Tribunal judges call for regulatory controls over non-lawyer employment advisers

Print This Post

By Legal Futures

2 December 2011


Employment dispute: judges call for level playing field

The Legal Ombudsman should have jurisdiction over non-lawyer employment advisers as part of work to improve consumer protection in the field, employment judges have suggested.

Responding to the Legal Services Board’s consultation paper Enhancing consumer protection, reducing regulatory restrictions, the Judiciary of the Employment Tribunals said its primary concern was the lack of consistency in the redress available to claimants given the wide range of people – most of whom are not regulated – who act as advocates before tribunals.

The judges complained that claimants, the judiciary and the effective operation of the Tribunal Service are all “impacted upon by poor-quality advice, preparation, representation and advocacy”.

Tags: , , , ,



Legal Futures Blog

Disruptive innovation: the Christensen thesis hits law schools and legal services

Roger Smith

A report from the Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation warns that law schools in the US are “in crisis” and doomed unless they must respond positively to the “disruption of the traditional model for the provision of legal services”. The report relishes the coming of Armageddon by a sector whose financial viability it says will soon be choked off by the transformation of the legal market. How does this thesis stack up from the other side of the Atlantic?

February 28th, 2017