The Solicitors Regulation Authority ‘lacks the sufficient skills, understanding and flexibility to effectively regulate all parts of the profession’, the Law Society has told the independent review of legal regulation, which Chancery Lane commissioned.

In its submission to Lord Hunt’s review, Chancery Lane says sole practitioners and corporate firms in particular lack sufficient regulatory oversight, and raises the possibility that each might need their own ­tailored regime.

The Society says it is concerned about a lack of communication between the SRA and the profession. It warns that firms adopting alternative business structures might be able to pick their regulator, which in turn might encourage regulators to create less restrictive rules and thereby undermine the profession.

The submission also criticises legal education as ‘divorced from legal practice in a way that is damaging to the profession’.

It expresses concerns over the state of academic law degrees, the legal practice course and continuing professional development, and questions the degree to which the SRA has safeguarded the quality of the system.

The Society said the SRA exercises ‘very little control’ over university education, with the result that the quality of degrees varies ‘enormously’, and leads to employers making judgements based on the quality of universities rather than degree results. The Society also said the SRA should take a ‘keener interest’ in the standards of the LPC.

Regulation of CPD is insufficient to ensure the scheme is effective, the Society says it proposes that those who go on to become principals in law firms should receive special management training, as is already the case in Scotland.

Work on the SRA’s submission to the review is understood to be ongoing.

Hunt is scheduled to provide an initial response to submissions later this spring. This will be followed by a secondary consultation period, before his final report is presented in the autumn.