Pub Date : 2016-01-02DOI: 10.1080/1460728x.2016.1190103
Tim Dare
‘Legal ethics’ is a broad church, embracing the legal regulation of lawyers as well as the empirical, historical, sociological and – since the mid-1970s – philosophical study of legal practice. Ethics and the Law is the first book-length introduction to this last, philosophical, thread. Brad Wendel is a singularly appropriate author for such an introduction. He is a lawyer and a philosopher, a leading contributor to contemporary philosophical legal ethics, and he writes clearly and engagingly. Ethics and the Law is divided into two parts. The first part introduces a range of philosophical issues raised by the ethical analysis of legal practice; the idea of role differentiation; reflective equilibrium and the form of common justifications of legal practice; the justification of the legal system itself, particularly the adversary system; connections between leading positions in the philosophy of law and legal ethics; questions about the relationship between citizens and government and the notions of obligation and obedience; and the challenge of unjust laws. The second part is motivated by appreciation that the role of lawyer is not monolithic: there are many ‘law jobs’ – lawyers work as criminal defenders, as prosecutors, within civil litigation, as in-house or company counsel, representing clients in courts or as adviser or counsel in matters never likely to be independently examined, and so on. These roles raise distinct ethical issues that are identified and discussed in chapters dedicated to each of the selected law jobs. This is for the most part a very good introduction. The book displays its author’s mastery of an impressive range of material. It includes engaging and deeply troubling cases, such as the one it starts with, in which client confidentiality leads lawyers to sit on a confession that might have spared an innocent man 25 years in prison, gives a sense how justification might proceed in applied ethics, and in legal ethics in particular, and draws connections between legal ethics and broader philosophical issues. The chapters on the multiple roles of lawyers in the second part are both nuanced treatments in their own right and an important reminder of the need for proper regard to the detail of particular roles within law. Too many write as though all lawyers work in court, or deep in the shadow of litigation. Wendel’s introduction is a reminder that that is not so, and why it matters. Inevitably, there are quibbles. The authors of introductory texts tread a fine line when drawing connections between their topics and broader issues: the connections can enrich new readers’ understanding of the core topic, or puzzle and confuse. Mainly, I think Wendel gets it right but occasionally he delivers a perfectly good introduction to some aspect of social or moral philosophy without making its connections to legal ethics very clear. Chapter 4, on the philosophy of law, is a useful primer on legal positivism and natural law theory, for instan
{"title":"Ethics and the law: an introduction","authors":"Tim Dare","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2016.1190103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1190103","url":null,"abstract":"‘Legal ethics’ is a broad church, embracing the legal regulation of lawyers as well as the empirical, historical, sociological and – since the mid-1970s – philosophical study of legal practice. Ethics and the Law is the first book-length introduction to this last, philosophical, thread. Brad Wendel is a singularly appropriate author for such an introduction. He is a lawyer and a philosopher, a leading contributor to contemporary philosophical legal ethics, and he writes clearly and engagingly. Ethics and the Law is divided into two parts. The first part introduces a range of philosophical issues raised by the ethical analysis of legal practice; the idea of role differentiation; reflective equilibrium and the form of common justifications of legal practice; the justification of the legal system itself, particularly the adversary system; connections between leading positions in the philosophy of law and legal ethics; questions about the relationship between citizens and government and the notions of obligation and obedience; and the challenge of unjust laws. The second part is motivated by appreciation that the role of lawyer is not monolithic: there are many ‘law jobs’ – lawyers work as criminal defenders, as prosecutors, within civil litigation, as in-house or company counsel, representing clients in courts or as adviser or counsel in matters never likely to be independently examined, and so on. These roles raise distinct ethical issues that are identified and discussed in chapters dedicated to each of the selected law jobs. This is for the most part a very good introduction. The book displays its author’s mastery of an impressive range of material. It includes engaging and deeply troubling cases, such as the one it starts with, in which client confidentiality leads lawyers to sit on a confession that might have spared an innocent man 25 years in prison, gives a sense how justification might proceed in applied ethics, and in legal ethics in particular, and draws connections between legal ethics and broader philosophical issues. The chapters on the multiple roles of lawyers in the second part are both nuanced treatments in their own right and an important reminder of the need for proper regard to the detail of particular roles within law. Too many write as though all lawyers work in court, or deep in the shadow of litigation. Wendel’s introduction is a reminder that that is not so, and why it matters. Inevitably, there are quibbles. The authors of introductory texts tread a fine line when drawing connections between their topics and broader issues: the connections can enrich new readers’ understanding of the core topic, or puzzle and confuse. Mainly, I think Wendel gets it right but occasionally he delivers a perfectly good introduction to some aspect of social or moral philosophy without making its connections to legal ethics very clear. Chapter 4, on the philosophy of law, is a useful primer on legal positivism and natural law theory, for instan","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1190103","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59985209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-01-02DOI: 10.1080/1460728x.2016.1187453
Crispin Passmore
ABSTRACT The legal market is changing. Whether individual consumer or corporate client, the choice of services available to help manage or solve legal problems appears increasingly wide. Business process outsourcing, technology and data companies, accountants and other professional advisors are offering corporate clients new options to manage their legal affairs. Law firms are responding to this increasing competitive pressure with new services of their own. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), as the largest legal regulator in the UK, is liberalising its approach to regulation, removing prescriptions and inflexibilities, so that business and solicitors can compete and thrive in this changing market. The proposals will introduce greater flexibility for individual solicitors (including those currently described as in-house) to offer services to the public (including corporate clients) from businesses outside of legal regulation. A simpler and shorter Code of Conduct, focused separately on individual solicitors and firms that the SRA authorises, will increase flexibility and establish clear and high standards. The SRA expects that the increasing focus on proportionate and targeted regulation will support increased economic growth and thereby access to justice.
{"title":"The Solicitors Regulation Authority: looking to the future","authors":"Crispin Passmore","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2016.1187453","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1187453","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The legal market is changing. Whether individual consumer or corporate client, the choice of services available to help manage or solve legal problems appears increasingly wide. Business process outsourcing, technology and data companies, accountants and other professional advisors are offering corporate clients new options to manage their legal affairs. Law firms are responding to this increasing competitive pressure with new services of their own. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), as the largest legal regulator in the UK, is liberalising its approach to regulation, removing prescriptions and inflexibilities, so that business and solicitors can compete and thrive in this changing market. The proposals will introduce greater flexibility for individual solicitors (including those currently described as in-house) to offer services to the public (including corporate clients) from businesses outside of legal regulation. A simpler and shorter Code of Conduct, focused separately on individual solicitors and firms that the SRA authorises, will increase flexibility and establish clear and high standards. The SRA expects that the increasing focus on proportionate and targeted regulation will support increased economic growth and thereby access to justice.","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1187453","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59984673","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-01-02DOI: 10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189116
R. Rosen
ABSTRACT For ten years, General Motors (GM) denied that an ignition switch that could easily be turned to ‘Off’ constituted a safety defect. Accidents, deaths and injuries resulted. Despite many, many suits against GM, the problem remained uncorrected. The explanations that have been proffered are interrogated in this article and others are suggested. It concludes that a bureaucratic legal department is partly to blame, and criticises how the legal department evaluated cases by their settlement value. It criticises GM’s culture of blaming drivers for accidents. It concludes that the main problem at GM was not bureaucracy, but poor organisation of team management. GM was not organised for accountability without hierarchy. The article suggests that lawyers can play a key role in improving corporate decision making.
{"title":"The sociological imagination and legal ethics","authors":"R. Rosen","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189116","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189116","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT For ten years, General Motors (GM) denied that an ignition switch that could easily be turned to ‘Off’ constituted a safety defect. Accidents, deaths and injuries resulted. Despite many, many suits against GM, the problem remained uncorrected. The explanations that have been proffered are interrogated in this article and others are suggested. It concludes that a bureaucratic legal department is partly to blame, and criticises how the legal department evaluated cases by their settlement value. It criticises GM’s culture of blaming drivers for accidents. It concludes that the main problem at GM was not bureaucracy, but poor organisation of team management. GM was not organised for accountability without hierarchy. The article suggests that lawyers can play a key role in improving corporate decision making.","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189116","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59984831","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-01-02DOI: 10.1080/1460728x.2016.1188540
Suzanne M. Le Mire
In early April 2016 it came to public notice that the South Australian state government had sought to appoint three District Court judges to the superior Supreme Court on an auxiliary or temporary basis. This kind of appointment is not unusual within the Australian court system as cash-strapped state governments seek to add judicial officers to the ranks, without committing to the expense of a permanent judicial appointment. According to a statement made by the local Attorney General, ‘They are necessary from time to time to hear cases that may require specific legal expertise, or in cases where local judicial officers have a conflict of interest’. More broadly, however, they are being used to address caseload demands cheaply. In this case, however, the appointments did not play out as the government had hoped. One of the three District Court judges, Judge Barry Beazley, declined to take up the appointment. While he made no public statement as to his motivation, one media source suggested that his refusal was, according to ‘insiders’, as ‘he believes temporary judges won’t help the backlog and that the government should adequately resource the courts’. His reported decision was applauded by the local legal profession, with the Law Society President, David Caruso, stating he had ‘distinguished himself’. In Australia, judicial appointment is the gift of the executive and is not without episodes of considerable controversy. Most recently, the appointment of a Chief Magistrate to the position of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Queensland led to an unsightly judicial spat played out in newspapers across the nation, and ultimately to the resignation of the judicial officer in question. Despite a degree of concern about methods of appointment and a persistent lag in the appointment of a diverse judiciary,
{"title":"A temporary ‘fix’ for a permanent problem: the appointment of auxiliary judges in South Australia","authors":"Suzanne M. Le Mire","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2016.1188540","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1188540","url":null,"abstract":"In early April 2016 it came to public notice that the South Australian state government had sought to appoint three District Court judges to the superior Supreme Court on an auxiliary or temporary basis. This kind of appointment is not unusual within the Australian court system as cash-strapped state governments seek to add judicial officers to the ranks, without committing to the expense of a permanent judicial appointment. According to a statement made by the local Attorney General, ‘They are necessary from time to time to hear cases that may require specific legal expertise, or in cases where local judicial officers have a conflict of interest’. More broadly, however, they are being used to address caseload demands cheaply. In this case, however, the appointments did not play out as the government had hoped. One of the three District Court judges, Judge Barry Beazley, declined to take up the appointment. While he made no public statement as to his motivation, one media source suggested that his refusal was, according to ‘insiders’, as ‘he believes temporary judges won’t help the backlog and that the government should adequately resource the courts’. His reported decision was applauded by the local legal profession, with the Law Society President, David Caruso, stating he had ‘distinguished himself’. In Australia, judicial appointment is the gift of the executive and is not without episodes of considerable controversy. Most recently, the appointment of a Chief Magistrate to the position of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Queensland led to an unsightly judicial spat played out in newspapers across the nation, and ultimately to the resignation of the judicial officer in question. Despite a degree of concern about methods of appointment and a persistent lag in the appointment of a diverse judiciary,","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1188540","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59984405","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-01-02DOI: 10.1080/1460728x.2016.1186453
R. Moorhead, Rachel Cahill-O'Callaghan
ABSTRACT Commercial lawyers often signal that ‘client first’ is an essential element of their professional DNA, and some scholarly proponents have laid claim to a moral justification for zeal. That moral justification is found, in particular, in the notion of lawyers as friends. One critique of zeal is that this moral claim is bogus: that ‘client first’ is a convenient trope for disguised self-interest. This paper explores the empirical validity of this ‘client first’ ideal through a value-based analysis of zeal in lawyering. Our data suggest plausible differences in ethical decision-making related to those values. The data are consistent with more zealous lawyers having stronger self-interested rather than client-interested motivations. More zealous lawyers are also less constrained by valuing conformity to rules. If our results are valid, they suggest that the claim that zeal is motivated by placing a high value on the interests of the client is false.
{"title":"False friends? Testing commercial lawyers on the claim that zealous advocacy is founded in benevolence towards clients rather than lawyers’ personal interest","authors":"R. Moorhead, Rachel Cahill-O'Callaghan","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2016.1186453","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1186453","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Commercial lawyers often signal that ‘client first’ is an essential element of their professional DNA, and some scholarly proponents have laid claim to a moral justification for zeal. That moral justification is found, in particular, in the notion of lawyers as friends. One critique of zeal is that this moral claim is bogus: that ‘client first’ is a convenient trope for disguised self-interest. This paper explores the empirical validity of this ‘client first’ ideal through a value-based analysis of zeal in lawyering. Our data suggest plausible differences in ethical decision-making related to those values. The data are consistent with more zealous lawyers having stronger self-interested rather than client-interested motivations. More zealous lawyers are also less constrained by valuing conformity to rules. If our results are valid, they suggest that the claim that zeal is motivated by placing a high value on the interests of the client is false.","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1186453","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59984600","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-01-02DOI: 10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189115
Joanna Gray
ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is twofold. Firstly, to examine questions about the role and responsibilities of transaction lawyers working in the financial sector that, it is argued here, deserve closer scrutiny than they have hitherto received since the banking and economic crisis of 2008. It considers the manner in which the conduct of such lawyers in the pre-crisis financial markets may have played a particular role in contributing to the sources of latent risk that bore systemic fruit in 2008. It poses the question, ‘Could (and should) they have acted differently?’. The first section concludes that there are strong and persuasive arguments both for and against reorienting the responsibilities of the transaction lawyer to include some obligation to take account of the risk to the financial system which the transactions they are conducting for their clients may pose. Secondly, this paper explores ways in which, nonetheless, financial sector lawyers could – and indeed should – be expected to play a part in the efforts of UK regulators who do now have a clear legislative obligation (with all the weight of public expectation that accompanies such a mandate) to detect, minimise and prevent systemic risk erupting again in the financial sector.
{"title":"Lawyers and systemic risk in finance: could (and should) the legal profession contribute to macroprudential regulation?","authors":"Joanna Gray","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189115","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189115","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is twofold. Firstly, to examine questions about the role and responsibilities of transaction lawyers working in the financial sector that, it is argued here, deserve closer scrutiny than they have hitherto received since the banking and economic crisis of 2008. It considers the manner in which the conduct of such lawyers in the pre-crisis financial markets may have played a particular role in contributing to the sources of latent risk that bore systemic fruit in 2008. It poses the question, ‘Could (and should) they have acted differently?’. The first section concludes that there are strong and persuasive arguments both for and against reorienting the responsibilities of the transaction lawyer to include some obligation to take account of the risk to the financial system which the transactions they are conducting for their clients may pose. Secondly, this paper explores ways in which, nonetheless, financial sector lawyers could – and indeed should – be expected to play a part in the efforts of UK regulators who do now have a clear legislative obligation (with all the weight of public expectation that accompanies such a mandate) to detect, minimise and prevent systemic risk erupting again in the financial sector.","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189115","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59984667","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-01-02DOI: 10.1080/1460728x.2016.1165972
A. Paterson
{"title":"Lawyers’ ethics and professional responsibility","authors":"A. Paterson","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2016.1165972","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1165972","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1165972","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59984179","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-01-02DOI: 10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189114
Lawrence Etherington
ABSTRACT Recruitment of trainee solicitors by largely commercial organisations provides the effective gateway to professional qualification for aspiring solicitors. Professional bodies and others have sought to distinguish solicitors from other legal service providers through reference to professionalism and ethics. In this article I present the findings from a survey of the applicant experience of the graduate recruitment process and interviews with the professionals involved in those processes. The research is situated within the literature on professional identity development. The main aims are to contribute to understanding of the way in which graduate recruitment may inform the construction of professional identities, with particular focus on notions of ethicality within that. These engagements come at a critical time for professional identity construction. Despite data suggesting applicant expectations that professionalism and ethics will be important in their future practice, these early encounters do little to support that view. The influence of selection activities most likely marks the beginning of longer-term experiences that diminish the significance of ethicality in notions of professionalism. The data identifies recruiter assumptions as to appropriate ethical character. There is also evidence that the recruitment process may actively undermine ideas such as independence as relevant to legal practitioners.
{"title":"Public professions and private practices: access to the solicitors’ profession in the twenty-first century","authors":"Lawrence Etherington","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189114","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189114","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Recruitment of trainee solicitors by largely commercial organisations provides the effective gateway to professional qualification for aspiring solicitors. Professional bodies and others have sought to distinguish solicitors from other legal service providers through reference to professionalism and ethics. In this article I present the findings from a survey of the applicant experience of the graduate recruitment process and interviews with the professionals involved in those processes. The research is situated within the literature on professional identity development. The main aims are to contribute to understanding of the way in which graduate recruitment may inform the construction of professional identities, with particular focus on notions of ethicality within that. These engagements come at a critical time for professional identity construction. Despite data suggesting applicant expectations that professionalism and ethics will be important in their future practice, these early encounters do little to support that view. The influence of selection activities most likely marks the beginning of longer-term experiences that diminish the significance of ethicality in notions of professionalism. The data identifies recruiter assumptions as to appropriate ethical character. There is also evidence that the recruitment process may actively undermine ideas such as independence as relevant to legal practitioners.","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1189114","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59984622","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-01-02DOI: 10.1080/1460728x.2016.1186452
Jonathan Kembery
ABSTRACT This paper gives a personal perspective on the growth of in-house legal teams within law firms. It suggests why these departments have emerged as a response to greater legal and regulatory challenges, changes in the profession and a quest for professionalism and cost effectiveness. The paper examines the work of a substantial team and the parallels and differences between a role in that organisation and other forms of legal practice. Finally, it considers the future for these in-house teams in the light of regulatory and organisational factors and the possible implications of technological innovation on staffing and work.
{"title":"The evolution of the lawyer’s lawyer","authors":"Jonathan Kembery","doi":"10.1080/1460728x.2016.1186452","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1186452","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper gives a personal perspective on the growth of in-house legal teams within law firms. It suggests why these departments have emerged as a response to greater legal and regulatory challenges, changes in the profession and a quest for professionalism and cost effectiveness. The paper examines the work of a substantial team and the parallels and differences between a role in that organisation and other forms of legal practice. Finally, it considers the future for these in-house teams in the light of regulatory and organisational factors and the possible implications of technological innovation on staffing and work.","PeriodicalId":42194,"journal":{"name":"Legal Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/1460728x.2016.1186452","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59984729","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：