Skip to main content

Legal Services Bill [HL]

Volume 691: debated on Tuesday 8 May 2007

Further consideration of amendments on Report resumed on Schedule 16.

[Amendment No. 446ZA not moved.]

446A: Schedule 16, page 226, line 21, at end insert “or other financial institutions”

447: Schedule 16, page 227, line 4, at end insert—

“( ) In subsection (2), omit from “and the rules” to the end.”

448: Schedule 16, page 227, line 9, leave out from “of” to end of line 10 and insert “—

(a) the solicitor’s clients, other persons or trusts, generally, or(b) that client, person or trust, separately.””

448A: Schedule 16, page 227, line 41, after first “solicitor” insert “, or an account of another person,”

448B: Schedule 16, page 228, line 4, at end insert “or an account of another person”

448C: Schedule 16, page 228, line 10, leave out paragraph 33 and insert—

“ For section 36 (compensation fund) substitute—

“36 Compensation grants

(1) The Society may make rules concerning the grant of compensation by the Society in respect of loss that a person has suffered, or is likely to suffer, as a result of—

(a) an act or omission of a solicitor or former solicitor;(b) an act or omission of an employee or former employee of a solicitor or former solicitor;(c) the exercise by the Society of any of its powers under Part 2 of Schedule 1. (2) The rules may (among other things) make provision—

(a) as to the circumstances in which such grants may and may not be made;(b) as to the form and manner in which a compensation claim is to be made;(c) as to the procedure for determining compensation claims;(d) for the making of grants in respect of a compensation claim before it is finally determined;(e) for a grant to be made by way of loan in such circumstances and on such terms as may be prescribed in, or determined in accordance with, the rules;(f) for a grant to be made by way of making good a deficiency in monies held in trust by the Society under paragraph 6 or 6A of Schedule 1;(g) as to the minimum and maximum grants payable in respect of a compensation claim (or a claim of a prescribed description);(h) for the Society to be subrogated, to such extent as may be prescribed, to any rights and remedies of a person to whom a grant is made in relation to the loss in respect of which the grant is made.(3) The circumstances which may be prescribed by virtue of subsection (2)(a) include in particular—

(a) the nature of the loss;(b) in a case within subsection (1)(a) or (b), the nature of the act or omission.(4) For the purposes of subsection (2)(f), there is a deficiency if the monies mentioned in that subsection are insufficient to satisfy the claims of all persons with a beneficial interest in the monies.

(5) The Society may prepare and publish guidance as to the criteria it will apply in deciding whether to make a grant in respect of a compensation claim, or any part of a compensation claim.

(6) Where the Society decides—

(a) not to make a grant in respect of a compensation claim or any part of a compensation claim, or(b) to make a grant of less than the amount claimed,it must give reasons for its decision.(7) Rules under subsection (1) which are not regulatory arrangements within the meaning of the Legal Services Act 2007 are to be treated as such arrangements for the purposes of that Act.

(8) In this section—

“compensation claim” means a claim for the Society to make a grant of the kind mentioned in subsection (1);“prescribed” means prescribed in rules under subsection (1).36A Compensation funds

(1) Compensation rules may require or authorise the Society to establish or maintain a fund or funds (“compensation funds”) for the purpose of making grants in respect of compensation claims.

(2) Compensation rules may require solicitors, or solicitors of a description prescribed in the rules, to make contributions to compensation funds of such amounts, at such times and in such circumstances, as may be prescribed in or determined in accordance with the rules.

(3) Any amount payable by virtue of such a requirement may be recovered as a debt due to the Society.

(4) Subsection (2) does not apply to a solicitor who is a Crown Prosecutor.

(5) The Society may invest any money which forms part of a compensation fund in any investments in which trustees may invest under the general power of investment in section 3 of the Trustee Act 2000 (as restricted by sections 4 and 5 of that Act).

(6) The Society may insure with authorised insurers, in relation to compensation funds, for such purposes and on such terms as it considers appropriate.

(7) The Society may, in such circumstances and subject to such conditions as may be prescribed in or determined in accordance with compensation rules—

(a) borrow for the purposes of a compensation fund;(b) charge investments which form part of a compensation fund as security for borrowing by the Society for the purposes of that fund.(8) A compensation fund may be applied by the Society for the purposes mentioned in subsection (9) (in addition to the making of grants in respect of compensation claims).

(9) The purposes are—

(a) payment of premiums on insurance policies effected under subsection (6);(b) repayment of money borrowed by the Society for the purposes of the fund and payment of interest on any money so borrowed;(c) payment of any other costs, charges or expenses incurred by the Society in establishing, maintaining, protecting administering or applying the fund;(d) payment of any costs, charges or expenses incurred by the Society in exercising its powers under Part 2 of Schedule 1;(e) payment of any costs or damages incurred by the Society, its employees or agents as a result of proceedings against it or them for any act or omission of its or theirs in good faith and in the exercise or purported exercise of such powers.(10) In this section—

“compensation claim” has the same meaning as in section 36;“compensation fund” has the meaning given by subsection (1);“compensation rules” means rules under section 36(1).””

449: Schedule 16, page 229, line 18, after “(4A)” insert—

“In relation to an appeal under subsection (3) the High Court may make such order as it thinks fit as to payment of costs.

(4B) ”

450: Schedule 16, page 229, line 25, leave out “or a registered European lawyer”

451: Schedule 16, page 229, line 31, leave out “or registered European lawyer”

452: Schedule 16, page 229, leave out lines 44 and 45

453: Schedule 16, page 229, line 47, leave out “or registered European lawyer”

454: Schedule 16, page 230, leave out lines 6 to 13

455: Schedule 16, page 230, line 17, leave out “or registered European lawyer”

456: Schedule 16, page 230, line 19, leave out “or registered European lawyer”

457: Schedule 16, page 230, line 27, after “body” insert “or manager or employee of such a body”

458: Schedule 16, page 230, line 35, at end insert—

“(2A) The Society may make regulations prescribing charges to be paid to the Society by persons who are the subject of an investigation by the Society as to whether there are grounds for the Society—

(a) to make an order under subsection (2), or(b) to make an application to the Tribunal for it to make such an order.(2B) Regulations under subsection (2A) may—

(a) make different provision for different cases or purposes;(b) provide for the whole or part of a charge payable under the regulations to be repaid in such circumstances as may be prescribed by the regulations.(2C) Any charge which a person is required to pay under regulations under subsection (2A) is recoverable by the Society as a debt due to the Society from the person.””

459: Schedule 16, page 230, line 41, leave out from “body” to end of line 48 and insert “has the same meaning as it has in relation to a body in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see section 197 of that Act);”

460: Schedule 16, page 231, leave out lines 3 to 6

461: Schedule 16, page 231, line 13, leave out “paragraph” and insert “section”

462: Schedule 16, page 231, line 14, leave out “section 71 of the Legal Services Act 2007” and insert “Part 5 of the Legal Services Act 2007 (see sections 71 and 107 of that Act)”

463: Schedule 16, page 231, line 16, leave out paragraph (a) and insert—

“(a) for subsection (1) substitute—“(1) It is an offence for a person in respect of whom there is in force an order under section 43(2) which contains provision within section 43(2)(a)—(a) to seek or accept any employment or remuneration from a solicitor in connection with the practice carried on by that solicitor, without previously informing the solicitor of the order;(b) to seek or accept any employment or remuneration from a recognised body, or a manager or employee of a recognised body, in connection with that body’s business, without previously informing the body, or manager or employee, of the order.(1A) It is an offence for a person in respect of whom there is in force an order under section 43(2) which contains provision within section 43(2)(b) to seek or accept a position as a manager of a recognised body, without previously informing that body of the order.(1B) It is an offence for a person in respect of whom there is in force an order under section 43(2) which contains provision within section 43(2)(c) to seek or accept an interest in a recognised body from any person, without previously informing that person and (if different) the recognised body of the order.(1C) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1), (1A) or (1B) is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.”,”

464: Schedule 16, page 231, line 28, leave out from “section” to end of line 29 and insert “—

“manager” has the same meaning as in section 43;

“recognised body” means a body recognised under section 9 of the Administration of Justice Act 1985;

and for the purposes of subsection (1B) a person seeks or accepts an interest in a recognised body if the person seeks or accepts an interest which if it were obtained by the person would result in the person having an interest in shares in that body within the meaning of Part 5 of the Legal Services Act 2007 (see sections 71 and 107 of that Act).””

465: Schedule 16, page 231, line 33, at end insert “, and

(d) after “possession” insert “or under the control”.”

466: Schedule 16, page 232, line 1, leave out “fee” and insert “charge”

467: Schedule 16, page 232, line 4, leave out “fee” and insert “charge”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 467A not moved.]

468: Schedule 16, page 232, line 11, at end insert—

“( ) After that subsection insert—

“(5A) The Tribunal may do anything calculated to facilitate, or incidental or conducive to, the carrying out of any of its functions.””

469: Schedule 16, page 232, line 43, after “£5,000”,” insert—

“( ) after subsection (3A) insert—“(3B) For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this section permits the Tribunal to make an order requiring redress to be made in respect of any act or omission of any person.””

470: Schedule 16, page 233, line 1, at end insert—

“ In section 48 (orders of Tribunal), in subsection (3) for “Subject to section 43(5), any” substitute “Any”.”

471: Schedule 16, page 233, line 3, at end insert—

“( ) In subsection (2), after “(3)” insert “and to section 43(5) of the Administration of Justice Act 1985”.

( ) In subsection (3) for “legal aid work (within the meaning of that section)” substitute “providing representation funded by the Legal Services Commission as part of the Criminal Defence Service”.”

472: Schedule 16, page 234, line 1, leave out sub-paragraph (2) and insert—

“(2) In subsection (1)—

(a) in paragraph (a) for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”,(b) after paragraph (d) insert—“(da) a member of the Legal Services Board nominated by that Board;”, and(c) in paragraph (e) for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”.”

473: Schedule 16, page 234, line 4, leave out from “for” to end of line 5 and insert ““(the Secretary of State” to “think fit” substitute “(the Lord Chancellor being one), may make general orders prescribing the general principles to be applied when determining”.”

474: Schedule 16, page 234, line 6, after “(3)” insert “—

(a) for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”, and(b) ”

474A: Schedule 16, page 234, line 30, at end insert “, and

( ) for subsection (5) substitute—“(5) A provision in a contentious business agreement that the solicitor shall not be liable for negligence shall be void if the client is a natural person who, in entering that agreement, is acting for purposes which are outside his trade, business or profession.(6) A provision in a contentious business agreement that the solicitor shall be relieved from any responsibility to which he would otherwise be subject as a solicitor shall be void.””

474B: Schedule 16, page 235, line 26, leave out paragraph 58 and insert—

“58 (1) Section 69 (action to recover solicitor’s costs) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (1) for “taxed” substitute “assessed”.

(3) For subsection (2) substitute—

“(2) The requirements referred to in subsection (1) are that the bill must be—

(a) signed in accordance with subsection (2A), and(b) delivered in accordance with subsection (2C).(2A) A bill is signed in accordance with this subsection if it is—

(a) signed by the solicitor or on his behalf by an employee of the solicitor authorised by him to sign, or (b) enclosed in, or accompanied by, a letter which is signed as mentioned in paragraph (a) and refers to the bill.(2B) For the purposes of subsection (2A) the signature may be an electronic signature.

(2C) A bill is delivered in accordance with this subsection if—

(a) it is delivered to the party to be charged with the bill personally,(b) it is delivered to that party by being sent to him by post to, or left for him at, his place of business, dwelling-house or last known place of abode, or(c) it is delivered to that party—(i) by means of an electronic communications network, or(ii) by other means but in a form that nevertheless requires the use of apparatus by the recipient to render it intelligible,and that party has indicated to the person making the delivery his willingness to accept delivery of a bill sent in the form and manner used.(2D) An indication to any person for the purposes of subsection (2C)(c)—

(a) must state the address to be used and must be accompanied by such other information as that person requires for the making of the delivery;(b) may be modified or withdrawn at any time by a notice given to that person.(2E) Where a bill is proved to have been delivered in compliance with the requirements of subsections (2A) and (2C), it is not necessary in the first instance for the solicitor to prove the contents of the bill and it is to be presumed, until the contrary is shown, to be a bill bona fide complying with this Act.

(2F) A bill which is delivered as mentioned in subsection (2C)(c) is to be treated as having been delivered on the first working day after the day on which it was sent (unless the contrary is proved).”

(4) At the end insert—

“(5) In this section references to an electronic signature are to be read in accordance with section 7(2) of the Electronic Communications Act 2000 (c. 7).

(6) In this section—

“electronic communications network” has the same meaning as in the Communications Act 2003 (c. 21);“working day” means a day other than a Saturday, a Sunday, Christmas Day, Good Friday or a bank holiday in England and Wales under the Banking and Financial Dealings Act 1971 (c. 80).””

475: Schedule 16, page 237, line 18, after “committee,” insert—

“( ) a body corporate which is established for the purpose of providing services to the Council (or any committee of the Council) and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Society,”

476: Schedule 16, page 237, leave out lines 21 to 23

477: Schedule 16, page 237, line 27, after “committee,” insert—

“( ) a body corporate which is established for the purpose of providing services to the Council (or any committee of the Council) and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Society,”

478: Schedule 16, page 237, line 29, at end insert—

“(3A) Where, by virtue of subsection (1) or (3), any function may be discharged by a sub-committee, that sub-committee may arrange for the discharge of the function by an individual (whether or not a member of the Society’s staff).

(3B) Arrangements made under this section in respect of a function may provide that the function is to be exercised in accordance with the arrangements only (and not by the delegating body).

(3C) In subsection (3B) “the delegating body” means—

(a) in the case of arrangements under subsection (1), the Council,(b) in the case of arrangements under subsection (3), the committee,(c) in the case of arrangements under subsection (3A), the sub-committee.(3D) Subsections (3) and (3A) have effect subject to any contrary direction given by the Council.

(3E) Where arrangements under subsection (3A) relate to a function delegated by a committee under subsection (3), subsection (3A) also has effect subject to any contrary direction given by that committee.

(3F) Any power given by subsection (1), (3) or (3A) may be exercised so as to impose restrictions or conditions on the body or individual by whom the function is to be discharged.”

479: Schedule 16, page 237, line 43, at end insert—

“(8A) In this section “wholly-owned subsidiary” has the meaning given by section 1159 of the Companies Act 2006.”

479A: Schedule 16, page 238, line 8, at end insert—

“ Before section 87 (interpretation) insert—

“86A Rules

(1) Rules made by the Society under this Act may —

(a) make provision generally or subject to exceptions or only in relation to specified cases;(b) make different provision for different cases or circumstances or for different purposes.(2) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1), any rules prescribing a fee may provide for that fee to be reduced or waived in such circumstances as may be specified in the rules.””

480: Schedule 16, page 238, line 9, after “(interpretation)” insert—

“(a) in the definition of “client account”, for “in” to the end substitute “subject to rules under section 32(1)(a)”, and(b) ”

481: Schedule 16, page 238, line 11, at end insert—

““duly certificated notary public””

482: Schedule 16, page 238, line 13, at end insert—

““replacement date””

483: Schedule 16, page 238, line 14, at end insert—

“ In section 89 (consequential amendments etc.), omit subsection (7).”

484: Schedule 16, page 238, line 19, at end insert—

“( ) after that sub-paragraph insert—“(aa) the Society has reason to suspect dishonesty on the part of a solicitor (“S”) in connection with—(i) the business of any person of whom S is or was an employee, or of any body of which S is or was a manager, or(ii) any business which is or was carried on by S as a sole trader;”,”

485: Schedule 16, page 238, line 26, at end insert—

“( ) in sub-paragraph (1)(h)—(i) for “Council are” substitute “Society is”, and(ii) omit “sole”,”

486: Schedule 16, page 238, line 27, leave out “(1)(h), (i)” and insert “(1)(i)”

487: Schedule 16, page 238, line 31, after “(iii)” insert “for “an officer” substitute “a manager”, and

(iii) in that sub-paragraph”

488: Schedule 16, page 238, leave out line 42 and insert—

“( ) after sub-paragraph (1) insert—“(1A) In sub-paragraph (1) “manager” has the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see section 197 of that Act).”, and”

489: Schedule 16, page 238, line 44, leave out from “delay)” to end of line 2 on page 239 and insert “—

(a) for “10(3)” substitute “10(9)”,(b) in paragraph (a)—(i) for “a complaint is made to the Society” substitute “the Society is satisfied”,(ii) for “was instructed” substitute “is or was acting”, and(iii) for “controlled trust” substitute “trust”, and(c) in paragraph (c) for “Council regard” substitute “Society regards”.”

490: Schedule 16, page 239, line 12, at end insert “, and

( ) in sub-paragraph (2)(c) for “to which the complaint relates” substitute “in connection with which the Society is satisfied there has been undue delay as mentioned in sub-paragraph (a) of that paragraph”.”

491: Schedule 16, page 239, line 32, after “Society” insert “, having taken such steps to do so as are reasonable in all the circumstances of the case,”

492: Schedule 16, page 239, line 36, after “Society)” insert “—

(a) after “paragraph 6” insert “or 6A(3)”, and(b) ”

492A: Schedule 16, page 242, line 10, leave out paragraph 71 and insert—

“71 Omit Schedule 2 (the compensation fund).”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 492AA to 492AC not moved.]

492B: Schedule 16, page 244, line 27, after “(c)” insert “—

(i) for “conditions” substitute “requirements”, and(ii) ”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendment No. 492BA not moved.]

492C: Schedule 16, page 244, line 35, leave out “requiring other applications under the rules” and insert “for the manner and form in which other applications under the rules are to be made, and requiring such applications”

492D: Schedule 16, page 245, line 28, after ““(2A)” insert—

“Where the Society decides to recognise a body under this section it must grant that recognition subject to one or more conditions if—

(a) the case is of a kind prescribed for the purposes of this section by rules made by the Society, and(b) the Society considers that it is in the public interest to do so. (2B) At any time while a body is recognised under this section the Society may, in such circumstances as may be prescribed, direct that the body’s recognition is to have effect subject to such conditions as the Society may think fit.

“Prescribed” means prescribed by rules made by the Society. (2C) The conditions which may be imposed under subsection (2A) or (2B) include—

(a) conditions requiring the body to take specified steps that will, in the opinion of the Society, be conducive to the carrying on by the body of an efficient business;(b) conditions which prohibit the body from taking any specified steps except with the approval of the Society.“Specified” means specified in the condition.(2D) Rules made by the Society may make provision about when conditions imposed under this section take effect (including provision conferring power on the Society to direct that a condition is not to have effect until the conclusion of any appeal in relation to it).

(2E) Section 86A of the 1974 Act applies to rules under this section as it applies to rules under that Act.

(2F) ”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 492E to 492G not moved.]

493: Schedule 16, page 245, line 37, at end insert—

“( ) In subsection (7) for “Secretary of State” (in both places) substitute “Lord Chancellor”.”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 493A to 493C not moved.]

494: Schedule 16, page 245, line 43, leave out from “body,” to end of line 2 on page 246 and insert “has the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see section 197 of that Act);”,”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 494A to 494F not moved.]

495: Schedule 16, page 246, line 5, leave out “foreign” and insert “European”

496: Schedule 16, page 246, line 10, leave out “by multi-national partnerships” and insert “lawyers of other jurisdictions”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 497 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

[Amendments Nos. 497ZA to 497ZD not moved.]

497A: Schedule 16, page 246, leave out lines 21 to 24 and insert—

“(a) at least one of the partners is—(i) a solicitor,(ii) a registered European lawyer, or(iii) a qualifying body, and(b) the partnership is not a licensable body.”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendment No. 498 not moved.]

[Amendments Nos. 499 and 500 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

500A: Schedule 16, page 246, leave out lines 28 to 31 and insert—

“(a) at least one of the members of the body is—(i) a solicitor, (ii) a registered European lawyer, or(iii) a qualifying body, and(b) the body is not a licensable body.”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendment No. 501 not moved.]

[Amendments Nos. 502 to 504 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

504A: Schedule 16, page 246, leave out lines 34 to 37 and insert—

“(a) at least one of the persons within subsection (5) is—(i) a solicitor,(ii) a registered European lawyer, or(iii) a qualifying body, and(b) the body is not a licensable body.”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendment No. 505 not moved.]

[Amendments Nos. 506 and 507 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

[Amendments Nos. 507A and 507B not moved.]

508: Schedule 16, page 247, line 7, at end insert—

““licensable body” has the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see sections 71 and 107 of that Act);”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendment No. 508ZA not moved.]

508A: Schedule 16, page 247, line 9, at end insert—

““qualifying body” means a body in respect of which—

(a) the management and control condition is satisfied by virtue of—(i) subsection (2)(a)(i) or (ii) and (b),(ii) subsection (3)(a)(i) or (ii) and (b), or(iii) subsection (4)(a)(i) or (ii) and (b), and(b) the services condition is satisfied;”

509: Schedule 16, page 247, leave out lines 14 and 15

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 509A not moved.]

510: Schedule 16, page 247, line 19, leave out “solicitors, registered European lawyers or registered foreign lawyers” and insert “solicitors or registered European lawyers”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 510A and 510B not moved.]

511: Schedule 16, page 247, line 29, leave out “section 71 of the Legal Services Act 2007” and insert “Part 5 of the Legal Services Act 2007 (see sections 71 and 107 of that Act)”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 511A to 511D not moved.]

512: Schedule 16, page 248, line 25, at end insert—

“(1) Section 43 (jurisdiction and powers of Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in relation to complaints against solicitors) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (2)(a) for “(7) to” substitute “(9) to”.

(3) After subsection (3) insert—

“(3A) Nothing in section 154 of the Legal Services Act 2007 (approved regulators not to make provision for redress) prevents an order being made under subsection (3).”

(4) For subsection (5) substitute—

“(5) An appeal under section 49 of the Solicitors Act 1974 against an order of the Tribunal under subsection (3) lies only at the instance of the solicitor with respect to whom the legal aid complaint was made.””

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendment No. 512A not moved.]

513: Schedule 16, page 248, line 30, leave out ““corporate”,” and insert “—

(i) paragraph (b) and the “or” immediately preceding it,(ii) “corporate”, and(iii) “or application”,”

514: Schedule 16, page 248, line 30, at end insert—

“( ) after that sub-paragraph insert—

“(2A) References in this Schedule to a manager or employee of a recognised body, in relation to a complaint (other than such a complaint as is mentioned in paragraph 16(1A)(a)), include references to a person who was such a manager or employee at the time when the conduct to which the complaint relates took place.”,”

515: Schedule 16, page 248, line 32, at end insert—

“( ) in sub-paragraph (5) for “sub-paragraphs (3) and (4)” substitute “sub-paragraphs (4) and (6)”,”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 515A and 515B not moved.]

516: Schedule 16, page 248, line 36, leave out from “body,” to end of line 47 and insert “has the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see section 197 of that Act);”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendments Nos. 516A to 516E not moved.]

517: Schedule 16, page 249, line 2, leave out “9” and insert “9A”

517A: Schedule 16, page 249, line 4, leave out paragraph 78 and insert—

“78 For paragraph 2 of that Schedule (appeal against refusal of Council to grant recognition) substitute—

“Appeal against refusal of Society to grant recognition etc2 (1) A body may appeal to the High Court against—

(a) a decision to refuse an application by the body for recognition under section 9, (b) a decision to impose a condition under subsection (2A) of that section on the body’s recognition under that section,(c) a decision to impose a condition under subsection (2B) of that section on the body’s recognition under that section.(2) A recognised body whose recognition is subject to a condition within section 9(2C)(b) may appeal to the High Court against any decision by the Society to refuse to approve the taking of any step for the purposes of that condition.

(3) Rules made by the Society may make provision, as respects any application for recognition that is neither granted nor refused by the Society within such period as may be specified in the rules, for enabling an appeal to be brought under this paragraph in relation to the application as if it had been refused by the Society.

(4) On an appeal under sub-paragraph (1)(a) or (b), the High Court may—

(a) affirm the decision of the Society,(b) direct the Society to grant the body recognition under section 9 free from conditions or subject to such conditions as the High Court may think fit,(c) direct the Society not to recognise the body,(d) if the Society has recognised the body, by order suspend the recognition, or(e) make such other order as the High Court thinks fit.(5) On an appeal under sub-paragraph (1)(c), the High Court may—

(a) affirm the decision of the Society,(b) direct that the body’s recognition under section 9 is to have effect subject to such conditions as the High Court may think fit,(c) by order revoke the direction given by the Society under section 9(2B), or(d) make such other order as the High Court thinks fit.(6) On an appeal under sub-paragraph (2), the High Court may—

(a) affirm the decision of the Society,(b) direct the Society to approve the taking of one or more steps for the purposes of a condition within section 9(2C)(b), or(c) make such other order as the High Court thinks fit.(7) In relation to an appeal under this paragraph, the High Court may make such order as it thinks fit as to payment of costs.

(8) The decision of the High Court on an appeal under this paragraph is final.””

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 518 not moved.]

519: Schedule 16, page 249, line 24, leave out paragraphs 79 and 80 and insert—

“79 For paragraph 3 of that Schedule (accounts rules) substitute—

“3 (1) This paragraph applies where rules made under section 32(1) of the 1974 Act are applied—

(a) to recognised bodies in accordance with section 9(2)(f) of this Act, or (b) to managers or employees of such bodies in accordance with section 9(2)(fb) of this Act.(2) The Society may disclose a report on or information about the accounts of a recognised body, or a manager or employee of a recognised body, obtained in pursuance of such rules for use—

(a) in investigating the possible commission of an offence by the body or any of its managers or employees, and(b) in connection with any prosecution of the body or any of its managers or employees consequent on the investigation.””

520: Schedule 16, page 250, line 12, leave out paragraphs 83 and 84 and insert—

“83 For paragraph 4A of that Schedule (inspection of bank accounts) substitute—

“4A (1) This paragraph applies where rules made under section 33A(1) of the 1974 Act are applied—

(a) to recognised bodies in accordance with section 9(2)(f) of this Act, or(b) to managers or employees of such bodies in accordance with section 9(2)(fb) of this Act.(2) The Society may disclose information about the accounts of a recognised body, or a manager or employee of a recognised body, obtained in pursuance of such rules for use—

(a) in investigating the possible commission of an offence by the body or any of its managers or employees, and(b) in connection with any prosecution of the body or any of its managers or employees consequent on the investigation.””

520A: Schedule 16, page 250, line 34, leave out paragraph 87 and insert—

“87 For paragraph 6 of that Schedule (compensation fund) substitute—

“6 (1) Section 36 of the 1974 Act applies in relation to recognised bodies as if for paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (1) there were substituted—

“(a) an act or omission of a recognised body or former recognised body;(b) an act or omission of a manager or employee, or former manager or employee, of a recognised body or former recognised body;”.(2) Section 36A(2) and (3) of the 1974 Act applies in relation to recognised bodies as it applies in relation to solicitors.””

521: Schedule 16, page 252, leave out lines 40 to 46 and insert—

““(2) No recognised body (or manager or employee of such a body) may, except in accordance with a written permission granted by the Society under this paragraph, permit a person to whom sub-paragraph (2A) applies to—

(a) be a manager of the body, or(b) have an interest in the body.(2A) This sub-paragraph applies to a person who to the knowledge of the recognised body (or, as the case may be, the manager or employee) is a person—

(a) who is disqualified from practising as a solicitor by reason of one of the facts mentioned in section 41(1)(a), (b) or (c) of the 1974 Act (name struck off the roll, suspension etc), or(b) in respect of whom there is a direction in force under section 47(2)(g) of that Act (prohibition on restoration to roll).”

522: Schedule 16, page 253, line 10, after “(5)” insert—

“In relation to an appeal under sub-paragraph (4) the High Court may make such order as it thinks fit as to payment of costs.

(5A) ”

523: Schedule 16, page 253, leave out lines 12 to 15

524: Schedule 16, page 253, line 16, leave out paragraph 90 and insert—

“90 In paragraph 10 of that Schedule (failure to disclose striking off or suspension)—

(a) the existing paragraph becomes sub-paragraph (1) of that paragraph,(b) in that sub-paragraph after “recognised body” insert “(or any manager or employee of such a body)”, and(c) after that sub-paragraph insert—“(2) It is an offence for a person (“P”) to whom sub-paragraph (3) applies—(a) to seek or accept from any person an interest in a recognised body, without previously informing that person (and, if different, the recognised body) that P is a person to whom that sub-paragraph applies, or(b) to seek or accept a position as a manager of a recognised body, without previously informing that body that P is such a person.(3) This sub-paragraph applies to a person—(a) who is disqualified from practising as a solicitor by reason of one of the facts mentioned in section 41(1)(a), (b) or (c) of the 1974 Act (name struck off the roll, suspension etc), or(b) in respect of whom there is a direction in force under section 47(2)(g) of that Act (prohibition on restoration to roll).(4) A person guilty of an offence under sub-paragraph (2) is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.(5) Subsection (2) of section 42 of the 1974 Act applies in relation to an offence under sub-paragraph (2) as it applies in relation to an offence under that section.(6) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (2)(a) a person seeks or accepts an interest in a recognised body if the person seeks or accepts an interest which if it were obtained by the person would result in the person having an interest in shares in that body within the meaning of Part 5 of the Legal Services Act 2007 (see sections 71 and 107 of that Act).””

525: Schedule 16, page 253, line 26, leave out paragraphs (a) and (b) and insert—

“(a) for sub-paragraph (1) substitute— “(1) The Society may give a recognised body, or any manager or employee of a recognised body, an information notice, if the Society is satisfied that it is necessary to do so for the purpose of investigating—(a) whether the recognised body, or any of its managers or employees, has failed to comply with any requirement imposed by or by virtue of this Act or any rules made by the Society and applicable to the body, manager or employee by virtue of section 9 of this Act, or(b) whether there are grounds for making, or making an application to the Tribunal for it to make, an order under section 43(2) of the 1974 Act.(1A) An information notice is a notice which requires the recipient of the notice to produce or deliver to any person appointed by the Society all relevant documents in the possession, or under the control, of the recipient.(1B) An information notice may require the documents to be produced or delivered at a time and place fixed by the Society.”,(b) in sub-paragraph (2) for “by sub-paragraph (1) of this paragraph” substitute “by sub-paragraphs (1) to (1B) of this paragraph”,(c) in sub-paragraph (2)(a) after “the body” insert “, manager or employee”, (d) in sub-paragraph (2)(b) for “sub-paragraph (1)” substitute “sub-paragraphs (1) to (1B)”, and(e) in sub-paragraph (2)(c) for “(1)” substitute “(1A)”.”

526: Schedule 16, page 254, line 7, leave out “fee” and insert “charge”

527: Schedule 16, page 254, line 10, leave out “fee which a person” and insert “charge which a recognised body”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 527A not moved.]

528: Schedule 16, page 254, line 19, leave out from “sub-paragraph” to end of line 20 and insert “for “section 34 of the 1974 Act” substitute “any requirement imposed by or by virtue of this Act”,”

529: Schedule 16, page 254, line 21, leave out paragraph (c) and insert—

“(c) for paragraph (c) of that sub-paragraph substitute—“(c) a complaint that the body has acted in contravention of section 41 of the 1974 Act or paragraph 9(2) of this Schedule or of any conditions subject to which a permission has been granted under section 41 of that Act or that paragraph of this Schedule; or”, and”

530: Schedule 16, page 254, line 36, after “Act” insert “or paragraph 9(2) of this Schedule”

531: Schedule 16, page 254, line 38, at end insert “or for the purposes of paragraph 9(2) of this Schedule”

532: Schedule 16, page 255, line 9, leave out from “sub-paragraph” to end of line 10 and insert “for “section 34 of the 1974 Act” substitute “any requirement imposed by or by virtue of this Act”,”

533: Schedule 16, page 255, line 25, leave out “16A(1A)” and insert “16(1A)”

534: Schedule 16, page 255, line 34, leave out “or a registered European lawyer”

535: Schedule 16, page 255, line 42, leave out “or registered European lawyer”

536: Schedule 16, page 255, line 44, leave out “or registered European lawyer”

537: Schedule 16, page 256, line 4, after “body” insert “or manager or employee of such a body”

538: Schedule 16, page 256, line 12, at end insert—

“( ) Subsections (1) to (1C), (3) and (4) of section 44 of the 1974 Act (offences in connection with orders under section 43(2) of that Act) apply in relation to an order under sub-paragraph (2)(c) as they apply in relation to an order under section 43(2) of that Act, except that references in those subsections to provision within section 43(2)(a), (b) or (c) of that Act are to be read as references to provision within sub-paragraph (3)(a), (b) or (c).”

539: Schedule 16, page 256, line 14, leave out “14(3A)” and insert “15(3A)”

540: Schedule 16, page 256, line 17, leave out “that Act” and insert “the 1974 Act”

541: Schedule 16, page 256, line 29, leave out paragraph (a)

542: Schedule 16, page 256, line 32, at end insert—

“( ) for “legal aid work” substitute “providing representation funded by the Legal Services Commission as part of the Criminal Defence Service”, andomit sub-paragraph (2).”

543: Schedule 16, page 257, line 1, leave out paragraphs 102 and 103 and insert—

“102 In paragraph 23 (orders as to remuneration for non-contentious business)—

(a) the existing provision becomes sub-paragraph (1) of that paragraph, (b) in that sub-paragraph for “regulating (in accordance with paragraph 22)” substitute “prescribing (by virtue of paragraph 22) general principles to be applied when determining”, and(c) in that sub-paragraph for paragraph (b) substitute—“(b) in paragraph (d), the reference to the solicitor were a reference to any manager or employee of the recognised body who is an authorised person.”, and(d) after that sub-paragraph insert—“(2) In this paragraph “authorised person” means a person who is an authorised person in relation to an activity which is a reserved legal activity, within the meaning of the Legal Services Act 2007 (see section 17 of that Act).””

543A: Schedule 16, page 257, line 15, leave out paragraph 104 and insert—

“104 For paragraph 24 of that Schedule (effect of contentious business agreements) substitute—

“24 (1) This paragraph applies in relation to a contentious business agreement made between a recognised body and a client.

(2) A provision in the agreement that the body shall not be liable for the negligence of any of its managers or employees shall be void if the client is a natural person who, in entering that agreement, is acting for purposes which are outside his trade, business or profession.

(3) A provision in the agreement that the body shall be relieved from any responsibility to which it would otherwise be subject in the course of carrying on its business as a recognised body shall be void.””

544: Schedule 16, page 257, line 19, leave out paragraph (a) and insert—

“(a) for sub-paragraph (1)(b) substitute—“(b) a relevant insolvency event occurs in relation to the body;”,”

545: Schedule 16, page 257, line 26, at end insert “, and

( ) after that sub-paragraph insert—“(4) For the purposes of this paragraph a relevant insolvency event occurs in relation to a recognised body if— (a) a resolution for a voluntary winding-up of the body is passed without a declaration of solvency under section 89 of the Insolvency Act 1986;(b) the body enters administration within the meaning of paragraph 1(2)(b) of Schedule B1 to that Act;(c) an administrative receiver within the meaning of section 251 of that Act is appointed;(d) a meeting of creditors is held in relation to the body under section 95 of that Act (creditors’ meeting which has the effect of converting a members’ voluntary winding up into a creditors’ voluntary winding up);(e) an order for the winding up of the body is made.””

546: Schedule 16, page 257, line 33, after “officer”,” insert—

“( ) after “the body” (in the second place) insert “or any manager or employee of the body”,”

547: Schedule 16, page 257, line 40, at end insert—

“ In paragraph 28 (power of court to order recognised body to pay over clients’ money) after “client” (in the third place) insert “or any manager or employee of such a body”.”

547A: Schedule 16, page 257, line 41, leave out paragraph 107 and insert—

“107 For paragraph 29 of that Schedule (actions to recover costs) substitute—

“29 (1) Subsection (2A) of section 69 of the 1974 Act shall have effect in relation to a bill of costs delivered by a recognised body as if for paragraphs (a) and (b) there were substituted—

“(a) signed on behalf of the recognised body by any manager or employee of the body authorised by it to do so, or(b) enclosed in, or accompanied by, a letter which is so signed and refers to the bill.”(2) Subsection (2E) of that section shall have effect in relation to such a bill as if for “the solicitor” there were substituted “the recognised body”.””

548: Schedule 16, page 257, line 42, at end insert—

“ In paragraph 30 (power of Society to inspect files relating to certain proceedings), for paragraph (b) substitute—

“(b) for the appointment of an administrative receiver within the meaning of section 251 of the Insolvency Act 1986; or”.”

549: Schedule 16, page 257, line 43, at end insert “, and

(b) after “bank” insert “or building society”.”

550: Schedule 16, page 258, line 3, after “bank” insert “or building society”

551: Schedule 16, page 258, line 10, at end insert “, and

( ) for “it” substitute “the body or manager”.( ) Omit sub-paragraph (1)(b).”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 552 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

552A: Schedule 16, page 260, line 24, leave out paragraph 115 and insert—

“115 The Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 is amended in accordance with this Part of this Schedule.

115A In section 89 (foreign lawyers: recognised bodies and partnerships with solicitors)—

(a) for subsection (3)(a)(iv) substitute—“(iv) sections 36 and 36A (compensation grants); and”,(b) in subsection (5) for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”, (c) in paragraph (a) of that subsection for “the commencement of this section” substitute “or in the same Session as the Legal Services Act 2007 was passed”,(d) in subsection (6) for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”,(e) in subsection (7) for “Secretary of State” (in both places) substitute “Lord Chancellor”,(f) in paragraph (a) of that subsection for “the commencement of this section” substitute “or in the same Session as the Legal Services Act 2007 was passed”, and(g) after subsection (8) insert—“(8A) Rules and regulations made by the Law Society under, or by virtue of, this section or Schedule 14 which are not regulatory arrangements within the meaning of the Legal Services Act 2007 are to be treated as such arrangements for the purposes of that Act.”115B Schedule 14 to that Act (foreign lawyers: partnerships and recognised bodies) is amended as follows.”

553: Schedule 16, page 260, line 33, at end insert—

“( ) omit sub-paragraph (3),”

554: Schedule 16, page 260, line 38, at end insert—

“( ) in that sub-paragraph, after paragraph (b) insert “and(c) the making available to the public of the information contained in the register (including the manner in which, and hours during which, the information is to be made so available and whether the information is to be made available free of charge).”,”

555: Schedule 16, page 260, line 39, at end insert—

“ After paragraph 2 insert—

“2A (1) The Society may direct that a foreign lawyer’s registration is to have effect subject to such conditions as the Society thinks fit to impose.

(2) A direction under sub-paragraph (1) may be given in respect of a foreign lawyer

(a) at the time he is first registered, or(b) at any time when the registration has effect.””

556: Schedule 16, page 260, line 44, at end insert “and—

(ii) omit “by virtue of his being a member of that partnership”,”

557: Schedule 16, page 260, line 45, leave out “and (i)”

558: Schedule 16, page 260, line 46, at end insert—

“( ) after sub-paragraph (3)(e) insert—“(ea) the Society is satisfied that he has abandoned his practice;”,( ) in sub-paragraph (3)(i)—(i) for “Council are” substitute “Society is”, and(ii) for “an officer” (in both places) substitute “a manager”,( ) after that sub-paragraph insert—“(j) the Society is satisfied that it is necessary to exercise the intervention powers (or any of them) in relation to the registered foreign lawyer to protect—(i) the interests of clients (or former or potential clients) of the registered foreign lawyer or the multi-national partnership, or(ii) the interests of the beneficiaries of any trust of which the registered foreign lawyer is or was a trustee.”,”

559: Schedule 16, page 261, line 1, leave out paragraph (c) and insert—

“( ) omit sub-paragraph (4),( ) in sub-paragraph (5)(a) for “a complaint is made to the Society” substitute “the Society is satisfied”,”

560: Schedule 16, page 261, leave out line 3

561: Schedule 16, page 261, line 5, at end insert “, and

( ) after sub-paragraph (9) insert—“(10) In this paragraph “manager”, in relation to a recognised body, has the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see section 197 of that Act).””

561A: Schedule 16, page 261, line 6, leave out paragraphs 120 and 121 and insert—

“120 For paragraph 6 (compensation fund) substitute—

“6 Section 36 of the 1974 Act applies in relation to registered foreign lawyers as if for paragraphs (a) and (b) of subsection (1) there were substituted—

“(a) an act or omission of a registered foreign lawyer or former registered foreign lawyer;(b) an act or omission of an employee or former employee of a registered foreign lawyer or former registered foreign lawyer;”. 121 For paragraph 7 (contributions to fund) substitute—

“7 Section 36A(2) and (3) of the 1974 Act applies in relation to registered foreign lawyers as it applies in relation to solicitors.””

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 561B not moved.]

562: Schedule 16, page 262, line 19, at end insert “and

(ii) for “2(3)” substitute “2A”,”

563: Schedule 16, page 262, line 26, after “(4)” insert—

“In relation to an appeal under this paragraph the High Court may make such order as it thinks fit as to payment of costs.

(5) ”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 564 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

565: Before Clause 174, insert the following new Clause—

“Unqualified person not to pretend to be a barrister

(1) It is an offence for a person who is not a barrister—

(a) wilfully to pretend to be a barrister, or(b) with the intention of implying falsely that that person is a barrister to take or use any name, title or description.(2) A person who is guilty of an offence under subsection (1) is liable—

(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or both), and(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years or a fine (or both).(3) In relation to an offence under subsection (1) committed before the commencement of section 154(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (c. 44), the reference in subsection (2)(a) to 12 months is to be read as a reference to 6 months.”

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I shall speak also to government Amendments Nos. 629 and 720. I said on the last day in Committee that I would take away the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, on barristers and the role of the Inns of Court. I have now tabled these amendments which seek to address his concern by ensuring that the Bill acknowledges and defines the term “barrister”, creates a new offence of pretending to be a barrister when not qualified, and recognises the extremely important and valuable role played by the Inns of Court in training barristers.

The Inns’ role in calling and disbarring barristers is currently recognised in statute under Section 31 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 in respect of rights of audience. However, as a result of the changes to the way in which reserved legal activities will be granted in the future, it has been necessary to repeal that section. These amendments seek to address any imbalance caused and ensure that the public, consumers and members of the profession can be confident that any person using the title “barrister” has been properly educated and trained, and that they are appropriately regulated.

The offence provision is important as it brings parity with offences in respect of solicitors under Section 21 of the Solicitors Act 1974, so consumers can be confident that the same rules apply for both recognised professions. I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, will feel that I have reflected his concerns appropriately in this amendment. I beg to move.

My Lords, rather like a brief gleaming shaft of sunlight in an otherwise cloudy sky, I am delighted that the Government have tabled these amendments. They allow me not to press my own. This, I know the noble Baroness will agree, is an important matter. It is vital that an appropriate definition of “barrister” is included in the Bill, with proper protection. The noble Baroness has kindly done that. We are entirely satisfied with the outcome and I am most grateful to her.

My Lords, I agree that these amendments are important and I am grateful to be his ray of sunshine.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Schedule 17 [Licensed conveyancing]:

565A: Schedule 17, page 264, line 9, leave out “a qualified” and insert “an”

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 566 to 586, 587A to 596 and 651. These are minor and consequential amendments that address a number of anomalies which have arisen as a result of amendments to the Administration of Justice Act 1985 and the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990. For example, we have brought forward amendments to remove references to “complaints” in both Acts, avoiding confusion with Part 6 of the Bill. We have also discussed with the Council for Licensed Conveyancers the amendments tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, in Committee. These amendments give the council additional powers to allow it to delegate its functions further, to directly reprimand a recognised body and to remove the requirement for an accountant’s report to be prepared by a person qualified as company auditor under the Companies Act 1989 in favour of allowing those accounts to be audited by an accountant. We are persuaded that these powers are necessary to ensure that the council can effectively and efficiently discharge its regulatory functions, so this group of amendments also covers those matters. I beg to move.

My Lords, I support these amendments and I am most grateful to the Government.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

566: Schedule 17, page 264, line 11, at end insert—

“(eb) after having been disqualified under section 97 of the Legal Services Act 2007 (disqualification from being manager or employee of a licensed body etc);(ec) after his holding of a restricted interest in a licensed body has been approved subject to conditions under paragraph 17, 28 or 33 of Schedule 13 to that Act (ownership of licensed bodies) or objected to under paragraph 19, 31 or 36 of that Schedule;”

567: Schedule 17, page 264, line 14, at end insert “(eb), (ec),”

568: Schedule 17, page 264, line 14, at end insert—

“( ) In subsection (5) for “or” at the end of paragraph (a) substitute—

“(aa) pending the hearing and determination of any appeal brought by the applicant under paragraph 18, 20, 29, 32, 34 or 37 of Schedule 13 to the Legal Services Act 2007;(ab) pending the review by a licensing authority, in accordance with its licensing rules, of a determination that the applicant should be disqualified under section 97 of the Legal Services Act 2007; or”.( ) After that subsection insert—

“(6) In this section—

“licensed body”, “licensing authority” and “licensing rules” have the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see sections 70, 72 and 81 of that Act);

“restricted interest”, in relation to a body, has the same meaning as in Schedule 13 to that Act (ownership of licensed bodies).””

