M i n i s t e r d a t e d 
13 F e b r u c o n c l u s i o n s and recommenda 
6. 

The recommendations of t P r o f e s s i o n s A l l i e d t o Medicine and H e a l t h V i s i t o r s s h o u l d be a c 
7. 

The recommendations o f t h e To be a c c e p t e d i n f u l l , s u b j e c t t o recommended t h a t t h e pay o f 2 - s t a r f i r s t performance p o i n t f o r Grade c o n s i d e r t h a t i t would be wrong i n p r i r i performance element t o a performance p o & t . 

On t h e o t h e r hand, t h e y a l s o thought t h a t 2 - s t a r o f f i c e r s s h o u l d r e c e i v e a s a l a r y a t about t h e l e v e l recommended by t h e TSRB, and t h a t a between t h e pay o f s e n i o r o f f i c e r s and o f c i v i l s e r v a n t s must b t h e v i e w t h a t t h e pay o f 2 - s t a r o f f i c e r s sho n o r m a l l y a t t a i n a b l e maximum of Grade 2 c i v i l s t h e pay p o i n t f o r 
3 - s t a r o f f i c e r s ) . 

T h i s would s a l a r y a t t h e l e v e l recommended by TSRB. 

8. 

The recommendations by t h e D o c t o r s and Den s h o u l d a l s o be a c c e p t e d , e x c e p t f o r i n c r e a s e s , i n g e n e r a l 8% i n c r e a s e , a t t h e t o p o f t h e c o n s u l t a n t s ' 
s i z e o f c o n s u l t a n t s ' 
d i s t i n c t i o n awards (paragraphs 3 i M i n i s t e r s were o f t h e view t h a t t h e s e recommendations b i g i n c r e a s e s f o r c o n s u l t a n t s and t h a t t h e Review o b j e c t i v e o f improving t h e l o n g - t e r m c a r e e r s t r u c t u r e f d o c t o r s would be a c h i e v e d by t h e p r o p o s a l i n t h e White P a p e r V ^ f r k i n g f o r P a t i e n t s " , t o c r e a t e 100 a d d i t i o n a l , permanent c o n s u l t a # T 5 p s t s o v e r t h e n e x t 3 y e a r s . 

The recommendation t o i n c r e a s e t h e n u ^^ | ׳p f d i s t i n c t i o n awards (paragraph 
3 i i i above) s h o u l d however be a c < 5 e ^ d ^ 
!

C
O
N
F
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
! 

iyiew Bodies on t h e Armed F o r c e s , l u r s e s and N u r s i n g S t a f f , Midwives i n f u l l . 

r i e s Review Body s h o u l d a l s o p o i n t . 

The Review Body e r s s h o u l d be l i n k e d t o t h e v i l s e r v a n t s . 

M i n i s t e r s p i e t o l i n k pay which has no a i n e d . 

They came t o around 85% 
of t h e s 
(which i s a l s o 
β-star o f f i c e r s a Review Body i o n t o t h e and i n t h e a b o v e ) . produce s t a t e d p i t a l 
9. 

As t o f i n a n c i n g , t h e c o s t of t h e awards by t h e Top S a l a r i e s R e v i e w Body and t h e Armed F o r c e s Pay^ 
Review Body c a n be a f f o r d e d 
} w i t h i n c u r r e n t p r o v i s i o n . The awards for t h e NHS groups would i n v o l v e c o s t of £248m i n e x c e s s o f c u r r e n t p r o v i s i o n , a f t e r a l l o w i n g f o r t h e itement f o r c o n s u l t a n t s d e s c r i b e d i n paragraph 8. 

£62m of t h i s i s t t h e F a m i l y P r a c t i o n e r S e r v i c e , and f a l l s on t h e R e s e r v e . 

Of t h e c o s t f a l l i n g on t h e H o s p i t a l and Community H e a l t h S e r v i c e s , £44m 
1 
be met from w i t h i n t h e NHS, w i t h t h e r e m a i n i n g £142m coming from 
^erve. 

L a s t y e a r t h e Government met t h e e x c e s s c o s t of t h e iody awards i n f u l l , and M i n i s t e r s thought i t important t o esta1$^2^l t h e p r i n c i p l e t h a t t h i s would not n e c e s s a r i l y happen every y e a r . 

10. The groups but a l l o w i n g would be me1 
f c l i n i c a l a c a d e m i c s i s kept i n l i n e w i t h t h a t of DDRB 
s on t h e DES. The c o s t i n e x c e s s o f p r o v i s i o n , a f t e r abatement f o r c o n s u l t a n t s , would be £2.8m, which the R e s e r v e . 

s a l a r y and t h e Lord C h i e f J u s t i c e ' s , i n r e d G o v e r n m e n t p o l i c y . 

T h i s r e q u i r e s a n both Houses of P a r l i a m e n t and has i n t h e i t y f o r debate on t h e whole TSRB 
r e p o r t . 

Government should u s e t h e o p p o r t u n i t y o f amentary p e n s i o n s t o remove t h i s r e q u i r e -
1 1 . There i s Vio P a r l i a m e n t a r y p r o c e s s f o r t h e Review Body r e p o r t s , e x c e p t t h a t an Order i s n e c e s s a r y t o m a i n t a i n t h e d i f f e r e n t i a l between t h e L o r d C h a n c e l l a c c o r d a n c e w i t h A f f i r m a t i v e Resolu' 
p a s t c r e a t e d an op M i n i s t e r s thought th' 
n e x t S e s s i o n ' s B i l l on ment. 

Teachers' 
Pay 
12. The S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e r e p o r t of t h e I n t e r i m A d v i s o C o n d i t i o n s 
( I A C ) . 

They reco: 
E n g l a n d and Wales from 1 A p r i l b i l l . 

The main recommendations i . 

a 6% i n c r e a s e i n t h e Main Pr i i . a 7% i n c r e a s e i n t h e v a l u e **o f** U 
1989. 

i i i a 7.5% i n c r e a s e i n t h e s p o t s a l a r i e s of heads and d e p u t i e s from 
1 A p r i l 
1989. 

i v . a 5.6% u p l i f t i n London Weighting from
1 
v i . an a d d i t i o n a l 9,500 i n c e n t i v e a l l o w a n c e s M i n i s t e r s were of t h e v i e w t h a t t h e IAC recomm a c c e p t e d , b u t t h a t t h e Government s h o u l d not pa e x t r a g r a n t t o f i n a n c e them. 

## Announcement

13. M i n i s t e r s c o n s i d e r t h a t t h e r e i s a s t r o n g c a s e f o r a^^n^uAcing t h e Government's d e c i s i o n s q u i c k l y . 

D e c i s i o n s on Review Body r a j f e ^ t s have g e n e r a l l y been announced by way of a W r i t t e n Answer t o a w ^ u r a n g e d P a r l i a m e n t a r y Q u e s t i o n . 

Arrangements have been made t o puCr^ptawn a W r i t t e n Q u e s t i o n f o r answer tomorrow, Thursday 16 F e b r u a r y . ^^£-vthe C a b i n e t approve t h e p r o p o s a l s d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s note, t h ^ ^ ^ f i i p e C
O
N
F
I
D
E
N
T
I
A
L
]  ־CMO u n t i l 17 F e b r u a r y ^ 8 9 
i o n and S c i e n c e has r e c e i v e d t h e i t t e e on S c h o o l T e a c h e r s  יPay and i n c r e a s e s f o r s c h o o l t e a c h e r s i n t h a t would add 6.3% t o t h e pay p n a l Grade from 1 A p r i l 1989 
i v e a l l o w a n c e s from 1 A p r i l ons should be 
.

