header-logo header-logo

08 January 2015
Issue: 7635 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

BSB opens applications for lawyer-owned & managed businesses

Barristers’ regulator, the Bar Standards Board (BSB), has opened its doors to applications from those wishing to set up lawyer-owned and managed businesses (or entities) providing reserved legal activities.

From this week, barristers and other advocates can apply to form companies, become a partnership or set up an LLP without changing regulators. The BSB will begin authorising applications in April.

Joining or forming an entity appeals most strongly to criminal and family barristers, and least strongly to those working in commercial and chancery, and international or EU practice, according to Bar Council and BSB research published last summer (Barristers’ Working Lives, a second biennial study of the Bar). Interest focused most strongly on barrister-only entities.

More than a third of family barristers and more than a quarter of criminal barristers had definite or possible intentions to join or form an entity with other barristers. More than a quarter of criminal barristers and nearly a quarter of family barristers had definite or potential plans to join or form entities with barristers and other lawyers. Some 18% of criminal barristers and 17% of family barristers had definite or potential plans to join or form entities with barristers, other lawyers and lay people.

The BSB also announced that it will apply to the Legal Services Board this year to become a licensing authority for ABSs, which may be owned and managed by non-lawyers. 

Oliver Hanmer, director of supervision for the BSB, says: “This is a major chapter in the story of the Bar. Adjusting the way in which it does business is critical to the profession’s posterity. As a regulator, it is our job to do what we can to enable barristers to alter the ways in which they can structure their practice so it better meets clients’ needs.”

 

Issue: 7635 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Cripps—Radius Law

Cripps—Radius Law

Commercial and technology practice boosted by team hire

Switalskis—Grimsby

Switalskis—Grimsby

Firm expands with new Grimsby office to serve North East Lincolnshire

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Slater Heelis—Will Newman & Lucy Spilsbury

Property team boosted by two solicitor appointments

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll