How ‘Tesco law’ took a step nearer reality.
The Law Society Gazette, 24 June 2004
Legal help and triple Clubcard points at Tesco
‘Tesco law’ took a step closer to reality this week after the supermarket giant launched an on-line legal store offering shoppers the chance to buy self-help legal solutions alongside their groceries. Tesco has linked up with legal DIY publisher Lawpack to provide a range of DIY kits and forms covering 17 legal topics, such as accident claims, property and employment law ‘at great value prices’.
Lammy attacks City giants
Magic circle firms were defiant last week following Department for Constitutional Affairs minister David Lammy’s attack on the lack of black and ethnic minority partners at the largest City firms. A spokesman for Clifford Chance said it was committed to diversity through its involvement with the Afro-Caribbean diversity group and the Legal Diversity Forum.
22 June 1994
Prettys’ TV ad attraction
TV advertising by law firms has been tried only a few times in this county. But Ipswich firm Prettys is hoping to raise its profile with an innovative campaign which began on Anglia Television this month. The 30-second advertisement makes animated use of Prettys’ red seal logo which bumps, jumps and gyrates around the screen to the accompaniment of an authoritative-sounding male voice-over.
20 June 1984
Conveyancers Law School
‘Be a professional in a £1.2bn market’, advertises the Conveyancers Law School, who tells its readers that the government intends to remove the conveyancing monopoly and adds ‘become a non-solicitor lawyer by qualifying as a conveyancer’. Six months’ training begins with an intensive 14-day residential course at a polytechnic: fees are £1,725 plus VAT.
I wonder how many of our profession are involved in teaching the non-solicitor lawyer? (I prefer that title to ‘licensed conveyancer’!)
26 June 1974
Civility to prisoners from the bench
Surely even a member of (or prospective entrant to) the criminal class (after all only a human being – often underprivileged or otherwise thwarted by life) is entitled to basic human decency from another, even if the other is an exalted judge? Fundamental courtesy aside, a judge who wanders from the path of impartiality strikes at the very system he strives to maintain: what juryman doubts a charge when a judge appears against the defence as testy, caustic and sarcastic, albeit attired as a king’s clown?