Lord Woolf backs Societys dual role as body with union and regulatory powersCOUNCIL: vital that voice of lawyers continued to be heard in period of extraordinary changeThe Lord Chief Justice, Lord Woolf, last week supported the Law Societys dual role as a trade union for solicitors and as the regulator of...The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Woolf, last week supported the Law Societys dual role as a trade union for solicitors and as the regulator of the profession, saying it was of benefit to lawyers and the public.

Speaking to the Law Societys Council, Lord Woolf said it would be very sad indeed if the Society became just a trade union.

The fact [the Law Society] is also a regulatory body means its voice is heard in matters such as reform in a wholly different way than if it was just a pressure group, he said.

Expressing his own struggle to keep up to date with what he described as a period of extraordinary change, he said there was a danger of those involved in the civil and criminal justice fields becoming punch drunk because of the rapidity with which developments were emerging.

However, Lord Woolf said with greater changes still in store, it was vital that the voice of lawyers continued to be heard.

As the first port of call for the man in a small town receiving justice, it was important to have a healthy legal profession and a healthy Law Society and Bar, he said.

Lord Woolf also confirmed that there would be a move away from smaller courts towards large, properly equipped centres dealing with serious and heavy litigation.

However, he said it was vital to ensure balance and that justice was accessible.

With the increased availability and improved use of IT, the use of satellite offices where judges could sit in less formal surroundings with documents being transported electronically was a real possibility for the future, he said.

Speaking in the wake of the Office of Fair Tradings report (see [2001] Gazette, 15 March, 1), Lord Woolf confirmed that he was in favour of a split profession where the Bar earned its independence through the quality and cost of its advice and not through restrictive practices.

He also expressed support for multi-disciplinary practices which he said could help sole practitioners as much as larger firms.

Sue Allen