Top City firms called for the Law Society's regulatory and representative functions to be separated and ring-fenced this week, but fell short of calling for the Society to be stripped of its dual role.

In a draft response to the Clementi review consultation, the City of London Law Society (CLLS) said only model B+ (see [2004] Gazette, 20 May, page 1) would improve the promotion of public and consumer interest, while keeping strong professional input into the regulatory standards and rules.

It rejected model A, arguing that such a move would risk the independence of the profession.

CLLS chairman David Wyld said: 'We will probably recommend model B+, which achieves separation of regulation from the "trade union" people.

But it will depend on how it is done - it should not be too heavily regulated from above.'

The CLLS submission said the separation could be achieved within a single professional body, so long as regulatory decisions could not be influenced by the representation side.

Clifford Chance director of public policy Hilary Plattern said: 'We are likely to recommend the model B+, but it needs to have change at its heart and not be a fudged separation.

The separation could be achieved by ring-fencing, with the Law Society doing everything but being very clear in its own mind where the separation is internally.'

Herbert Smith partner David Willis said he favoured the B+ model because it is important to retain profession-led regulation.

He added: 'If the Law Society Council is restructured, with some of the council seats to which representational groups have an entrenched right swept away, then there may be potential for greater influence for those acting for commercial clients.'

Rachel Rothwell