1 
a u t h o r i t i e s M i n i s t e r w i l l announce t h e d e c i s i o n s i n an Answer on t h e l i n e s o f t h e d r a f t a t t a c h e d a t Annex A, which w i l l become p u b l i c a t 4pm tomorrow i f t e r n o o n . 

At t h e same t i m e , t h e S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e f o r E d u c a t i o n 
^ 1 1 
announce t h e d e c i s i o n s on t h e IAC r e p o r t by way of a n o t h e r 
1!±ten Answer, of which a d r a f t i s a t Annex B. 

ROBIN BUTLER 
C a b i n e t O f £ £ £ e ^ 
15 February<I^iW 

## D R A F T Written Answer

The 
1989 
r e p o r t s of t h e Review B o d i e s on t h e pay of N u r s i n g S t a f f , Midwives and H e a l t h V i s i t o r s , and P r o f e s s i o n s A l l i e d t o M e d i c i n e , t h e Doctors and D e n t i s t s , and t h e Armed F o r c e s , and of t h e Top S a l a r i e s Review Body, have been p u b l i s h e d today. 

C o p i e s a r e now a v a i l a b l e i n t h e Vote O f f i c e . 

The Government a r e g r a t e f u l t o members of t h e r e v i e w b o d i e s f o r t h e s e r e p o r t s and t h e time and c a r e which t h e y have put i n t o t h e i r p r e p a r a t i o n . 

The f o l l o w i n g t a b l e shows t h e i n c r e a s e s i n pay r a t e s recommended by t h e r e v i e w b o d i e s , and t h e i r c o s t : 
Review Body reports Pay b i l l i n c r e a s e , 

|                       | per             |  cent.          |
|-----------------------|-----------------|-----------------|
| Armed                 |                 | F o r c e s     |
| 6.8                   | 5-8             | 272             |
| D o c t o r s         | and             | d e n t i s t s |
| 8.8                   |                 |                 |
| 8-14.1                | 312             |                 |
| P r o f e s s i o n s |                 | a l l i e d     |
| t o                   | m e d i c i n e |                 |
| 7.7                   | 7.6-7.8         | 43              |
| N u r s i n g         | s t a f f ,     | midwives        |
| and                   | h e a l t h     |                 |
| 6.8                   |                 |                 |
| (2)                   |                 |                 |
| 6.7-6.9               |                 |                 |
| 420                   |                 |                 |
| Top                   |                 | s a l a r i e s |
| 6.5                   | 4.9-10          |                 |
| (3)                   |                 |                 |
| 6                     |                 |                 |

(1) The f i g u r e s f o r p u b l i c e x p e n d i t u r e c o s t d i f f e r from t h o s e i n t h e r e v i e w b o d i e s ' r e p o r t s . 

T h e i r f i g u r e s do not i n c l u d e some c o s t s w h i c h count as p u b l i c e x p e n d i t u r e . 

The f i g u r e f o r d o c t o r s and d e n t i s t s i n c l u d e s payments f o r GPs יe x p e n s e s , not counted a s pay. 

The f i g u r e f o r n u r s e s i n c l u d e s £5m f o r t h e f l e x i b l e pay e x p e r i -
ment and an e s t i m a t e d £3 m i l l i o n f o r a new g r a d i n g s t r u c t u r e f o r e d u c a t i o n a l g r a d e s , w h i c h t h e Review Body has not y e t c o s t e d . 

(2) T h r e e C h i e f Area Nurses grade 4 i n S c o t l a n d w i l l g e t i n c r e a s e s o f 
10-13.6%. 

(3) T h i s f i g u r e does not a l l o w f o r t h e recommendation t o i n c r e a s e from 25% t o 35% t h e quota o f c i v i l s e r v a n t s i n Grades 2 and 3 
e l i g i b l e f o r d i s c r e t i o n a r y i n c r e m e n t s . 

The f i g u r e f o r t h e pay b i l l i n c r e a s e does however a l l o w f o r t h i s . 

The f i g u r e g i v e n f o r t h e r a n g e o f i n c r e a s e s a l s o e x c l u d e s r e s t r u c t u r i n g f o r 13 
I m m i g r a t i o n A d j u d i c a t o r s who r e c e i v e i n c r e a s e s of 2 7 . 1 % , and f o r t h e C h i e f Immigration A d j u d i c a t o r and t h e V i c e - P r e s i d e n t s of t h e I m m i g r a t i o n Appeal T r i b u n a l , who g e t 28.3%. 

Range of 
i n c r e a s e , 
per cent. 
UK 
P u b l i c 
Expenditure 
Cost 
(1) 
£ M i l l i o n 

The Government have d e c i d e d t o a c c e p t i n f u l l t h e Review b o d i e s ' 
recommendations on t h e armed f o r c e s , on p r o f e s s i o n s a l l i e d t o medic i n e , and on n u r s i n g s t a f f , midwives and h e a l t h v i s i t o r s . 

The Government have a l s o d e c i d e d t o a c c e p t t h e recommendation o f t h e r e v i e w body on d o c t o r s and d e n t i s t s f o r a b a s i c i n c r e a s e o f 8% 
f o r a l l t h e groups c o v e r e d . 

I n t h e Government's v i e w t h e c r e a t i o n o f 100 
a d d i t i o n a l permanent c o n s u l t a n t p o s t s o v e r t h e n e x t 
3 
y e a r s , a s proposed i n t h e White P a p e r , "Working f o r P a t i e n t s " , w i l l b e s t a c h i e v e t h e o b j e c t i v e of i m p r o v i n g t h e l o n g - t e r m c a r e e r s t r u c t u r e f o r h o s p i t a l d o c t o r s . 

The c r e a t i o n o f t h e s e p o s t s w i l l t h e r e f o r e t a k e t h e p l a c e o f the i n c r e a s e s recommended, i n a d d i t i o n t o t h e 8% b a s i c i n c r e a s e , a t t h e t o p of t h e c o n s u l t a n t s ' 
s c a l e and i n t h e s i z e o f c o n s u l t a n t s ' 
d i s t i n c t i o n awards. 

S u b j e c t t o t h i s , t h e Government a c c e p t s t h e Review Body's recommendations. 

The Government have d e c i d e d t o a c c e p t t h e recommendations o f t h e Top S a l a r i e s Review Body i n f u l l , e x c e p t t h a t t h e y c o n s i d e r t h a t t h e pay o f 2 - s t a r o f f i c e r s s h o u l d be around 85% of t h e n o r m a l l y a t t a i n a b l e maximum of Grade 2 c i v i l s e r v a n t s 
(which i s a l s o t h e pay p o i n t f o r 
3 - s t a r o f f i c e r s ) r a t h e r t h a n l i n k e d t o a performance p o i n t f o r Grade 3 
c i v i l s e r v a n t s . 

T h i s would g i v e t h e 2 - s t a r o f f i c e r a s a l a r y a t t h e l e v e l recommended by t h e TSRB. 

The f u l l c o s t o f t h e awards by t h e Armed F o r c e s Pay Review Body and Top S a l a r i e s Review Body groups w i l l be met from w i t h i n e x i s t i n g p u b l i c e x p e n d i t u r e programme t o t a l s f o r t h i s y e a r . 

