Securing licences, debt refinancing and selling lager

first_img Grecian earner: City firm Norton Rose advised on a credit card securitisation in Greece, consisting of a ­portfolio of credit card and open loan accounts from Piraeus Bank. The transaction involved the issue of €558m (£490m) worth of loan notes. Big pharma: City firm ­Herbert Smith, alongside US firm Davis Polk & Wardwell, advised pharmaceutical ­company Warner Chilcott on its $3.1bn (£1.9bn) acquisition of the pharmaceutical business of Procter & Gamble, the consumer goods giant. US firm Covington & Burling advised Procter & Gamble. Course work: Bristol firm TLT advised David Walters, owner of Ffos Las racecourse, on securing gaming, liquor and entertainment licences that allowed him to open the first National Hunt racecourse in 80 years. The 600 acre Ffos Las course, formerly an open cast coalmine, includes a 60 metre-wide track. TLT is now looking to secure a marriage licence for the course Brewing up: Magic circle firm Freshfields advised brewer Anheuser-Busch InBev on selling its Tennent’s Lager brand to beverage company C&C Group for £180m. C&C Group was advised by City firm LG. Building blocks: Magic circle firm Clifford Chance, alongside US firm Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, Mexican firm Ritch Mueller, Australian firm Minter Ellison, Irish firm A&L Goodbody and Swiss firm Bär & Karrer, advised BBVA, Banco Santander, BNP Paribas, Citibank, HSBC and RBS on a $15bn (£9.2bn) debt refinancing package for CEMEX Group, the building materials company. The refinancing involved every one of CEMEX Group’s creditors, comprising more than 50 banks and 25 noteholders.last_img read more

Read More »

Criminal procedure

first_imgBail – Legitimate expectation – Reasonableness – Crown Prosecution Service John Cooper (instructed by Edward Fail Bradshaw & Waterson) for the claimant; no appearance or representation for the defendant; Gary Pons (instructed by the CPS) for the interested party. The claimant (B) applied for judicial review of a decision of a Crown court to refuse him bail. B had been charged with offences of fraud, blackmail and possession of criminal property. The charges arose from allegations that B with others had deceived a 76-year-old man into believing that his property was in urgent need of repair so as to obtain £140,000 from him. Of that sum, £25,000 was allegedly paid to B. B was arrested and questioned about a sum of £25,000 deposited in his bank account. B was also questioned about other sums deposited in his bank account about which he made no comment. The interested party CPS did not object to B and his co-accused being granted bail and a magistrates’ court granted them conditional bail. At a later hearing before a Crown court, the court having been informed that B and his co-accused were on bail, a police officer gave sworn evidence as to B’s criminal record, indicating that it was intended that B would be arrested in respect of the other sums deposited in his account. The CPS purportedly did not seek to revoke B’s bail but the Crown court having heard the police officer’s evidence indicated that it was minded to revoke bail and stated that it would consider the matter of bail later in the day. At that later hearing, the CPS did oppose the grant of bail. The Crown court held that the information as to B’s potential arrest, together with the evidence that it had heard, amounted to a change of circumstances and it was satisfied that there were substantial grounds for believing that B would commit further offences, interfere with witnesses, and fail to surrender if granted bail so that it was inappropriate to grant him bail. B contended that (1) the Crown court had not been entitled to look at bail afresh as there had been no relevant change in circumstances and no new relevant facts; (2) the Crown court’s decision was irrational; (3) the Crown court’s revocation of bail amounted to a frustration of his legitimate expectation that it would grant him bail as the CPS had not opposed the grant of bail up until the very end of the proceedings. Held: (1) It was apparent that there had been a change of circumstances from when the magistrates’ court granted B bail and the hearing before the Crown court. Since B’s initial questioning an investigation had taken place and a decision had been taken to charge B with two new offences. The Crown court was therefore entitled to look at bail afresh. (2) The decision of the Crown court to refuse bail for the reasons that it had given was rational and within reasonable bounds. Given what the Crown court had learnt from material, namely the police officer’s evidence, which was not before the magistrates’ court, it was reasonable for it to take the view that if the alleged offences had occurred they had occurred while B was on conditional discharge in respect of other offences. Accordingly, it was not unreasonable for it to have found that it was likely that B would commit further offences if granted bail, R (on the application of M) v Isleworth Crown Court [2005] EWHC 363 (Admin) applied. (3) B could not have had any legitimate expectation that he would be granted bail. It was not for the CPS to give a defendant an expectation as to the grant of bail as bail was a matter for the courts and not the CPS. Application refused. center_img R (on the application of Burns) (claimant) v Woolwich Crown Court (defendant) & Crown Prosecution Service (interested party): DC (Lord Justice Aikens, Mr Justice Openshaw): 14 January 2010last_img read more

