PROPOSED LEGISLATION to regulate the legal profession will be amended to encourage the informal resolution of disputes between clients and solicitors and to ensure the independent appointment of members of the new disciplinary bodies, Minister for Justice Alan Shatter said yesterday.
Mr Shatter was delivering the opening address at a conference on regulatory reform of the legal profession organised by his department. He said he would be preparing amendments to the Legal Services Regulation Bill for discussion at its committee stage when it returns for debate.
Amendments would include changes to the ministerial consents and method of appointment to the legal services regulatory authority that featured in its first draft, as well as putting the disciplinary architecture beyond any perception of undue influence by Minister or Government, he said.
He said the proposals relating to new business structures would require further refinement but this must pave the way for new approaches in the way some legal business is conducted in the State.
“The Bill is set to open up the path of the legal services sector to the future and its emergent business technologies,” he said.
He said advances in business and communication technology had “utterly altered and internationalised the way business is being conducted, be that in the legal or other spheres.” This permitted Indian legal firms to offer “e-lawyering” services and solutions online, he said. “We have not fully tuned in to this.”
Steve Mark, legal services commissioner for New South Wales in Australia, told the conference that since his office was set up in 1994 the number of lawyers had doubled but the number of complaints against lawyers had fallen.
The Office of the Legal Services Commissioner (OLSC) was set up because of a public perception that the system run by the professional bodies was not working, and a system of co-regulation, where the Law Society, the Bar Association and the OLSC all acted as regulators, was established.
People with complaints about lawyers first contacted his office by telephone, whereupon members of staff tried to resolve the matter through contact between client and lawyer. About two-thirds of complaints were resolved in this manner. The remainder were processed formally and could lead to sanctions up to and including striking off. His office, the Bar Association and the Law Society were all empowered to bring prosecutions for misconduct against lawyers.
He said multidisciplinary practices had been introduced in New South Wales, with the proviso that 51 per cent of decision-making and rules were controlled by lawyers. This was found anti-competitive by the Competition Policy Review and lawyers were permitted to form incorporated companies with other lawyers and non-lawyers.
However, each must have a legal-practitioner director who must maintain “appropriate management systems” to ensure best practice. These were not defined in legislation and the OLSC, along with the professional bodies, drew up 10 objectives to be met.
These have contributed to better management, which has led to fewer complaints, he said.
