The BMO report is somewhat timely as it comes just before the Canadian Bar Association is expected to release its much - anticipated Futures report at its annual meeting next month, which will address
the issue of alternative business structures for law.
Not exact matches
«New York State Bar Association's Comments on the ABA Commission on the Future
of Legal Services»
Issues Papers on Legal Checkups, Unregulated LSP Entities and
Alternative Business Structures.»
According to David, the UK Legal Services Act, passed in 2007, and subsequent regulations
issued in 2012, resulted in hundreds
of law firms applying for
Alternative Business Structure (ABS) licenses.
And the
issue as to whether to legalize ABSs (
alternative business structures, i.e., commercial & other investors able to own law firms) is very relevant to law societies» ability to prosecute them in Canada for UPL (the unauthorized practice
of law).
As is apparent from the OTLA, and the many comments on my previous post, the upcoming Bencher elections in Ontario finally have an
issue that has grabbed the attention
of lawyers across the province:
Alternative Business Structures.
There are a variety
of issues tied up here, including providing accessible legal services to survivors
of domestic abuse, multi-disciplinary partnerships,
alternative business structures, and crowdfunding.
[The Commission's
Issues Paper regarding
alternative business structures] seems to stray from the core
of ABA Goal 1 and risks further alienation
of our membership.»
In the third
of these three
Issues Papers («
Alternative Business Structures»), the Commission appeared to openly defy the House
of Delegates.
More specifically, the
Issues Paper describes that the group «Regulatory Opportunities» is charged with studying existing regulatory innovations, such as
alternative business structures and the Canada Bar Association's Legal Futures Initiative Report, and then recommending «regulatory innovations that improve the delivery
of, and the public's access to, competent and affordable legal services.»
From the outset, the Commission has been transparent about the broad array
of issues it is studying and evaluating, including those legal services developments that are viewed by some as controversial, threatening, or undesirable (e.g.,
alternative business structures).
The ACTLA Board
of Directors has serious concerns regarding
Alternative Business Structures (ABS), Non-Lawyer Ownership
of law practices (NLO) and other changes being brought forward by the Law Society
of Alberta (LSA) including reducing the number
of benchers representing its growing membership as well as the lack
of full consultation with the profession on these
issues.
As McCarthy Tetrault General Counsel Malcolm Mercer pointed out to me and members
of the Canadian Association for Legal Ethics on our listerv,» the approval
of nearly 50 ABSs [
Alternative Business Structures]... in England and Wales in 2012 (with the counterpoints
of [the ABA's Ethics 2020 Commission] electing to do nothing on the
issue in the US and New South Wales in Australia having permitted non-lawyer ownership
of ILPs [Incorporated Legal Practices] for the last decade without a «fitness to own» requirement) is important context and perhaps impetus for Canada».
While the question
of alternative business structures dominated the recent Law Society
of Upper Canada bencher elections, there's another major
issue about to take centre stage: the decision to accredit or not Trinity Western University's planned law school.
the Law Society
of Upper Canada working group on
alternative business structures issued a report advising that it «does not propose to further examine any majority or controlling non-licensee ownership models for traditional law firms in Ontario at this time» but it will continue to explore options for «more limited non-licensee ownership models.»
For example, LSUC ignores the problem and its duties as set out in s. 4.2
of the (Ontario) Law Society Act, while «fast - tracking» the
Alternative Business Structures issue (ABS
issue) to the quick creation
of: (1) an ABS Committee (2) a (biased) ABS Discussion Paper written by the Committee; (3) the online publication
of the responses thus obtained; (4) the online publication
of a summary
of those responses — all done by the work
of those self - interested benchers who have campaigned hard to have ABSs made legal; and (5) a proposed vote in 2016 to determine the law society's position as to making ABSs legal.
It's the jump - off point for a series
of research papers on the future
of the profession and looks at three key areas: education; innovation and
alternative business structures; and ethics and regulatory
issues.
On behalf
of the more than 9,000 members and 6,000 firms represented by the Association
of Legal Administrators (ALA), we believe the benefits
of alternative business structures as described in the
issues paper outweigh any potential risks.