569: Schedule 17, page 264, leave out line 23 and insert—

“( ) Section 17 (imposition of conditions during currency of licence) is amended as follows.

( ) In subsection (2)(a)—”

570: Schedule 17, page 264, line 25, after ““(ea),” insert “(eb), (ec),”

571: Schedule 17, page 264, line 25, at end insert—

“( ) In subsection (4), for “or” at the end of paragraph (a) substitute—

“(aa) pending the hearing and determination of any appeal brought by the licensed conveyancer under paragraph 18, 20, 29, 32, 34 or 37 of Schedule 13 to the Legal Services Act 2007;(ab) pending the review by a licensing authority, in accordance with its licensing rules, of a determination that the licensed conveyancer should be disqualified under section 97 of the Legal Services Act 2007; or”.( ) After subsection (5) insert—

“(6) In this section “licensing authority” and “licensing rules” have the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see sections 72 and 81 of that Act).””

571A: Schedule 17, page 264, line 25, at end insert—

“After section 17 insert—

“17A Variation of conditions

(1) This section applies where a licensed conveyancer’s licence has effect subject to conditions.

(2) On an application made by the licensed conveyancer, the Council may in prescribed circumstances direct—

(a) the removal of a condition;(b) the variation of a condition in the manner described in the application.(3) “Prescribed” means prescribed by rules made by the Council.

(4) Section 14 (applications for licences) applies in relation to an application under this section as it applies in relation to applications for a licence under this Part.””

572: Schedule 17, page 264, line 30, after “1(1)(a)(i),” insert “(aa),”

573: Schedule 17, page 265, line 13, leave out “conditionally” and insert “unconditionally”

573A: Schedule 17, page 265, line 19, at end insert—

“ In section 22 (keeping of accounts and establishment of client accounts)—

(a) in subsection (3)(a) omit “qualified”, and(b) for subsections (4) and (5) substitute—“(4) Provision made in rules by virtue of subsection (3)(a) may provide that the reports delivered to the Council must be reports given by accountants in respect of whom requirements prescribed by the rules are met.””

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 573B not moved.]

574: Schedule 17, page 265, line 23, after ““consideration”,” insert—

“( ) omit paragraph (b),”

575: Schedule 17, page 265, line 31, at end insert—

“( ) Omit subsection (2).

( ) In subsection (3) omit—

(a) “or (2)”,(b) “or complaint” (in both places), and(c) “or paragraph (b)”.”

576: Schedule 17, page 265, line 36, at end insert—

“( ) In subsection (5) omit “or complaint” (in both places).”

576A: Schedule 17, page 266, line 39, at end insert—

“( ) In subsection (2), for the purposes of paragraph (a) or (b) of that subsection, the reference to costs includes costs incurred in connection with a preliminary investigation of the allegation under section 24(1A).”

577: Schedule 17, page 267, line 22, at end insert—

“ In section 25 (the Discipline and Appeals Committee), in subsection (1)(b) for “sections 27 to” substitute “section 24A, 27, 28 or”.”

577A: Schedule 17, page 267, line 44, at end insert—

“(2B) In subsection (2A), for the purposes of paragraph (a) or (b) of that subsection, the reference to costs includes costs incurred in connection with a preliminary investigation of the allegation under section 24(1A).”

577B: Schedule 17, page 268, line 26, at end insert—

“ In section 29 (appeals from decisions of Council in relation to licences)—

(a) in subsection (1), omit “or” at the end of paragraph (b),(b) in that subsection, at the end of paragraph (c) insert “or(d) refuses an application made by that person under section 17A,”, and(c) in subsection (2), after paragraph (b) insert—“(ba) in the case of an appeal under subsection (1)(d), by order direct the Council to grant the application;”.”

578: Schedule 17, page 268, leave out line 27 and insert—

“ (1) Section 31 (application of Schedule 5) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (2) omit—

(a) “or complaint” (in each place), and(b) “or paragraph (b)”.(3) In subsection (3), for “and 12” substitute “to 12A”.

(4) In subsection (4) omit “or complaint”.”

578A: Schedule 17, page 268, line 38, at end insert—

“( ) In subsection (1)(c) for “conditions” substitute “requirements”.”

578B: Schedule 17, page 269, leave out line 19 and insert—

“(d) omit paragraph (d),”

578C: Schedule 17, page 269, line 43, after “(3A)” insert—

“Rules made by the Council may provide for the Council to grant a body recognition under this section subject to one or more conditions.

(3B) At any time while a body is recognised under this section, the Council may, in such circumstances as may be prescribed, direct that the body’s recognition is to have effect subject to such conditions as the Council may think fit.

“Prescribed” means prescribed by rules made by the Council.(3C) The conditions which may be imposed under subsection (3A) or (3B) include—

(a) conditions restricting the kinds of conveyancing services that may be provided by the body;(b) conditions imposed by reference to criteria of general application;(c) conditions requiring the body to take any specified steps that will, in the opinion of the Council, be conducive to the body carrying on an efficient business;and conditions may be imposed despite the fact that they may result in expenditure being incurred by the body.(3D) On an application made by a recognised body, the Council may, in such circumstances as may be prescribed, direct—

(a) the removal of a condition subject to which the body’s recognition has effect;(b) the variation of such a condition in the manner described in the application.(3E) For the purposes of subsection (3D)—

(a) section 14 applies in relation to an application under that subsection as it applies in relation to an application for a licence under this Part of this Act, and(b) “prescribed” means prescribed by rules made by the Council.(3F) Rules under subsection (3A) or (3B) may make provision about when conditions imposed take effect (including provision conferring power on the Council to direct that a condition is not to have effect until the conclusion of any appeal in relation to it).

(3G) ”

578D: Schedule 17, page 269, leave out line 49 and insert—

“(b) for paragraph (b) substitute—“(b) that a body’s recognition under this section does not have effect subject to any conditions or has effect subject to any particular conditions,”.”

579: Schedule 17, page 270, line 43, leave out “section 71 of the Legal Services Act 2007” and insert “Part 5 of the Legal Services Act 2007 (see sections 71 and 107 of that Act)”

580: Schedule 17, page 271, line 10, at end insert—

“ In section 34 (modification of existing enactments relating to conveyancing etc), omit subsection (2)(c) to (e).”

581: Schedule 17, page 272, line 14, at end insert “in subsection (1)—

( ) in the definition of “client”, in paragraph (a) omit “or his firm”,”

582: Schedule 17, page 272, line 15, leave out “in subsection (1),”

583: Schedule 17, page 272, line 16, leave out “in that subsection,”

584: Schedule 17, page 272, line 17, leave out from “body,” to “, and” in line 27 and insert “has the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see section 197 of that Act);””

585: Schedule 17, page 273, line 5, at end insert—

“( ) In paragraph 10 for “Secretary of State” (in both places) substitute “Lord Chancellor”.

( ) In paragraph 11(3) for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”.”

586: Schedule 17, page 273, line 18, at end insert—

“( ) after that sub-paragraph insert—“(aa) the Council has reason to suspect dishonesty on the part of a licensed conveyancer (“L”) in connection with—(i) the business of any person of whom L is or was an employee, or of any body of which L is or was a manager, or(ii) any business which is or was carried on by L as a sole trader;”,”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

[Amendment No. 587 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

587A: Schedule 17, page 273, line 21, at end insert—

“( ) after sub-paragraph (1)(e) insert—“(ea) the Council is satisfied that a licensed conveyancer has abandoned his practice;(eb) the Council is satisfied that a licensed conveyancer has been practising in breach of any conditions subject to which his licence has effect;”,”

588: Schedule 17, page 274, line 33, after “Council” insert “, having taken such steps to do so as are reasonable in all the circumstances of the case,”

589: Schedule 17, page 277, line 25, at end insert “, and

(b) in sub-paragraph (2) omit—(i) “or complaint” (in both places), and(ii) “or (b)”.”

589A: Schedule 17, page 277, line 35, at end insert—

“(ab) it is alleged that a recognised body (while a recognised body) has failed to comply with a condition subject to which its recognition has effect.”,”

590: Schedule 17, page 277, line 36, after “omit” insert “—

(i) paragraph (b), and(ii) ”

590A: Schedule 17, page 278, line 7, leave out from “satisfied” to “the Committee” in line 12 and insert—

“(a) in a case within paragraph 3(1)(a), that a recognised body has failed to comply with any such rules as are mentioned in sub-paragraph (ii) of that paragraph, or(b) in a case within paragraph 3(1)(aa), that a manager or employee has failed to comply with any such rules as are mentioned in that paragraph, or(c) in a case within paragraph 3(1)(ab), that a recognised body has failed to comply with any condition mentioned in that paragraph,”

590B: Schedule 17, page 278, line 24, at end insert—

“(2A) In sub-paragraph (2), for the purposes of paragraph (a) or (b) of that sub-paragraph, the reference to costs includes costs incurred in connection with a preliminary investigation of the allegation under paragraph 3.”

590C: Schedule 17, page 279, line 10, after “3(1)(a)” insert “or (ab)”

590D: Schedule 17, page 279, line 10, at end insert—

“( ) in that sub-paragraph, after paragraph (b) insert “, or(c) has failed to comply with any such condition as is mentioned in paragraph 3(1)(ab),”,”

590E: Schedule 17, page 279, line 13, at end insert—

“( ) after paragraph (b) of that sub-paragraph insert—“(ba) an order reprimanding that body;(bb) an order that the recognition of that body under section 32 is to have effect subject to such conditions as may be specified in the order;”,”

590F: Schedule 17, page 280, line 6, after “person.” insert—

“(2E) In sub-paragraph (2D), for the purposes of paragraph (a) or (b) of that sub-paragraph, the reference to costs includes costs incurred in connection with a preliminary investigation of the allegation under paragraph 3.”

590G: Schedule 17, page 281, line 2, leave out from “recognition),” to end of line and insert—

“(a) in sub-paragraph (1) omit “corporate”,(b) in paragraph (b) of that sub-paragraph for “restrictions” substitute “conditions”,(c) after that paragraph insert “, or (c) decides to give a direction in relation to that body under section 32(3B), or(d) refuses an application by that body under section 32(3D),”,(d) in sub-paragraph (2) for “this paragraph” substitute “sub-paragraph (1)(a) or (b)”,(e) in paragraph (a) of that sub-paragraph—(i) for “restrictions” (in first place) substitute “conditions”, and(ii) for “restrictions falling within subsection (3)(d) of that section” substitute “conditions”, and(f) after that sub-paragraph insert—“(2A) On an appeal under sub-paragraph (1)(c), the Discipline and Appeals Committee may—(a) revoke the direction of the Council under section 32(3B),(b) direct that the body’s recognition is to have effect subject to such conditions as may be specified by the Council in the direction, or(c) affirm the decision of the Council,and the Committee may make such order as to the payment of costs by the Council or by that body as they think fit.(2B) On an appeal under sub-paragraph (1)(d), the Discipline and Appeals Committee may—(a) direct the Council to grant the application, or(b) affirm the decision of the Council,and the Committee may make such order as to the payment of costs by the Council or by that body as they think fit.””

590H: Schedule 17, page 281, line 8, at end insert—

“( ) after that paragraph insert—“(aa) the Council is satisfied that a recognised body has been carrying on business in breach of any condition subject to which the body’s recognition under section 32 of this Act has effect; or”,”

591: Schedule 17, page 282, line 19, at end insert “(in both places)”

592: Schedule 17, page 283, line 12, leave out paragraphs (a) and (b) and insert—

“(a) for sub-paragraph (1) substitute—“(1) Where the Investigating Committee are satisfied that it is necessary to do so for the purpose of investigating any such allegation as is mentioned in paragraph 3(1)(a)(ii), (aa) or (ab), the Committee may give an information notice to a relevant person.(1A) An information notice is a notice requiring the production or delivery to any person appointed by the Committee, at a time and a place to be fixed by the Committee, of all documents in the possession or under the control of the relevant person in connection with the matters to which the allegation relates (whether or not they relate also to other matters).(1B) In this section “relevant person” means—(a) in the case of an allegation against a recognised body, the recognised body or any of its managers or employees, and(b) in the case of an allegation against a manager or employee of a recognised body, the manager or employee, the recognised body or any other manager or employee of the recognised body.”, and(b) in sub-paragraph (2)—(i) for “and 12” substitute “to 12A”,(ii) for “sub-paragraph (1) of this paragraph” (except where it appears in paragraph (d)) substitute “sub-paragraphs (1) and (1A) of this paragraph”, (iii) in paragraph (b) after “body” insert “, manager or employee”, and(iv) in paragraph (d) for “sub-paragraph (1)” substitute “sub-paragraph (1A)”.”

592A: Schedule 17, page 283, line 23, at end insert—

“( ) Omit paragraph 15 (application of rules relating to accounts etc).”

593: Schedule 17, page 283, line 36, at end insert—

“ The Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 is amended in accordance with this Part.

(1) Section 53 (the Council for Licensed Conveyancers) is amended as follows.

(2) For subsections (1) to (3) substitute—

“(1) The Council for Licensed Conveyancers has the powers necessary to enable it to become designated as an approved regulator in relation to one or more of the reserved legal activities within subsection (1A).

(1A) The reserved legal activities to which this subsection applies are—

(a) the exercise of a right of audience;(b) the conduct of litigation;(c) probate activities.(2) If the Council becomes an approved regulator in relation to one or more of those activities, it may, in that capacity, authorise a person to carry on a relevant activity only if the person is a licensed conveyancer.

(3) Where the Council authorises a licensed conveyancer to carry on a relevant activity, it is to do so by issuing a licence to the licensed conveyancer.”

(3) Omit subsection (5).

(4) For subsection (6) substitute—

“(6) Where the Council exercises any of its powers in connection with—

(a) an application for designation as an approved regulator in relation to a reserved legal activity within subsection (1A), or(b) the authorising of a person to carry on a relevant activity,it is to do so subject to any requirements to which it is subject in accordance with the provisions of the Legal Services Act 2007.”(5) In subsection (8), for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”.

(6) In subsection (9)—

(a) for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”, and(b) omit paragraph (e).(7) After that subsection insert—

“(10) For the purposes of this section—

(a) “right of audience”, “conduct of litigation”, “probate activities” and “reserved legal activity” have the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007;(b) references to designation as an approved regulator are to designation as an approved regulator—(i) by Part 1 of Schedule 4 to the Legal Services Act 2007, by virtue of an order under paragraph 1 of Schedule 22 to that Act, or(ii) under Part 2 of Schedule 4 to that Act;(c) “relevant activity” means an activity which is a reserved legal activity—(i) which is within subsection (1A), and(ii) in relation to which the Council is designated as an approved regulator by Part 1 of Schedule 4 to that Act (by virtue of an order under paragraph 1 of Schedule 22 to that Act) or under Part 2 of that Schedule.””

594: Schedule 17, page 283, line 37, leave out “to the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990”

595: Schedule 17, page 283, line 38, at end insert—

“( ) In paragraph 1 (definitions)—

(a) in the definition of “advocacy licence” for “and constituting” to the end substitute “by which the Council authorises the licensed conveyancer concerned to exercise a right of audience;”,(b) in the definition of “litigation licence” for “and constituting” to the end substitute “by which the Council authorises the licensed conveyancer concerned to carry on activities which constitute the conduct of litigation;”,(c) in the definition of “probate licence” for “and constituting” to the end substitute “by which the Council authorises the licensed conveyancer concerned to carry on activities which constitute probate activities;”(d) at the end insert—““reserved legal activity” has the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see section 12 of and Schedule 2 to that Act).”

( ) In paragraph 2 (qualification regulations and rules of conduct), in sub-paragraph (1)—

(a) for “rules of conduct” substitute “conduct rules”, and(b) for “granting of the rights or exemption” substitute “carrying on of the reserved legal activities”.( ) In paragraph 4 (issue of licences), in sub-paragraph (1)—

(a) in paragraph (a) for “rules of conduct” substitute “conduct rules”, and(b) in paragraph (c) for “provide the advocacy, litigation or probate services” substitute “carry on the reserved legal activities”.( ) In paragraph 5 (conditional licences)—

(a) for sub-paragraph (1)(d) substitute—“(d) after the Investigating Committee have made any order in his case under section 24A(1) of the Act of 1985 or the Discipline and Appeals Committee have made any order in his case under section 26(1) of that Act.”,(b) in sub-paragraph (6)—(i) in paragraph (a) for “service that may be provided” substitute “activities that may be carried on”, and(ii) in paragraph (b) for “provides the additional services” substitute “carries on the additional activities”,(c) after sub-paragraph (7) insert—“(8) Where a person applies for an advocacy, litigation or probate licence at a time when this paragraph has effect in relation to that person by reason of the circumstances mentioned in section 16(1)(ea) of the Act of 1985, section 16A(2) of that Act has effect as it has effect in relation to an application for a licence under Part 2 of that Act.”( ) Omit paragraph 7 (code of conduct).

( ) In paragraph 9 (removal of disqualification from holding a licence) after sub-paragraph (2) insert—

“(3) In relation to proceedings on an application under sub-paragraph (1), the Discipline and Appeals Committee may make such order as they consider fit as to the payment of costs by—

(a) the Council;(b) the applicant.”( ) In paragraph 10 (revocation on grounds of error or fraud), after sub-paragraph (4) insert—

“(5) In relation to proceedings for the revocation of a licence under sub-paragraph (1), the Discipline and Appeals Committee may make such order as they consider fit as to the payment of costs by—

(a) the Council;(b) the licensed conveyancer to whose licence the proceedings relate.(6) In relation to proceedings on an application under sub-paragraph (2), the Discipline and Appeals Committee may make such order as they consider fit as to the payment of costs by—

(a) the Council;(b) the applicant.”( ) Omit paragraph 11.”

595A: Schedule 17, page 283, line 38, at end insert—

“( ) In paragraph 12 (delegation of powers etc)—

(a) in sub-paragraph (1) for “Subject” to “enactment, the” substitute “The”,(b) in that sub-paragraph, for paragraph (b) substitute—“(b) by a sub-committee of such a committee; or(c) by an individual (whether or not a member of the Council’s staff).”,(c) after that sub-paragraph insert—“(1A) Where by virtue of sub-paragraph (1) any function may be discharged by a committee, the committee may arrange for the discharge of that function by—(a) a sub-committee of that committee; or(b) an individual, whether or not a member of the Council’s staff.(1B) Sub-paragraph (1A) is subject to any contrary direction given by the Council.(1C) Arrangements made under sub-paragraph (1) or (1A) in respect of a function may provide that the function is to be exercised in accordance with the arrangements only (and not by the delegating body).(1D) For this purpose “the delegating body” means—(a) in the case of arrangements under sub-paragraph (1), the Council, and(b) in the case of arrangements under sub-paragraph (1A), the committee.”,(d) for sub-paragraph (3) substitute—“(3) Any power conferred by sub-paragraph (1), (1A) or (2) may be exercised so as to impose restrictions or conditions on the body or individual by whom the function is to be discharged.”,(e) for sub-paragraphs (6) and (7) substitute—“(6) A committee or sub-committee established under this paragraph may include or consist of individuals other than—(a) members of the Council;(b) licensed conveyancers.(7) A sub-committee of a committee established under this paragraph may also include or consist of individuals other than members of the committee.(7A) The Council may make arrangements for the appointment and removal of members of any committee to be made other than by the Council.(7B) A committee or sub-committee may regulate its own procedure, including quorum.”, and(f) after sub-paragraph (9) insert—“(10) This paragraph is subject to any provision to the contrary made by or under any enactment.”( ) Omit paragraph 13 (Council’s intervention powers).”

596: Schedule 17, page 283, line 39, leave out sub-paragraphs (2) and (3)

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Clause 175 [Commissioners for oaths]:

597: Clause 175, page 90, line 33, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

598: Clause 175, page 90, line 36, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Clause 176 [Trade mark attorneys]:

599: Clause 176, page 91, line 25, leave out “attorney” and insert “agency”

600: Clause 176, page 92, line 30, leave out from “body,” to end of line 37 and insert “has the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see section 197);”

601: Clause 176, page 92, line 45, leave out “attorney” and insert “agency”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Clause 177 [Patent attorneys]:

602: Clause 177, page 93, line 25, after “is” insert “to continue”

603: Clause 177, page 94, line 47, leave out from “body,” to end of line 5 on page 95 and insert “has the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see section 197);”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Schedule 18 [Immigration advice and immigration services]:

604: Schedule 18, page 284, line 14, at end insert—

“Continuity of existing rights1A Each of the following bodies is a qualifying regulator for the purposes of Part 5 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999—

(a) the Law Society;(b) the Institute of Legal Executives;(c) the General Council of the Bar.”

605: Schedule 18, page 284, line 36, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

606: Schedule 18, page 285, line 27, leave out “individuals” and insert “persons”

607: Schedule 18, page 285, line 41, at end insert—

“( ) In subsection (2)(c) the reference to persons who are also authorised by the applicant to carry on activities which are reserved legal activities includes, in relation to any application by the Law Society, registered foreign lawyers (within the meaning of section 89 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990).”

608: Schedule 18, page 286, line 20, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

609: Schedule 18, page 286, line 31, at end insert—

“( ) If a body in the list in paragraph 1A ceases to be a qualifying regulator by virtue of sub-paragraph (1), the Lord Chancellor must, by order, remove it from that list.”