I n t h e c a s e of t h e h e a l t h s e r v i c e s however t h e Government r e c o g n i s e t h a t t h e f u l l c o s t s c o u l d n o t be accommodated w i t h o u t a d v e r s e l y a f f e c t i n g s e r v i c e s t o p a t i e n t s . 

The Government have t h e r e f o r e d e c i d e d t o p r o v i d e an e x t r a 
£142m f o r h e a l t h a u t h o r i t y c a s h l i m i t s from t h e R e s e r v e f o r n e x t y e a r . 

Of t h e r e m a i n i n g c o s t , 
£417m i s a l r e a d y f u l l y c o v e r e d w i t h i n t h e a l l o c a t i o n s made f o r t h i s y e a r , l e a v i n g a b a l a n c e o f £44m t o be c o v e r e d from c o s t improvements. 

The Government have s i m i l a r l y d e c i d e d t o p r o v i d e an a d d i t i o n a l £62m t o t h e F a m i l y P r a c t i t i o n e r S e r v i c e s from t h e R e s e r v e f o r t h i s y e a r . 

T o g e t h e r w i t h t h e i n c r e a s e s i n a l l o c a t i o n a l r e a d y announced, t h e i n c r e a s e i n p r o v i s i o n f o r t h e N a t i o n a l H e a l t h S e r v i c e i n 1989-90 o v e r 1988-89 w i l l t h e r e f o r e be £1899m. 

The pay r a t e s and s c a l e s r e s u l t i n g from t h e d e c i s i o n s w i l l be promulgated a s soon a s p o s s i b l e f o r a l l t h e groups c o n c e r n e d . 

Q u e s t i o n : 
To a s k t h e S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e f o r E d u c a t i o n and S c i e n c e , when t h e s e c o n d R e p o r t of t h e I n t e r i m A d v i s o r y Committee on S c h o o l T e a c h e r s ' Pay and C o n d i t i o n s w i l l be p u b l i s h e d . 

Answer : 
MR KENNETH BAKER 
I t i s b e i n g p u b l i s h e d t o d a y . 

I t s main recommendations a r e a 6% i n c r e a s e i n t h e main p a y s c a l e f o r t e a c h e r s from 1 A p r i l 
1989 
a 7% i n c r e a s e i n t h e v a l u e o f t h e f i v e r a t e s of i n c e n t i v e a l l o w a n c e s from 1 A p r i l 
1989 
a 7.5% i n c r e a s e i n t h e s a l a r i e s of t h e 
55,000 
Heads and D e p u t i e s from 1 A p r i l 
1989 
an e x t r a 9,500 i n c e n t i v e a l l o w a n c e s f o r t h e 
1989-90 a c a d e m i c y e a r , on t o p o f t h e a d d i t i o n a l 18,000 a l r e a d y p l a n n e d a 5.6% i n c r e a s e i n London a l l o w a n c e s from 1 
J u l y 1988. 

I p r o p o s e t o a c c e p t t h e Committee's recommendations i n f u l l . 

I 
am t o d a y i n i t i a t i n g t h e c o n s u l t a t i o n r e q u i r e d by S e c t i o n 3 ( 1 ) of t h e T e a c h e r s ' Pay and C o n d i t i o n s A c t 
1987 
by w r i t i n g t o t h e r e l e v a n t l o c a l a u t h o r i t y a s s o c i a t i o n s , t e a c h e r u n i o n s and b o d i e s r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e i n t e r e s t s o f t h e g o v e r n o r s o f v o l u n t a r y s c h o o l s , s e t t i n g o u t my p r o p o s a l s . 

The t e x t o f t h e l e t t e r i s a s f o l l o w s : 
[ t e x t o f c o n s u l t a t i o n l e t t e r ] 
LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EDUCATION AND SCIENCE TO 
THE RELEVANT LOCAL AUTHORITY ASSOCIATIONS, TEACHER UNIONS AND 
BODIES REPRESENTING THE INTERESTS OF THE GOVERNORS OF VOLUNTARY 
SCHOOLS 

## Teachers Pay And Conditions Of Employment

1 . 

On 14 September 1988 I a s k e d t h e I n t e r i m A d v i s o r y Committee on S c h o o l T e a c h e r s Pay and C o n d i t i o n s t o examine and r e p o r t t o me on c e r t a i n i s s u e s . 

I e n c l o s e a copy o f t h e Committee's r e p o r t w h i c h i s b e i n g p u b l i s h e d today. 

The Committee's recommendations a r e summarised i n C h a p t e r 9 of i t s r e p o r t . 

I propose t o make an O r d e r g i v i n g e f f e c t t o t h e recommendations r e f e r r e d t o i n p a r a g r a p h s 2 - 3 below. 

But b e f o r e I t a k e a d e c i s i o n on what p r o v i s i o n t h e o r d e r s h o u l d make, I i n v i t e your v i e w s . 

T h i s l e t t e r t h e r e f o r e i n i t i a t e s t h e c o n s u l t a t i o n r e q u i r e d by S e c t i o n 3 ( 1 ) of t h e T e a c h e r s ' Pay and C o n d i t i o n s A c t 1987. 

2. 

I p r o p o s e t o a c c e p t t h e Committee's recommendations t h a t i . 

t h e s a l a r i e s of a l l q u a l i f i e d t e a c h e r s s h o u l d be r a i s e d by a u n i f o r m 6% t o t h e f i g u r e s s e t out i n p a r a g r a p h 4.13 of t h e Committee's r e p o r t w i t h e f f e c t from 1 A p r i l 1989; 
i i . 

t h e s a l a r i e s of u n q u a l i f i e d t e a c h e r s s h o u l d be r a i s e d by t h e same p e r c e n t a g e , 
( p a r a g r a p h 
4 . 1 3 ) . 

The a l l o w a n c e f o r t e a c h e r s of t h e v i s u a l l y i m p a i r e d and h e a r i n g i m p a i r e d would a l s o be i n c r e a s e d by 6%; 
i i i . t h e s p o t s a l a r i e s f o r Heads and D e p u t i e s s h o u l d be i n c r e a s e d by 7.5% w i t h e f f e c t from 
1 A p r i l 1989, ( p a r a g r a p h 4 . 2 1 ) ; 
i v . 

t h e r a t e s of t h e London a r e a a l l o w a n c e s s h o u l d be i n c r e a s e d by 5.6% w i t h e f f e c t from 
1 J u l y 1988, ( p a r a g r a p h 5 . 1 6 ) ; 
t h e v a l u e o f e a c h o f t h e i n c e n t i v e a l l o w a n c e s s h o u l d be i n c r e a s e d by 7% w i t h e f f e c t from 1 A p r i l 1989, ( p a r a g r a p h 
4 . 3 4 ) ; 
t h e p l a n n e d number o f i n c e n t i v e a l l o w a n c e s s h o u l d be expanded from September 1989 by 9,500 (5,000 e x t r a A a l l o w a n c e s ; 2,500 Β 
a l l o w a n c e s ; 1,500 C a l l o w a n c e s and 500 D 
a l l o w a n c e s ) : ( p a r a g r a p h s 4.31 and 4 . 3 2 ) . 

T h e r e w i l l need t o be some c o n s e q u e n t i a l r e v i s i o n s t o t h e l i m i t s r e l a t i n g t o i n c e n t i v e a l l o w a n c e s i n Annex A t o Appendix I of t h e S c h o o l T e a c h e r s Pay and C o n d i t i o n s Document 1988, 
( p a r a g r a p h 
4 . 3 3 ) . 

3. 

The Committee makes a number o f o t h e r recommendations w h i c h would r e q u i r e amendments t o t h e S c h o o l T e a c h e r s ' Pay and C o n d i t i o n s Document 1988 ( t h e 
1988 Document): 

a. 
t h a t t e a c h e r s r e t u r n i n g t o r e g u l a r f u l l - t i m e 
o r p a r t - t i m e t e a c h i n g s h o u l d be p a i d on r e - e n t r y a t no l o w e r p o i n t on t h e m a i n s c a l e 
t h a n 
when l a s t employed a s a r e g u l a r f u l l - t i m e o r 
p a r t - t i m e t e a c h e r ( p a r a g r a p h 5.21) 
b. 
t h a t , c o n t i n g e n t upon t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n of t h e 
proposed l i c e n s e d t e a c h e r a r r a n g e m e n t s , t h e r e 
s h o u l d be d i s c r e t i o n f o r l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s o r 
g o v e r n o r s , a s . a p p r o p r i a t e , t o pay l i c e n s e d t e a c h e r s a t e i t h e r q u a l i f i e d o r u n q u a l i f i e d 
r a t e s ( p a r a g r a p h 5.26) 
c. 
t h a t l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s ( a n d , a t t h e 
a p p r o p r i a t e p o i n t , g o v e r n o r s of s c h o o l s w i t h 
d e l e g a t e d b u d g e t s ) s h o u l d be g i v e n d i s c r e t i o n 
to a c c e l e r a t e a t e a c h e r ' s p r o g r e s s i o n t o t h e 
top of t h e m a i n s c a l e ( p a r a g r a p h 5.29) 
d. 

t h a t once t h e n e c e s s a r y r e g u l a t i o n s under S e c t i o n 218 of t h e E d u c a t i o n Reform A c t have been made, a t e a c h e r who i s awarded Q u a l i f i e d T e a c h e r S t a t u s (QTS) r e t r o s p e c t i v e l y s h o u l d be e n t i t l e d t o r e c e i v e back pay from any a u t h o r i t y h e / s h e h a s worked f o r from t h e d a t e from w h i c h h i s / h e r q u a l i f i c a t i o n r u n s , t o make good any d i f f e r e n c e between what he/she was a c t u a l l y p a i d up t o t h e p o i n t when QTS 
was awarded and what he/she would have been e n t i t l e d t o a s a q u a l i f i e d t e a c h e r 
( p a r a g r a p h 
5.41) 
t h a t t h e d i s c r e t i o n s o v e r pay and c o n d i t i o n s c u r r e n t l y e x e r c i s e d by l o c a l e d u c a t i o n a u t h o r i t i e s s e t o u t i n Appendix I of t h e r e p o r t s h o u l d be t r a n s f e r r e d t o g o v e r n i n g b o d i e s of s c h o o l s w i t h budgets d e l e g a t e d under C h a p t e r I I I o f P a r t I o f t h e E d u c a t i o n Reform A c t 1988 ( p a r a g r a p h 7.24) and t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n on w h e t h e r i t i s " r e a s o n a b l y p r a c t i c a b l e t o p r o v i d e a s u p p l y t e a c h e r " 
s h o u l d t r a n s f e r t o t h e g o v e r n o r s i n t h o s e s c h o o l s where t h e g o v e r n i n g body have been made r e s p o n s i b l e , under t h e r e l e v a n t LMS 
scheme, f o r managing t h e arrangements f o r p r o v i d i n g s u p p l y t e a c h e r s ( p a r a g r a p h 
7.26) 
t h a t t h e f u n c t i o n s , b o t h mandatory and d i s c r e t i o n a r y , c u r r e n t l y a l l o c a t e d t o LEAs under t h e 1988 Document s h o u l d be a l l o c a t e d t o g o v e r n i n g b o d i e s of g r a n t m a i n t a i n e d 
(GM) 
s c h o o l s ( p a r a g r a p h 
7.28) 
t h a t where a GM s c h o o l was f o r m e r l y a v o l u n t a r y s c h o o l , a head t e a c h e r s h o u l d c a r r y out h i s / h e r p r o f e s s i o n a l d u t i e s i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h any t r u s t deed a p p l y i n g t o t h e s c h o o l 
( p a r a g r a p h 
7.29) 
t h a t s a l a r y s a f e g u a r d i n g on a d i s c r e t i o n a r y b a s i s and d i s c r e t i o n a r y s a f e g u a r d i n g on London a l l o w a n c e and s o c i a l p r i o r i t y a l l o w a n c e s h o u l d a p p l y i n both d i r e c t i o n s between a GM s c h o o l and i t s former m a i n t a i n i n g a u t h o r i t y ( p a r a g r a p h 7.31) 

i . 
t h a t t h e p r o v i s i o n i n r e l a t i o n t o c o v e r a t 
sub p a r a g r a p h 
3 5 ( 9 ) ( b ) ( i i ) of t h e 
1988 
Document s h o u l d be amended i n 
t h e d i r e c t i o n 
of w o r d i n g s u g g e s t e d by t h e P r o f e s s i o n a l 
A s s o c i a t i o n of T e a c h e r s ( p a r a g r a p h 8.9) 
j . 
t h a t t h e r e f e r e n c e t o payment f o r 
midday 
s u p e r v i s i o n a t p a r a g r a p h 23 of t h e 
1988 
Document s h o u l d be d e l e t e d ( p a r a g r a p h 8.14) 
k. 
t h a t t h e r e f e r e n c e t o e d u c a t i o n 
l e g i s l a t i o n 
i n t h e " o v e r r i d i n g r e q u i r e m e n t s " s e c t i o n of 
head t e a c h e r s c o n d i t i o n s of employment -
p a r a g r a p h 2 7 ( i ) of t h e 1988 Document - s h o u l d be updated t o i n c l u d e t h e E d u c a t i o n Reform A c t 1988 ( p a r a g r a p h 8.24) 

1 . 
t h a t s p e c i f i c r e f e r e n c e s h o u l d be made i n 
b o t h head t e a c h e r s and s c h o o l t e a c h e r s 
c o n d i t i o n s of s e r v i c e t o t h e B a s i c 
( i n c l u d i n g 
N a t i o n a l ) C u r r i c u l u m , and, i n 
t h e c a s e of 
head t e a c h e r s , t o t h e c o l l e c t i v e 
w o r s h i p 
r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e E d u c a t i o n Reform A c t 
( p a r a g r a p h 8.25) 
I propose t o a c c e p t a l l t h e s e recommendations. 

4. 

The Order I p r o p o s e t o make t o g i v e e f f e c t t o a l l of t h e above would do s o by b r i n g i n g i n t o e f f e c t a new S c h o o l T e a c h e r s ' 
Pay and C o n d i t i o n s Document. 

The Committee's r e m a i n i n g recommendations do n o t r e q u i r e changes t o t h e 1988 Document: I do n o t t h e r e f o r e p r o p o s e t o change t h e document i n r e s p o n s e t o t h o s e recommendations. 

Nor i s i t i n t e n d e d t o r e v i s e t h e RSG 
s e t t l e m e n t s f o r 
1989-90 on a c c o u n t o f t h e p r o p o s a l s s e t out i n p a r a g r a p h s 2 and 3 above. 

