Andrew Holroyd hails a landmark ruling for legal aid lawyers and the launch of the law society’s international division


Last week’s decision in the Royal Courts of Justice was not just a victory for legal aid practitioners and a vindication of our decision to launch the high-profile What Price Justice campaign. I hope that it also turns out to be a victory for access to justice that signals a change of approach by the Legal Services Commission (LSC) and the government – although that remains to be seen.



This was no victory on points: the decision was utterly and emphatically in our favour. Indeed, the judgment – which can be read in full on our website – was highly critical of the case put forward by the LSC.



Three times the Lord Chief Justice described the LSC’s attempt to be able unilaterally to change contracts at a whim as ‘extreme’, which is something we had argued for months. The immediate effect is that the LSC’s right unilaterally to amend the unified contract is severely restricted, if not totally removed.



Coming at a time when LSC Online – the online tool for practitioners to report their work in order to receive their remuneration – is, to quote the LSC, ‘closed indefinitely’, there can be no starker demonstration of the congenital problems in the reforms to legal aid.



The LSC’s initial reaction to the decision was not positive. In fact, to be more accurate, it was spinning, claiming not only that it welcomed the clarification that the judgment gave, but that it had ‘already anticipated this outcome’.



Such a waste of public resources is a slap in the face of the many legal aid practitioners who still face an uncertain future and are still waiting for their remuneration. Now that reality has overtaken rhetoric, the dizzy thinking must stop.



Where we go from here depends on the LSC and the government. From day one, we have stated that we want to work with them to find a consensus approach. The question is: can they?



We have received advice from counsel that the government has a clear obligation to ‘put right’ the effect of its unlawful action. The October changes must therefore be rescinded. We wait to see what action the LSC will take to address this and will advise practitioners accordingly.



International Division

It is not every day that we welcome 450 lawyers from around the world to Chancery Lane, but then again it is not every night we get to launch an International Division. The queues outside the building and the number of languages spoken under one roof were certainly a testament to the interest that this new and original venture has generated.



Our 19th century Common Room was transformed into one of the most modern venues imaginable. The international theme was reflected in the food and entertainment – from the fajitas, sushi, curry, and fish and chips to the Bollywood dancers and a couple doing the Tango – each reflecting an area of the world where the Law Society has been particularly active.



In the last two years, the number of our lawyers working overseas has more than doubled, and many more lawyers based in England and Wales are seeing national frontiers as opportunities, not barriers to business. The new division is about just that – opening eyes to new business opportunities and opening doors to new contacts.



In particular, by enabling solicitors to upload their details online, the website is a superb opportunity for individuals and firms to promote themselves right across the world. I also have no doubt the option of attending trade missions will appeal to those enthusiastic to capitalise on the many opportunities overseas.



The division also demonstrates how the new, representative Law Society is evolving, tailoring work for specific groups while continuing our broader work that cuts right across the profession.



Next up in the New Year is the launch of the Junior Lawyers Division. If the queue for that event is half as long as the one for the launch of the International Division, I know it will be a real success story too.



Paris Bar conference

Speaking of international matters, I spoke at the Paris Bar international conference recently and heard an interesting speech given by Christine Lagarde, the former managing partner of Baker & McKenzie who is now the French minister for finance. Her view was that self-regulation should not be a strait-jacket but should allow for innovation and new thinking.



It seems, however, that the new thinking we have embraced here in the UK with the Legal Services Act is a step too far for the French and for many of our continental neighbours.



I hope we have managed to convince them that the safeguards put in place in the Act provide a proper regulatory framework which balances excellent professional standards with the consumer interest. The fact is that the Legal Services Act has the proper checks and balances to guarantee our independence and provide a framework for the profession for a long time to come.



Andrew Holroyd is President of the Law Society