Jonathan Ames meets Carol Williams, recently appointed head of the Law Society's Commerce & Industry Group, to discuss the changing perception of in-house lawyers and their role in an inevitable legal revolution

In-house lawyers have been coming of age for some time.

The condescending approach of private practice solicitors - which for years viewed in-house lawyers as second-class practitioners - has been all but eradicated.

This is especially so in commerce and industry, where in-house lawyers wield large annual legal budgets from which their private practice counterparts would be delighted to benefit.

Working in-house is also increasingly newsworthy.

Recent corporate scandals in the US have emphasised the importance of the role of corporate counsel - employed by one client, but still independent and (at least in theory) owing a higher duty to the court and the administration of justice.

Specifically in England and Wales, in-house lawyers could soon find themselves at the centre of a revolution in the delivery of legal services.

If the Law Society Council amends practice rule 4 and rolls back the prohibition on employed solicitors offering legal advice direct to the public, then lawyers working from supermarkets and shopping centres around the country could become the most visible face of the legal profession.

And it appears entirely possible that the forthcoming Clementi review of legal services will make just that recommendation.

It is against this intriguing backdrop that Carol Williams - the solicitor head of legal at Hull-based Northern Foods - recently took the chairmanship of the Law Society's Commerce & Industry Group.

Indeed, Ms Williams has witnessed the evolution of in-house lawyers at first hand.

She qualified in 1985 and went into private practice, focusing on general litigation at what was then Booth & Co in Leeds.

She stayed for a few years before realising that her progression prospects were limited.

'At that time in Leeds,' Ms Williams recalls, 'there were only six female partners in the city.

As a woman, you had a better chance of progressing in industry than you did in private practice.' So she moved in-house - first to Asda and then to Northern Foods in 1990.

Ms Williams became active in the Commerce & Industry Group about seven years ago.

As for her agenda for the forthcoming year, she is well aware that the next 12 months will see the beginnings of potentially massive change for the profession and for her in-house membership.

For example, reform of practice rule 4 she sees as an inevitability.

'It is going to happen whether we want it or not,' Ms Williams predicts.

'On that basis we should embrace the change.

'It will bring about a huge change and shake-up in the profession.

You will get the big supermarkets entering the field, and once one or two get in there, the others will have no choice but to follow.

It won't happen immediately, but if you are looking between five to ten years ahead, then I think the whole structure of the legal profession will have changed.

I don't necessarily think that is a bad thing, but we do have to approach it cautiously.'

That caution should be focused on two main areas, she says - protection of the public and an awareness of the affects on smaller high street private practitioners.

'It all depends on the proper safeguards for the public being in place.

That is of primary importance.

Then there is a danger that the smaller solicitors' firms will find it extremely difficult to compete.

Indeed, they could be driven out of business.

'But from another perspective it could bring about greater access to the law for the public.

Rather than having to visit a solicitors' office - which can be intimidating to people - an office in a supermarket might be less intimidating.'

Another area of major concern is the position of in-house lawyers in relation to the European Commission.

The EC does not afford the same rights of legal professional privilege to in-house lawyers as it does to those in private practice.

As Ms Williams explains: 'If you get a dawn raid from the European Commission it can have an impact on the in-house UK lawyer because the EC does not take the view that professional privilege attaches to the documents that they find.

I feel quite strongly that we should be treated no differently than an external lawyer.

Provided you maintain your independence and professionalism, then you are no different.

'However, my understanding of the position in Europe is that the parliament is extremely reluctant.

I don't know why Euro MPs are so wary in relation to liberalising the rules.

I would want the Law Society in this country to take a pro-active stance in support of our view.'

Ms Williams is also adamant that in-house lawyers have to take a strong line with their employers in relation to matters of corporate responsibility and probity.

'If I lose my practising certificate because I have been in breach of the professional rules, then I don't have a career.

If I have a row with my employer about my status and my independence, I can always go to another job with my PC and my morals intact.'

The new chairwoman is also preparing to engage in lively debate with the Law Society over in-house lawyer contributions to the cost of practice and the regulation of the profession.

'If you looked back over ten years, I'll bet you would find there has not been one claim on the compensation fund by an in-house lawyer or from an employer of an in-house lawyer.

On that basis, why should in-house lawyers contribute at the level that we do? In effect, we are bailing out private practice.

I would like to see a breakdown of claims on the fund in terms of sole practitioners, large firms and in-house lawyers, and see where we stand in relation.'

With the coming of age of in-house lawyers, then, has come a new-found confidence and strength of opinion.

Far from being second-class professionals, commerce and industry solicitors are committed to being at the forefront of a reformed profession.