Doctrine of Part Performance in Transfer of property.pptx
Regulating education and training in a liberalised legal services market
1. Regulating education and training in a liberalised
legal services market:
The experience of England and Wales
Julian Webb
University of Warwick, UK
(Melbourne Law School,Aus
from August 2014)
ILECVI , London 2014
2. Market liberalisation rather than deregulation
Dual system of oversight and frontline regulation, with separation
of regulatory and representative functions
Complex regulatory system of multiple regulators with mix of
individual and entity regulation
facilitates a limited market in regulation (regulatory competition)
Evidence of a new ‘political and moral economy’ of professional
regulation
Increased significance of education and training
3. (1) In this Act a reference to “the regulatory objectives” is a reference
to the objectives of—
(a) protecting and promoting the public interest;
(b) supporting the constitutional principle of the rule of law;
(c) improving access to justice;
(d) protecting and promoting the interests of consumers;
(e) promoting competition in the provision of services within subsection
(2);
(f) encouraging an independent, strong, diverse and effective legal
profession;
(g) increasing public understanding of the citizen's legal rights and
duties;
(h) promoting and maintaining adherence to the professional principles.
4. Section 4 duty:
The [Legal Services] Board must assist in the
maintenance and development of standards
in relation to—
(a) the regulation by approved regulators of
persons authorised by them to carry on
activities which are reserved legal activities,
and
(b) the education and training of persons so
authorised.
5. Announced regulators’ review of
legal education and training
Legal education and training is
central to encouraging ‘an
independent, strong, diverse and
effective legal profession’.
“[Workforce development] is about
achieving a constant interplay
between practice and education, with
the two spheres in constant dialogue,
each driving improvement and
innovation in the other to the broader
public good.”
6. Joint project of BSB, IPS, SRA
Review of the regulation of E&T for the legal
services sector - so different and wider
First phase commenced in May 2011;
reported in June2013
Evidence-based approach
Implementation work ongoing (2017/18)
7. Tearing up
assumptions: in
the real world...
• Level of qualification
may be only weakly
correlated to
competence
• Less need for full-
service lawyers
• Relationship between
cost and quality of
service is NOT linear
• ‘Quality’ is more than
‘technical’
competence – soft
skills, systems, etc
Initial +
continuing
(active)
• Too much focus on
input , not enough
on outcomes and
outputs (eg
‘benefits’ approach
to CPD)
• Need for greater
consistency across
whole piece
What about
‘Competence+’
?
• Ok but not a
requirement – market
differentiation
• Activity based
authorisation?
• Re-accreditation?
8. No clear evidence that the
system is fundamentally
not ‘fit for purpose’
Need to build on strengths
and address some
weaknesses for the future
Overarching theme:
enhancing quality,
accessibility and flexibility
of the LSET system(s)
9. Outcomes-led system
‘Day one’ outcomes defined by reference to the knowledge, skills and attributes of a
competent practitioner
Increase consistency in assessment standards
Greater co-ordination and collaboration between regulators in setting standards
Redefinition of content will follow; Report highlights concerns in respect of professional ethics,
communication skills, management skills
Structures
Focusing CPD on learning, not just “hours” – move to more outputs-driven model
Supervised practice (such as the training contract) no longer determined by time-served
Flexibility – more opportunities to work and study in different configurations
Access and diversity: Supporting apprenticeships, set standards for internships and work
placements, standards/qualification scheme for paralegals
Voluntary regulation of paralegals outside regulated organisations
Better information
On diversity
On careers options, opportunities and risks
Greater coordination across system of information resources, research and development,
and evaluation04 February 2015 9
10. Opportunities:
Fits with regulatory direction of travel (and new political economy)
Better aligns the academic, vocational and continuing stages of LSET
Puts ethics and values more centre stage = remoralization of professional
regulation
Transforms ‘competence’ from a relatively static, passive concept, to one that is
active and continuing,
Supports the opening up of new, flexible, qualification pathways and careers
within the legal services sector.
Risks:
Liberalises /flexibilises too much
Further ‘bureaucratises’ learning
Creates divisions between first and second class pathways - increasing liminal
workforce, and
Creating new access problems without adequately resolving existing ones
Implementation: resources and mechanisms for change? Pony express or snail
mail?
Collaboration between regulators/regulators and others
11. “A resounding sentiment was that there needs to
be a permanent conversation about the future of
the profession – from broad and creative
imaginings of future business structures, to
assessing emerging technologies, to pedagogical
reform in the training of lawyers – to encourage
lawyers to innovate within their own practice
setting. More often than not, participants
affirmed that there should be space within the
CBA for these issues to be discussed on a more
regular basis.” (Canadian Bar Association,
2014:24)
...the fundamental tension between education of
lawyers as delivering public value and education of
lawyers as delivering private value is structural.
The tension may manifest itself in different ways
under different conditions, but it will always be
with us and must always be managed. Other
matters likely to continually give rise to stresses,
challenges, and the need for managing change
are: the economics of law schools; the rapid
evolution in the market for legal services; the
function and value of accreditation standards; the
financing of legal education; the role of parties
other than law schools in legal education; and the
role of media in understanding legal education and
communicating with the public.
Since these forces and factors will always be with
us, it is prudent for the system of legal education
to institutionalize the process of dealing with
them. All parties involved in legal education should
support a framework for the continual assessment
of strengths and weaknesses and of conditions
affecting legal education, and for fostering
continual improvement.The process should
ensure that not only law schools, but also
practicing lawyers, judges, and other interested
actors have a voice and an opportunity for
meaningful contribution.” (ABATask Force,
2014:29)
12. A. Sherr and S.Thomson, ‘Tesco Law andTesco Lawyers: Will Our Needs Change
If the Market Develops?’ Oñati Socio-Legal Series,Vol. 3, No. 3, 2013. Available at
SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2293660
H. Sommerlad et al (eds) The Futures of Legal Education and the Legal Profession
(Hart, 2014), forthcoming.
Special Issue: LawTeacher, vol. 48(1) (2014).
M.Thornton, Privatising the Public University:The Case of Law (Routledge, 2012)
J.Webb, ‘Regulating Lawyers in a Liberalized Legal Services Market:The Role of
Education andTraining’ (2013) 24(2) Stanford Law & Policy Review 533-70.
J.Webb, ‘The LETRs (Still) in the Post:The Legal Education andTraining Review
and the Reform of Legal Services Education andTraining – A Personal (Re)view in
Sommerlad et al (2014).
J.Webb,The New Moral Economy of Legal Services and the Moral Economic
Regulation of the Legal Profession in Australia and England (forthcoming).