The c o s t w i l l be o f f s e t i n p a r t by t h e g r e a t e r t h a n e x p e c t e d r e d u c t i o n i n t h e employers' c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o t h e T e a c h e r s S u p e r a n n u a t i o n Scheme w h i c h I announced on 
10 
F e b r u a r y . 

5. 

Any comments on the p r o p o s a l s s e t out above and on any o t h e r m a t t e r s r a i s e d i n t h e r e p o r t a r e i n v i t e d by 10 March. 

I f you would l i k e t o e x p r e s s y o u r v i e w s i n a m e e t i n g would you l e t my o f f i c e know of t h i s as soon a s p o s s i b l e so t h a t any m e e t i n g s c a n t a k e p l a c e b e f o r e E a s t e r . 

6. 

F o l l o w i n g t h e s e c o n s u l t a t i o n s a new S c h o o l T e a c h e r s ' Pay and C o n d i t i o n s Document w i l l be p r e p a r e d . 

T h e r e w i l l t h e n be o p p o r t u n i t y t o comment on t h e p r e c i s e w o r d i n g of t h e amendments p r i o r t o t h e p u b l i c a t i o n of t h e new Document and t h e l a y i n g b e f o r e P a r l i a m e n t of an O r d e r w h i c h w i l l g i v e e f f e c t t o i t s p r o v i s i o n s . 

7. 

The I n t e r i m A d v i s o r y Committee s a y t h a t t h e y hope i t w i l l be p o s s i b l e f o r a copy of t h e r e p o r t t o be s e e n by t e a c h e r s i n e v e r y m a i n t a i n e d s c h o o l . 

Enough c o p i e s of t h e r e p o r t a r e b e i n g s e n t t o e a c h l o c a l e d u c a t i o n a u t h o r i t y f o r a copy t o be c i r c u l a t e d i n e a c h s c h o o l . 

THIS DOCUMENT I S 
                  THE 
                      PROPERTY OF HER BRITANNIC MAJESTY'S 
                                                           GOVERNMENT 

C ( 8 9 ) 5 
March 
1989 
CABINET 
THE L E G I S L A T I V E PROGRAMME 1989-90 
Memorandum by t h e L o r d P r e s i d e n t 

## Background And Proposed Programme

i s e d a y e a r ago ( C C ( 8 8 ) 9 t h M e e t i n g ) , the p r e s e n t 

a t t h e 
                l i m i t s o f 
                                        what c a n 
                                                              be 
                                                                     managed, and t h i s v e r y 
     to have a knock-on e f f e c t on the s t a r t i n g date 

As t h e C a b i n e t 
s e s s i o n ' s 
                progrAjjsame 
heavy programme 1 

i s e s s e n t i a l , however, t h a t we p l a n f o r 
                                                                                  t h e 

t h i s P a r l i a m e n t t o 
                                      b e g i n a t the c o n v e n t i o n a l 
 me must be c o n s t r u c t e d w i t h both these 
    so r e c o g n i s e t h a t t h e r e a r e some n e c e s s a r y 

f o r 
         the n e x t 
                                 s e s s i 
f o u r t h ( 1 9 9 0 - 9 1 ) 
                                        s e s 
t i m e . 
                 Next s e s s i o n ' s 
p r e s s u r e s i n mind. We 

l e f o r a f o u r t h o r f i f t h s e s s i o n o f t h e 
  ave a s t r o n g c l a i m on next s e s s i o n ' s 

B i l l s which would n o t be 
P a r l i a m e n t and 
                              w h i c h t h e r 
programme. 
                        E q u a l l y , t h e r e 

s u i t a b l e f o r t h e l a t e r 
                                                s e s s i 
                                                                       c o u l d be d e f e r r e d w i t h t h a t i n mind. 

2. 
      T a k i n g a l l t h e s e c o n s i d e r a 
F u t u r e L e g i s l a t i o n Committee 
                                       (QL 
c o n s u l t a t i o n w i t h c o l l e a g u e s and 
                                             η 
Annex A. The 
                   main elements of the p^ 

d i f f e r e n t c h a r a c t e r from those of r e c 

d i t t e r e n t c n a r a c t e r irom 
                                                  m
                                                     u
                                                        s
                                                          e 
                                                              u
                                                                  ! i ^ w i y i c a t o , 
                                                                                                        ._ _״
                                                                                                                    ״
t h e C o u r t s and 
                             L e g a l S e r v i c e s B i l l , 
                                                                        t h e ^ y j j ^ J r B i l l , 
                                                                                                      t h e 
                                                                                                               E n v i r o n m e n t a l 

P r o t e c t i o n 
                     B i l l , 
                                 the H e a l t h S e r v i c e s B i l W ^ a n d the Human F e r t i l i s a t i o n and 
Embryology ( C o n t r o l ) B i l l . 
                                                       The 
                                                               programmeM:ontains s e v e r a l B i l l s which 
would be c o n t r o v e r s i a l and w i l l consume a good d e a l o f time i n both 
Houses. One p a r t i c u l a r d i f f i c u l t y i s t h a t amendm&jjts t o the a b o r t i o n 
                                                                                                                                        l a w 
a r e l i k e l y t o 
                            be w i t h i n the scope o f the Human / i i r t m l i s a t i o n 
                                                                                                                      and 
Embryology ( C o n t r o l ) B i l l , and t h i s i s bound t<vc£nJ|W:<cate the 
                                                                                                                             B i l l ' s 
passage. 

3. 
      The 
            programme which QL recommend i s a g a i n a t t 

be d e l i v e r e d i n 
                          the s e s s i o n , and t h e r e i s no c o n t i n g e 

u n f o r e s e e a b l e 
                            e x t r a s . 
                                              Once a g a i n I must a s k c o l l e a g u e 

s i g n i f i c a n t a d d i t i o n s to the programme would need t o 
                                                                                                          be 
                                                                                                                ο r e d u c t i o n s . 

COPY NO 
.er B i l l s t h a t would be p e r f e c t l y 

    a c c o u n t , The 
                               Queen's Speech 
                                                            and 
een through the u s u a l p r o c e s s o f 
  oses the programme s e t out a t 
        programme, which has a v e r y 
    'ears, a r e the B r o a d c a s t i n g 
                                                             B i l l , 

:s o f 
          what 
                  can 

^gin 
       f o r 

~ept t h a t 
            any 
 yby matching 

## ! C O N F I D E N T I A L !

B I L L S NOT RECOMMENDED FOR INCLUSION 

4. 
    A l i s t o f the B i l l s which QL d e c i d e d not 
                                            t o i n c l u d e i n t h e 
recommended programme i s a t 
                           Annex B. As u s u a l , t h e l i s t c o n t a i n s a number 
of a t t r a c t i v e b i d s , and 
                       I p a r t i c u l a r l y draw the C a b i n e t ' s a t t e n t i o n t o the 
  guments which were put 
                        t o 
                           QL i n 
                                 f a v o u r o f 
                                           t h e f o l l o w i n g : 

Town and 
         Country P l a n n i n g 
                          B i l l 

  B i l l would p r o v i d e f o r changes t o l a n d compensation 
ngements, which would be o f h e l p i n 
                                                                            c o n n e c t i o n w i t h major 

            t r u c t u r e p r o j e c t s such a s 
                                                                t h e 
                                                                        c h a n n e l t u n n e l r a i l 
                                                                                                               l i n k ; changes 
            elopment p l a n s , which were t h e 
                                                                          s u b j e c t o f 
                                                                                               a White Paper 
                d l a s t month; c h a r g i n g f o r a p p e a l s , which should h e l p t o 
          e the b a c k l o g o f p l a n n i n g a p p l i c a t i o n s 
                                                                                        and 
                                                                                                a p p e a l s ; and, s u b j e c t 
            l e a g u e s ' p o l i c y agreement, measures on p l a n n i n g enforcement, 
which i s a s u b j e c t on which t h e r e i s widespread 
                                                                                                p u b l i c concern. 
T h e r e i s c l e g j r l y a s t r o n g c a s e f o r proceeding q u i c k l y w i t h t h i s 
                                                                                                                                B i l l , 
but p l a n n i i i g ^ r e t o i s a p o l i t i c a l l y 
                                                                    l i v e l y i s s u e and, a l t h o u g h the 
                                                                                                                                  B i l l 
would p r o t y t i l y j i h e no more than 30-40 c l a u s e s , i t would undoubtedly 
t a k e up a goqy^^׳l o f P a r l i a m e n t a r y time. 

