The Legal Services Bill has been passed by the Scottish Parliament. The Bill removes restrictions on solicitors entering into business relationships with non-solicitors, allowing investment by non-solicitors and external ownership. The Bill will also create a regulatory framework in which the new types of business will operate.
The legislation will for the first time allow non-solicitors to set up in partnership with solicitors to provide legal services in Scotland. The Bill, as passed, will mean solicitors and other regulated professionals must still have a majority share of at least 51% in any new legal services business, with the remaining 49% open to other external investors.
Amendments brought forward during the committee stage of the Bill, meant the ‘Tesco law’ option, which would have allowed 100% of non-solicitor ownership of a law firm, was ruled out for Scotland.
The bill can be viewed here-
www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/bills/30-l...es/b30as3-stage2.pdf
However, not all think this is necessarily the right move, a Council member of the Scottish Law Agents Society (and a practising solicitor) has written this open letter -
"Colleagues
I watched part of the debate from the Holyrood TV on my computer. Naturally I am disappointed at the result. I offer some observations of my own –
There were a great deal of self congratulatory comments by the MSPs among themselves and made to the Law Society of Scotland (LSS) (which strangely made me feeling a trifle queasy) at a Parliament clearly relieved to believe they have rid themselves of any further hassle from this Bill.
Ownership and control now feature as a direct result of our campaign. 49% maximum external ownership is better than 100% external except that it can be 100% if these owners are other regulated professionals. This is not well understood generally.
Of course the really hard work is still before them with the SIs to make the Act work and I suspect a lot of SLAS points will come back to haunt them. The devil is in the detail.
It will now be even more acutely embarrassing for the Scottish Government and Scottish Parliament if the Advocate General (AG) rules the Bill does not comply with the Scotland Act. We suggested helpfully to MSPs to take legal advice before Stage 3. They have ignored the friendly warning.
It is absolutely clear the Parliament would not have supported the Bill if England had not passed their Act. Does that mean they accept our arguments of principle? It seems only economic arguments are important in their decision. However they also made clear that they proceeded only because the LSS indicated they wanted it.
If the Advocate General rules the Bill does not comply with the Scotland Act I wonder if MSPs will be so lavish in their praise of LSS.
The EU challenge is more of a problem for the AG as if he rules the Bill is not compliant I think it means the English version is too. He will be tempted I am sure not to rule this point in favour of those lodging the challenge. However the stakes are high. If he certifies the Bill as compliant and the ECJ later decide the Scottish Bill or Act (and the English Act) a breach of the European Services Directive at some point might it mean that all the LPs (formerly LLSPs) have no legal basis and cannot continue? What a mess that would be.
So cheer up SLAS colleagues, members and supporters and enjoy this show. It is likely to be entertaining!"
