Why is the legal profession still resistant to alternative business structures?

Why is it that after three years I am still surprised at the lack of awareness of alternative business structures? 

The Legal Services Act allowed non-lawyers to own and manage law firms. It allowed this chartered wealth manager and a barrister in 2021 to set up their own law firm. At times we have felt a bit like Anakin Skywalker walking into the Jedi Counsel to be granted a seat on the Jedi Master Council but without the title of Jedi Master. We are regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority but we are not a solicitors firm, instead we hold the title of ABS, a title that many in the profession struggle with, let alone the general public.

As an ABS we are virtually identical to a 'firm of solicitors' with the big exception that we are not owned by solicitors. Unfortunately we have found that even members of the judiciary can get confused about the status of an ABS and especially where we are also acting as counsel for a client.

In spite of the act being 17 years old the legal profession seems to have acted with glacial speed to recognise the changes. A classic example being that some court forms still have sections to be completed by a client’s solicitor, whilst the N434 is still titled: 'Notice of change of solicitor'. The associated Practice Direction Part 42 updated in 2023 also talks of solicitor rather than 'legal representative'. What about an ABS?

It is this entrenched artificial divide that leads to confusion regarding the fact that barristers can litigate and solicitors can advocate, and let us not forget that chartered executives can also do both.

The confusion has led to some amusing conversations that demonstrate the myths that exist around ABSs. We have had firms question the fact that we are authorised to litigate for clients or even sign certain documentation. Whilst one of our clients informed us that they were told by another firm that we did not have insurance as we were not a solicitors firm. One solicitor stated that a barrister was not allowed to supervise a solicitor.

There have been a number of instances where a judge asked 'but what chambers are you from?', even after receiving case summaries with firm details on it. Or have seemed bemused when referring to the firm as if not clear about it’s status. This was further complicated by the fact we were a virtual firm with everyone working remotely!

At first we felt as if we were doing something that was legal but not really the done thing but after dealing with our initial clients we realised, it’s ok to be different; indeed to quote Maya Angelou: 'If you’re always trying to be normal, you will never know how amazing you can be'. In fact the one group of people who have never seemed confused about our ABS is our clients. They want someone to help them with their legal problems, whether they are a business, a multi-millionaire or retired person wanting a will updating. They like the fact that they can go to one place that can see their matter through from start to finish, even if it includes court advocacy.

So this is not about the traditional views of the legal industry but instead about the opportunity for change. The opportunity to offer services that suit clients rather than trying to make clients fit an existing service. Not everyone welcomes change, it can be very tough for some, especially those that benefit from the status quo. Will we get things wrong, of course, this happens with innovation; but Kodak and Blockbuster’s show what happens if we try to ignore the world as it changes around us.

David Robinson is the director of Wildcat Law