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

How best to achieve independent regulation under the Legal Services Act?

Craig Wakeford LSB

Independent regulation gives confidence to consumers, providers, investors and society as a whole that legal services work in the public interest and support the rule of law. The Legal Services Act 2007 does not require all approved regulators to be structurally separate from representative bodies. Instead, the Legal Services Board is required by the Act to produce internal governance rules (IGR) which apply the principle of regulatory independence in legal service regulation. We are currently running a consultation on the IGR which continues until 9 February.

January 19th, 2018