The regulation of the legal market will be examined in England and Wales on November 5. The British Ministry of Justice supported a comprehensive review of the regulation of legal services. They will examine the limits of the supervised activity, the division of powers between the supervisory authorities and the impact of artificial intelligence and legal technology on the market. The reason was an independent report by Richard Lloyd, published in July. His conclusion is formulated quite harshly: the Legal Services Council (the body that oversees the legal market) has "lost its way" in recent years. It lacked strategic clarity and oversight by professional regulators did not adequately protect clients. The problems include failures of law firms, violations of professional ethics and an increase in the number of complaints. What is important to know The review refers to the very architecture of the market: what types of activities should be professionally supervised and how to regulate new technological legal services. Specific rule changes have not yet been approved. The immediate agenda includes a common approach to identifying risks, a clearer delineation of the responsibilities of the Ministry of Justice, LSB and professional regulators and reducing duplicative functions. It is planned to improve the current system now, without waiting for a major reform. The government's response anchors two principles: protecting consumers of legal services and maintaining regulatory independence from the state. Independence must be accompanied by clear responsibility for the results of the work. Lloyd proposed to prepare a new model by 2029 for later implementation. The government supported the substantive review, but explicitly stated that it was unable to guarantee this date yet due to the scope and complexity of the work. The full text of the government's response Molotnikov Anonymous.

The regulation of the legal market will be examined in England and Wales on November 5. The British Ministry of Justice supported a comprehensive review of the regulation of legal services. They will examine the limits of the supervised activity, the division of powers between the supervisory authorities and the impact of artificial intelligence and legal technology on the market. The reason was an independent report by Richard Lloyd, published in July. His conclusion is formulated quite harshly: the Legal Services Council (the body that oversees the legal market) has "lost its way" in recent years. It lacked strategic clarity and oversight by professional regulators did not adequately protect clients. The problems include failures of law firms, violations of professional ethics and an increase in the number of complaints. What is important to know The review refers to the very architecture of the market: what types of activities should be professionally supervised and how to regulate new technological legal services. Specific rule changes have not yet been approved. The immediate agenda includes a common approach to identifying risks, a clearer delineation of the responsibilities of the Ministry of Justice, LSB and professional regulators and reducing duplicative functions. It is planned to improve the current system now, without waiting for a major reform. The government's response anchors two principles: protecting consumers of legal services and maintaining regulatory independence from the state. Independence must be accompanied by clear responsibility for the results of the work. Lloyd proposed to prepare a new model by 2029 for later implementation. The government supported the substantive review, but explicitly stated that it was unable to guarantee this date yet due to the scope and complexity of the work. The full text of the government's response Molotnikov Anonymous.