moved Amendment No. 108DB:
108DB: Clause 88, page 50, line 9, leave out ““an employee or”” and insert ““a””
The noble Lord said: This amendment was rightly provoked by the City of London Law Society. Its purpose is to avoid imposing professional duties, which are statutory, on non-professional members of staff. Briefly, Clause 88 imposes an obligation on non-authorised employees of an ABS to refrain from doing anything that contributes to a breach of professional duties of an authorised person. So, for example, a secretary who types and sends correspondence on the wrong letterhead could be directly and personally liable for a breach of professional rules even though he or she had not had the benefit of professional training and nor would he or she hold a professional qualification. Therefore, there is a justifiable perception that that is unfair. Professional duties should not be extended on a statutory basis to non-professional members of staff. It is also perhaps unnecessary, to the extent that solicitors are already responsible for breaches of professional duty caused by their members of staff. I beg to move.
Legal Services Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Kingsland
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 6 February 2007.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Legal Services Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
689 c651 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:04:00 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_376547
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_376547
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_376547