( b ) 
                Open 
                             Mar 

r T r a d e and 
                         I n d u s t r y has i n d i c a t e d t h a t , 
                                                                                   i n 
        be p r e p a r e d to t r i m t h i s t o 
                                                                  a 
                                                                       B i l l 

s t r i c t i v e t r a d e p r a c t i c e s and, i f t h e r e 
   uses on consumer c r e d i t . 
                                                        Both 
                                                                t h e 
     nd I n d u s t r y and the C h a n c e l l o r o f t h e 

The S e c r e t a r y 
                     o f 
o r d e r t o a s s i s t QL, 
c o n t a i n i n g 50 c l a u s e 
was room, a f u r t h e r 3 
S e c r e t a r y of S t a t e f o r 
E x c h e q u e r emphasised 

i s an i m p o r t a n t element o f 
c o m p e t i t i o n and 
                                     promoting eripffr 
out i n 
                a Green Paper p u b l i s h e 
were i n t r o d u c e d n e x t s e s s i o n i t 
background f o r the L o r d 
                                                         C h a n c e l 

s e r v i c e s , and the 
                                     c o r r e s p o n d i n g 
consumer c r e d i t , which i s a l s o 
                                                             o f 
welcome i n v i e w o f c u r r e n t c o n c e r n s 

( c ) 
              Road T r a f f i c 
                                                 B i l l 

The S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e f o r T r a n s p o r t has י1 
p r e p a r e d t o t r i m t h i s 
                                   B i l l t o 
                                                a 70 c l a u s e me 
North Review o f 
                         Road T r a f f i c Law, 
                                                       t o g e t h e r 
amendments t o the Road T r a f f i c A c t . The White 
Government's response t o the North Review, which 
month, h a s 
                 been e x t r e m e l y w e l l r e c e i v e d . The 
                                                                         r e f 
law i s w i d e l y seen t o 
                                   be overdue and l e g i s l a t i o n woul 

a l l 
        s i d e s . 
                         The S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e f o r T r a n s p o r t 
                                                                                                      i s 
t h e Government would be c r i t i c i s e d f o r d e l a y and woul 

i n i t i a t i v e i f l e g i s l a t i o n were not 
                                                                      brought i n a t 
                                                                                                  t h e f i r , 
o p p o r t u n i t y . 
                            We might a l s o be f a c e d w i t h a number of P r 
Members' B i l l s n e x t s e s s i o n , s e e k i n g t o l e g i s l a t e on eleme 
own White Paper p r o p o s a l s . 

l a t i o n on r e s t r i c t i v e t r a d e p r a c t i c e s 
   vernment's p o l i c y o f 
                                            i n c r e a s i n g 
       e. The p o l i c y p r o p o s a l s were s e t 
         y e a r . 
                       P r o v i d e d t h a t the 
                                                            B i l l 
             p r o v i d e a v e r y h e l p f u l 

  i l l on the r e f o r m o f l e g a l 
         measure. 
                                L e g i s l a t i o n on 
e r e g u l a t o r y n a t u r e , would be 
  out c r e d i t 
                            p r a c t i c e s . 

t h a t he would be 

to implement 
                      t h e 
     m i s c e l l a n e o u s 

e t t i n g out the 

b l i s h e d 
                l a s t 
   oad 
            t r a f f i c 
          lcomed on 
        ed t h a t 
           he 

## ! C O N F I D E N T I A L !

I n each o f t h e s e c a s e s , QL r e c o g n i s e d t h a t t h e r e were p o w e r f u l arguments 

f o r 
         proceeding i n 
                                             t h e 
                                                       1989-90 S e s s i o n , but 
                                                                                                            were s i m p l y unable t o f i n d room 

i n the programme. QL c o n s i d e r e d t h a t a l l t h r e e B i l l s would be s u i t a b l e 

f o r a f o u r t h S e s s i o n . 

## Aration And Handling Of B I L L S

u s u a l , I must i n v i t e c o l l e a g u e s t o t a k e a p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t i n the t i m e l y p r e p a r a t i o n o f B i l l s f o r which they a r e r e s p o n s i b l e , 

a t e 
          the g r e a t e f f o r t s t h a t were made t o 
                                                                                                     have most o f 
                                                                                                                                      our 
                                                                                                                                                 m a j o r 

a t 
       the b e g i n n i n g o f the p r e s e n t s e s s i o n , and i t i s e s s e n t i a l 
£t t h a t performance t h i s y e a r as i t p r o v i d e s t h e f o u n d a t i o n 
  the whole s e s s i o n ' s b u s i n e s s . The 
                                                                                      management o f t h e 

^ l s o 
           depends on 
                                     a r e a s o n a b l e number o f 
                                                                                          w e i g h t y 
                                                                                                             B i l l s 
                                                                                                                            b e i n g 

programme 
i n t r o d u c e 

                         i n the House o f 
                                                              L o r d s . 
                                                                                 The 
                                                                                          L o r d P r i v y S e a l and 
                                                                                                                                        I w i l l once 
a g a i n be l o o k i n g t o c o l l e a g u e s t o cooperate w i t h us i n making 
                                                                                                                                             t h e 
n e c e s s a r y 
                       c h o i c e s 

## Conclusion

I 
i n v i t e t h e 
( a ) 
t o approve 

t o f B i l l s a t 
                          Annex A a s t h e 
 rogramme f o r n e x t s e s s i o n , 
     hould now 
                        be put 
                                     i n hand; 

p r o v i s i o n a l 
                        l e g i s l ' 
on which p r e p a r a t o r y 

( b ) 
               t o 
                      endorse the c 
about the p r e p a r a t i o n 
                                                     an' 

P r i v y C o u n c i l O f f i c e 

7 March 
      1989 

i n paragraph 5 above 

ing o f B i l l s . 

## B I L L S Recommended For Inclusion I N Τ 989/90 Programme Essential

DTp C i v i l A v i a t i o n A u t h o r i t y v e r y s h o r t 
(Borrowing L i m i t s ) 
To i n c r e a s e t h e c e i l i n g on a g g r e g a t e b o r r o w i n g by t h e C i v i l A v i a t i o n A u t h o r i t y . 

## Contingent

DEn C o a l I n d u s t r y s h o r t To i n c r e a s e t h e s t a t u t o r y l i m i t on r e s t r u c t u r i n g g r a n t s p a y a b l e t o t h e B r i t i s h C o a l C o r p o r a t i o n (BCC) 
and/or t o change BCC's c a p i t a l . 