610: Schedule 18, page 290, line 8, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

611: Schedule 18, page 290, line 38, leave out sub-paragraph (1) and insert—

“(1) During the transitional period, each of the following is deemed to be authorised by the Law Society to provide immigration advice and immigration services—

(a) every qualified solicitor;(b) every registered foreign lawyer (within the meaning of section 89 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 (c. 41));(c) every legal partnership (within the meaning of paragraph 7(4) of Schedule 5);(d) every body recognised under section 9 of the Administration of Justice Act 1985 (c. 61).”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Clause 182 [Legal professional privilege]:

612: Clause 182, page 97, line 42, leave out paragraph (i) and insert—

“( ) a European lawyer (within the meaning of the European Communities (Services of Lawyers) Order 1978 (S.I. 1978/1910)).”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

613: After Clause 182, insert the following new Clause—

“Rights of audience etc of employees of housing management bodies

After section 60 of the County Courts Act 1984 (c. 28) insert—

“60A Rights of audience etc of employees of housing management bodies

(1) An employee of a housing management body who is authorised by that body for the purposes of this section has—

(a) a right of audience in relation to any proceedings to which this section applies, and(b) a right to conduct litigation in relation to any such proceedings.(2) This section applies to relevant housing proceedings in a county court before a district judge which are brought—

(a) in the name of a local housing authority, and(b) by the housing management body in the exercise of functions of that local housing authority delegated to that body under a housing management agreement.(3) “Relevant housing proceedings” are—

(a) proceedings under section 82A of the Housing Act 1985 (demotion because of anti-social behaviour);(b) proceedings for possession of a dwelling-house subject to a secure tenancy, where possession is sought on ground 2 in Part 1 of Schedule 2 to that Act (anti-social behaviour);(c) proceedings for possession of a dwelling-house subject to a demoted tenancy;(d) proceedings for a suspension order under section 121A of the Housing Act 1985 (suspension of right to buy);(e) proceedings under section 153A, 153B or 153D of the Housing Act 1996 (injunctions against anti-social behaviour);(f) proceedings for the attachment of a power of arrest to an injunction by virtue of section 91(2) of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003 or section 27(2) of the Police and Justice Act 2006 (proceedings under section 222 of the Local Government Act 1972: power of arrest attached to injunction); (g) at a hearing at which a decision is made in relation to proceedings within paragraphs (a) to (f), proceedings for permission to appeal against that decision;(h) such other proceedings as the Lord Chancellor may prescribe by order.(4) An authorisation for the purposes of this section must be in writing.

(5) The power to make an order under subsection (3)(h) is exercisable by statutory instrument subject to annulment by resolution of either House of Parliament.

(6) In subsection (3)(e) the reference to section 153A of the Housing Act 1996 is a reference to that section—

(a) as inserted by section 13 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003, or(b) as substituted by section 26 of the Police and Justice Act 2006.(7) In this section—

“dwelling-house” has the same meaning as in Part 4 of the Housing Act 1985;

“housing management agreement” means an agreement under section 27 of the Housing Act 1985 (including an agreement to which section 27B(2) or (3) of that Act applies);

“housing management body” means a person who exercises management functions of a local housing authority by virtue of a housing management agreement;

“local housing authority” has the same meaning as in section 27 of the Housing Act 1985;

“right of audience” means the right to appear before and address a court, including the right to call and examine witnesses;

“right to conduct litigation” means the right—

(a) to issue proceedings before any court in England and Wales,(b) to commence, prosecute and defend such proceedings, and(c) to perform any ancillary functions in relation to such proceedings (such as entering appearances to actions);“secure tenancy” has the same meaning as in Part 4 of the Housing Act 1985.””

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, the amendment enables employees of certain housing management organisations to exercise rights to conduct litigation and rights of audience in relation to specified housing-related proceedings, in particular where anti-social behaviour is an issue. Many of the bodies’ employees are former local authority housing officers who on transferring to the new housing management bodies lost the ability to exercise their rights of appeal as local authority employees. I know from our discussions with stakeholders that some concerns about the supervision of those employees and to whom they will be accountable if something goes wrong when they are exercising those rights have been raised. There are safeguards that will address those concerns. The right of audience and rights to conduct litigation will be exercisable only by employees of housing management bodies that have an agreement with a local housing authority under Section 27 of the Housing Act 1985. Those agreements regulate the activities of the housing management bodies and state what they can and cannot do on behalf of the local authority and must be approved by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.

In approving any Section 27 agreement, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government will clearly need to be satisfied that there is adequate supervision in respect of any exercise of those rights by the staff of the housing body concerned. As a result of those safeguards, I beg to move.

My Lords, this amendment seeks to grant employees of organisations that manage local authority housing stock rights of audience and the right to conduct litigation in respect of anti-social behaviour proceedings in the county court. There is a concern that those rights are to be granted without such housing officers being subject to any regulation or training requirements. They will be the only group authorised to deal with complex litigation that is not required to comply with the regulatory scheme. Where a solicitor behaves in breach of his or her obligation to the court he or she can be disciplined or even struck off. There will be no mechanism for stripping housing officers of those rights save for persuading their employer to withdraw the written authorisation.

We would support in principle housing officers having rights of audience in that area, provided that they are subject to a regulatory regime with sufficient teeth to ensure that proper standards of administration are maintained. It is essential that those who conduct litigation and have rights of audience are under an obligation, for example, not to mislead the court, and that they understand their other duties to the court, such as the full disclosure of relevant documents. That is particularly important because, in many of the proceedings that housing officers will be conducting, applications will be included without notice where the opponent is not present.

The proceedings for which housing officers will have these rights include proceedings seeking injunctions, where a power of arrest can be attached to the injunction. In addition, possession orders could be made evicting tenants on a without-notice basis in serious cases. We believe that the public have a right to expect those representing landlords in such cases to be properly qualified and regulated.

Local authority employees may appear, though they cannot conduct litigation, in possession and other minor cases. The right to appear before the court is exercised by local authority officers under the supervision of local authority legal departments. We support in principle housing officers employed by management organisations being given the right to appear in similar routine cases, provided that the issues related to legal supervision can be resolved.

This government amendment appeared without warning after Committee was concluded. There has been no consultation with either the Law Society or the Bar Council on the subject. I am unaware whether or not there has been any consultation with the judiciary. Many of the matters covered by the amendment are serious cases where eviction is a possibility and where the facts may be hotly disputed. It is therefore vital that the advocates should be professionals, with the duties to the court that that implies.

My Lords, I strongly agree with my noble friend. I was very surprised to find this new clause appearing at such a late stage in our consideration of the Bill without any prior warning. It is fundamentally flawed for the Government to rewrite in this way the rules concerning rights of audience and the right to conduct litigation. As my noble friend has pointed out, the restrictions on those rights serve an important public purpose; namely, that those who carry out the functions are properly trained and are subject to appropriate professional duties. It may well be that there has been some good reason for this new clause appearing at this very late stage without proper consultation. If there is, we look forward to hearing it.

My Lords, my noble friend has asked the one question I was going to ask: why? What is the justification, and what is wrong with the present system?

My Lords, there has been a change. The issue raised with the amendment is that we now have a new system where we have people and arm’s-length organisations who need to be able to have the rights we have talked about. I accept that concerns have been raised, not least by the Law Society, which, my briefing says, has raised the issue, which rather suggests that there has been some kind of dialogue. I know that the Law Society is looking, quite reasonably, to have certainty about the situation, and I will seek to provide that in my response to the questions noble Lords have asked.

The rights of audience and the right to conduct litigation will only be exercisable by employers of housing management bodies that have a formal management agreement with the local housing authority. That is covered, as I indicated, in Section 27 of the Housing Act 1985. The local authority will set the terms of the management agreement, thereby ensuring that there is sufficient accountability of the new housing management body. That agreement sets the respective roles, responsibilities and functions of the local authority and the housing management bodies, and should normally provide that parent local authorities continue to be legally liable for anything that housing management bodies do, or do not do, under the terms of the agreement.

As I indicated earlier, those agreements must be approved by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. Each and every agreement is thoroughly scrutinised by officials to ensure that it is robust. The employers will need written authority from the housing management body before exercising their rights. As with local authority housing officers, employees of housing management bodies will handle only routine cases. More complex cases will require the involvement of solicitors or the local authorities’ legal officers. The Department for Communities and Local Government is looking at making Section 27 agreements guidance more up to date, with particular reference—I think this allays the concern of the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Wirral—to the need for all housing management employees to be supervised by a qualified lawyer.

The safeguards are in place. I understand that our discussions with the Law Society have been constructive. I hope that noble Lords will feel able to withdraw their objection to my amendment.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 184 [Solicitors to public departments and the City of London]:

614: Clause 184, page 99, line 4, leave out subsection (2)

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this amendment, which was discussed at an earlier stage, is intended to remove the exemption from the need to hold a practising certificate which applies to solicitors in government service. At present, all solicitors providing legal services in private practice are required to hold a practising certificate, and thus to contribute towards the costs of regulation. Solicitors in commerce and industry and in local government are also required to hold a practising certificate if they undertake reserved activities or if they are held out as solicitors. Government solicitors are wholly exempt from the need to hold such a certificate. Incidentally, there is no similar exemption for government solicitors in Scotland.

The Government have recognised the indefensibility of the present exemption in other contexts. When the Crown Prosecution Service was created in the 1980s, prosecuting solicitors who had formerly worked in local government and were required to hold practising certificates transferred to a central government department. The Government recognised that it would be unjustified for that change of employer to remove the need for them to hold a practising certificate, so the Prosecution of Offences Act specifically provided for solicitors employed in the CPS to hold a practising certificate. Similarly, when the Bar Council’s practising certificate fees became enforceable as a result of the Access to Justice Act 1999, there was no provision excluding government barristers from the need to hold a practising certificate. The result is to create a quite discriminatory situation. Government solicitors are exempt from the need to hold a practising certificate while government barristers must pay.

The position might be understandable if government solicitors were regarded in some way as second-class lawyers not requiring the same qualifications and not subject to the same regulatory requirements as their colleagues in private practice; but this, of course, is not the case. Government solicitors are treated as being equally professional and equally subject to professional discipline.

Your Lordships may recall that, in Committee, discussion took place on this amendment and the Minister suggested that because government solicitors did not hold client money, they did not pose any regulatory risk. That argument is wholly misconceived. Regulation of the solicitors’ profession is not simply about the arrangements for holding clients’ money or for dealing with lay clients. It also encompasses establishing qualification requirements to become a solicitor, establishing the continuing professional development requirements, establishing the rules of conduct and monitoring and enforcing compliance with the rules of conduct. All those issues are as applicable to government solicitors as they are to those in private practice. Government solicitors frequently have to advise on the lawfulness of particular action where the wishes of their Minister may not be lawfully achieved. It is essential that those advising in such circumstances are subject to professional duties, including duties to the court, to help ensure that they give independent legal advice rather than simply the advice that the Minister wishes to hear.

We recognise that it is inappropriate for practising certificate fees to be the same for all sectors when there are significant differences in the extent to which different sectors require the use of regulatory resources. In the case of government lawyers and lawyers in commerce, industry and local government, the cost of practising certificate fees should be less than for solicitors in private practice because they do not hold client money. The apparatus to guard against mishandling of client money is not relevant to their sector. For those reasons, the fees for solicitors employed in government and in commerce and industry should be substantially less than those in private practice; but that does not mean that they should be exempt.

The present legislation does not allow the Law Society to charge differential fees in that way. However, amendments to the Solicitors Act, which are already incorporated in the Bill, will give that power to the Law Society in the future. Accordingly, a requirement to hold a practising certificate will not lead to an unfair burden being put on government lawyers or on their departments, which will in practice meet the cost of their practising certificates. It will simply ensure that government solicitors are no longer unfairly exempted from the requirement to contribute an appropriate amount towards the cost of regulating solicitors. I beg to move.

My Lords, noble Lords will already be aware of my strong support for the amendment. This was something that the Joint Committee found difficult to understand, particularly the differentiation between solicitors and barristers and with those practising in Scotland. The Minister has always promised to come forward with a detailed explanation of exactly why the situation should be permitted to continue. As far as I can see, it is an anomaly that began somewhere in the 19th century, and no one can quite understand how it ever arose or why the exemption was originally provided for. Certainly, we have never heard any explanation of why it should continue. We await the response of the noble Baroness.

My Lords, I was not going to respond to this amendment, but I know something about government lawyers because I have responsibility for them; and I thought that, with my noble friend’s agreement, I ought to respond.

Having listened to both the noble Lords, Lord Kingsland and Lord Hunt, I noted one absolute omission from anything that they said. They have not at any stage pointed out what the benefit to the public would be or what the need for regulation of government lawyers is that is not presently catered for. There are anomalies, and I can go through them if the House wants, but at the end of the day there is a real, practical issue here. The amendment seeks a substantial sum of money to be paid by taxpayers to the Law Society without demonstrating what the public benefit would be. That is a difficult thing to justify when that would be the effect of the amendment.

The Government are the principal consumers in the case of those offices listed under Clause 184, not the public at large. To that end, the existing system adequately provides regulation for government solicitors. I know from my own responsibilities that there is a strong and proportionate system of regulation applying to government solicitors which includes comprehensive training and development programmes, ensuring that high standards are maintained across the Government Legal Service. The head of the Government Legal Service is the Treasury Solicitor, who is responsible for what takes place.

Clause 184(5) also ensures that any government solicitor who exercises a right of audience or conducts litigation is under a duty to the court to act with independence in the interests of justice. I come back to the point: I have not heard a single shred of evidence to suggest that there is a problem with how government solicitors carry out their duties under the existing regime, or information which supports the case for the public purse to meet the cost of different regulatory arrangements to those already provided.

I am sorry to disappoint noble Lords, but I ultimately find it hard to accept that the taxpayer should make this additional sum of money available for no benefit to the public. I therefore invite the noble Lord to withdraw his amendment.

My Lords, I am most grateful to the noble and learned Lord for his unexpected intervention this evening. I will respond in two ways. First, if that principle should apply to government lawyers, should it not apply to at least all lawyers in the Government’s service? It does not, after all, apply to barristers—they must pay their practising fee—or barristers or solicitors in Scotland. If the noble and learned Lord is going to go on to the front foot, and not simply say that this is now the situation because it always has been but adduce some positive reasons for exempting government solicitors in England and Wales, those reasons should surely apply equally to other lawyers in the Government’s service.

Secondly, there is one important reason why government lawyers should be regulated: they give advice to Ministers. As I said in my opening, government lawyers must frequently give advice to Ministers on the lawfulness of particular actions in circumstances where the wishes of their Minister may not lawfully be achieved. I make no apology for repeating myself; but it is essential that those advising in those circumstances are not only subject to professional duties but are seen to be so. That is why government lawyers ought to be drawn into the net.

My Lords, does the noble Lord know what the systems within government are if a lawyer is concerned that his advice is not being followed? Does he know what happens in those circumstances? Does he know of any example where anyone has thought that they should turn to the Law Society? I know of no such case.

My Lords, I have some knowledge of the procedures, but not sufficient to compete in every detail with the noble and learned Lord. I know of no circumstances in which a government lawyer has appealed to the Law Society for any support where there has been a conflict between themselves and the Minister.

I do know, however, that the Government have insisted, throughout the Bill, not only on realities but on perceptions. The Government have always said that even if there is no danger, in respect of some danger that we have said does not exist, we have to be crystal clear in the Bill because there may be a perception of danger. Even if the noble and learned Lord is right that the system in practice at the moment is watertight, nevertheless, I suggest, at least on behalf of the Law Society, that there is a perception that that is not so. There is a perception that government lawyers ought to be subject to similar regimes to other lawyers. In these circumstances and despite what I regard as the well intentioned and calmly presented arguments of the Government, I nevertheless wish to test the opinion of the House.

Clause 185 [Payments in respect of pro bono representation]:

[Amendments Nos. 615 and 616 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

617: Clause 185, page 100, line 15, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

616A: Clause 185, page 100, line 15, at end insert—

“( ) Where an award of costs is made to a party under this section, the prescribed charity shall have regard to the wishes of the legal representative of that party with respect to the distribution of the award.”

The noble Lord said: My Lords, your Lordships may recall that we debated this matter in Committee. It concerns two issues; first, the Government have established a system—both imaginatively and correctly, in my view—whereby cost awards may be made, in future, to the successful litigant who has pro bono representation. The second issue is: what happens to the money that flows from the cost awards? The Government have established a system under the Bill whereby it will be managed by a prescribed charity. The terms of reference of that charity, and the manner in which it is to be established, have yet to be decided—but it will, of course, be a creature of charities legislation.

In Committee, our concern was for those individuals who might have views about how the cost award ought to be distributed which conflicted with the charitable scope of the prescribed charity. At the end of the debate, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Goldsmith, kindly suggested that I might take the time to look into the intended terms of reference of that charity, to satisfy myself that its objectives conformed with those of which, during the debate, I had said I approved. I have done so, and I am entirely satisfied about them.

However, there might be circumstances in which a pro bono representative has strong views about the destination of the moneys, even within the terms laid down in the charitable objectives of the prescribed charity. Amendment No. 616A is intended to require the prescribed charity to have regard to the wishes of the legal representative of the party with respect to the distribution of the award made to that party.

I have been much influenced by the discussions that I have had with various lawyers, in particular Mr Robin Knowles, who have spent a great deal of time, entirely at the service of the general public, to ensure that the idea behind the clause gets off the ground. I applaud the work that he has done. Indeed, I would like to say to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Goldsmith, how much I admire everything that he has done for the pro bono movement. Since the early seeds were sown, it has gone from strength to strength. The fact that he is prepared to put his shoulder so firmly behind it is one of the main reasons for its success.

So in tabling the amendment, I do not want the noble and learned Lord to think that I am in any way trying to undermine his objectives. I am simply trying to ensure that those who do the pro bono work can, if they wish, have some say in the ultimate destination of the money. I beg to move.

My Lords, I start by thanking the noble Lord for three things: first, for having taken the trouble and time—he is very heavily committed on this Bill so he will have had a great deal else to do—to consider the issue and to discuss it with those whom he has mentioned. I entirely share his view on the work that they have done and I, too, pay tribute to Mr Robin Knowles and others. Secondly, I thank him, as a result, for having withdrawn his previous amendment and tabled one focused on the point that he identified. Thirdly, I thank him for the very generous remarks he made at the end of his speech moving the amendment. I very much appreciate what he said.

I declare my interests, as I did responding to the amendments in Committee, both as president—it carries no executive responsibility—of the Bar Pro Bono Unit and as chairman of the Attorney-General’s National Pro Bono Co-Ordinating Committee. I repeat those declarations.

I also thank my noble friend for allowing me the opportunity to propose what I regard as this important, if small, amendment to the Bill. I am grateful for the overall support that it has been given by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland. As he knows and has explained, the structure of the single charity envisaged under the clause was the subject of study by a working party set up under the auspices of the co-ordinating committee to which I referred. The membership of that working party was drawn from across the profession and the working sector. The report of the working party was fully endorsed by the full co-ordinating committee. I know that the noble Lord has seen that report.

The report contemplates that among the factors to which the single prescribed charity would have regard—probably through principles rather than as a constitutional fetter—when making decisions about distribution of money received, would be any expression of preference by the legal representatives who have acted pro bono. The report emphasises that such expression of preference could not be determinative, otherwise much of the advantage of strategic perspective that the use of a single prescribed charity offers would be lost. Those who wish to express a preference would be free to do so. I can see that proper regard to such expressions of preference would be helpful in ensuring confidence in the use of the prescribed charity. But, again, as the working party report emphasises, there must be a balance between having regard to preferences expressed and ensuring fair and strategic disbursement.

It is intended that the single charity, which is referred to and which will be prescribed under Clause 185, will have the feature that I have just described. I hope that the noble Lord will take the view that that is sufficient to meet his concerns, without his amendment being moved. He will not be surprised to hear that I would have some difficulties with the amendment as it stands. For example, it identifies only one factor and does not mention that the charity can have regard to the others. That always creates a difficulty in the statute—there are others, but I am sure that the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, has taken my point.

Without, I hope, adding any sour note to what has been a constructive discussion, I do not share the view expressed by some to the noble Lord, that the enthusiasm of those who do pro bono work will be dampened by thinking that money might not go to their favourite or prescribed charity. I have confidence in them, have had the privilege of seeing them at work and know that they do that work because they want to help those people who receive legal advice and assistance. For those reasons, I hope that the noble Lord will feel able to withdraw the amendment.

I note that, since I spoke to the associated amendment in Committee, the Department for Constitutional Affairs has issued a consultation paper on the clause which invites comments on all aspects of the clause’s implementation. I hope that that will result in constructive suggestions from many quarters.

My Lords, I am most grateful to the noble and learned Lord for his response. I would have preferred to have the amendment incorporated in the Bill. However, I have had his undertaking that its terms will be taken into account by those responsible for the management of the prescribed charity, when funds come in which have been derived from particular cases. I am sure that that consideration will be given proper attention by the prescribed charity and am, therefore, content to withdraw my amendment and leave matters as they stand in the Bill.

The noble and learned Lord is right in saying that there is concern in sectors of the solicitors’ profession, in particular among some city firms, about the extent of the prescribed charity’s power in relation to the ultimate destination of funds. I draw consolation from what the noble and learned Lord has said and am sure that if those concerns are properly taken into account, the existence of the prescribed charity will not prove to be a disincentive to the effort they make in pro bono cases. In those circumstances, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

[Amendment No. 618 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

619: Clause 185, page 100, line 29, leave out subsection (11) and insert—

“( ) The court may not make an order under subsection (3) in respect of representation if (or to the extent that) it is provided before this section comes into force.”

The noble and learned Lord said: My Lords, the amendment will allow the court to consider making a pro bono costs order in proceedings commenced before the clause comes into force but in relation to costs incurred after the clause comes into force. If passed, the amendment will give the court the discretion to make a costs order in a successful pro bono case, even though the case had started before the clause came into force. That might mean that in long-running cases—perhaps those on their way to the Court of Appeal or even to the Judicial Committee of this House, or those that have reached only their early stages at the commencement of this legislation—the court could still make an order for pro bono costs if it considered it appropriate. That will have the benefit of expanding the proceedings in which this new power can be used. I underline that the court could not make an order in relation to costs incurred, or to work carried out, before the clause comes into force. That would be retrospective, and is not what the Government seek to do. I add that this will mean that ongoing cases are in the same position as those that have started after the clause comes into effect, so far as work done after the commencement of the legislation is concerned. It will, I hope, have the benefit of producing additional funds for the prescribed charity, which in turn may use those funds to assist the further provision of free advice. For those reasons, I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Schedule 20 [Amendments in relation to the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007]:

620: Schedule 20, page 295, line 21, at end insert—

“(17A) In Schedule 1 paragraph 3(ba) after “of” insert “the Council””

The noble Lord said: My Lords, the amendment would ensure that non-solicitors can be appointed members of the Council of the Law Society of Scotland. The governing body of the Law Society of Scotland is its council, which is currently composed exclusively of solicitors, although it has four non-solicitor observers. I have been in touch, and had correspondence, with Michael Clancy, the director of the Law Society of Scotland, who explains that he and his colleagues would very much like this provision to be made. I am also now aware that the Scottish Consumer Council is backing the move by the Law Society of Scotland to appoint non-solicitors to its governing council for the first time in history. I warmly applaud this move, and I very much hope that the Government will support it.

Schedule 20 is interesting because it deals with a whole range of issues relating to devolved and non-devolved matters. I do not know whether the Minister will explain whether we require a legislative consent Motion, although it would undoubtedly be difficult to require one, given the Scottish Executive’s present situation. On balance, it is probably not necessary, given the other matters that are repealed in this part. As the Minister is showing an interest in this issue, I shall explain that, as I understand it, many of the repeals in Schedule 23 deal with a range of devolved issues surrounding the discharge of functions of the council. The repeals involve Section 3A, on the discharge of the functions of the Council of the Law Society; Section 20, on the council’s duty to supply a list of solicitors holding practising certificates; Section 24C, on the discretion of the council in special cases; Section 34(4), on the rules of professional practice conduct and discipline; and Sections 38, 39, 42A and 42B, which all relate to council powers where dishonesty is alleged. The list of sections is considerable, and I need mention no more, except to say that, in the light of that, it is not necessary for a legislative consent Motion to be passed by the Scottish Parliament. I therefore hope that the Minister will accept the amendment. I beg to move.

My Lords, it is, at first blush, rather surprising that it falls to this Parliament to consider the composition of the council of the Law Society of Scotland. In so far as it has the backing of Mr Michael Clancy, the profession itself and the consumer representatives in Scotland, it merits our acceptance in principle. I hope it can be achieved without the consents that the noble Lord mentioned.

My Lords, as noble Lords will know, and as the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Wirral, alluded to, the regulation of the legal profession in Scotland is a devolved matter and therefore more appropriately dealt with by the Scottish Parliament. I recognise that this amendment is important. It attempts to promote greater non-solicitor involvement in the functions of the Law Society of Scotland. It is, of course, consistent with the agenda that seeks to put consumers at the heart of regulatory arrangements in the legal profession. As the noble Lord will know—and the noble Lord, Lord Maclennan of Rogart, will certainly know—the Scottish Parliament legislated on matters concerning the Scottish legal profession last year. The Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007 came into force earlier this year.

While it is technically possible for us to amend the relevant legislation to allow non-solicitors to sit on the council of the Law Society of Scotland, noble Lords will be familiar with the convention, set out in the Statement by the noble Lord, Lord Sewel, to this House in 1998:

“Westminster would not normally legislate with regard to devolved matters in Scotland without the consent of the Scottish Parliament”.—[Official Report, 21/7/98; col. 791.]

The change sought by the Law Society of Scotland was not put forward when the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act was before the Scottish Parliament. It is unlikely—bearing in mind where we are with the Scottish elections—to be possible to obtain a legislative consent Motion in that Parliament at this time, following the very recent elections. I must ask the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment. We will seek to get the Law Society to raise this with the Scottish Executive and the Scottish Parliament first, and then return to it if need be. At this stage there is nothing I can do.

My Lords, I listed a series of the present enactments which surely fall within the same bracket. Is the Minister confident that the repeals that I set out do not require a legislative consent Motion? The amendment that I am moving seems very much on a par with what is already provided for within this schedule.

My Lords, we took advice from the Scotland Office lawyers and lawyers within the Scottish Executive. The advice I was given was very clear and direct: I need to pursue the process I have set out. I need to get the required Motion in order to make that possible.

This is a good and important amendment; I have no objection to it. I am simply rather trapped in the process at present. That does not mean that I have given up on it. We will have to see if there is anything that we can do, but it will not be by way of amending other than getting a Sewel Motion in the Scottish Parliament. We wait to see what happens. This legislation has further to go; it has another House to go through. There may be time within that. I merely ask the noble Lord to withdraw the amendment at this stage because I am rather tied.

My Lords, I understand that the Minister will now seek a way within the timescale of this legislation to ensure that a legislative consent Motion is required. I would have thought that it should meet with the approval of the Parliament in the way that the noble Lord has already indicated. It seems a sensible move forward for the Minister to initiate the processes necessary to see if that is possible in good time before the Bill completes its parliamentary passage.

My Lords, I will certainly seek to discuss this. I cannot say that I can initiate because initiation comes from within the Scottish Parliament. The noble Lord will understand that my hands are tied. This is absolutely within the jurisdiction of a devolved matter. I must wait to see the Ministers appointed. I have no doubt that the Law Society of Scotland will make representations. We shall see where the Parliament and the Executive wish to go with it. We will not stand in its way, but I do not want to pretend that I am hopeful that we will be able to do it during the passage of the Bill. If we can, we will, but I cannot pretend that I am certain of that.

My Lords, I wish to make it absolutely clear that I was not looking for certainty. I was merely looking for commitment. In the light of the Minister’s commitment in the terms she has just expressed, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

621: Before Clause 188, insert the following new Clause—

“Protected functions not transferable under Ministers of the Crown Act 1975

(1) The Ministers of the Crown Act 1975 (c. 26) is amended as follows.

(2) In section 1 (Power by ordering Council to transfer functions of Ministers), at the end of subsection (6) insert—

“or the Legal Services Act 2007””

The noble Lord said: My Lords, in Committee the Government accepted an amendment to the effect that ministerial functions under the Bill should rest with the Lord Chancellor rather than the Secretary of State. The thinking behind the amendment was that it was essential, in order to reinforce the perceived independence of the regulation of the legal profession, that any ministerial functions rested with the Minister responsible for the judiciary and the court system. During the debate on that amendment, my noble friend Lord Hunt made it clear that if the amendment was successful, it would be important to bring forward a further amendment to entrench the position.

Under the proposed amendment, therefore, it would no longer be possible for the ministerial functions to be transferred from the Lord Chancellor to another Minister simply through a transfer of functions order. Instead, primary legislation would be needed. An equivalent provision was included in the Constitutional Reform Act to ensure that ministerial responsibilities in relation to the judiciary were carried out by the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor rather than by another Minister. That principle is equally important in respect of the functions in the Legal Services Bill. I beg to move.

My Lords, as the noble Lord says, the amendment seeks to entrench in the Bill the functions of the Lord Chancellor so that those functions could be transferred only by primary legislation. The amendment is deficient in that it does not provide for all of the Lord Chancellor’s functions in the regulation of the legal professions to be entrenched. The Government have decided that all these functions should be entrenched, and if the noble Lord will bear with us, a government amendment follows this group which I think will satisfy him completely.

My Lords, in those circumstances, how could I possibly not withdraw my amendment? I thank the Minister very much. I am delighted to receive that excellent news. In those circumstances, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 189 [Local weights and measures authorities]:

622: Clause 189, page 102, line 26, at end insert—

“(1A) A local weights and measures authority may institute proceedings for an offence under section (Offence to carry on reserved legal activity through person not entitled) if the activity which it is alleged that E was not entitled to carry on constitutes reserved instrument activities; and “E” has the same meaning as in that section.”

623: Clause 189, page 102, line 29, after “(1)” insert “or (1A)”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

623A: After Clause 189, insert the following new Clause—

“Protected functions of the Lord Chancellor

(1) Schedule 7 to the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 (c. 4) (protected functions of the Lord Chancellor) is amended as follows.

(2) After paragraph 3 insert—

“3A Any function of the Lord Chancellor under the Legal Services Act 2007.”

(3) Part A of paragraph 4 is amended in accordance with subsections (4) to (7).

(4) After the entry for the Juries Act 1974 (c. 23), insert—

“Solicitors Act 1974

Section 56”.(5) After the entry for the Reserve Forces (Safeguard of Employment) Act 1985 (c. 17), insert—

“Administration of Justice Act 1985

Section 9(7)Section 69(2)Schedule 3”.(6) In the entry for the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 (c.41)—

(a) after “Section 1” insert—“Section 53Section 60”, and(b) after “Section 72” insert—“Section 89Section 125(4)Schedule 19, paragraph 17”.(7) After the entry for the Finance Act 1999 (c.16), insert—

“Access to Justice Act 1999

Section 45”.”

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, on the first day in Committee, Members of the Committee argued strongly in support of the need to preserve the independence of the legal professions. In particular, there were concerns that the responsibilities under the Bill should be exercised by the Lord Chancellor as opposed to a Secretary of State. The Committee had in mind the fact that the Lord Chancellor, by reason of his oath of office and the provisions of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, has a range of unique duties and responsibilities not shared by other Ministers. Among those are that he must have regard to,

“the need for the public interest in regard to matters relating to the judiciary or otherwise to the administration of justice to be properly represented in decisions affecting those matters”.

The Lord Chancellor must also be qualified by experience in law or Parliament and has a specific duty to respect the rule of law.

The Government of course recognise not only the need to ensure that the legal professions are properly independent of government, but also that they can be seen to be independent. In recognition of this I agreed that the functions should be exercised by the Lord Chancellor, and the Government have brought forward amendments to give effect to that. Members of the Committee pressed me further to exclude the functions from the permitted scope of orders under the Ministers of the Crown Act 1975, in much the same way as was done in respect of the Lord Chancellor’s judiciary-related functions and functions relating to the Great Seal in the Constitutional Reform Act.

Noble Lords will recall that at the time I resisted going that far. However, in looking carefully at the proposition, I am content to propose this government amendment which I hope achieves the outcome which noble Lords were seeking and does not have the deficiencies of the previous amendment. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 194 [Orders, regulations and rules]:

624: Clause 194, page 106, line 8, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

625: Clause 194, page 106, line 23, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Clause 196 [Parliamentary control of orders and regulations]:

626: Clause 196, page 107, line 23, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

627: Clause 196, page 108, line 16, at end insert—

“( ) section 197(4A) (power to modify definition of “manager” in its application to foreign bodies);”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

628: Clause 196, page 108, line 22, at end insert—

“( ) paragraph A2 of Schedule 22 (transitory power to modify functions of designated regulators etc).”

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I shall also speak to Amendments Nos. 636, 648, 651A, 654A and 654B. The amendments in this group share the common objective of ensuring that the transition to the new regulatory framework is not hindered by undue delay. As noble Lords will know, it will be some time before the board is fully established and the entire regime in place. That should not prevent us making progress in the mean time.

Amendment No. 648 creates a provision which enables changes to be made to the statutory functions of designated regulators; that is, bodies which will become approved regulators when the provisions come into force. This will cover the period before the board comes into existence and is able to recommend orders under Clause 68 for this purpose. I am introducing this amendment in response to an amendment tabled in Committee by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland. That amendment was not moved due to lack of time, but as I indicated in letters to your Lordships on 22 March 2007, I was prepared to consider it. Having given this further thought, I am persuaded that the noble Lord’s proposals in this regard are valid. I hope that these government amendments achieve the outcome that the noble Lord was seeking.

As noble Lords will know, one of the key aims of the Government has been to ensure that any changes needed to enable approved regulators to operate efficiently and effectively under the new regulatory arrangements are not unduly delayed by inflexible arrangements. Against that backdrop, I can well conceive that statutory bodies will need to adapt certain aspects of their regulatory framework at some point before the board comes into being. This power will allow this, placing them as far as possible on an equal footing with non-statutory bodies such as the Bar Council during the transitional period.

The proposed new clause is modelled in principle on Clause 68. It will enable the Lord Chancellor to make an order to modify the functions of designated regulators during a transitional period, provided that the change in question is for one of the stated purposes, which are effectively the same as those in Clause 68. The Lord Chancellor may act only in accordance with a request from a designated regulator. He must publish the proposed changes and consult the Lord Chief Justice and the Office of Fair Trading. He may also consult the Legal Services Consultative Panel and any other persons as appropriate, and must have regard to advice and representations. As with Clause 68, the final order will be subject to Parliament under the affirmative procedure.

The purpose of the second set of amendments in this group is to ensure smooth transition by enabling the LSB to carry out its initial functions without waiting until the chief executive is in place. It is particularly important for the Office of Legal Complaints to be appointed at the earliest opportunity so that it can begin the work necessary for implementation, including the production of its scheme rules. Should the LSB have to wait until it has appointed its chief executive before it can proceed to appoint the OLC, it could delay the implementation up to nine months. This would be of real detriment. Similarly, it is important that the LSB is able to issue supervisory directions to the interim chief executive of the OLC at the earliest opportunity. The LSB chairing board should be able to oversee the work of the interim chief executive, be aware and kept informed of the activities taking place, and issue directions accordingly. I beg to move.

My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for responding to some of our concerns.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 197 [Interpretation]:

629: Clause 197, page 108, line 31, at end insert—

““barrister” means an individual who—

(a) has been called to the Bar by an Inn of Court, and(b) is not disbarred by order of an Inn of Court;”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

[Amendment No. 630 had been withdrawn from the Marshalled List.]

631: Clause 197, page 108, leave out lines 44 to 46 and insert—

““court” includes—

(a) a tribunal that is (to any extent) a listed tribunal for, or for any of, the purposes of Schedule 7 to the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (functions etc of Administrative Justice and Tribunals Council);(b) a court-martial;(c) a statutory inquiry within the meaning of section 16(1) of the Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1992 (c. 53);(d) an ecclesiastical court (including the Court of Faculties);”

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 638A to 647, and 655A to 719. As noble Lords will note, these consequential amendments are numerous and technical, so I do not propose to address each one in detail. The current regulatory framework is established under a number of provisions in existing legislation, primarily the Solicitors Act 1974, the Administration of Justice Act 1985, the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 and the Access to Justice Act 1999. Amendments to the Solicitors Act have in the main been dealt with in Schedule 16. Those Acts variously deal with the regulation, education and training applying to the provision of advocacy, litigation, conveyancing and probate services. They also set out the persons who have a role in regulating those services, such as the Master of the Rolls, the Lord Chief Justice, the Secretary of State—the Lord Chancellor—the Legal Services Consultative Panel and the Office of Fair Trading.

As noble Lords will know, the Bill simplifies this model by placing the board as the single oversight regulator, sweeping away the maze of existing regulators who have overlapping responsibilities. It also sets out the board’s duties in designating approved regulators in considering regulatory arrangements and ensuring compliance with the regulatory objectives. Further, a large number of existing statutory provisions refer to lawyers of a named description or certain types of legal professions. For example, many statutory provisions refer to services provided by solicitors and barristers. Under the Bill, legal services are services provided by persons authorised in respect of reserved legal activities irrespective of title. It will be possible for persons other than those with titles such as “barrister” or “solicitor” to carry out those reserved activities, so it is important that existing legislation is updated to reflect the position, covering all persons who are or may become so authorised.

Given the scale of these changes, it is clearly essential to repeal a number of existing provisions to the current regime, or where appropriate to amend them so that they are consistent with the regulatory framework established under the Bill. I beg to move.

On Question, amendment agreed to.

632: Clause 197, page 109, line 5, after “means” insert “(subject to subsection (4A))”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

632ZA: Clause 197, page 109, line 5, after “person” insert “providing services to clients, directly or indirectly,”

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I make no apology for returning to this subject, which we dealt with on the last day in Committee. I do so because I believe there is a growing consensus across parties and the professions that we really need to get the approach to Part 5 right. One of the problems is that Part 5 fails to deal with the new structures on a risk-based approach, something I know Sir David Clementi was keen to see and to which the Government signed up when they accepted the Hampton principles in March 2005. When we last debated the issue, the Minister summarised the problem as she saw it in the following terms:

“A body either has non-lawyers in positions of control or it does not. Consequently, it is either a licensable body or it is not”.—[Official Report, 18/4/07; col. 301.]

That approach fails to recognise the point of difference between legal disciplinary practices and multidisciplinary practices which Sir David Clementi said was at the heart of his review.

The most important point here is that legal disciplinary practices are low risk—I refer to LDPs as defined by Sir David Clementi—and the concerns that they should fall outside Part 5 could be addressed quite simply by introducing new clauses to require fitness to own or registration of non-lawyer principals without burdening such practices with the full difficulties arising from the legislative requirements of Part 5. This amendment seeks to remove that artificial distinction and allow legal disciplinary practices with non-client-facing managers to develop and grow, which I believe would drive up the efficiency of legal services providers and enable them to attract and retain the best talent. I beg to move.

My Lords, I was sad to see these amendments retabled because I thought in Committee that we had considered and agreed that non-lawyer managers would still be in positions to influence a business even if only assisting in the development of legal services or indeed delivering ancillary services. It is important that we are confident that legal services are properly protected. Exempting certain types of non-lawyer manager is in my view a step too far. We are not confident that the board or for that matter other approved regulators will be able to effectively regulate them under this approach. The noble Lord is right that we need to be careful and in a sense cautious about Part 5. Being a partner or a director in a firm brings with it influence and responsibility. Where legal services are concerned it is right that anyone in such an influential position can be under effective regulation, but applied flexibly. Under Part 5, that is the case in practice. In my view, the provisions for low-risk bodies that we have put in Clause 106 strike the right balance. I hope that on that basis the noble Lord will withdraw his amendment.

My Lords, I know what the Minister said, but I am referring to the report by Sir David Clementi which emphasised that the approach must be on a risk-based analysis. I am not sure that the Government have fully accepted that. Although I note what the Minister says, I want to reflect on the matter and consider it further. In return perhaps the Minister might also see if there is a further way through other than the one she explained, but in the mean time I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

[Amendment No. 632A not moved.]

633: Clause 197, page 110, line 7, at end insert—

“(4A) The Lord Chancellor may by order make provision modifying the definition of “manager” in its application to a body of persons formed under, or in so far as the body is recognised by, law having effect outside England and Wales.”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 198 [Minor and consequential provision etc]:

634: Clause 198, page 110, line 16, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

635: Clause 198, page 110, line 18, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Clause 199 [Transitional provision]:

636: Clause 199, page 110, line 32, after “transitional” insert “and transitory”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

Clause 201 [Commencement]:

637: Clause 201, page 110, line 39, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

637A: Clause 201, page 110, line 39, at end insert “provided always that no order may be made by the Secretary of State bringing into force Part 5 of this Act and the related Schedules 10 to 14 until after—

(a) consideration by both Houses of Parliament of a comprehensive report to be commissioned by the Lord Chancellor from an independent source analyzing—(i) the advantages or disadvantages (or both) which may be realistically expected to flow from the implementation of Part 5, including the benefits or risks (or both) to consumers;(ii) the potential enhancement or curtailment (or both) of access to justice; and(iii) the threats actual or internationally perceived to the independence of lawyers practising in England and Wales; and(b) the laying of the draft of a statutory instrument designed to bring into force the whole or part of Part 5 and the related Schedules before each House of Parliament and approval thereof by resolution of each House.(3) In this section an “independent source” means a source (such as a research organisation) which is independent of Government, free of connections with any political party and free of connections with any individual or body representing consumer interests or lawyers.”

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I declare an interest as a practising member of the Bar, a former member of the Bar Council and sometime chairman of the Bar. This is a plea by me with support from other Members of the House that we should be told more by Government about Part 5 and about alternative business structures before we allow it to be put into operation or before we allow the Legal Services Board to take steps to implement those provisions. My plea is based on the degree of ignorance we have about the alternative business structures. My primary concern is about access to justice: what is going to happen to the small firms of solicitors; and what will be the consequences on the ground of implementing Part 5 in the real world? Secondly, I have a deep query about who is going to invest in the big partnerships and what their motivation will be. Thirdly, I am concerned about the degree of our ignorance about what is happening in other countries in this area. What about the common law countries and the civil law countries, particularly in the European Union? Are we going to find ourselves in a pariah status as lawyers? At the moment the legal profession is widely admired for its integrity and independence and we need to reflect and have information before we move forward.

I will keep this discussion as brief as possible; the hour is late, but it is a serious matter. I turn to access to justice. When I spoke on the sixth day in Committee I went through the testimony that had gradually been built up in earlier debates to show how worried senior lawyers were about the state of solicitors, by which I mean the economic stability and their chances of survival in various parts of the country. The starkest warning was from the former Lord Chief Justice, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Woolf. I shall not read out again what he said, but it was particularly striking, because he said he was in the position of someone whose duty it was to travel around the United Kingdom and take note of what was happening to legal practices and the state of solicitors. He found that concern was expressed countrywide, as your Lordships will find in Hansard on 23 January this year at col. 1057.

On the same day the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, expressed his concern about Wales and the position of solicitors there, from close personal knowledge—his earlier practice in law was there, of course. With regard to Yorkshire and Cumbria, the noble Lord, Lord Carlile, spoke of his worry and his knowledge of the anxieties in those areas on 6 February, and on the same day the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, spoke about the West Country, with which she is very familiar. On an earlier occasion—I have not recorded the date here—the noble Lord, Lord Whitty, stated that he was particularly concerned about the position in rural areas.

There is a feeling of concern about just how strong and stable these medium, small and very small solicitors’ firms throughout the country are, and we are interested in finding out what the effect will be of the establishment of these new forms of practice. That needs to be looked at. We want to have some evidence-based conclusions that are up to date. Merely citing what Sir John Vickers may have written in 2001 in the Office of Fair Trading report will not do; in my submission, we have to have a serious study now. In a moment I will mention the literature the Minister sent me, but I have not found that it directly addresses the concerns I have in this field.

My second point, which is perhaps smaller, is the astonishing lack of information we have about who will come forward and fund these big partnerships. I should have mentioned that I was on the Joint Committee under the excellent chairmanship of the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Wirral. I think I am right in saying that Co-operative Legal Services said it was enthusiastic about going down this route and supporting law firms by putting a financial stake in, but I believe that is the only bit of evidence we had.

I have asked this question before, but I shall repeat it: are we going to have law firms bought and sold like football clubs? Will they end up being quoted on the Stock Exchange? I believe that is just about to be developed in New South Wales. What is happening in other countries? Do we find models for these proposals working in other countries? I stated last time, and no one has contradicted me, that the United States of America has been firmly against this sort of financial participation, the ownership of firms by outside interests.

The only Commonwealth area about which the Minister has supplied evidence is New South Wales. I shall say a word about that because this is new material that I have not seen before. I base this all on an article written by the Legal Services Commissioner in New South Wales, a Mr Steven Mark, and his co-author, Georgina Cowdroy, the senior legal and policy officer in the commission. It appeared on page 671 of the Penn State International Law Review in volume 22, part 4, in 2004, and I am indebted to the Minister for kindly letting me see the article. The current position is that there are now in New South Wales some 300 incorporated legal practices. I am unable to say how many of those are multi-disciplinary, because we are not told that.

The commissioner makes a rather interesting statement:

“The Law Society’s records indicate that at present, there are almost 300 ILPs in NSW. The vast majority of these ILPs were previously sole practitioners or small partnerships, which changed their ownership structures to obtain the perceived benefits of incorporation. However, aside from having to comply with the ILP legislation, such practices have experienced little change in their daily management and operation”.

