The Competition Authority is likely to recommend a relaxation of the Bar Council's sole trader rule in its long-awaited report, due to be published this afternoon.
The sole trader and self-employed status of barristers is one of the most cherished organisational principles of the Law Library. It means that every practising barrister is a member of the Law Library and operates on the "taxi-rank" principle, whereby a barrister who is available must take the next case offered to him or her.
Only sole trading barristers can be members of the Law Library, which excludes barristers working for companies.
The Bar Council claims that this means every citizen, whatever his or her position in society or geographical location, can access any barrister, including the most eminent, through their local solicitor. The Bar Council also claims that this is a highly- competitive system as barristers all compete with each other.
However, its critics point out that the system makes it very difficult for barristers employed by companies to appear in court.
Instead, the company must hear their advice, and then instruct a solicitor who in turn engages a barrister from the Law Library. The need for a client to go first to a solicitor is regarded as overly restrictive.
This system also means that barristers cannot work in multiple practices with solicitors. Nor can they work in multi-professional practices, offering a "one-stop-shop" for businesses with legal, accounting and similar services available under the one roof.
The Competition Authority has been considering the impact of such multi-disciplinary practices on competition within the legal profession. Reports on the legal profession in the UK have favoured the creation of such companies, which exist widely in the US. However, the authority is understood not to have come down firmly in favour of such companies here.
Lawyers' organisations in the UK and in Ireland stress that such multi-disciplinary companies would make regulation of the lawyers working in them impossible, and a European Court of Justice ruling has upheld this view.
The vocational training systems for both branches of the profession are also likely to come in for criticism. The Law Society trains all solicitors, and the Kings Inns provides the qualifications for barristers. The authority is likely to recommend opening up access to these qualifications to other providers.
In a submission to the authority, the Law Society said it would be perfectly happy to license any outside provider, but expressed scepticism that anyone could provide the necessary training any cheaper. It operates on a break-even basis, and pointed out to the Competition Authority that any outside provider would require to make a profit.
The Kings Inns operates independently, offering a one-year degree course to law graduates and to those who complete its own diploma in law. There is no other route to qualification, and this is likely to be criticised by the authority.
While the Competition Authority has considered the division of the legal professions into two, solicitors and barristers, with access to barristers only available through solicitors, it is understood it is not going to recommend the fusing of the professions, instead favouring some form of direct access to barristers.
It is also expected to recommend that a separate body be set up to regulate the professions. This would involve a range of users of legal services as well as lawyers.
Today's report will not be final, and the Competition Authority is expected to consider submissions over the next few months before presenting its final report to the Government.