FCO 
F i j i s h o r t To make p r o v i s i o n consequent upon F i j i ' s p o s s i b l e d e p a r t u r e from t h e Commonwealth. FCO 
P a k i s t a n s h o r t To make p r o v i s i o n consequent upon P a k i s t a n ' s p o s s i b l e r e a d m i s s i o n t o t h e Commonwealth. 

## Programme With Essential Elements

HO 
B r o a d c a s t i n g l o n g 
(150-200 c l a u s e s ) 
To implement t h e b r o a d c a s t i n g White Paper ( i n c l u d i n g r e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f independent t e l e v i s i o n 
( e s s e n t i a l ) ) ; t o r e f o r m commercial r a d i o ; 
to s t r e n g t h e n p r o v i s i o n s on b r o a d c a s t i n g s t a n d a r d s ; and m i s c e l l a n e o u s o t h e r measures. LCD 
C o u r t s and L e g a l S e r v i c e s l o n g 
( c 70 c l a u s e s ) 
To make r e f o r m s i n t h e o r g a n i s a t i o n o f t h e l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n s and i n the c i v i l j u s t i c e system; t o b r i n g j u d i c i a l p e n s i o n s i n t o l i n e w i t h t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f t h e S o c i a l S e c u r i t y A c t s 1985 
and 1986 
( e s s e n t i a l ) ; and m i s c e l l a n e o u s o t h e r measures. 

HMT 
P e n s i o n s ( M i s c e l l a n e o u s s h o r t P r o v i s i o n s ) 
To p r o v i d e f o r p e n s i o n s i n c r e a s e f o r widowers i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h EC 
r e q u i r e m e n t s 
( e s s e n t i a l ) ; and t o s c o r e t h e c o s t o f p e n s i o n s i n c r e a s e i n t e a c h e r s  יand NHS
1 
n o t i o n a l f u n d s . 

## Programme

MAFF 
Food l o n g To r e p l a c e t h e Food A c t s f o r E n g l a n d and Wales and f o r S c o t l a n d w i t h a comprehensive and modernized GB 
A c t . 

DES 
T e a c h e r s
 
1 Pay and C o n d i t i o n s s h o r t To e s t a b l i s h a permanent s t a t u t o r y framework f o r d e t e r m i n i n g t e a c h e r s ' pay. 

DES 
S t u d e n t Support s h o r t To e s t a b l i s h t h e S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e ' s powers t o s e c u r e t h e p r o v i s i o n of l o a n s t o s t u d e n t s i n h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n i n England, Wales and S c o t l a n d . 

DEmp Employment ( e x c l u d i n g t o u r i s m medium p r o v i s i o n s ) 
To make f u r t h e r r e f o r m s o f t r a d e u n i o n l a w ; 
and t o a b o l i s h t h e Wages C o u n c i l s y s t e m . 

DOE 
E n v i r o n m e n t a l P r o t e c t i o n l o n g To p r o v i d e f o r v a r i o u s improvements i n e n v i r o n m e n t a l p r o t e c t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n i n c l u d i n g t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f an i n t e g r a t e d s y s t e m o f c o n t r o l o v e r i n d u s t r i a l p o l l u t i o n and r e f o r m o f t h e l a w on waste d i s p o s a l . 

DOE 
Crown S u p p l i e r s v e r y s h o r t To f a c i l i t a t e t h e p r i v a t i s a t i o n o f t h e Crown S u p p l i e r s . 

DH 
H e a l t h S e r v i c e s l o n g To implement t h e White Paper on t h e r e f o r m o f t h e N a t i o n a l H e a l t h S e r v i c e . 

(c 100 c l a u s e s ) 
( c 100 c l a u s e s ) 
DH 
Human F e r t i l i s a t i o n and Embryology s u b s t a n t i a l 
( C o n t r o l ) 
(40-50 
c l a u s e s ) 
To implement t h e White Paper on Human F e r t i l i s a t i o n and Embryology a r i s i n g i n p a r t from t h e Warnock R e p o r t . 

HO 
Mutual A s s i s t a n c e s u b s t a n t i a l To e n a b l e t h e UK t o j o i n i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l arrangements f o r mutual l e g a l a s s i s t a n c e . 

HO 
R e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e People s h o r t To r e f o r m t h e l a w on v o t i n g f o r B r i t i s h c i t i z e n s r e s i d e n t o v e r s e a s ; 
and t o s i m p l i f y t h e l a w on a b s e n t v o t i n g f o r t h o s e who move house. SO 
S c o t t i s h E n t e r p r i s e and New Towns l o n g 
( S c o t l a n d ) 
To e s t a b l i s h S c o t t i s h E n t e r p r i s e t o r e p l a c e t h e S c o t t i s h Development Agency and t h e T r a i n i n g Agency i n S c o t l a n d ; t o p r o v i d e powers t o r e c o n s t r u c t development c o r p o r a t i o n s  יl i a b i l i t i e s ; and t o e x t e n d powers f o r w i n d i n g up development c o r p o r a t i o n s . 

SO 
Law Reform ( M i s c e l l a n e o u s P r o v i s i o n s ) 
l o n g 
( S c o t l a n d ) 
( c 50 c l a u s e s ) 
To r e f o r m r e s t r i c t i v e p r a c t i c e s i n t h e l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n s i n S c o t l a n d and t o make m i s c e l l a n e o u s improvements t o S c o t t i s h a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of j u s t i c e and c r i m i n a l law. 

DSS 
S o c i a l S e c u r i t y s u b s t a n t i a l To make f u r t h e r r e f o r m s t o s o c i a l s e c u r i t y l e g i s l a t i o n . 

DTI 
E x p o r t C r e d i t and I n v e s t m e n t medium G u a r a n t e e s 
( c 15 c l a u s e s ) 
To e n a b l e t h e E x p o r t C r e d i t G u a r a n t e e s Department t o t a k e advantage of c a p i t a l market developments. 

DTp Highways and T r a n s p o r t s u b s t a n t i a l 
( P r i v a t e F i n a n c e ) ( e x c l u d i n g non-highways p r o v i s i o n s ) 
To e s t a b l i s h new p r o c e d u r e s f o r a u t h o r i s i n g p r i v a t e l y f i n a n c e d roads; 
and t o amend t h e Highways A c t and t h e P u b l i c U t i l i t i e s S t r e e t Works A c t . 

( c 30 c l a u s e s ) 
DTp A v i a t i o n and Marine S e c u r i t y s h o r t To p r o v i d e f o r p r o s e c u t i o n o r e x t r a d i t i o n i n r e s p e c t o f t e r r o r i s t a c t s a g a i n s t s h i p s , o f f s h o r e p l a t f o r m s and a t a i r p o r t s ; and t o t i g h t e n powers r e l a t i n g t o a i r p o r t , f e r r y and p o r t s e c u r i t y . 

HMT 
Government T r a d i n g Funds s h o r t To widen powers f o r Next S t e p s A g e n c i e s t o be t a k e n o u t o f t h e Vote a c c o u n t i n g s y s t e m . 

HMT 
P a r l i a m e n t a r y P e n s i o n s s h o r t To i n t r o d u c e new p e n s i o n s arrangements f o r t h e Prime M i n i s t e r , Speaker and L o r d C h a n c e l l o r ; and t o p r o v i d e f o r s e v e r a n c e pay f o r House o f Commons M i n i s t e r s . 