So they have taken on a corporate structure to derive a benefit for themselves with no thought of what good it will confer on consumers. The commissioner says elsewhere in the article that this may be disadvantageous because the limited liability obtained by the partners means that not so many purses can be pursued by the dissatisfied claimant. As I say, there are 300 of these bodies, none of which has yet become a public listed company. It is open to them to do that. Under the Legal Profession Act the solicitor’s duty is paramount and duties to shareholders come second. However, it is pretty clear that the commissioner, who has had experience of these incorporated partnerships, does not really believe that. He says that despite the assurances that the legal duty to maintain professional standards is paramount,

“my tentative view is that where an ILP becomes publicly listed, the duty of an ILP solicitor director to the court and to clients will inevitably conflict with the duty of a solicitor director to the ILP and its shareholders. Furthermore, I believe that such conflict is irreconcilable. While the perceived conflict between professional ethics and profit is an ongoing concern in the regulation of at least some present partnerships, in publicly listed ILPs, shareholder pressure for commercial gain will introduce a dynamic for solicitor directors which was non-existent in partnership structures”.

In other words, the profit motive is likely to become dominant and possibly irresistible, notwithstanding the fine words in the statute.

The other aspect that I mentioned briefly previously is that we are still in the same state of ignorance about the position regarding the civil law in European countries. The only country that we know anything about is Germany. All the members of its association equivalent of a combined Bar Council and Law Society belong to an organisation, the abbreviation of which is BRAK. It is quite obvious from the evidence that it sent to our committee that it regards our proposals as an abomination because in Germany the independence of the lawyer is enshrined in constitutional provisions of law and the notions that we are considering here would be completely impossible. In the type of structure that is contemplated here you could not have a German partner coming in as a shareholder and owning a firm. A German lawyer can have a stake but he has to be part of the firm and subject to the professional ethic. What about the position in other countries in Europe? We do not have the faintest idea what is happening in France, Sweden or Ireland. As I thought about this today it struck me what an incredibly insular approach we are taking. We are ploughing on with these proposals without making any inquiry about what happens in the rest of the world.

My amendment would require the Government to put before us proper targeted information. I do not believe that would cause any delay. Nothing will come into force immediately. A document I was sent by one of the interested parties stated that we are looking at 2010 before the Legal Services Board will really get into action. That leaves plenty of time for a bit of decent research to come back to us within 12 months. I beg to move.

My Lords, we are extremely grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Neill of Bladen, for tabling the amendment. If Part 5 is to succeed, three things will be needed: rigorous procedures to ensure that those who own law firms are fit and proper persons, a guarantee that the same consumer protections will apply to externally owned law firms as well as to other law firms and the assurance that proper attention is given to the impact on access to justice before licensing decisions are taken.

Two of those issues are dealt with satisfactorily by the Bill, which provides a comprehensive framework to ensure that external owners will be fit and proper persons. Furthermore, regulators of ABS firms will be able to ensure that the bodies that they license are subject to the same conduct of business rules and other consumer and public protection requirements as apply to existing law firms.

However, the Bill does not ensure proper consideration of the impact on access to justice. It is highly likely that the impact of these new providers on access to justice will vary considerably in different parts of the country. In urban areas, it may well be that externally owned law firms would simply provide desirable extra competition without any significant consumer detriment. The position may well be different in rural areas where the existing network of law firms is already thinly spread and under considerable economic pressure. In those areas, it is entirely possible that a new provider, concentrating on easily delivered routine legal services, might flourish, but only at the expense of making existing law firms unviable.

That could be damaging in two separate ways. First, there is a significant risk that large new providers would not be readily accessible to disadvantaged consumers, particularly if they operated from out of town sites, as many supermarkets are. Secondly, many essential but less remunerative services may become unavailable. Existing law firms fold because the new providers are highly unlikely to offer the services concerned. Those services might include advice to parents whose children are involved in care proceedings, or help for the elderly having difficulties in relation to a care home; and they might simply become unavailable in large swathes throughout the country. Once services of that sort are lost, it will be exceedingly difficult to replace them.

It is imperative therefore that the Government should analyse the likely impact of ABSs before implementing this part of the Bill. Research carried out, as the noble Lord, Lord Neill of Bladen, indicated, prior to implementation of the provisions cannot be definitive; it will simply be a prediction based on economic analysis. The fact that it may not be perfect is no reason to proceed without it. Research on these lines could be particularly useful in highlighting especial risks and in suggesting what safeguards could be introduced to mitigate them.

My Lords, I, too, express great appreciation and support of the amendment and the speech by the noble Lord, Lord Neill, who has, even at this late stage, brought new and forceful arguments to a debate that we have had before. As we have had it before, I have nothing new to add, so I will be brief. The amendment, to which my name is added, may appeal to the Government more than my earlier attempt to suggest that Part 5 should not be made operative prior to the conduct of a pilot scheme to test whether the fears about access to justice are real.

For the reason just given by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, the circumstances will vary from one part to another. The proposal of the noble Lord, Lord Neill—that careful studies should be made available before the implementation of Part 5—is probably the better route. Furthermore, it is clear that it need not hold up the Government’s desire to give effect to Part 5, since the studies could be put in hand virtually immediately and would no doubt greatly enhance our understanding of what is at risk and how best to avoid any adverse consequences for licensing alternative business structures.

My Lords, I am grateful. I am only sorry for the noble Lord, Lord Neill of Bladen, that the late hour means that his words fall on few ears. I am sure that noble Lords will none the less read our debate with interest. I agree with the sentiments expressed by noble Lords: this is an important debate on Part 5.

I agree that we should proceed cautiously with the development of alternative business structures. My principal concern is with doing more research, as the amendment requires, and the value that that would bring to our deliberations. Building on the excellent work of Sir David Clementi and working with stakeholders, we have obviously thought about and carefully reviewed the ABS proposals. That work was of course informed by the work of the Joint Committee on the draft Bill, chaired—“so ably” it says in my notes, but I agree—as noble Lords will know, by the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Wirral. The debates on this matter have been both informed and occasionally lengthy, but none the less important.

The difficulty with further research is that, in a sense, it takes us into a slight Catch-22. I have provided the noble Lord, Lord Neill of Bladen, with information about the different approaches overseas. He rightly talks about New South Wales, where they have been looking at alternative business structures. We are interested in developments in other jurisdictions. He talked about the firm floated on the stock exchange there. There was recent publicity about the Australian firm Slater & Gordon, saying that it plans to be one of the world’s first law firms to float on the stock exchange; the first was actually in 2004.

Monitoring the effect of this sort of change on the Australian market and consumers is important, but I stress that what happens in one country is unlikely to exactly map across to another. The different safeguards make comparisons difficult, and services offered by firms in one jurisdiction may differ from other jurisdictions and ABS firms here. Although it is important to be aware of developments in other countries, that is not how to drive the development of alternative business structures in England and Wales.

That does not mean that the noble Lord’s concern should not be addressed. Indeed, the amendments accepted by your Lordships’ House on the second day of Report, 18 April, are important: the requirement for licensing authorities to publish policy statements, setting out how they would satisfy their Clause 24 objectives—including, importantly, access to justice when granting ABS licences. Government amendments introduced a duty for the board’s annual report to deal with how the activities of a licensing authority and licensed bodies have affected the regulatory objectives, again including access to justice. That is the right approach to monitoring. Placing the duty on the Legal Services Board avoids fragmentation and maintains a central oversight of the regime’s impact by the LSB.

There is no disagreement between us over the need to recognise and minimise risks. However, I remain concerned that requiring more research at this stage adds little. It seems attractive to look at other jurisdictions where ABS has been allowed but, as I have indicated, the potential for learning from them is limited. Noble Lords talked about the German BRAK. On a recent overseas visit, I heard that the German Parliament is looking to legislate in this direction. The relationship between the reaction of the German BRAK and what is happening in Germany may be relevant to our deliberations, but it looks as if Germany may be heading in the same direction. We will have to find more information because that was new to me, but it appears to be the case.

To draw conclusions about the factors covered in the amendment would be difficult because there is not an ABS in operation. Parliament would find it difficult to draw any conclusion or take a decision to commence Part 5, because there would not be any evidence. It is a Catch-22; unless we work on alternative business structures we cannot ascertain how successful they have been, and without that how can Parliament make a decision on research that cannot possibly exist?

The difficulty that I have is that we have given the noble Lord, Lord Neill of Bladen, all the information that we have. We will proceed with caution; that is absolutely right and proper. We intend to monitor effectively; we have tabled amendments to that effect based on what the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, said in Committee on the importance of thinking about monitoring.

I accept all the concerns about rural communities. ABS licences can have conditions within them that could make sure that those seeking advice on childcare proceedings or those in rural communities can be well protected. I endorse that approach. That is why I endorse the need for information on how all the regulatory objectives have been met including, importantly, access to justice. The safeguards that we have in the Bill recognise the risks and concerns. We are confident that we can get ABS development at the right pace and in the right direction. I know that the licensing authority will take into account the concerns raised, and will have to have regard to policy statements.

As I have already said, your Lordships’ House has agreed that the LSB should be under a duty to report annually on how ABS licensing affects regulatory objectives. With respect to the noble Lord, Lord Neill of Bladen, that will be more effective than the amendment. It will be based on what is happening on the ground rather than a theoretical set of assumptions on alternative business structures which do not exist. We will achieve what he wants, which is to make sure to do this in a measured and constructive way, but we need to begin the process in order to ascertain that. The safeguards that we have accepted within the Bill will make sure that noble Lords’ concerns will be met. On that basis, I hope that he will withdraw his amendment.

My Lords, I thank the Minister for the courteous welcome that she gave to what I said and for showing that she agreed with a high percentage of my observations, although not the final conclusion as to what should happen. I tend to be an optimist. I believe that she is going to find it hard in the days that follow to resist the combined oratory of myself and my noble friends as it works on her mind very persuasively. She has reinforced my argument by citing the proposed German legislation. I knew nothing about that; I am most grateful to her for informing us. It is precisely the sort of information that we ought to have and it makes my point. In the mean time, leaving these forces working on the noble Baroness’s mind, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Schedule 21 [Minor and consequential amendments]:

638: Schedule 21, page 295, line 34, at end insert—

“Public Notaries Act 1801 (c. 79) A1 The Public Notaries Act 1801 is amended in accordance with paragraphs B1 and C1.

B1 In section 1 (no person to be created to act as public notary, to do any notarial act etc unless duly admitted), omit “, or use and exercise the office of a notary, or do any notarial act,”.

C1 In section 14 (Act not to extend to certain persons), omit from “proctor” to “any other”.

Public Notaries Act 1843 (c. 90)D1 The Public Notaries Act 1843 is amended in accordance with paragraphs E1 to G1.

E1 After section 7 insert—

“7A Effect of admission or grant of faculty

(1) Despite any provision made by the Public Notaries Acts, a person’s entitlement to carry on an activity which is a notarial activity is to be determined in accordance with the Legal Services Act 2007.

(2) Nothing in the Public Notaries Acts is to be regarded, for the purposes of paragraph 5(2) of Schedule 3 to the Legal Services Act 2007 (exempt persons in relation to notarial activities) as authorising a person to carry on such an activity.

(3) For this purpose—

“the Public Notaries Acts” means this Act and the Public Notaries Act 1801;

“exempt person” and “notarial activity” have the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007.”

F1 In section 8 (Master of Faculties may issue commissions to take oaths)—

(a) the existing provision becomes subsection (1), and(b) after that subsection insert—“(2) For the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, the issue of a commission under subsection (1) is to be treated as an authorisation to carry on the relevant activities by virtue of another enactment (see paragraph 6(2) of Schedule 3 to that Act).(3) In subsection (2), “relevant activities” means the activities authorised by the commission.”G1 Omit section 10 (offence of practising as notary without authorisation).”

638A: Schedule 21, page 295, line 34, at end insert—

“Bills of Exchange Act 1882 (c. 61)“H1 The Bills of Exchange Act 1882 is amended in accordance with paragraphs I1 and J1.

I1 In section 51 (noting or protest of bill), after subsection (7) insert—

“(7A) In subsection (7) “notary” includes a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to any activity which constitutes a notarial activity (within the meaning of that Act).”J1 In section 94 (protest when notary not accessible)—

(a) the existing provision becomes subsection (1), and(b) after that subsection insert—“(2) In subsection (1), “notary” includes a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to any activity which constitutes a notarial activity (within the meaning of that Act).””

639: Schedule 21, page 295, line 35, at end insert—

“Z1 The Commissioners for Oaths Act 1889 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 1 and 1A.”

640: Schedule 21, page 295, line 36, leave out “of the Commissioners for Oaths Act 1889, in subsection”

641: Schedule 21, page 295, line 37, at end insert—

“1A In section 6 (powers as to oaths and notarial acts abroad), after subsection (1) insert—

“(1A) In subsection (1), “notary public” includes a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to any activity which constitutes a notarial activity (within the meaning of that Act).”

Benefices Act 1898 (c. 48)1B In section 3 of the Benefices Act 1898 (appeal against refusal of benefice)—

(a) in subsection (2) for “counsel or a solicitor” substitute “an authorised person”, and(b) after that subsection insert—“(2A) In subsection (2) “authorised person” means a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise a right of audience (within the meaning of that Act).”Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (c. 12)1C The Children and Young Persons Act 1933 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 1D to 1H.

1D In section 37(1) (power to clear court while child or young person giving evidence), for “counsel or solicitors” substitute “legal representatives”.

1E In section 43 (admission of deposition in evidence), for “counsel or solicitor” substitute “legal representative”.

1F In section 47(2)(b) (procedure in youth courts), for “solicitors and counsel” substitute “legal representatives”.

1G In section 49(11) (restrictions on reports of proceedings), omit the definition of “legal representative”.

1H In section 107 (interpretation), after the definition of “legal guardian” insert—

““legal representative” means a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act);”.

London Building Acts (Amendment) Act 1939 (c. xcvii)1I In section 115 of the London Building Acts (Amendment) Act 1939 (jurisdiction of tribunal of appeal)—

(a) in subsection (2), for “counsel solicitor” substitute “an authorised person”, and(b) after that subsection insert—“(2A) In subsection (2) “authorised person” means a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience (within the meaning of that Act).”Accommodation Agencies Act 1953 (c. 23)1J In section 1 of the Accommodation Agencies Act 1953 (illegal commissions and advertisements)—

(a) in subsection (3), after “solicitor” insert “or an authorised person”, and(b) in subsection (6), after “say:—” insert—““authorised person” means a person (other than a solicitor) who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which is a reserved legal activity (within the meaning of that Act);”.

Horserace Betting Levy Act 1969 (c. 14)1K In section 4 of the Horserace Betting Levy Act 1969 (non-renewal of bookmaker’s permit)—

(a) in subsection (2), for “or a solicitor” substitute “, a solicitor or an authorised person”, and(b) after that subsection insert—“(2A) In subsection (2), “authorised person” means a person (other than counsel or a solicitor) who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act).” Taxes Management Act 1970 (c. 9)1L In section 20B of the Taxes Management Act 1970 (restrictions on power to require documents)—

(a) in subsection (3), for “barrister, advocate or solicitor” (in both places) substitute “relevant lawyer”,(b) in subsection (8), for “barrister, advocate or a solicitor” substitute “relevant lawyer”, and(c) after subsection (14) insert—“(15) In this section “relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to professional privilege.”Powers of Attorney Act 1971 (c. 27)1M In section 3 of the Powers of Attorney Act 1971 (proof of instruments creating powers of attorney)—

(a) in subsection (1)(b) for “duly certificated notary public” substitute “, authorised person”,(b) in subsection (3) for from ““duly” to “Act and” substitute ““authorised person” means a person (other than a solicitor) who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to any activity which constitutes a notarial activity (within the meaning of that Act) and”.Poisons Act 1972 (c. 66)1N In section 9(7) of the Poisons Act 1972 (right to conduct proceedings), omit “notwithstanding that he is not of counsel or a solicitor”.

Local Government Act 1972 (c. 70)1O In section 223 of the Local Government Act 1972 (appearance of local authorities in legal proceedings), in subsection (1) for “, notwithstanding” to the end substitute “to conduct any such proceedings.”

Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (c. 18)1P In section 6 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 (attempts at reconciliation of parties to marriage) in subsection (1) for “solicitor” substitute “legal representative”.

Fair Trading Act 1973 (c. 41)1Q In section 29 of the Fair Trading Act 1973 (powers of entry and seizure)—

(a) in subsection (5), for “barrister, advocate or solicitor” substitute “relevant lawyer”, and(b) after subsection (5) insert—“(6) “Relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor, or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to privilege.”Consumer Credit Act 1974 (c. 39)1R In section 146 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (exceptions from section 145), after subsection (2) insert—

“(2A) An authorised person (other than a barrister or solicitor) engaging in contentious business is not to be treated as doing so in the course of any ancillary credit business.

(2B) In subsection (2A)—

“authorised person” means a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act);

“contentious business” means business done in or for the purposes of proceedings begun before a court or before an arbitrator, not being non-contentious or common form probate business (within the meaning of section 128 of the Supreme Court Act 1981).”

Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (c. 65)1S In section 77 of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (validity and revision of contracts), in subsection (4BB)(a) for “a barrister” (in first place) to the end substitute “a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act), and”.

Bail Act 1976 (c. 63)1T The Bail Act 1976 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 1U and 1V.

1U In section 3 (general provisions), in subsection (6)(e) for “an authorised advocate” to the end substitute “a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act);”.

1V In section 5 (supplementary provisions about decisions on bail)—

(a) in subsection (5), for “is represented by counsel or a solicitor unless his counsel or solicitor” substitute “has legal representation unless his legal representative”, and(b) in subsection (6), for “is not represented by counsel or a solicitor” substitute “does not have legal representation”.”

641A: Schedule 21, page 295, line 37, at end insert—

“Geneva Conventions Act 1957 (c. 52)In section 3 of the Geneva Conventions Act 1957 (legal representation of certain persons), after subsection (5) insert—

“(6) In this section—

“counsel” includes any person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience (within the meaning of that Act);

“solicitor” includes any person who, for the purposes of that Act, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act).””

642: Schedule 21, page 296, line 1, at end insert—

“1X The Race Relations Act 1976 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 1Y to 2.

1Y In section 67A (national security: procedure), in subsection (3)(a) for “have a general” to the end substitute “be a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act), and”.

1Z In section 72 (validity and revision of contracts), in subsection (4BB)(a) for “a barrister” (in the first place) to the end substitute “a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act), and”.”

643: Schedule 21, page 296, line 2, leave out from “1A” to “(bodies”

644: Schedule 21, page 296, line 19, at end insert—

“Estate Agents Act 1979 (c. 38)3A In section 11 of the Estate Agents Act 1979 (powers of entry and inspection)—

(a) in subsection (8), for “counsel or solicitor” substitute “a relevant lawyer”, and(b) after that subsection insert—“(9) For the purposes of subsection (8) “relevant lawyer” means counsel, a solicitor or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to privilege.”Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 (c. 43)3B The Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 3C and 3D.

3C In section 144 (rule committee and rules of procedure)—

(a) in subsection (3)(c), for from “granted” to “right” substitute “authorised by a relevant approved regulator”, and(b) after subsection (3) insert—“(3A) In this section “relevant approved regulator” is to be construed in accordance with section 19(3) of the Legal Services Act 2007.”3D In section 150 (interpretation), in subsection (1), in the definition of “legal representative” for “an authorised advocate” to the end substitute “a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act);”.

Supreme Court Act 1981 (c. 54)3E The Supreme Court Act 1981 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 3F and 3G.

3F In section 86 (Crown Court Rule Committee)—

(a) in subsection (1)(g), for from “granted” to “right” substitute “authorised by a relevant approved regulator”, and(b) after subsection (6) insert—“(7) In this section “relevant approved regulator” is to be construed in accordance with section 19(3) of the Legal Services Act 2007.”3G In section 90(3B) (conduct of proceedings by Official Solicitor) for “section 28(2)(a) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990” substitute “the fact that he is a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act)”.

Representation of the People Act 1983 (c. 2)3H The Representation of the People Act 1983 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 3I to 3L.

3I In section 86 (authorised excuses for failures as to return and declarations)—

(a) in subsection (1A), for “or solicitor” substitute “, solicitor or authorised person”, and(b) after that subsection insert—“(1B) In subsection (1A) “authorised person” means a person (other than a barrister or solicitor) who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience (within the meaning of that Act).”3J In section 156 (costs of trying election petition)—

(a) in subsection (5), for “or solicitor” substitute “, a solicitor or an authorised person”, and(b) after that subsection insert—“(5A) In subsection (5) “authorised person” means a person (other than counsel or a solicitor) who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience (within the meaning of that Act).”3K In section 162 (member of legal and certain other professions)—

(a) the existing provision becomes subsection (1),(b) in that subsection—(i) after “solicitor” insert “, authorised person”, and(ii) for “or tribunal” (in both places) substitute “, tribunal or other body”, and(c) after that subsection insert—“(2) In subsection (1) “authorised person” means a person (other than a barrister or solicitor) who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes a reserved legal activity (within the meaning of that Act).”3L In section 181 (Director of Public Prosecutions)—

(a) in subsection (3), for “or solicitor” substitute “, solicitor or authorised person”, and(b) after that subsection insert—“(3A) In subsection (3) “authorised person” means a person (other than a barrister or solicitor) who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience (within the meaning of that Act).”Mental Health Act 1983 (c. 20)3M The Mental Health Act 1983 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 3N to 3T.

3N In section 35 (remand to hospital for report on accused's mental condition), in subsection (6) for “counsel or a solicitor and his counsel or solicitor” substitute “an authorised person who”.

3O In section 36 (removal of accused person to hospital for treatment), in subsection (5) for “counsel or a solicitor and his counsel or solicitor” substitute “an authorised person who”.

3P In section 38 (interim hospital orders), in subsection (2) for “counsel or a solicitor and his counsel or solicitor” substitute “an authorised person who”.

3Q In section 52 (further provisions as to persons remanded by magistrates' courts), in subsection (7)(b) for “counsel or a solicitor” substitute “an authorised person”.

3R In section 54 (requirements as to medical evidence), in subsection (3)(a)—

(a) for “counsel or a solicitor” substitute “an authorised person”, and(b) for “his counsel or solicitor” substitute “that authorised person”.3S In section 55 (interpretation of Part 3), in subsection (1) before the definitions of “child” and “young person” insert—

““authorised person” means a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience (within the meaning of that Act);”.

3T In section 78 (procedure of Mental Health Review Tribunals), in subsection (7) for “counsel or a solicitor” substitute “an authorised person (within the meaning of Part 3)”.

