Plan to smooth paralegals’ path to CILEx qualification sparks “confusion” claim

Print This Post

10 December 2015


Leat: proposal would "confuse employers and consumers"

Leat: proposal “muddies the waters”

A proposal by CILEx Regulation (CRL) to make it easier for paralegals to become qualified legal executives has been rejected as likely to cause “confusion to employers and consumers” by the new voluntary paralegals regulator.

In a speech to this week’s Westminster Legal Policy Forum, David Gilbertson, a board member of the legal executives’ regulator, said its next step would be a period of review following completion of its new schemes for CPD and competence assessment of CILEx independent practitioners.

It would include “looking at the possibility of creating streamlined pathways to enable paralegals to become both Chartered Legal Executives and CILEx Practitioners, without the need for unnecessary duplication of evidence where it is appropriate to do so”.

But Rita Leat, managing director of the Professional Paralegal Register (PPR), a voluntary regulation scheme for paralegals launched in July, said: “The [PPR] regulates all paralegals who work in the unregulated sector and already provide the necessary pathways for specialist paralegal practitioners to operate with paralegal practising certificates without the need to become something else [such as] legal executives…

“It would be less of a repetition of efforts if CILEx would engage more with the PPR to offer a greater diversity of opportunity in the sector and enable consumers to access a more cost-effective legal system. It appears to us to be a muddying of the waters that causes confusion to employers and consumers.”

A spokesman for CRL explained that the streamlining of rules for paralegals could include “aligning some of the evidence we require for a practice rights application with the work-based learning portfolio aspiring Chartered Legal Executives must provide. Paralegals seeking lawyer status either as Chartered Legal Executives, or with CILEx practice rights, would therefore not have to duplicate their evidence unnecessarily.”

He added: “Of course, application for practice rights specifically in conveyancing or probate is open to anyone… Our desire is to make our application processes more streamlined without diminishing the high standards we expect of applicants.”

CILEx last year announced an enquiry into paralegals, reflecting a push by the representative body to assert a leadership role in an area of the legal employment market widely expected to grow over the next decade. At the time, CILEx estimated it had about 12,500 paralegals in its membership, including students, affiliates, associates and graduates who were working in the legal aid field.

Separately, CRL this week launched an eight-week consultation on whether it should become a licensing authority for alternative business structures (ABS), claiming it “receives enquiries regularly from organisations seeking to be licensed by it as a licensed body” under the Legal Services Act 2007.

Currently only entities run by Chartered Legal Executives, CILEx Practitioners or other lawyers can be authorised by CRL, but not those with non-lawyer owners or managers.

The consultation said its current inability to licence ABSs “limits growth, consumer choice and innovative delivery of legal services”.

In particular, it said, “the demographic of the community regulated by [CRL] includes a high proportion of females, ethnic minorities and those from less advantaged socio-economic backgrounds, potentially increasing the market for consumers who may seek legal advice from those closer to their own demographic.”

The consultation closes on 29 January 2016.

Tags: , ,



Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

The ethics of the SRA’s social media warning notice

Mena Ruparel

Social media portals are regularly used by firms and those who work for law firms in both professional and personal capacities. Their informal nature and the fast pace of use makes it all too easy for regulated people to get carried away with online discussions or comments which can fall foul of the regulator. This is more likely to happen on social media platforms as these are virtual, accessed in the solicitor’s own time and space. It can be easy to forget that solicitors are regulated just the same at 11pm on their home computer as they are at 3pm in the office or at court.

September 15th, 2017