Not exact matches
This one - tier
partnership and «up - or - out» system began eroding in the 1980s as the increasingly competitive
legal marketplace required new
approaches to the traditional
partnership system.
Jeff Bell spoke at a recent mastermind session on their
approach to
partnerships with both attorneys and
legal technology providers.
In a
legal sector that is constantly changing, James prioritises a consultative
approach in which he works in
partnership with law firms and candidates to overcome uncertainties and achieve the best results for all.
When
Legal Disciplinary
Partnerships (LDPs) came into force in March 2009, the market did not quite know whether to expect a raft of UK law firms to convert and defy their usually conservative wait - and - see
approach in order to bring valued senior non-lawyers into the
partnership.
After reviewing the marketplace we felt Advanced
Legal was the right choice due to its
partnership approach and market - leading status.
Interdisciplinary
partnerships between lawyers and clinicians promise more informed
approaches for helping older clients meet their
legal needs.
In essence, the options were either (1) limited lawyer / nonlawyer
partnerships with a cap on nonlawyer ownership and the nonlawyers would be subject to a «fit to own» test, (2) lawyer / nonlawyer
partnerships with no cap on nonlawyer ownership but the firm could provide
legal services only (no multidisciplinary services) and the nonlawyer partner (s) would be required to perform services for the firm (they could not be passive investors; as discussed further below, this option was considered to be the «DC
approach»), or (3) the same as Option (2) except the firm could offer multidisciplinary services.
There is still more work to do, but I see progress everywhere I look in both the cultural and formal
approaches to
legal partnerships.
However, the paper also suggests that there are reasons to believe that non-lawyer ownership will not lead to significant access gains because (i) those in need of civil
legal services often have few resources and, for them,
legal aid is the answer, (ii) non-lawyer ownership is likely to be attracted to profitable sectors of the market, (iii) some
legal services require the individualized attention of an experienced practitioner who charges high rates and the traditional worker owned
partnership model may be the better
approach in this context and (iv) there may be reasons other than price causing people not to address civil
legal needs.
For these groups, native title agreements will be achieved through strong, cooperative relationships based on a
partnership approach, rather than an emphasis on the
legal processes of the NTA.
Medical ‐
legal partnership (MLP) is an
approach to health that integrates the work of healthcare, public health, and civil
legal aid to more effectively identify, treat, and prevent health ‐ harming
legal needs for patients, clinics, and populations.