header-logo header-logo

04 October 2018
Issue: 7811 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services
printer mail-detail

Transparency Rules: who, what & how much?

New transparency rules to take effect in December 2018

The Solicitors Regulatory Association (SRA) has spelled out the range of price and service information law firms must publish under the new Transparency Rules due to take effect in December.

Law firms must say how long a quoted service might typically take and provide details of the experience and qualifications of staff who will be doing the work, the SRA states in guidance published this week. Firms must post the information in a prominent, clearly signposted location on their website. Any solicitor or firm without a website must make the information available immediately in any format for any member of the public who requests it. The SRA guidance says the Transparency Rules will apply to: conveyancing; probate; motoring offences; employment tribunals (claims for unfair or wrongful dismissal); immigration (excluding asylum); debt recovery (up to £100,000); and licensing applications for business premises.

Meanwhile, research published by the SRA this week and compiled by YouGov and Europe Economics suggested that publishing prices might boost business. A survey of about 1,000 small businesses found that they overestimated the cost of using a solicitor by 22%.

Nearly seven in ten small businesses said cost was a barrier to using a solicitor and nearly half of small businesses shop around online for legal services. When prices were published, therefore, assumptions on what solicitors cost fell and more small businesses said they would use a law firm compared to other legal services providers. The SRA said the findings echoed those of previous research which found that the majority of the public (70%) wanted to shop around, but were frustrated by the lack of accessible information available.

Issue: 7811 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services
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