Standards of expertise are increasingly high on Law Society solicitor panels, which .

.

.SPECIALISTS ARE DISCONTENTED ABOUT RATES OF PAY.

NICOLA LAVER EXAMINES their VITAL servicesStandards of expertise are increasingly high on Law Society solicitor panels, which exist mainly to protect the public.

However, the question of whether their worth is being properly recognised by the government is up for debate in some quarters of the profession.There are at least ten Law Society panels and they were set up, at different stages, to enable the public to identify good service within the profession.The best-known panels are the children panel, the family law panel, the clinical negligence panel, the personal injury panel and the immigration panel; and membership of each can be as high as 4,000.Simmering disquiet within the family law panel, which has 3,500 members, has ended in a dispute with Lord Irvine, the Lord Chancellor.

All family lawyers doing publicly funded work, regardless of whether or not they are members of any panel, have been awarded an increase of 10% on their fees.

However, in addition, members of the Solicitors Family Law Association have been granted an uplift of 15% on amendments of their bills in all family matters; and memb ers of the children panel have been granted the same increase where their cases involve children.Members of the family law panel will receive the general 10% increase -- although, like all other lawyers carrying out publicly funded work they may request an uplift of 15%, and this will be considered on a discretionary basis.Marilyn Stowe, partner at Grahame Stowe Bateson and chief assessor of the family law panel, calls the pay level 'punitive to our members', adding: 'We have a very good panel and our standards are very high.

It's unusual for anyone who only meets the minimum criteria to be admitted.'The Legal Services Commission recognises membership of the family law panel to achieve supervisory status for those doing publicly funded work.

Ms Stowe asks: 'If someone is good enough to be a supervisor why shouldn't they have an enhancement?'Peter Watson-Lee, chairman of the Law Society's family law committee and partner with Christchurch firm Williams Thompson, is furious: 'The thing that annoys me totally is that the Lord Chancellor has decided to give a pay increase to a very small number of people.

I don't think he has really understood how hard it is to get on to our panel.'He adds that the lack of pay enhancement is a question of survival for many firms.It is accepted on both sides that the SFLA is a specialist panel for family law practice.

However, Mr Watson-Lee is concerned that if standards are too high it can become elitist.

He points out: 'The more provincial, rural firm has to do more than one area of law.

It can also be quite discriminating for women returning to work.' He is concerned to keep a balance and says it is better for the public as a whole to have a wider panel.Ms Stowe says: 'The government should be concentrating on ensuring that those doing publicly funded work attain a higher standard, rather than looking at specialists who -- because of the very nature of their work -- are highly unlikely to be doing much publicly funded work.'Rosemary Carter, chairman of the SFLA, maintains that there is a significant difference between the family law panel and the SFLA.

She says: 'The difference is in the standards.

Our core standard is higher than the requirements of the family law panel.

In addition to passing an open book examination in five core subjects, candidates have to submit satisfactory portfolios to prove expertise in at least two specialist areas.'Claire Jones, partner at Jones Goodall, Wakefield, may apply for leave for judicial review of the Lord Chancellor's decision if the proposals are implemented.

She says: 'It is a disgrace that the Law Society's own panel is being targeted as being second-rate.

The criteria for Community Legal Service franchising is either you're on the SFLA or on the Law Society's family panel, so if you qualify for either, you should be paid the same for publicly funded work.'The Law Society last week confirmed that it will create a second tier for its family panel members, in the hope that it would make them eligible for the enhanced vote.So, what is the primary purpose of these panels and how are the other ones remunerated?Pauline Lloyd, Partner at Thos Boyd Whyte, Bexleyheath, and chief assessor of the children panel, which has 2,000 members, says: 'The children panel exists to give specialised, accredited expert representation of parties to very complex and important proceedings relating to children.'She says that since implementation of the children panel in 1984, its standards remain extremely high, and she is pleased the Lord Chancellor has recognis ed the expertise of the members in the pay awards.Application to the panel is by an assessment, a questionnaire, and an interview demanding experience and expertise.

Furthermore, members have to undertake to the Law Society personally to represent their client throughout the case, including undertaking the advocacy (unless it is unreasonable to do so).Despite her pleasure at the pay award, Ms Lloyd has reservations about the future of applications for discretionary uplifted rates of pay at the end of a case.

She says it may be more difficult to obtain uplifted rates in the future, if enhanced rates are also received before such applications would usually be made.Paul McCarthy is the chief assessor of the clinical negligence panel, which numbers about 250, and was set up about five years ago.

Mr McCarthy says: 'It was set up to protect the public.

There were too many solicitors around who were dabbling.

We take the view that this panel is absolutely essential, so that the public have accredited solicitors to undertake work for them.' Panel members get no pay enhancement.

They may apply to the court, at the close of a case, for up to 100% uplift, but this has to be justified.The personal injury panel has a membership of around 3,000 and was also set up for the protection of the public.

Colin Simpson, a partner with Dunmow firm Holmes & Hills, is the chief assessor and says it ensures accessibility of good specialist PI lawyers to the public.

He adds: 'It has enhanced the quality of work through the years.'With legal aid now withdrawn from PI cases, remuneration is not an issue.

Accident Line used to require membership of the PIP before recommending lawyers, but this is no longer the case.Mr Simpson does not wish to see the PIP become more specialist.

He says: 'It's all very well having an expert in PI but if you can't get to see them it's not practical.

We have PI lawyers spread across the country and so far it's been successful.'Immigration lawyers have received a lot of bad press in recent years, and the immigration panel was set up to raise standards.

David Webb is the chief assessor and says lawyers do not have to be panel members to undertake immigration work, although he is aiming to obtain more public funding and obligatory panel membership as long-term goals.Panel membership is vigorous and requires at least three years' experience and at least 350 hours of chargeable hours of immigration practice in each of those years.

Publicly funded work is not paid at an enhanced rate, but Mr Webb says: 'We are pressing for this to reflect the standard required.'Specialist lawyers across the board are understandably keen to see their expertise reflected in their rates of pay.

With more niche practice areas emerging, most lawyers will one day have to increasingly specialise.

In the meantime, Lord Irvine clearly has a case to answer.