Read More »

Law firm CEOs are standing up to be counted in the most difficult market yet

first_img Ben Rigby is a freelance legal journalist. Anastasia Hancock also contributed Middle groundElsewhere, among the national law firms, management renewal has been at the forefront, with John Heaps newly installed as chairman of Eversheds, and John Pickering elected as national managing partner of Irwin Mitchell. Pickering says he looks forward to bringing continuity to the established senior management team and ‘working with partners on any challenges we may face’. He adds: ‘We have well-defined and clear business objects which we constantly review and continue to invest in. This allows us to channel our energies and ensure we work collectively towards a common goal.’ While Pickering’s concerns are no different to those of the City or larger corporate firms, he points out that they can be emphasised in certain practice areas: ‘The focus on value is particularly high in litigation, where commercial clients are increasingly looking for fixed-fee quotes and innovative fee solutions.’ David Pester, managing partner of TLT Solicitors, agrees with Cheyne that the search for greater efficiency and consistency is key, and is also ‘listening to clients to understand what value means in their terms’. He says: ‘That involves spending much more time with clients and finding out what they are doing and what they would like to do.’ Like the legendary Linklaters deal-maker, Pester says ‘it’s also an opportunity to improve our service so we know we are contributing real value by investing in the right people and the right ideas’. This exploration with clients has led him to consider embedding the solution with the client: ‘If capacity is an issue, we may be able to assist through secondments. We currently have about 20 staff, from trainee through to partner level, on secondment with clients.’ Like Pester, Irwin’s Pickering has also taken the opportunity to review major capital spend, and to take advantage of the current property market and look at expansion: ‘We continue to invest in systems that will help us carry on growing our business and, most importantly, continue to deliver the services our clients want. We have recently moved into new premises in London and will open a new office in Bristol this year.’ Richard Baxter, managing partner of Guildford-based Stevens & Bolton, also stresses the importance of communication: ‘In challenging times it is essential to communicate well, so I’m interested in fresh ways to keep partners and other colleagues well-informed about our business. We want to ensure that everyone continues to pull together in the same direction.’ He, too, is focused on balancing continuing financial discipline with longer-term investment and growth, and, like Pickering, his firm has made some major strategic investments: ‘We have taken on a number of high-quality senior hires, improved IT infrastructure and are shortly moving to new premises.’ This, he says, will be very positive: ‘We will be able to keep everyone under one roof in a perfect location close to London, while keeping our cost base significantly lower than our City peers.’ Last year was challenging for law firms to say the least. For the vast majority growth rates fell or stagnated. And redundancies were common, from the magic circle to the high street firms. Clients were more demanding, applying extensive scrutiny in seeking real value for money. Add in regulatory change, a growing tax burden, and underfunded public legal services; and the hangover from 2009 arguably makes 2010 an unpalatable prospect for law firm chief executives and their equivalents. Yet senior and managing partners insist they remain bullish about their roles. Gary Senior, managing partner of Baker & McKenzie’s London office, is pithily clear that to meet such challenges, he must remain strategic, show strong leadership, and communicate in ‘engaging with my partners and all of our people; and talking to as many of our key clients as possible’. Nabarro senior partner Simon Johnston prefers to focus on key principles – managing costs and maintaining revenue. While the former is within his control, much also depends on the market. Johnston says ‘those two principles will continue to underpin everything we do’ over this year. He stresses that checking the firm’s objectives still remain appropriate is important; both in developing the business into 2012 and beyond, and in making investment decisions. As Johnston says: ‘Cost control is an imperative in a downturn.’ Though so is retaining turnover, he adds. The same is true for relatively new law firms seeking to innovate. Martin Hosken, a director at Cubism Law, a limited company that recruits senior lawyers with established clients and provides branding and office infrastructure, says his firm treats the recession as any other business would. The focus for clients is ‘as always, money and provision of quality of service’. Hosken notes: ‘As a limited company, we focus on the business as a service provider, which just so happens to be providing legal services’. Help from Chancery LaneSo are the profession’s management needs being taken into account by the Law Society? Haddon says the needs of managing partners are not lost on him: ‘The LMS has certainly reacted to the needs of our members. We have made extra efforts to ensure that members in the regions can attend our seminars and events.’ He points out that events have been held in his home region of the north-west, the north-east, the south-east and elsewhere, so members can attend without travelling far, saying: ‘The management events we hold have been varied so that they are shorter, less expensive, and at more convenient times.’ He hopes members will see ‘there is much to help make a difference in their management.’ Within the City firms and elsewhere, there is also a focus on what is happening at the Solicitors Regulation Authority, with almost universal awareness of the challenges the new regime of alternative business structures will present, and the changing relationship between the Society, the Legal Services Board and the SRA. Yet there is recognition, too, of the changes in the way the City has been regulated previously, with moves to ‘outcomes-focused’ regulation welcome, and the adoption of new conduct rules. Cheyne welcomes these changes which, he says, take a less prescriptive approach and focus on the benefit to the client: ‘In principle, we see this as a positive move – it’s a more mature style of regulation, which allows greater flexibility in ensuring the right approach for different clients.’ In managing the consequences of recession, it seems, there are also ‘green shoots’ of recovery in the relationship between the regulator and the regulated as far as the City is concerned. Magic circleThe strategic dimension is already firmly fixed at the upper echelon of the magic circle. Linklaters senior partner David Cheyne maintains it is business as usual: ‘The firm is committed to the markets and sectors in which it operates,’ he says. ‘Our strategy has not changed; we continue to focus on complex work for the world’s leading corporations and financial institutions.’ Yet for Cheyne, what has changed is the client environment – changes, he says, that have led the firm to carry out an extensive ‘client listening’ programme to ensure that ‘we understand their concerns and issues and can support them appropriately’. He adds that, in consequence ‘the ways in which we can best serve them may change too’. Stressing that this trend is not limited to Linklaters, he believes lawyers ‘need to become even more flexible in (their) skill sets and how we deploy them across practices, sectors and geographies, to ensure that we are best placed to meet our clients’ evolving legal needs’. To that extent, he says, developing efficiencies may mean, for instance, ‘the adoption of more flexible fee approaches, or the use of legal process outsourcing, which has the potential to improve the cost-effectiveness and flexibility with which clients can procure services, enabling clients and law firms alike to focus on their core strengths’. Johnston points out that such a change in emphasis runs contrary to the previous norm: ‘Client feedback surveys previously tended to list things like the quality of legal services, service delivery, responsiveness and commercial approach as the key drivers to client relationships’, in which ‘costs have tended to be a factor but not a significant one’. Not any more, he says: ‘In the last 18 months that has certainly changed, and I think will continue over the next year. Clients will be looking for “cost-effective quality” as a priority, when they are buying legal services.’ As Baker & McKenzie’s Senior points out: ‘Client service and delivery is always front of mind, but there is also an increased focus on recognising what it is that clients want and especially their understanding of what value is.’ David Harris, managing partner at Lovells, observes: ‘It is obviously important that jobs are resourced at the right level and clients are less willing to pay perceived high prices for more routine work. They want their lawyers to be creative in reducing costs and we have been working with our clients to match their needs, including the use of managed outsourcing, where it makes commercial and legal sense to do so.’ The TLT advantage South-west firm TLT has been recognised for its innovation at the FT Innovative Lawyers Awards, and managing partner David Pester is clear that innovation is something that is integral to managing his firm’s response to the recession. ‘It’s important to maintain the capacity to adjust, according to how you see the legal services market moving,’ he says. One example is TLT’s involvement in the UK legal industry’s first shared library service. The deal involved a multi-year agreement for a shared library service with Integreon, a well-established provider of knowledge and legal support services, to deliver enhanced services and additional cost-efficiencies to his firm’s clients. The roles of staff were included too. ‘It was important to us to include in the agreement that the firm’s existing library employees will have guaranteed roles with Integreon,’ he says. He continues: ‘While we take a measured, long-term approach to our strategic decision-making, for any law firm the downturn will also have presented real opportunities.’ One of those opportunities was property investment. For him, this meant being able to invest in new premises in the City – premises, he says, that would not have been cost-effective two years ago. A move to 20 Gresham Street has doubled capacity in London. ‘Through timely investment we have been able to reduce the firm’s cost-base in London and develop the capacity to grow in niche practice areas,’ Pester says. ‘We can now offer a superb working space in London, and ultimately this will help support our talent recruitment and retention ambitions.’Pester says the challenge of dealing with economic turbulence ‘requires you to pause and test where your market is and where you are in it’. He believes in taking a longer-term view and building the business in a sustainable way. ‘If you focus on sustainability then you can not only survive in difficult times but actually develop and invest in new areas,’ he concludes. High street bluesIn other parts of the profession the challenges ahead are no less numerous and varied, according to Nigel Haddon, managing partner of north-west solicitors SAS Daniels and chair of the Law Society’s Law Management Section (LMS): ‘It is a harsh, tough, environment, other than perhaps for those involved in insurance litigation, to a greater or lesser degree.’ Haddon adds that his firm has seen decreases in transactional income, both for corporate work or residential property. He observes that ‘the cake itself is smaller, and will stay smaller, but we must seek a bigger slice of it’, adding that this ‘is true for many members of the LMS also’. Haddon’s firm has also made management changes to adapt to current circumstances, so ‘we can take quick decisions, and make ourselves leaner and speedier’. Edward Nally, senior partner at Bolton-based Fieldings Porter, and a former president of the Law Society, is less pessimistic, welcoming evidence that ‘those famous “green shoots of recovery” do seem evident within our own client base’ as ‘activity levels are higher, and business seems to be regaining confidence’. Nally is also clear on the need for fee-earners to keep on top of their monthly billing targets, saying ‘debtor and disbursements control is singularly important, because we can certainly observe some areas where clients are slower to pay for legal work done’. Business fundamentals are key, with Nally ensuring that Fieldings Porter’s fee-earners ‘are aware that interim bills have to be paid, and that we must put a break on ongoing work until these are up-to-date’. Haddon stresses the importance of following up with clients across the firm: ‘What may have been good enough in busy times before may well not now be good enough in chasing down, winning and doing our best work.’ He suggests that the buoyancy of the market pre-recession over the last 15 years, with work subsequently ‘pouring in’, might have led to complacency setting in. Yet like Cheyne, Senior, Pester, and their ilk, Haddon agrees that ‘what counts is having the deep expertise that clients want in their business sector, and to be able to empathise with their problems, and to work together on them’. Haddon says this depth of understanding was not previously required to the same extent. The firm is ‘changing to adapt to the requirements of their sectors and businesses and re-examining how we do things’, by commissioning external client service research.last_img read more

