Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Kingsland (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 6 February 2007. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Legal Services Bill [HL].


Legal Services Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 108DB: 108DB: Clause 88, page 50, line 9, leave out ““an employee or”” and insert ““a”” The noble Lord said: This amendment was rightly provoked by the City of London Law Society. Its purpose is to avoid imposing professional duties, which are statutory, on non-professional members of staff. Briefly, Clause 88 imposes an obligation on non-authorised employees of an ABS to refrain from doing anything that contributes to a breach of professional duties of an authorised person. So, for example, a secretary who types and sends correspondence on the wrong letterhead could be directly and personally liable for a breach of professional rules even though he or she had not had the benefit of professional training and nor would he or she hold a professional qualification. Therefore, there is a justifiable perception that that is unfair. Professional duties should not be extended on a statutory basis to non-professional members of staff. It is also perhaps unnecessary, to the extent that solicitors are already responsible for breaches of professional duty caused by their members of staff. I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
689 c651 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Legal profession Licensing Exemptions Misconduct Pilot schemes Northern Ireland Patents Scotland Regulation Trade unions Solicitors Trade marks Legal Services Board Sunset clauses
Legislation
Legal Services Bill (HL) 2006-07
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk