IPReg set to apply this year to become ABS regulator number 3


IP: some firms already have external ownership

The Intellectual Property Regulation Board (IPReg) will apply this year to become an alternative business structure (ABS) licensing authority, it has emerged.

Having unveiled its plans shortly before Christmas, IPReg has published a timeline saying that following a consultation this summer, it will seek designation as a licensing authority in October.

The Legal Services Board has a year to decide on such applications – extendable to 16 months – but IPReg hopes to have approval within around six months so that the parliamentary process can then be completed and it can begin accepting ABS applications from the start of 2014.

ABSs are seen as offering increased flexibility for IP firms to broaden their scope of work and finance their activities.

If approved, it will join the Solicitors Regulation Authority and Council for Licensed Conveyancers as ABS licensing authorities, with the Bar Standards Board also planning an application for advocacy-focused ABSs. Longer term ILEX Professional Standards and possibly the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales are eyeing up applications as well.

The Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA) and Institute of Trade Mark Attorneys (ITMA) – both of which are regulated by IPReg – have signalled their support for the application, which is expected to cost around £130,000 to prepare, plus Legal Services Board fees.

IP firms have long been allowed non-lawyer owners – the highest profile is AIM-listed Murgitroyd – although IPReg rules require 75% lawyer ownership.

Those which have non-lawyer owners and managers will need to become ABSs once the Legal Services Board ends transitional arrangements, and the two institutes see the application as strategic, enabling both ABS and non-ABS IP firms to continue to be regulated by the same regulator.

Alasdair Poore, a partner at regional law firm Mills & Reeve and past president of CIPA, told Legal Futures last year that the move would help both IP businesses like Murgitroyd that have created “a coherent business strategy around funding”, and small practices with family shareholdings.

He added: “It also provides the opportunity to put in place firms that are more vertically integrated in the services they offer.” By delivering additional services such as investment and marketing advice, a single firm would be able to take a business “from bench to market”.

 

Tags:




Leave a Comment

By clicking Submit you consent to Legal Futures storing your personal data and confirm you have read our Privacy Policy and section 5 of our Terms & Conditions which deals with user-generated content. All comments will be moderated before posting.

Required fields are marked *
Email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Reports

No larger firm can ignore the demands of innovation – that was the clear message from our most recent roundtable: “The law firm of the future”, sponsored by LexisNexis Enterprise Solutions. It comes in many forms, predominantly but not just technology, and is not simply a case of automating process. Expertise and process are not mutually exclusive.

Blog

18 July 2019

Good company – general counsel’s difficult balancing act

Company behaviour and the ethical responsibility of general counsel is a sensitive subject, because the status and influence of the role can vary considerably from one entity to another, and the issue can be complicated.

Read More

Loading animation