Read More »

Glam-tastic

first_imgIt’s official; solicitors are glamorous. Confirmation, if ever we needed it, came last week when Glamour magazine named solicitor Lisa Morgan (pictured) alongside the likes of Cheryl Cole and Kate Middleton as one of the most influential women in Britain. Morgan was named junior lawyer of the year at the Law Society’s excellence awards last year, and Obiter recalls being impressed by her passionate awards speech in support of the elderly clients she specialises in representing to recover their wrongly paid nursing fees. Who’d have thought it would turn out to be such a glamorous area of practice?last_img read more

Read More »

Family law

first_img Stephen Cobb QC (instructed by Smith Llewelyn Partnership) for the appellant; Matthew Rees (instructed by in-house solicitor) for the respondent and the guardian. The appellant mother (M) appealed against findings of fact made during the course of care proceedings brought by the respondent local authority in respect of one of her children (C). C, who was just over a year old at the relevant time, had been found to have multiple unexplained bruises. The police and local authority became involved and care proceedings were commenced. At a fact finding hearing, the parties accepted that the injuries had been inflicted upon C. The judge examined a record of text messages, obtained by the local authority that had been exchanged at the relevant times between M, her then partner (P) and P’s mother (X) which tended to show that M did not know how the injuries had occurred. The judge heard evidence from P that M had ‘freaked out’ in the immediate aftermath of discovering the injuries. The judge went on to find that M had, ultimately, lied about ending her relationship with P soon after the incident but that she had taken steps to inform the authorities, remove herself from the house and seek medical help. He limited the pool of perpetrators to M, P and X. On appeal, the local authority and C’s guardian consented to the pool being further limited to P and X. P and X opposed M’s appeal. M submitted that (1) the text messages clearly indicated that she did not know what had happened to C and were either a sophisticated and devious decoy designed to implicate P after the event or a genuine representation of her struggle to understand how the injuries had occurred; (2) the judge did not set out his reasons for including M in the pool of perpetrators and that it was not a necessary step from M having lied about her continuing relationship with P to having lied about C’s injuries. Held: (1) Firstly, the text messages were a valuable contemporaneous record. The judge did not make any finding that M’s part of the exchange was a devious attempt to set up a false trail. If it had been her intent from such an early stage to exculpate herself by this quite sophisticated ruse, it was highly unlikely that she would have been content to await the accident of the local authority seeking the text records in order to unveil the evidence. In the absence of any real evidence that those texts were a decoy, the proper conclusion for the judge was that M was genuinely struggling to understand how the injuries were caused and by whom. They were, therefore, a powerful piece of evidence against her inclusion in the pool of perpetrators. Secondly, P’s own evidence that M had ‘freaked out’ was entirely consistent with the picture which emerged from the texts. M’s immediate reaction together with the prompt steps that she took to remove herself and C from the house and seek medical help and to inform the authorities gave support to her case that she was not responsible for what happened to C (see paragraphs 22, 24 of judgment). (2) It was essential for the judge to have considered M’s lies and her presence during part of the critical period against the factors that pointed away from her having been responsible for C’s injuries, particularly the text messages, P’s description of her immediate reaction and the steps she took in the immediate aftermath. The judge did not complete that part of the exercise. His finding about the pool of perpetrators was therefore flawed. Had he considered all the relevant factors, he would necessarily have concluded that it was not appropriate for M to remain in the pool of perpetrators (paragraph 28). (3) The case was not one where it would be necessary or appropriate for the matter to be remitted to the court below for further consideration but rather a case in which the instant court should substitute the alternative finding for which M had contended (paragraph 28). Appeal allowed. Civil evidence – Local government – Care proceedingscenter_img H v City & County Of Swansea & Ors: CA (Civ Div) (Lady Justice Arden, Lords Justices Black, Richards): 2 March 2011last_img read more

