From the large window-paned offices of law firm Warner Cranston there is a view over the Thames of the Temple and the City of London.

Packed with lawyers, both, but separated by a historical and traditional divide which until recently never looked like being breached.That was before the opportunities offered by the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990, legislation which the 16-partner Pickfords Wharf firm has latched on to with gusto.

A few other firms, they say, have used the Act to create in-house 'advocacy departments'.

They, on the other hand, are taking advantage of the law to 'change the whole culture of litigation' at the firm.From last week, Michael Jones - a barrister of some 20 years' standing - was officially made a partner at Warner Cranston.

He is being brought on board, according to Michael Cranston, a founding partner at the 16-year-old firm, to act as supervisor and motivator, overseeing all aspects of the firm's litigation services.Essentially, that translates into weaning solicitors away from the Bar.

From now on, Warner Cranston lawyers will be encouraged to take complete and total control of their cases, from initial brief to the courtroom if necessary.

Hiding behind the skirts of counsel will no longer be allowed.Explains Mr Cranston: 'We are endeavouring - by means of importing people and then using those people to train us - to capture that part of the work which has traditionally been dealt with by the Bar.

That isn't just appearing in court as an advocate.

The Bar does all kinds of things from opinions before writs of issue, drafting pleadings, drafting letters and affidavits.

Solicitors have grown comfortable with that and left it to the Bar.

That's what we are trying to bring into the one-stop shop as well as the advocacy.'It is a move primarily born out of a growing dissatisfaction with the Bar's services.

'I have never been a believer with blind faith in the Bar,' says Mr Cranston.

'We've had too many let downs, too many disappointments, too many rows.'Until this autumn, Michael Jones was at 1 Essex Court in the Temple.

He maintains that he and Mr Cranston had been discussing the future of the profession for the last decade with an eye towards some sort of fusion.The 1990 legislation reignited their interest and when solicitors were given higher court advocacy rights in England and Wales earlier this year, Mr Jones jumped.

He acquired a practising certificate three weeks ago and is now awaiting formal approval of his High Court advocate's certificate.But both Mr Jones and Mr Cranston are adamant that they are not creating an 'advocacy department' at the firm simply by 'bolting on a barrister'.

Instead, says Mr Jones, 'we are providing an integrated service - a fused service - so that a particular practitioner who is responsible for the case will be responsible from the first telephone call to the appearance in court.

It is not the recreation of barrister-solicitor functions in the guise of the litigation man and the advocacy man within the firm.'In practice, Warner Cranston will - overseen by Mr Jones - plead its own cases, take its own affidavits and witness statements and write its own skeleton arguments.

It is intended that hearings will be grouped together so that Mr Jones can oversee them and monitor which lawyers are getting more advocacy experience.Mr Cranston says: 'We want every lawyer in the firm to stop and think: "I can do this myself.

I am not going to pick up the phone to counsel." And if they get stuck they can go to Michael Jones.'According to Mr Jones, the new ethos will be ideally suited to the standard 'rank-and-file, half-million pound, commercial civil litigation' case that is the meat and drink of many City law firms.

And, sooner or later, he reckons, more law firms will adopt the technique out of commercial necessity.

'For the major cases, sure, get yourself seven or eight barristers and 14 solicitors and make a real meal of it.

But those cases don't come around that often.'Former colleagues at the Temple, says Mr Jones, 'think I'm barking mad to have left.

But this was too stimulating an idea to miss out on.'