A sort of elder statesman. These days, the term is often applied to people who do not have a practising certificate or who are not solicitors at all who are giving advice to the firm in a particular area such as taxation, accounting, computers or a myriad of other disciplines. This is not objectionable as long as the person's status is made clear. In areas outside the law of course, the use of the term consultant is widespread to signify someone who can give specialist assistance. It has been argued that this might not be a genuine practice change in some cases but calculated to deceive the Society in an endeavour to avoid the proper payment of practising certificate and LawCover fees, particularly where the practical effect of the change is minimal.
Care obviously needs to be taken to avoid a situation which misleads.
While the position is somewhat deregulated beyond allowing a firm name to include only the names of present or past partners, Rule 41 in the Revised Professional Conduct and Practice Rules does provide some constraints. There would be nothing wrong with a firm name continuing to include the names of former partners who become consultants. That of itself does not amount to a holding out that a particular consultant is in fact still a partner. There has been some argument about that. The appropriate use of business cards crops up from time to time.