Read More »

The minimum trainee salary has had its day

first_imgLet’s stir up the hornets’ nest, open a can of worms, poke our heads above the parapet and discuss that ever-controversial topic – minimum salaries for trainee solicitors. I first wrote on the subject in the Thursday 31 May 2007 issue of the Gazette, when I was still quite new to the magazine. It was a ‘splash’, the main story on the front page, and the headline read: ‘The minimum salary survives – for now.’ It hangs, framed, on the wall of my bathroom, light reading for when I am shaving or brushing my teeth. More pertinently, the prediction in the headline that the minimum salary wasn’t long for this world was wrong. Four years on it is still very much with us – and still as controversial as ever. For instance, I wrote a short piece in the 16 June 2011 issue announcing that the minimum salary was to remain unchanged for the third year in succession at £18,590 per annum in central London and £16,650 elsewhere. The comments posted online were, if I may put it delicately, robust. Sirtakealot accuses one of the legion of Anonymous posters of being, and I quote: ‘a grumpy miserable b*****d.’ To which another Anonymous retorts: ‘And yes I am also a grumpy old b*stard, and I have every right to be so.’ Wow! I thought newsrooms were forums for no-holds-barred home truths but our readership has redefined the limits of candour when it comes to commenting on one another’s perceived defects. So let’s get back to the roots. Why a minimum salary? Whose idea was it? Is it working? The Law Society council introduced the minimum salary requirement in 1982 to prevent the exploitation of trainees and to attract a high calibre of graduates to the profession. More recently, in October 2006 the Solicitors Regulation Authority began a consultation exercise on the future of the minimum salary. It was found that a ‘substantial majority’ of respondents favoured its retention. The grounds they cited were that it helped ensure that those joining the profession came from a wide range of backgrounds and experience. It also helped protect trainees from exploitation. Nearly three-quarters thought removing the minimum salary requirement would lower standards in the profession. Some 20% of respondents, however, said they would be more likely to take on trainees if there were no minimum salary requirement – a statistic to bear in mind now that training contracts are so hard to come by. That’s the rationale behind the minimum salary, but how meaningful is it? A first-year trainee at a magic circle firm, for instance, earns around £40,000 – which bears no relation to any minimum salary set by the Law Society. It’s also a whole lot more than a trainee journalist can expect. A quick check of the recruitment ads shows that some local newspapers pay just £10,000 a year. But to stop whingeing, and to stop being a ‘a grumpy miserable b*****d’, as one my readers characterised him or herself, let’s get back to the subject. Junior Lawyers Division executive committee member Camilla Graham Wood told me that she had spoken to a sole practitioner who said he would take on a trainee if he could pay the minimum national wage, rather than the one set by the Law Society. ‘That sole practitioner employs paralegals instead, which is arguably a lost opportunity for someone desperate for a training contract,’ she said. Graham Wood acknowledges that not all firms are affected by the need to pay at least the minimum salary. She said: ‘City and large commercial firms compete for what they believe to be the best talent by paying very generously. They can afford to. It’s small and medium-sized firms, particularly those doing legal aid, that struggle.’ She added that the government’s cancellation of the LSC training contract grant scheme, which used to help legal aid firms finance training contracts, has meant that many young lawyers who were keen to do such work could not find a firm to take them on. More wasted opportunity and more wasted talent. And is the minimum salary stopping the exploitation of trainees? Not really. Graham Wood reports that, with the oversupply of LPC graduates, many aspiring lawyers are having to do a couple of years as a paralegal, plus lots of unpaid work experience and charity work, before anyone will give them a contract. Has it ever been thus or are things getting worse? Would you recommend your best friend – or child – to try and become a lawyer? What’s to be done? Well, that’s got the the hornets buzzing nicely. Now it’s over to you!last_img read more

Read More »