County Courts Act 1984 (c. 28)3U In section 147 of the County Courts Act 1984 (interpretation), in subsection (1), in the definition of “legal representative” for “an authorised advocate” to the end substitute “a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act);”.

Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (c. 51)3V In section 219 of the Inheritance Tax Act 1984 (power to require information)—

(a) in subsection (3) for “barrister or solicitor” substitute “relevant lawyer”,(b) in subsection (4) for “solicitor” (in both places) substitute “relevant lawyer”, and(c) after that subsection insert— “(5) In this section “relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to professional privilege.”Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 (c. 23)3W In section 15 of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 (interpretation), in subsection (1), in the definition of “legal representative” for “an authorised advocate” to the end substitute “a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act);”.

Administration of Justice Act 1985 (c. 61)3X The Administration of Justice Act 1985 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 3Y and 3Z.

3Y In section 41 (application of disciplinary provisions to legal aid complaints against barristers), in subsection (2) after “those provisions” insert “and despite section 154 of the Legal Services Act 2007 (approved regulators not to make provision for redress)”.

3Z In section 69(2) (commencement) for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”.

Social Security Act 1986 (c. 50)3ZA In section 56 of the Social Security Act 1986 (legal proceedings), in subsection (1) omit “although not a barrister or solicitor”.

Building Societies Act 1986 (c. 53)3ZB The Building Societies Act 1986 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 3ZC to 3ZE.

3ZC In section 52 (powers to obtain information and documents etc)—

(a) in subsection (8) for “barrister, solicitor or advocate” substitute “relevant lawyer”, and(b) in subsection (13) after the definition of “approved” insert—““relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to professional privilege;”.

3ZD In section 67 (directors, etc, not to accept commission in connection with loans), in subsection (7), in the definition of “solicitor” for “licensed conveyancer” substitute “any person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes a reserved instrument activity (within the meaning of that Act)”.

3ZE In section 69 (disclosure and record of income of related businesses), in subsection (17), in the definition of “solicitor” for “licensed conveyancer” to the end substitute “any person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes a reserved instrument activity (within the meaning of that Act).”

Ministry of Defence Police Act 1987 (c. 4)3ZF In section 4 of the Ministry of Defence Police Act 1987 (representation at disciplinary proceedings)—

(a) in subsection (2) for “either by counsel or by a solicitor” substitute “by a relevant lawyer”,(b) in subsection (7) for “counsel or a solicitor” substitute “a relevant lawyer”, and(c) after that subsection insert—“(8) In this section “relevant lawyer” means—(a) in relation to Scotland or Northern Ireland, counsel or a solicitor, and(b) in relation to England and Wales, a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience (within the meaning of that Act).”Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 (c. 1)3ZG In the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988, in section 778 (power to obtain information)—

(a) in subsection (3) for “solicitor” substitute “relevant lawyer”, and(b) after that subsection insert—“(4) In subsection (3) “relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to professional privilege or, in Scotland, protected from disclosure in legal proceedings on the grounds of confidentiality of communication.””

644ZA: Schedule 21, page 296, line 19, at end insert—

“Companies Act 1985 (c. 6)In Schedule 15D of the Companies Act 1985 (disclosures)—

(a) the existing paragraph 46 becomes sub-paragraph (1) of that paragraph,(b) in that sub-paragraph for “solicitor, barrister” substitute “relevant lawyer”, and(c) after that sub-paragraph insert—“(2) “Relevant lawyer” means—(a) a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes a reserved legal activity (within the meaning of that Act),(b) a solicitor or barrister in Northern Ireland, or(c) a solicitor or advocate in Scotland.””

644A: Schedule 21, page 296, line 39, at end insert—

“Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 (c. 34)9A In section 1 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 (deeds and their execution)—

(a) in subsection (5) for “a solicitor” (in the first place) to “conveyancer” (in the second place) substitute “a relevant lawyer, or an agent or employee of a relevant lawyer”, and(b) in subsection (6) for the definition of “duly certificated notary public” substitute—““relevant lawyer” means a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes a reserved instrument activity (within the meaning of that Act).”

Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 (c. 41)9B The Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 9C to 9T.

9C Omit the following provisions—

(a) section 17 (the statutory objective and the general principle);(b) section 18 (the statutory duty);(c) section 18A (the Consultative Panel);(d) section 27 (rights of audience);(e) section 28 (rights to conduct litigation);(f) section 29 (authorised bodies);(g) section 31 (barristers and solicitors: rights of audience and rights to conduct litigation);(h) section 31A (employed advocates).9D In section 31B (advocates and litigators employed by Legal Services Commission)—

(a) for subsection (1) substitute—“(1) This section applies where a person—(a) is authorised by a relevant approved regulator (“the regulator”) to carry on an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation, and(b) is employed by the Legal Services Commission, or by any body established and maintained by that Commission.(1A) Any rules of the regulator which fall within subsection (2) shall not have effect in relation to that person.”,(b) in subsection (2)—(i) for “body” (in each place) substitute “regulator”, and(ii) for “rules of conduct” substitute “conduct rules”,(c) in subsection (3) for “body” substitute “regulator”, and(d) after subsection (3) insert—“(4) For the purposes of this section “relevant approved regulator” is to be construed in accordance with section 19(3) of the Legal Services Act 2007.” 9E In section 31C (change of authorised body)—

(a) for subsection (1) substitute—“(1) Where a person—(a) has at any time been authorised by a relevant approved regulator to exercise a right of audience before a court in relation to proceedings of a particular description, and(b) becomes authorised by another relevant approved regulator to exercise a right of audience before that court in relation to that description of proceedings,any qualification regulations of the relevant approved regulator mentioned in paragraph (b) which relate to that right are not to have effect in relation to the person.”,(b) in subsection (2) for “the body” substitute “the relevant approved regulator”,(c) in subsection (3) for “body” (in each place) substitute “relevant approved regulator”, and(d) after that subsection insert—“(4) In this section “relevant approved regulator” is to be construed in accordance with section 19(3) of the Legal Services Act 2007.”9F Omit sections 34 to 52 (extension of conveyancing services).

9G Omit sections 54 and 55 (preparation of probate papers etc).

9H In section 60 (regulation of right of Scottish and Northern Ireland lawyers to practise in England and Wales)—

(a) in subsection (1) for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”,(b) in subsection (2) for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”, (c) after subsection (2) insert—“(2A) Regulations may be made under this section only if—(a) the Legal Services Board has made a recommendation under section 60A,(b) draft regulations were annexed to the recommendation, and(c) the regulations are in the same form as, or a form not materially different from, the draft regulations.”, and(d) in subsection (4) for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”.9I After that section insert—

“60A Procedural requirements relating to recommendations for the purposes of section 60

(1) Before making a recommendation under this section, the Legal Services Board must publish a draft of—

(a) the proposed recommendation, and(b) the proposed draft regulations.(2) The draft must be accompanied by a notice which states that representations about the proposals may be made to the Board within a specified period.

(3) Before making the recommendation, the Board must have regard to any representations duly made.

(4) If the draft regulations to be annexed to the recommendation differ from the draft regulations published under subsection (1)(b) in a way which is, in the opinion of the Board, material, the Board must, before making the recommendation, publish the draft recommendations along with a statement detailing the changes made and the reasons for the changes.”

9J Omit section 63 (legal professional privilege).

9K Omit section 69 (exemption from liability for damages etc).

9L Omit section 70 (offences).

9M In section 71 (qualification for judicial and certain other appointments)—

(a) in subsection (4) for “granted by an authorised body” substitute “exercisable by virtue of an authorisation given by a relevant approved regulator”,(b) in subsection (6) for “the authorised body concerned” substitute “the relevant approved regulator”, and(c) after that subsection insert—“(6A) In this section “relevant approved regulator” is to be construed in accordance with section 19(3) of the Legal Services Act 2007.”9N In section 75 (judges etc barred from legal practice), after paragraph (b) insert—

“(ba) carry on any notarial activities (within the meaning of the Legal Services Act 2007);”.9O Omit section 113 (administration of oaths and taking of affidavits).

9P (1) Section 119 (interpretation) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (1) omit the following definitions—

“authorised advocate”

“authorised body” and “appropriate authorised body”

“authorised litigator”

“authorised practitioner”

“Consultative Panel”

“duly certificated notary public”

“the general principle”

“qualified person”

“the statutory objective”.

(3) In that subsection, for the definition of “court” substitute—

““court” has the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see section 197 of that Act);”.

(4) In that subsection, for the definition of “qualification regulations” and “rules of conduct” substitute—

““qualification regulations” and “conduct rules”, in relation to a body, have the same meaning as in the Legal Services Act 2007 (see section 20 of that Act);”.

(5) In that subsection, in the definition of “right to conduct litigation”—

(a) in paragraph (a) after “court” insert “in England and Wales”,(b) for “and” at the end of that paragraph substitute—“(aa) to commence, prosecute and defend such proceedings; and”.(6) In subsection (3) for from “(including” to the end substitute “to conduct rules includes a reference to practice rules (within the meaning of the Legal Services Act 2007 (see section 20 of that Act)).”

9Q In section 120 (regulations and orders) omit—

(a) in subsection (4) —(i) “26(1), 37(10), 40(1)”, and(ii) from “paragraph 24” to “Schedule 9”, and(b) subsection (5).9R In section 125 (power to make provision consequential on provision made by Part 2 of Administration of Justice Act 1985 etc)—

(a) in subsection (4) for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”, and(b) for subsection (5) substitute—“(5) In subsection (4)—(a) “relevant enactments” means such enactments or instruments passed or made before or in the same Session as the Legal Services Act 2007 was passed as may be specified in the order, and (b) the reference to Part 2 is a reference to that Part as amended by that Act or any enactment or instruments passed or made before or in the same Session as that Act was passed.”9S Omit the following provisions—

(a) Schedule 4 (authorised bodies);(b) Schedule 5 (the Authorised Conveyancing Practitioners Board);(c) Schedule 6 (the Conveyancing Appeals Tribunals);(d) Schedule 7 (the Conveyancing Ombudsman Scheme);(e) in Part 2 of Schedule 8 (amendments of provisions relating to powers of Conveyancing Licensing Council etc), paragraphs 14 to 20 and 21(1)(b);(f) Schedule 9 (probate).9T In paragraph 17 of Schedule 19 (revocation of appointment under section 1(1) of the Commissioners for Oaths Act 1889) for “Secretary of State” substitute “Lord Chancellor”.”

Environmental Protection Act 1990 (c. 43)9U In section 114 (appointment etc of inspectors), in subsection (4) omit “, although not of counsel or a solicitor,”.

Friendly Societies Act 1992 (c. 40)9V In section 62 of the Friendly Societies Act 1992 (powers to obtain information and documents etc)—

(a) in subsection (7), for paragraphs (a) and (b) substitute—“(a) by a relevant lawyer of a document or material contained in a privileged communication or, in Scotland, a communication which is protected from disclosure on the ground of confidentiality, made by or to the relevant lawyer in that capacity or the furnishing of information contained in such communication so made;”, and(b) in subsection (12), at the end insert “; and“relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to professional privilege or, in Scotland, be protected from disclosure in legal proceedings on grounds of confidentiality of communication.”

Trade Union and Labour Relations Consolidation Act 1992 (c. 52)9W The Trade Union and Labour Relations Consolidation Act 1992 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 9X to 9Z.

9X In section 194 (offence of failure to notify), in subsection (2) omit “, although not of counsel or a solicitor,”.

9Y In section 216 (constitution and proceedings of court of inquiry)—

(a) in subsection (6) for “counsel or solicitor” (in both places) substitute “a relevant lawyer”, and(b) after subsection (6) insert—“(7) In subsection (6) “relevant lawyer” means—(a) a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation within the meaning of that Act, or(b) an advocate or solicitor in Scotland.”9Z In section 288 (restriction on contracting out), in subsection (4B)(a) for “a barrister” (in the first place) to the end substitute “a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act), and”.”

644ZB: Schedule 21, page 296, line 39, at end insert—

“Companies Act 1989 (c. 40)In section 87 of the Companies Act 1989 (exceptions from restrictions on disclosure)—

(a) in subsection (2), in paragraph (c)(i), for “solicitor” substitute “relevant lawyer”, and (b) after that subsection insert—“(2A) In subsection (2)(c)(i) “relevant lawyer” means—(a) a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes a reserved legal activity (within the meaning of that Act),(b) a solicitor or barrister in Northern Ireland, or(c) a solicitor or advocate in Scotland.”Finance Act 1993 (c. 34)In Schedule 21 of the Finance Act 1993 (oil taxation)—

(a) the existing paragraph 7 becomes sub-paragraph (1) of that paragraph,(b) in that sub-paragraph for “barrister, advocate or a solicitor” substitute “relevant lawyer”, and(c) after that sub-paragraph insert—“(2) “Relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to professional privilege.””

644B: Schedule 21, page 297, line 38, at end insert—

“Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (c. 33)In section 38 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (interpretation and savings for sections 34 to 37 of that Act) in subsection (1), in the definition of “legal representative” for “an authorised advocate” to the end substitute “a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act); and”.”

645: Schedule 21, page 297, line 38, at end insert—

“Environment Act 1995 (c. 25)16A In section 54 of the Environment Act 1995 (appearance in legal proceedings), omit “although not of counsel or a solicitor”.

Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (c. 50)16B In Part 1 of Schedule 3A to the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (validity and revision of contracts), in paragraph 2(5)(a) for “a barrister” (in the first place) to the end substitute “a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act); and”.

Employment Rights Act 1996 (c. 18)16C In section 203 of the Employment Rights Act 1996 (restrictions on contracting out), in subsection (4)(a) for “a barrister” (in the first place) to the end substitute “a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act), and”.

Family Law Act 1996 (c. 27)16D In Schedule 4 of the Family Law Act 1996—

(a) for paragraph 1 substitute—“1 In this Schedule “legal representative” means a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes a reserved instrument activity (within the meaning of that Act).”,

(b) in paragraph 3(3) for “solicitor” substitute “legal representative”, and(c) in paragraph 5(2)(a) for “solicitor” substitute “legal representative”.Civil Procedure Act 1997 (c. 12)16E In section 2 of the Civil Procedure Act 1997 (Civil Procedure Rule Committee)—

(a) in subsection (2), in paragraph (f) for from “granted” to “right” substitute “authorised by a relevant approved regulator”, and(b) after that subsection insert— “(2A) In subsection (2)(f) “relevant approved regulator” is to be construed in accordance with section 19(3) of the Legal Services Act 2007.”Sexual Offences (Protected Material) Act 1997 (c. 39)16F In section 2 of the Sexual Offences (Protected Material) Act 1997 (meaning of other expressions), in subsection (1) in the definition of “legal representative” for “any authorised advocate” to “Act 1990)” substitute “a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act) and who is”.

National Minimum Wage Act 1998 (c. 39)16G The National Minimum Wage Act 1998 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 16H and 16I.

16H In section 33 (proceedings for offences)—

(a) in subsection (1) omit paragraph (a), and(b) after that subsection insert—“(1A) The persons who may conduct proceedings for an offence under this Act in England and Wales, before a magistrates’ court, shall include any person authorised for the purpose by the Secretary of State.”16I In section 49 (restrictions on contracting out) for subsection (7)(a) substitute—

“(a) as regards England and Wales, a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act);”.”

646: Schedule 21, page 297, line 39, at end insert—

“16J The Access to Justice Act 1999 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 16K to 17.

16K In section 16(4) (code of conduct) after “consult” insert “the Legal Services Board,”.

16L In section 44 (barristers employed by solicitors)—

(a) in subsection (1)—(i) omit “is employed by”,(ii) for paragraphs (a) and (b) substitute—“(a) is employed by an authorised person, or(b) is a manager of such a person,”, and(iii) for “his employer” substitute “the authorised person of which the barrister is an employee or a manager”,(b) in subsection (2) after “employees” insert “or managers of an authorised person”, and(c) after that subsection insert—“(3) In this section—“authorised person” means a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which is a reserved legal activity (within the meaning of that Act), and

“manager” has the same meaning as in that Act (see section 197 of that Act).”

16M In section 45 (fees on application for appointment as Queen’s Counsel), in subsections (1) and (2) for “Secretary of State” (in each place) substitute “Lord Chancellor”.”

646A: Schedule 21, page 297, line 40, leave out “of the Access to Justice Act 1999”

646B: Schedule 21, page 297, line 42, at end insert—

“Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (c. 23)17A In section 63 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (general interpretation etc of Part 2), in subsection (1), in the definition of “legal representative” for “any authorised advocate” to the end substitute “a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act);”.

Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 (c. 43)17B In section 15 of the Criminal Justice and Court Services Act 2000 (right to conduct litigation and right of audience)—

(a) in subsection (2) for “section 28(2)(a) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990” substitute “the fact that he is a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to that activity”, and(b) in subsection (3) for “section 27(2)(a) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990” substitute “the fact that he is a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to that activity”.Finance Act 2002 (c. 23)17C The Finance Act 2002 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 17D and 17E.

17D In Schedule 34 (stamp duty: withdrawal of group relief: supplementary provisions), in paragraph 10—

(a) in sub-paragraph (2) for “A barrister or solicitor” substitute “A relevant lawyer”, and(b) after that sub-paragraph insert—“(2A) “Relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to professional privilege.”17E In Schedule 35 (stamp duty: withdrawal of relief for company acquisitions: supplementary provisions), in paragraph 11—

(a) in sub-paragraph (2) for “A barrister or solicitor” substitute “A relevant lawyer”, and(b) after that sub-paragraph insert—“(2A) “Relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to professional privilege.””

646C: Schedule 21, page 298, line 9, at end insert—

“Finance Act 2003 (c. 14)In Schedule 13 to the Finance Act 2003 (stamp duty land tax: information powers)—

(a) in paragraph 22, in sub-paragraphs (1) and (2), for “barrister, advocate or solicitor” substitute “relevant lawyer”,(b) after sub-paragraph (2) of that paragraph insert—“(3) “Relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor or other professional legal adviser communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to legal privilege.(4) “Legal privilege” here has the same meaning as in paragraph 35 of this Schedule.”, and(c) in paragraph 25 for “barrister, advocate or solicitor” substitute “relevant lawyer (within the meaning of paragraph 22(3))”.”

647: Schedule 21, page 298, line 9, at end insert—

“Licensing Act 2003 (c. 17)19 The Licensing Act 2003 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 20 and 21.

20 In section 58 (meaning of “certified copy” in section 57 of that Act), after subsection (3) insert—

“(4) In this section “notary” means a person (other than a solicitor) who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to any activity which constitutes a notarial activity (within the meaning of that Act).”

21 In section 95 (meaning of “certified copy” in section 94 of that Act), after subsection (3) insert—

“(4) In this section “notary” means a person (other than a solicitor) who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to any activity which constitutes a notarial activity (within the meaning of that Act).”

Courts Act 2003 (c. 39)22 The Courts Act 2003 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 23 and 24.

23 In section 70 (Criminal Procedure Rule Committee)—

(a) in subsection (2), in paragraph (i)(i) for from “granted” to “right” substitute “authorised by a relevant approved regulator”, and(b) after that subsection insert—“(2A) In subsection (2)(i)(i) “relevant approved regulator” is to be construed in accordance with section 19(3) of the Legal Services Act 2007.”24 (1) Section 77 (Family Procedure Rule Committee) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (2)—

(a) in paragraph (k) for from “granted” to “right” substitute “authorised by a relevant approved regulator”,(b) in paragraph (l) for “granted that right” substitute “authorised”, and(c) in paragraph (m) for “granted that right” substitute “authorised”.(3) For subsection (5)(b) substitute—

“(b) is a relevant approved regulator in relation to the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (or both).”(4) After subsection (7) insert—

“(8) In this section “relevant approved regulator” is to be construed in accordance with section 19(3) of the Legal Services Act 2007.”

Criminal Justice Act 2003 (c. 44)25 The Criminal Justice Act 2003 is amended in accordance with paragraphs 26 to 28.

26 In section 56 (interpretation of Part 8), in subsection (1), in the definition of “legal representative”, for “an authorised advocate” to the end substitute “a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act),”.

27 In section 159 (disclosure of pre-sentence reports etc), in subsection (2)(a) for “counsel or solicitor” substitute “legal representative”.

28 In section 160 (other reports of local probation boards and members of youth offending teams) in subsection (2)(a) for “counsel or solicitor” substitute “legal representative”.

Children Act 2004 (c. 31)29 In section 37 of the Children Act 2004 (Welsh family proceedings officers)—

(a) in subsection (2) for “section 28(2)(a) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 (c. 41)” substitute “the fact that he is a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to that activity”,(b) in subsection (3) for “section 27(2)(a) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990” substitute “the fact that he is a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to that activity”.Civil Partnership Act 2004 (c. 33)30 In section 42 of the Civil Partnership Act 2004 (attempts at reconciliation of civil partners) in subsection (2) for “solicitor” substitute “legal representative”.

Public Services Ombudsman (Wales) Act 2005 (c. 10)31 In section 13 of the Public Ombudsman (Wales) Act 2005 (investigations by Ombudsman)—

(a) in subsection (4)(b), for “counsel, solicitor” substitute “an authorised person”, and(b) after subsection (4) insert—“(4A) In subsection (4) “authorised person” means a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act).”Equality Act 2006 (c. 3)32 In Schedule 2 to the Equality Act 2006 (representations to Commission in relation to inquiry etc.), in paragraph 8—

(a) in sub-paragraph (2)(b), for “a barrister, an advocate or a solicitor” substitute “a relevant lawyer”, and(b) after sub-paragraph (2) insert—“(2A) “Relevant lawyer” means—(a) an advocate or solicitor in Scotland, or(b) a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act).”Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (c. 16)33 In section 12(2) of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (power to bring criminal proceedings) omit “even though he is not a barrister or solicitor”.

National Health Service Act 2006 (c. 41)34 In section 194(4) of the National Health Service Act 2006 (conduct of proceedings under section 194) omit “, although he is not a barrister or solicitor,”.

National Health Service (Wales) Act 2006 (c. 42)35 In section 142(4) of the National Health Service (Wales) Act 2006 (conduct of proceedings under section 142) omit “, although he is not a barrister or solicitor,”.”