UNCONTROVERSIAL . 

MOD 
Greenwich H o s p i t a l v e r y s h o r t To remove c o n s t r a i n t s on t h e a d m i s s i o n o f p u p i l s t o t h e R o y a l H o s p i t a l S c h o o l . 

FCO 
P r o t o c o l s A d d i t i o n a l t o t h e v e r y s h o r t Geneva C o n v e n t i o n s To e n a b l e t h e UK t o r a t i f y a d d i t i o n a l p r o t o c o l s t o t h e Geneva C o n v e n t i o n s . 

LCD 
C o n t r a c t s medium To e n a b l e t h e UK t o r a t i f y t h e 
1980 
Rome C o n v e n t i o n on t h e l a w on c o n t r a c t u a l r e l a t i o n s . 

## B I L L S Not Recommended For Inclusion I N 1989/90 Programme Programme

MAFF 
A g r i c u l t u r a l M a r k e t i n g s h o r t To a b o l i s h t h e p o t a t o and wool p r i c e s u p p o r t regimes and p o s s i b l y t o amend t h e p o t a t o m a r k e t i n g scheme. 

.MAFF 
S l a u g h t e r h o u s e s medium To extend t h e S l a u g h t e r h o u s e s A c t 
1974 
t o farmed d e e r and r a b b i t s ; t o s t r e n g t h e n w e l f a r e c o n t r o l s on s l a u g h t e r i n g ; and t o p r o v i d e f o r r e c o v e r y o f Government c o s t s f o r i n s p e c t i n g p i g s l a u g h t e r h o u s e s . 

MAFF 
A g r i c u l t u r e C a p i t a l G r a n t s v e r y s h o r t 
( E x p e n d i t u r e Management) 
To f a c i l i t a t e t r a n s f e r o f p r o v i s i o n f o r farm c a p i t a l g r a n t s t o a c a s h l i m i t e d V o t e . 

MAFF 
F o r e s t r y v e r y s h o r t To i n c r e a s e t h e maximum membership o f f o r e s t r y r e g i o n a l a d v i s o r y committees. 

MOD 
Defence R e s e a r c h Agency s h o r t To f a c i l i t a t e p o s s i b l e f o r m a t i o n o f MOD'S r e s e a r c h e s t a b l i s h m e n t s i n t o a Government owned p i c . 

DE 
Employment 
( t o u r i s m p r o v i s i o n s v e r y s h o r t o n l y ) 
To r e o r g a n i z e arrangements f o r promoting t o u r i s m . 

DES 
R e s e a r c h C o u n c i l s R e o r g a n i s a t i o n s h o r t To merge v a r i o u s R e s e a r c h C o u n c i l s . DOE 
Town and Country P l a n n i n g s u b s t a n t i a l 
(30-40 c l a u s e s ) 
To p r o v i d e f o r changes t o l a n d compensation a r r a n g e m e n t s ; r e f o r m o f development p l a n system; c h a r g i n g f o r a p p e a l s ; and measures on p l a n n i n g enforcement. 

DOE 
Commons l o n g To p r o v i d e f o r more e f f e c t i v e management o f , and improved a c c e s s t o , common l a n d . 

FCO 
D i p l o m a t i c and C o n s u l a r P r e m i s e s v e r y s h o r t 
( D i s t u r b a n c e s ) 
To c o n t r o l d e m o n s t r a t i o n s which d i s t u r b E m b a s s i e s and C o n s u l a t e s . 

FCO 
C h i n a I n d e m n i t y ( A p p l i c a t i o n ) 
s h o r t To wind up t h e a f f a i r s o f t h e C h i n e s e Government P u r c h a s i n g Commission and t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of i t s r e m a i n i n g f u n d s . 

DH 
R e g i s t r a t i o n S e r v i c e s s u b s t a n t i a l To modernise R e g i s t r a t i o n S e r v i c e p r o c e d u r e s . 

HO 
C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e ( e x c e p t mutual l o n g a s s i s t a n c e p r o v i s i o n s ) 
To make improved p r o v i s i o n f o r punishment i n t h e community; t o r e f o r m t h e l a w on p a r o l e ; t o w i t h d r a w t h e r i g h t t o j u r y t r i a l f o r minor t h e f t ; t o r e f o r m t h e l a w on t h e r i g h t o f s i l e n c e ; and t o make p r o v i s i o n f o r p r i v a t e s e c t o r i n v o l v e m e n t i n t h e remand system. 

HO 
Summer Time v e r y s h o r t To c o o r d i n a t e time w i t h o t h e r EC c o u n t r i e s and a l l o w more summer time i n t h e UK. 

HO 
Shops s h o r t To r e l a x r e s t r i c t i o n s on Sunday t r a d i n g . 

LCD 
Commonhold and Land O b l i g a t i o n s l o n g To f a c i l i t a t e t h e t r a n s f e r and management o f i n t e r d e p e n d e n t p r o p e r -
t i e s . 

OAL 
Museums and G a l l e r i e s medium To r e g u l a r i s e t h e f u n d i n g s t a t u s o f N a t i o n a l Museums and G a l l e r i e s ; to g r a n t c o r p o r a t e s t a t u s t o t h e t r u s t e e s o f c e r t a i n g a l l e r i e s and t o e n a b l e them t o d i s p o s e o f o b j e c t s i n t h e i r c o l l e c t i o n s . 

(over 100 c l a u s e s ) 
( c 35 c l a u s e s ) 
(90-100 c l a u s e s ) 
(c 25 c l a u s e s ) 
DTI 
Open Markets long 
(c 110 c l a u s e s ) 
To r e f o r m t h e l a w on r e s t r i c t i v e p r a c t i c e s ; consumer c r e d i t ; w e i g h t s and measures; t h e s a l e and s u p p l y o f goods; and s t a t i s t i c s o f t r a d e . 

DTI 
P r i v a t i s a t i o n s u b s t a n t i a l 
( M i s c e l l a n e o u s P r o v i s i o n s ) 
(30-40 c l a u s e s ) 
To f a c i l i t a t e t h e p r i v a t i s a t i o n of t h e N a t i o n a l E n g i n e e r i n g L a b o r a t o r y and t h e B r i t i s h Technology Group; and t o r e o r g a n i s e B r i t i s h S h i p b u i l d e r s i n t o a r e s i d u a r y body. 

DTp Road T r a f f i c l o n g 
( c 130 c l a u s e s ) 
To r e f o r m road t r a f f i c l e g i s l a t i o n i n t h e l i g h t o f t h e North Review; 
t o make m i s c e l l a n e o u s o t h e r r e f o r m s t o t r a f f i c law; and t o e a s e s t a t u t o r y r e q u i r e m e n t s on o p e r a t o r s o f goods v e h i c l e s . 

DTp Highways and T r a n s p o r t s u b s t a n t i a l P r i v a t e F i n a n c e (nonhighways p r o v i s i o n s ) 
To compel l o c a l a u t h o r i t i e s t o p r i v a t i s e t h e i r bus companies and t o complete t h e c o n v e r s i o n of t h e p o r t s t o a p r i v a t e s e c t o r i n d u s t r y . 

## Oncontroversial

LCD 
C i v i l J u r i s d i c t i o n and Judgements medium To g i v e e f f e c t t o t h e Lugano C o n v e n t i o n on c i v i l j u r i s d i c t i o n and t h e r e c o g n i t i o n and enforcement o f judgements.