A man of Straw

first_img Kerry Underwood, chairman, Law Abroad; senior partner, Underwoods Solicitors, Hemel Hempstead Andrew Twambley, senior partner, Amelans Solicitors; director, Injurylawyers4u, Manchester As personal injury lawyers, we think it is a great shame and totally unfair that so many lawyers are criticising Jack Straw for discovering the existence of referral fees in 2011. After all, why should we expect the former justice secretary to be aware that referral fees have been the backbone of personal injury business for the last 15 years? Just because he is the MP for Blackburn, a town with the largest cluster of claims management companies (registered or otherwise) in the country makes no difference. We think he has been done an injustice!last_img read more

Read More »

City firm couple jailed for fraud

first_imgA husband and wife have been jailed for fraudulently claiming over £200,000 of expenses from the City law firm where they worked. Zakia Sharif and Graham Simkin, who between 2004 and 2008 worked in the London office of Fulbright & Jarworski, were each sentenced to 16 months at the Old Bailey last week. Sharif was the firm’s director of administration. She pleaded guilty to one count of obtaining pecuniary advantage by deception, three counts of false accounting and one count of fraud by representation. Her husband Simkin was a litigation partner. He pleaded guilty to three counts of false accounting and one count of fraud by abuse of position. The Crown Prosecution Service said that Sharif acquired her job at the firm by deception, dishonestly claiming to have an LLB and LLM from King’s College, London. She was found to have fraudulently claimed more than £200,000 in net salary. She dishonestly claimed over £100,000 of expenses from the firm, some of which was used to pay for luxury items including cosmetic treatments, designer stationery, electrical goods and a memorabilia photograph of Muhammad Ali. Sharif also claimed for trips abroad with Simkin, whom the firm did not know was her husband. In turn, the CPS said Simkin falsely obtained more than £100,000 by privately billing clients and from claims for hospitality with clients. A spokeswoman for Fulbright & Jaworski said: ‘A former employee and a former partner in the firm, both of whom left in early 2008, have each been sentenced to 16 months’ imprisonment for stealing from the firm. No client ever suffered any loss. The firm now regards this matter as closed.’ The two firms acting for the pair declined to comment. Simkin was struck off by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal on 6 July 2011.last_img read more

Read More »

SRA seeks online feedback

first_imgThe Solicitors Regulation Authority has promised a ‘comprehensive review’ of problems encountered in its first year of online renewals.The regulator said it wants to respond to criticism of the system after the deadline for renewing practising certificates passed last week. Around half of the expected applications have still to be fully completed. The review will begin with an online survey for feedback of mySRA from practitioners.Survey results will form the basis of a series of workshops across the country, coordinated by the Law Society regional managers.Mike Jeacock, SRA chief operating officer, said: ‘Changing the way we carried out the renewals process was wholly necessary and the introduction of mySRA in the long run will save everyone time and money.‘However, we have no illusions about how frustrating this year’s renewals process has been, for all concerned, and we want to avoid a similar situation next time around.’The online survey can be found on the SRA site. Those interested in taking part in the workshops, which are being co-ordinated with assistance from the Law Society’s regional managers, are asked to email their request.last_img read more

Read More »

In brow-mopping mode

first_imgStay at the forefront of thought leadership with news and analysis from award-winning journalists. Enjoy company features, CEO interviews, architectural reviews, technical project know-how and the latest innovations.Limited access to building.co.ukBreaking industry news as it happensBreaking, daily and weekly e-newsletters Get your free guest access  SIGN UP TODAY To continue enjoying Building.co.uk, sign up for free guest accessExisting subscriber? LOGIN Subscribe now for unlimited access Subscribe to Building today and you will benefit from:Unlimited access to all stories including expert analysis and comment from industry leadersOur league tables, cost models and economics dataOur online archive of over 10,000 articlesBuilding magazine digital editionsBuilding magazine print editionsPrinted/digital supplementsSubscribe now for unlimited access.View our subscription options and join our communitylast_img read more

Read More »