Companies Act 2006 (c. 46)36 In Schedule 2 to the Companies Act 2006 (exceptions from restrictions on disclosure), in paragraph 67—

(a) for “solicitor, barrister, advocate” substitute “relevant lawyer”, and(b) for ““Foreign lawyer”” to the end substitute—“In this paragraph—

“foreign lawyer” means a person (other than a relevant lawyer) who is a foreign lawyer within the meaning of section 89(9) of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990;

“relevant lawyer” means—

(a) a person who, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an authorised person in relation to an activity which constitutes a reserved legal activity (within the meaning of that Act),(b) a solicitor or barrister in Northern Ireland, or(c) a solicitor or advocate in Scotland.”Income Tax Act 2007 (c. 3)37 The Income Tax Act 2007 is in accordance with paragraphs 38 to 41.

38 In section 748 (power to obtain information)—

(a) in subsection (4) for “solicitor” substitute “relevant lawyer”,(b) after that subsection insert—“(4A) In this section “relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to professional privilege or, in Scotland, protected from disclosure in legal proceedings on grounds of confidentiality of communication.”, and(c) in subsection (5) for “solicitors” substitute “relevant lawyers”. 39 In section 749 (restrictions on particulars to be provided by solicitors)—

(a) in the heading for “solicitors” substitute “relevant lawyers”,(b) for “solicitor” (in each place) substitute “relevant lawyer”, and(c) for subsection (7) substitute—“(7) In this section—“relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to professional privilege or, in Scotland, protected from disclosure in legal proceedings on grounds of confidentiality of communication;

“settlement” and “settlor” have the meanings given by section 620 of ITTOIA 2005.”

40 In section 771 (power to obtain information)—

(a) in subsections (5) and (6) for “solicitor” (in each place) substitute “relevant lawyer”, and(b) after subsection (6) insert—“(7) In this section “relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to professional privilege or, in Scotland, protected from disclosure in legal proceedings on grounds of confidentiality of communication.”41 In section 788 (power to obtain information)—

(a) in subsections (5) and (6) for “solicitor” (in each place) substitute “relevant lawyer”, and(b) after subsection (6) insert—“(7) In this section “relevant lawyer” means a barrister, advocate, solicitor or other legal representative communications with whom may be the subject of a claim to professional privilege or, in Scotland, protected from disclosure in legal proceedings on grounds of confidentiality of communication.”Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (c. )42 (1) Section 51 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 (meaning of “relevant qualification”) is amended as follows.

(2) In subsection (2), for from “awarded” to the end substitute “awarded by a body which, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, is an approved regulator in relation to the exercise of a right of audience or the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act).”

(3) In subsection (4)—

(a) in paragraph (b), for “(2)(b)” substitute “(2)”,(b) in paragraph (c), for from “the body” to “of that Act” substitute “, for the purposes of the Legal Services Act 2007, the body—(i) is not an approved regulator in relation to the exercise of a right of audience (within the meaning of that Act), and(ii) is not an approved regulator in relation to the conduct of litigation (within the meaning of that Act,”, and(c) for from “paragraph 33(1)” to the end substitute “section 45 of the Legal Services Act 2007 (transitional etc. provision in consequence of cancellation of designation as approved regulator).””

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Schedule 22 [Transitional provision]:

648: Schedule 22, page 298, line 11, at end insert—

“Transitory power to modify the functions of bodiesA1 (1) Paragraphs A2 to A4 have effect until such time as the Board is first constituted in accordance with paragraph 1 of Schedule 1.

(2) Where an order under paragraph A2 has effect immediately before that time, it is to be treated from that time as if it were an order made by the Lord Chancellor under section 68 (and in accordance with that section and section 69).

(3) Where that order is made by virtue of paragraph A4, the reference in sub-paragraph (2) to section 68 is a reference to that section as modified by section 173.

A2 (1) The Lord Chancellor may by order modify, or make any other provision relating to, the functions of a designated regulator or any other body.

(2) For this purpose “designated regulator” means—

(a) The Law Society;(b) The General Council of the Bar;(c) The Master of the Faculties;(d) The Institute of Legal Executives;(e) the Council for Licensed Conveyancers;(f) The Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys;(g) The Institute of Trade Mark Attorneys;(h) The Association of Law Costs Draftsmen;(i) any other body which is a body to which sub-paragraph (3) applies.(3) This sub-paragraph applies to—

(a) a body designated as an authorised body for the purposes of section 27 or 28 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 (c. 41) (rights of audience and rights to conduct litigation);(b) a body approved under Schedule 9 to that Act (approval of body to grant exemption from prohibition on preparation of probate papers etc);(c) a body prescribed by regulations under section 113 of that Act (administration of oaths and taking of affidavits).(4) The Lord Chancellor may make an order under sub-paragraph (1) only if—

(a) the body to which the order relates has made a recommendation under this section to which was annexed a draft order, and(b) the body to which the order relates consents to the order which is made.(5) The Lord Chancellor may make an order under this paragraph only for the purpose of enabling the body to which it relates to do one or more of the following—

(a) to become a body within sub-paragraph (3);(b) to grant its members rights for the purposes of section 27 or 28 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 (c. 41), to exempt its members for the purposes of section 55 of that Act or to authorise its members for the purposes of section 113 of that Act;(c) if it is or becomes a designated regulator, to regulate its members more effectively or efficiently;(d) if it is or becomes a designated regulator, to expand the categories of persons who are eligible to be members of the body;(e) to do any of the things mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (e) of section 68(3) at a time after paragraph 1 of Schedule 4 comes into force.(6) An order under this paragraph may make provision in relation to the body to which the order relates, and members of that body, corresponding to the provision which by virtue of subsection (4) or (5) of section 68 may be made by an order under that section in relation to an approved regulator and persons authorised by that regulator to carry on reserved legal activities or to provide immigration advice or immigration services.

(7) Any provision made by an order under this paragraph may be expressed to be conditional upon—

(a) the coming into force of paragraph 1 of Schedule 4; (b) the body to which the order relates being designated by an order under Part 2 of that Schedule as an approved regulator, or by an order under Part 1 of Schedule 10 as a licensing authority, in relation to one or more reserved legal activities specified in the order;(c) the body to which the order relates becoming a designated qualifying regulator under section 86A of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 (c. 33).(8) An order under this paragraph may modify provisions made by or under any enactment (including this Act or any Act passed after this Act), prerogative instrument or other instrument or document.

(9) The powers to make an order conferred by this paragraph are without prejudice to any powers (statutory or non-statutory) which a designated regulator or other body may have apart from this section.

(10) In this paragraph “member” in relation to a body includes any person who is not a member of the body but who may be subject to disciplinary sanctions for failure to comply with any of its rules.

A3 (1) This paragraph applies where a body makes a recommendation under paragraph A2.

(2) The Lord Chancellor must publish a document containing—

(a) the recommendation, and(b) the draft order annexed to it.(3) The document must be accompanied by a notice which states that representations about it may be made to the Lord Chancellor within a specified period.

(4) The Lord Chancellor must give a copy of the document to the Office of Fair Trading and the Lord Chief Justice, and invite each of them to provide advice on it within that period.

(5) The Lord Chancellor may give a copy of the document to the Legal Services Consultative Panel or any other person, and invite them to provide advice on it within that period.

(6) The Lord Chancellor must have regard to any representations and advice duly given.

(7) If the order which the Lord Chancellor proposes to make differs from the draft order published under sub-paragraph (2), the Lord Chancellor must, before making the order, publish the revised draft order along with a statement detailing the changes made and the reasons for those changes.

A4 Paragraphs A2 and A3 apply in relation to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal as they apply in relation to a designated regulator, but as if in paragraph A2—

(a) in sub-paragraph (4)(a) the reference to the body to which the order relates were a reference to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal or the Law Society, and(b) for sub-paragraph (5) of that paragraph there were substituted—“(5) The Lord Chancellor may make an order under this paragraph only for the purpose of enabling the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal to carry out its role more effectively or efficiently.”, and(c) sub-paragraphs (6) and (7) of that paragraph were omitted.”

649: Schedule 22, page 298, line 29, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

650: Schedule 22, page 299, line 1, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

651: Schedule 22, page 300, line 31, at end insert—

“ ( ) Until the repeal of paragraphs 17 and 19 of Schedule 8 to the Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 (c. 41) by Schedule 23 to this Act comes into force, those paragraphs have effect as if—

(a) in paragraph 17 (inadequate professional services: failure to comply with direction), after sub-paragraph (2) there were inserted— “(3) In relation to proceedings before the Discipline and Appeals Committee in respect of such a complaint, the Committee may make such order as they consider fit as to the payment of costs by—(a) the Council;(b) the licensed conveyancer against whom the complaint was made;(c) if the person on whose complaint the proceedings were brought was heard (in person, or through a representative) by the Committee in the course of the proceedings, that person.”, and(b) paragraph 19(b) (inadequate professional services: costs) were omitted.”

651A: Schedule 22, page 300, line 31, at end insert—

“Exercise of Board’s functions pending appointment of Chief Executive(1) Until the first Chief Executive of the Board is appointed under paragraph 11 of Schedule 1, the Board’s functions under—

(a) Schedule 1,(b) Schedule 15, and(c) paragraph 4(8) of this Schedule,may be exercised by the ordinary members of the Board.(2) For that purpose “ordinary member” has the same meaning as in Schedule 1.”

652: Schedule 22, page 300, line 33, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

653: Schedule 22, page 300, line 36, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

654: Schedule 22, page 300, line 38, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

654A: Schedule 22, page 301, line 1, leave out “the membership of the Board is first constituted” and insert “the Chairman of the Board, and at least 7 other ordinary members of the Board (within the meaning of Schedule 1) have been appointed”

654B: Schedule 22, page 301, line 4, leave out “the membership of the Board is first constituted” and insert “the Chairman of the Board, and at least 7 other ordinary members of the Board (within the meaning of Schedule 1) have been appointed”

655: Schedule 22, page 301, line 19, leave out “Secretary of State” and insert “Lord Chancellor”

655A: Schedule 22, page 301, line 45, at end insert—

“(1) During the transitional period, the reference to an authorised person in section 1A(d) of the Solicitors Act 1974 (practising certificates: employed solicitors) is to be read as a reference to a person listed in paragraph 6(1), other than a person listed in paragraph (b) or (c) of that paragraph.

(2) For this purpose “the transitional period” means the period which—

(a) begins with the day on which section 1A(d) of the Solicitors Act 1974 (as inserted by Schedule 16) comes into force, and(b) ends with the day appointed for the coming into force of section 13 (entitlement to carry on a reserved legal activity).”

655B: Schedule 22, page 301, line 45, at end insert—

“ (1) During the transitional period, section 69 of the Solicitors Act 1974 (action to recover solicitor’s costs) has effect as if—

(a) after subsection (2A)(a) of that section there were inserted— “(aa) in a case where the costs are due to a firm, signed by a partner of the firm, either in his own name or in the name of the firm, or on his behalf by any employee of the firm authorised by him to sign, or”, and(b) in subsection (2A)(b), after “paragraph (a)” there were inserted “or (aa)”.(2) For this purpose “the transitional period” means the period which—

(a) begins with the day on which subsections (2) to (2F) of that section (as substituted by Schedule 16) come into force, and(b) ends with the day appointed for the coming into force of section 13 (entitlement to carry on a reserved legal activity).(3) This paragraph does not apply in relation to section 69 of the Solicitors Act 1974 as it has effect by virtue of paragraph 29 of Schedule 2 to the Administration of Justice Act 1985.”

Solicitors Act 1974 (c. 47)”

656: Schedule 22, page 302, line 27, leave out “or”

657: Schedule 22, page 302, line 28, after “mark” insert “attorney”

658: Schedule 22, page 302, line 29, at end insert “, or

( ) an authorised member of the Association of Law Costs Draftsmen (within the meaning of paragraph 15A of Schedule 5).”

659: Schedule 22, page 302, line 35, at end insert—

“Functions transferred to the Lord Chancellor(1) This paragraph applies where, by virtue of an amendment made to an enactment by this Act, a function of the Secretary of State is transferred to the Lord Chancellor.

(2) In this paragraph such a function is referred to as a “transferred function”.

(3) Any subordinate legislation made by the Secretary of State in exercise of a transferred function is to have effect as if made or done by the Lord Chancellor.

(4) So far as is appropriate in consequence of the transfer, anything else done by the Secretary of State in exercise of a transferred function is to be treated as if done by the Lord Chancellor.”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Schedule 23 [Repeals]:

660: Schedule 23, page 303, line 3, at end insert—

“Public Notaries Act 1801 (c. 79)

In section 1, “, or use and exercise the office of a notary, or do any notarial act,”.

In section 14, from “proctor” to “any other”.

Public Notaries Act 1843 (c. 90)

Section 10.”

661: Schedule 23, page 303, line 5, at end insert—

“Children and Young Persons Act 1933 (c. 12)

In section 49(11), the definition of “legal representative”.”

662: Schedule 23, page 303, line 8, column 2, after “2,” insert ““Authorised Conveyancing Practitioners Board.” and”

663: Schedule 23, page 303, line 9, at end insert—

“Superannuation Act 1972 (c. 11)

In Schedule 1, “Employment by the Legal Services Ombudsman” and “The office of the Legal Services Ombudsman”.

Poisons Act 1972 (c. 66)

In section 9(7), “notwithstanding that he is not of counsel or a solicitor”.”

663A: Schedule 23, page 303, column 2, leave out lines 10 and 11 and insert—

“In section 1A—

(a) “or” at the end of paragraph (b), and

(b) in paragraph (c) “by the Council of the Law Society”.”

664: Schedule 23, page 304, line 3, column 2, at end insert—

“In section 33(2), “and the rules” to the end.”

665: Schedule 23, page 304, line 29, column 2, at end insert—

“( ) “duly certificated notary public”,”

666: Schedule 23, page 304, line 31, column 2, after “conditions”,” insert—

“( ) “replacement date”,”

667: Schedule 23, page 304, line 32, column 2, at end insert—

“Section 89(7).”

668: Schedule 23, page 304, line 33, after “Schedule 1,” insert—

“—

(a) in paragraph 1(1)(h), “sole”, and

(b) ”

668A: Schedule 23, page 304, column 2, leave out lines 35 and 36 and insert—

“Schedule 2.”

669: Schedule 23, page 304, line 36, column 2 at end insert—

“In Schedule 3, paragraph 9.”

670: Schedule 23, page 304, line 37, column 2, at beginning insert—

“In Part 2 of Schedule 1, “The Authorised Conveyancing Practitioners Board.””

671: Schedule 23, page 304, line 40, column 2, at beginning insert—

“In Part 2 of Schedule 1, “The Authorised Conveyancing Practitioners Board.””

672: Schedule 23, page 304, line 42, at end insert—

“Race Relations Act 1976 (c. 74)

In Schedule 1A, in Part 2, “The Legal Services Consultative Panel.””

672A: Schedule 23, page 305, line 37, at end insert—

“Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 (c. 23)

Section 4(6).”

672B: Schedule 23, page 306, line 5, column 2, at end insert—

“In section 22(3)(a) “qualified”.”

672C: Schedule 23, page 306, line 17, column 2, at end insert—

“In section 29(1), “or” at the end of paragraph (b).”

673: Schedule 23, page 306, line 18, column 2, leave out “In section 31(2),” and insert—

“In section 31—

(a) in subsection (2),”

674: Schedule 23, page 306, line 19, column 2, at end insert—

“, and

(b) in subsection (4), “or complaint”.”

674A: Schedule 23, page 306, column 2, leave out line 22 and insert—

“(b) subsection (3)(d),”

675: Schedule 23, page 306, line 25, column 2, at end insert—

“Section 34(2)(c) to (e).”

676: Schedule 23, page 306, line 30, column 2, at end insert—

“( ) in the definition of “client”, in paragraph (a) “or his firm”,”

676A: Schedule 23, page 306, line 35, leave out “and 9” and insert “, 9 and 14”

677: Schedule 23, page 307, line 4, column 2, leave out ““corporate”” and insert “—

(i) paragraph (b) and the “or” immediately preceding it,

(ii) “corporate”, and

(iii) “or application”,”

677A: Schedule 23, page 307, column 2, leave out lines 8 and 9

678: Schedule 23, page 307, leave out line 10

678A: Schedule 23, page 307, column 2, leave out lines 12 to 16

679: Schedule 23, page 307, leave out line 18

680: Schedule 23, page 307, line 20, column 2, leave out “, in paragraph (b) “section 34 of the 1974 Act or with”,”

681: Schedule 23, page 307, line 21, column 2, leave out “, and in paragraph (c) “39 or””

682: Schedule 23, page 307, line 25, column 2, leave out paragraph (p)

683: Schedule 23, page 307, line 31, column 2, at end insert—

“( ) paragraph 20(2),”

684: Schedule 23, page 307, line 33, column 2, leave out “32(2)” and insert “32(1)(b) and (2)”

685: Schedule 23, page 308, line 17, column 2, at end insert “(in both places)”

686: Schedule 23, page 308, line 21, column 2, leave out paragraph (l)

686A: Schedule 23, page 308, line 22, at end insert—

“( ) paragraph 15.”

687: Schedule 23, page 308, line 24, at end insert—

“Social Security Act 1986 (c. 50)

In section 56(1), “although not a barrister or solicitor”.”

688: Schedule 23, [Re-tabled as Amendment 689A]

689: Schedule 23, page 308, line 36, column 2, at beginning insert—

“Sections 17, 18 and 18A.”

689A: Schedule 23, page 308, line 36, column 2, leave out “26” and insert “29”

690: Schedule 23, page 308, line 36, column 2, at end insert—

“Sections 31 and 31A.”

691: Schedule 23, page 308, line 37, column 2, at end insert—

“In section 53—

(a) subsection (5), and

(b) subsection (9)(e).”

692: Schedule 23, page 308, column 2, leave out lines 38 and 39 and insert—

“Sections 54 and 55.”

693: Schedule 23, page 308, column 2, leave out line 41 and insert—

“Sections 68 to 70.

Section 73(5)(d).”

693A: Schedule 23, page 308, line 42, column 2, at end insert—

“Section 90.”

694: Schedule 23, page 308, line 43, column 2, leave out “(2) and (3)”

695: Schedule 23, page 308, line 46, column 2, at end insert—

“In section 119(1), the definitions of—

(a) “authorised advocate”,

(b) “authorised body” and “appropriate authorised body”,

(c) “authorised litigator”,

(d) “authorised practitioner”,

(e) “Consultative Panel”,

(f) “duly certificated notary public”,

(g) “the general principle”,

(h) “qualified person” and

(i) “the statutory objective”.

In section 120—

(a) in subsection (4), “26(1), 37(10), 40(1)”, and from “paragraph 24” to “Schedule 9”, and

(b) subsection (5).”

696: Schedule 23, page 308, column 2, leave out lines 47 and 48 and insert—

“Schedules 3 to 7.”

697: Schedule 23, page 309, line 2, column 2, at end insert—

“( ) paragraph 7,

( ) paragraph 11,”

697A: Schedule 23, page 309, line 2, column 2, at end insert—

“( ) paragraph 13,”

698: Schedule 23, page 309, column 2, leave out lines 3 and 4 and insert—

“( ) paragraphs 14 to 20,

( ) paragraph 21(1)(b), and”

699: Schedule 23, page 309, line 5, column 2, at end insert—

“Schedule 9.”

700: Schedule 23, page 309, line 10, column 2, leave out “2(5) and insert “2(3) and (5)”

701: Schedule 23, page 309, line 10, column 2, at end insert—

“( ) in paragraph 5—

(i) in sub-paragraph (3)(a) and (b), “by virtue of his being a member of that partnership”,

(ii) sub-paragraph (4),”

701A: Schedule 23, page 309, column 2, leave out lines 1 and 12

702: Schedule 23, page 309, line 22, column 2, after “paragraphs” insert “4,”

703: Schedule 23, page 309, line 22, column 2, leave out “and 10” and insert “, 10 and 20”

704: Schedule 23, page 309, line 23, column 2, after “18” insert—

“—

(a) in paragraph 1(1), ““The Authorised Conveyancing Practitioners Board”” and ““The Conveyancing Ombudsman””,

(b) paragraph 1(2), and

(c) ”

704A: Schedule 23, page 309, line 23, column 2, after “12,” insert “18,”

705: Schedule 23, page 309, line 23, at end insert—

“Environmental Protection Act 1990 (c. 43)

In section 114(4), “, although not of counsel or a solicitor,”.”

706: Schedule 23, page 309, line 25, at end insert—

“Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (c. 52)

In section 194(2), “, although not of counsel or a solicitor,”.

Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1993 (c. 50)

In Schedule 2, paragraph 3.”

707: Schedule 23, page 309, line 29, at end insert—

“Environment Act 1995 (c. 25)

In section 54, “although not of counsel or a solicitor”.”

708: Schedule 23, page 309, line 30, column 2, at end insert—

“In Schedule 5, paragraph 67.”

709: Schedule 23, page 309, line 30, at end insert—

“National Minimum Wage Act 1998 (c. 39)

Section 33(1)(a).”

710: Schedule 23, page 309, line 31, column 2, at beginning insert—

“Sections 35(2) to (4), 36, 37 and 40 to 42.

In section 44(1), “is employed by”.”

711: Schedule 23, page 309, line 34, column 2, at end insert—

“Section 47.”

712: Schedule 23, page 309, line 35, column 2, at end insert—

“In Schedule 4, paragraph 46.

Schedule 5.”

713: Schedule 23, page 309, line 36, column 2, at end insert “, 5 to 8 and 11”

714: Schedule 23, page 309, line 38, column 2, at end insert—

“In Schedule 14, paragraph 14.”

714A: Schedule 23, page 310, line 7, at end insert—

“Trustee Act 2000 (c. 29)

In Schedule 2, paragraph 37.”

715: Schedule 23, page 310, line 8, column 2, at end insert—

“( ) “The Authorised Conveyancing Practitioners Board.”,”

716: Schedule 23, page 310, line 10, column 2, after “Commissioner.”” insert—

“( ) “The Legal Services Consultative Panel.””

717: Schedule 23, page 310, line 12, column 2, leave out from “paragraph” to end of line 13 and insert “23(2) to (6) and (10).”

718: Schedule 23, page 310, line 20, at end insert—

“Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 (c. 16)

In section 12(2) “even though he is not a barrister or solicitor”.”

719: Schedule 23, page 310, line 22, at end insert—

“National Health Service Act 2006 (c. 41)

In section 194(4), “, although he is not a barrister or solicitor,”.

National Health Service (Wales) Act 2006 (c. 42)

In section 142(4), “, although he is not a barrister or solicitor,”.”

On Question, amendments agreed to.

Schedule 24 [Index of defined expressions]:

720: Schedule 24, page 310, line 31, at end insert—

“barrister

section 197”

On Question, amendment agreed to.

House adjourned at 10.31 pm.