Dictating ethics is always a delicate business.

The moralities of just two people can vary widely so problems of setting down rules of conduct for a profession of 70,000 are magnified intensely.Ipswich-based solicitor Sam Wilson has recently inherited the task of overseeing the Law Society's position on ethics.

As the new chairman of the standards and guidance (S&G) committee, he is deeply involved in, among other things, determining policy on publicity, client care, referrals and multi-disciplinary partnerships (MDPs).

A melting pot of hot topics.However, the first message he wants to convey as S&G chairman is this: contrary to the popular perception, Chancery Lane is sincere in its efforts to reduce the burden of regulation on solicitors.

But it is not an easy task.

Telling solicitors what they may do is one thing.

Telling them what they may do but adding restrictions inevitably means regulations.

As he explains, 'the difficulty is that it is easy to say you shan't do something, but it is more difficult to say you may do something but you've got to comply with these regulations'.

As an example of this conundrum, Mr Wilson points to the situation regarding solicitor advertising.

When the rules were liberalised riders were attached, essentially because the move came as 'such a culture shock to the profession'.Currently, Mr Wilson envisages three main areas for his committee's attention.

They cover the way in which solicitors attract work, the business entities through which solicitors may offer their services and the standards of care solicitors should offer their clients.

In other words, these areas translate to a review of the publicity code and the introduction and referral code; a fresh study of the thorny issues surrounding MDPs and a look to see how the client care measure, practice rule 15, could be strengthened.Work has already begun on all three areas.

A consultation paper has recently gone to the profession asking for views on referrals.

Explains Mr Wilson: 'We are primarily concerned about the distinction between payments for referrals and paying for the administrative charges of those who organise and promote solicitors' services.

There is a fine line between an administrative charge and a payment for referral.

It is specifically a matter of concern for those solicitors providing financial services because they will be in competition with others who have no problems making payments for referrals.'Discussion of MDPs is also back on the S&G agenda.

A steering group met for the first time last month and it is expected to report by April (see below).

The committee is also considering how it can drive home even further the importance of giving advance cost information.

A paper is scheduled to go to the Society's Council this spring, but no firm decisions have been taken yet.

However, Mr Wilson predicts a need for some action.

'There are still far too many complaints going to the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors that are based on solicitors not giving clients information on costs up front.

We must get it into solicitors' minds not to charge by ambush.

Solicitors are beginning to understand that they have a much better chance of having a good relationship with a client and not having an argument about costs if they give the best possible information right from the beginning -- not simply an hourly rate but a pretty good estimate of what the case is going to cost.'-- MDPS: TOUGH CHOICES AHEADThe concept of partnership is at the heart of legal practice so it comes as no surprise to find that the prospect of multi-disciplinary partnerships (MDPs) is causing considerable debate.Last month, a steering group -- set up by the Law Society's standards and guidance (S&G) committee -- had its first meeting in an effort to provide the Council with a view on whether MDPs should be permitted.

During the next few months the steering group will assess the mood amongst accountants and other professionals who might want to join in partnership with solicitors.The exercise could not be more timely.

Council members last had a major review of MDPs in the late eighties when they decided against lifting the ban.

But since then, Labour party frontbenchers have not disguised their enthusiasm for MDPs, and have pledged to sweep away existing restrictions once in power.There are essentially three issues facing the steering group.

First, it has to decide whether to recommend to the Council that MDPs should, in principle, no longer be prohibited by the Society.

If that ideological hurdle is cleared, the Council will then have to study whether MDPs could be permitted through the existing Solicitors Act or whether fresh primary legislation would be required.Finally, once a legislative framework had been decided, the Council would have to assess with which other professions solicitors should be allowed to join in partnership, and, most importantly, under whose regulatory control those partnerships would fall and how the partnerships would be indemnified.

For example, one of the thorniest issues to be considered is whether it would be acceptable for solicitors to be the minority members of an MDP.

Likewise, it would have to be asked whether an MDP primarily carrying out a certain type of work, say litigation, would be required to fall under the control of solicitors.An adjunct to the question of who would make a suitable partner for a solicitor is the issue of direct client contact.

In other words, should partnership be limited only to those who do client work, such as accountants, estate agents, surveyors, financial advisers and patent agents? Or should those without direct client contact, but who still play a vital role in the firm -- such as the practice manager and in-house accountant -- also be allowed to join the partnership?Potentially even more controversial is the possibilit y of forming a partnership with those who provide nothing more to the firm but risk capital -- investors who simply stump up money and play no other role.