The Legal Services Board has rejected a request from the Solicitors Regulation Authority to take greater direct control of its own board appointments.

In its latest consultation on legal services regulation, the umbrella body dilutes an earlier commitment toward a more discrete structure separating Chancery Lane and the solicitors’ regulator. The LSB will also require the regulatory boards of approved regulators to have a lay majority, while allowing flexibility on whether the chair is held by a lay person or a lawyer.

The ‘decision document’, titled ‘Internal governance and practising fee rules’, outlines measures to ensure that ‘the regulation of lawyers is carried out independently and in the public interest’.

‘Previously, draft rules and guidance suggested that regulatory arms should take control of the process for appointing regulatory boards,’ the document states. ‘After considering submissions, the LSB now considers that it is not essential for regulatory arms to have full control of all aspects of the appointments process. Where they do not have control, there must be compelling evidence that they have a strong voice in the process.’

Law Society chief executive Des Hudson commented: ‘We are concerned that the LSB has concluded that the regulatory board should have a lay majority. There is a risk that this may undermine the perception of an independent legal profession, particularly overseas.’

SRA chief executive Antony Townsend said: ‘We are pleased at the LSB’s emphasis on securing the independence and effective resourcing of regulatory bodies, and on the importance of non-lawyers in regulatory boards.