Claim that Law Society has put independence of solicitors in jeopardy by supporting bill

Published on Sunday 7 March 2010 21:59

THE Law Society of Scotland has "signed the death warrant" of the independence of solicitors by backing plans in the Scottish Government's Legal Services Bill, a leading Scottish lawyer has said.

Mike Dailly of the Govan Law Centre claims the society has "rendered itself obsolete" as a representative body by offering its support to plans to allow ministers to make appointments to its council.

And he has called on Scottish solicitors to be consulted in a referendum on the future of the society, adding his voice to a growing rebellion among lawyers over the introduction of alternative business structures (ABS).

Earlier this month, the Scottish Law Agents Society won a bid to hold an SGM of the Law Society to discuss calling a halt to ABS, which would allow non-lawyers to control firms, potentially leading to so-called "Tesco law" with legal services operated by supermarkets or banks.

Smaller solicitors, and some larger firms, such as MacRoberts, have added their weight to the campaign, complaining that the proposals were passed by the Law Society thanks to the block votes of the largest firms in the country. Mr Dailly has now joined them, issuing a devastating attack in a blog post.

He wrote: "I believe our 'representative' body has signed the death warrant for the independence of our profession, and in so doing rendered itself obsolete as a representative body. But it's not too late for solicitors to defend the independence of our profession. He added that the Legal Services Bill would "rip the heart out" of the profession by allowing ministers influence over the society's council: "Our society has embraced these proposals through a combination of supine naivety, acceptance of civil service diktat, and in the case of our big four corporate firms through the pecuniary self-interest and power of a handful of partners."

Ian Smart, president of the Law Society, maintained the independence of the legal profession was "fundamental" and that his organisation would continue to lobby for the bill to be amended.

"From the very outset of discussions on alternative business structures, which has since led to the profession voting in favour of allowing ABS in principle and the introduction of the Legal Services (Scotland) Bill in September 2009, the society has maintained that the independence of the legal profession is fundamental," he said.

"The arrival of the bill has not changed that view. In its response to the bill and during parliamentary evidence sessions, the society insisted that independence is essential and that the role of the Lord President should be strengthened to ensure that this remains the case. The society will continue to lobby (for] changes to section 92, which has been raised as a concern by both the society and its members."

He added: "Taking an antagonist stance does not help negotiate any long-term benefits for the profession. It's regrettable that it has taken until this stage for some of our members to engage in this debate, however we are continuing to encourage solicitors to contribute."

A Scottish Government spokesman said: "The Law Society of Scotland voted in favour of alternative business structures and a public consultation by the Scottish Government also found a majority of respondents in favour of the reforms.

"The Scottish Government have indicated that we remain keen to have constructive discussions with those who may have concerns over the bill."