Lawyers “may be trusted to the ends of the earth”. This statement might not reflect the public opinion anymore. The scandals around lawyers and their legal opinions in the wake of the financial crisis and the publication of the ‘Panama Papers’ raised the questions, if lawyers satisfy their clients ignoring risks and whether outcomes-focused regulation allows these risks to be ignored due to its wide scope.
To answer these questions, this essay will first explain the role of the lawyer to satisfy clients' needs (2.) with regard to the limitations of satisfying the clients' needs (3.) and the risks involved with the dissatisfaction and satisfaction of clients' needs (4.). Following on from these risks, the essay will look at the definition of outcomes-focused regulation and its aim (5.) and whether this approach allows ignoring the risks (6.).
This assessment will focus in particular on the guidance to transactions lawyers in commercial practise. For this purpose a transaction lawyer is a solicitor who gives legal advice on a transaction, but does not conduct advocacy.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The job of a lawyer to satisfy clients' needs
3. Satisfaction above all else
4. Risks of dissatisfaction and satisfaction
5. Definition and aim of outcomes-focused regulation
6. Ignoring risks and guidance on outcomes-focused regulation
6.1 Primary legislation
6.2 Regulations
6.3 SRA Code of Conduct
6.4 Turning to secondary sources
7. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This essay explores the tension between a lawyer's professional obligation to satisfy client needs and the potential for regulatory risks inherent in an outcomes-focused approach. The research investigates whether the flexibility provided by outcomes-focused regulation allows solicitors to inadvertently or intentionally overlook legal and ethical risks in their pursuit of client satisfaction.
- The contractual and regulatory pressure on solicitors to meet client expectations.
- The hierarchy of obligations, prioritizing legal compliance and public interest over client satisfaction.
- Financial and ethical risks associated with over-prioritizing client needs.
- The structural impact of outcomes-focused regulation on legal risk management.
- The role of secondary guidance in filling gaps left by broad regulatory principles.
Excerpt from the book
4. Risks of dissatisfaction and satisfaction
With the decision not to place the clients' needs above all else the dissatisfaction of a client can arise. This bares the risk of financial difficulty, loss of revenue or client base. The transaction lawyer in particular is under economic pressure to satisfy the clients due to the consequences of the failure to do so.
However, the risks of blindly satisfying the client are greater then those of dissatisfying as the severity scores for unethical behaviour and breach of regulatory requirements indicate. The lawyer's independence can become compromised by receiving revenue from only a small number of clients, by the dictation of terms by the clients or the supervision by in-house councils.
Further, the delivering of a proper standard of service could be neglected. Even though outcome 1.6 requires taking client needs into account, it is no proper service to the client, who is "opinion shopping", if the solicitor only delivers the advice the client is searching for.
A lawyer also needs to be "trusted to the ends of the earth" and client satisfaction will uphold the trust of the client in his advisor. However, it has to be noted, that the trust of the public in Principle 6 of the Code is not the same as the trust of the individual client. If too much emphasis is placed on the satisfaction of the client, the public perception of the profession as a whole can be damaged.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Presents the central research questions regarding the balance between client satisfaction and regulatory risk in the wake of major financial scandals.
2. The job of a lawyer to satisfy clients' needs: Examines the contractual and regulatory drivers that place immense pressure on solicitors to prioritize client needs.
3. Satisfaction above all else: Analyzes the limits of client-centricity, demonstrating that legal and public interest obligations must supersede client interests.
4. Risks of dissatisfaction and satisfaction: Discusses the dangers of both failing to satisfy clients and the unethical behavior that may stem from prioritizing client needs at any cost.
5. Definition and aim of outcomes-focused regulation: Defines the OFR framework, highlighting its shift towards flexibility and self-assessment to reduce unnecessary costs.
6. Ignoring risks and guidance on outcomes-focused regulation: Critically evaluates whether the vagueness of OFR principles and indicative behaviors leaves too much room for practitioners to ignore risks.
7. Conclusion: Summarizes findings that the financial incentives to satisfy clients combined with broad regulatory guidance create a significant risk of non-compliance.
Keywords
Outcomes-focused regulation, SRA Code of Conduct, legal ethics, transaction lawyer, client needs, risk management, professional independence, rule of law, compliance, regulatory guidance, solicitors, financial incentives, ethical behavior, legal services, self-regulation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research?
The study examines the inherent tensions within the legal profession regarding the obligation to satisfy client needs versus the regulatory requirement to identify and manage risks.
What are the primary themes explored?
The work centers on professional ethics, the regulatory framework of the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), financial pressures in commercial law, and the efficacy of outcomes-focused regulation.
What is the primary research goal?
The objective is to determine if the flexibility offered by the current outcomes-focused regulatory approach inadvertently enables solicitors to ignore systemic risks while attempting to satisfy client demands.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The essay utilizes a qualitative, normative legal analysis, examining the SRA Code of Conduct, primary legislation, and secondary guidance to evaluate current professional standards.
What topics are covered in the main section?
The main part covers the role of the lawyer, the hierarchy of ethical duties, the economic risks of client dissatisfaction, the theoretical basis of OFR, and an evaluation of authoritative versus non-authoritative guidance.
What keywords characterize the work?
Key terms include outcomes-focused regulation, professional independence, risk management, SRA Code of Conduct, and legal ethics.
Why is "opinion shopping" mentioned in the text?
It refers to a situation where a client seeks only legal advice that confirms their desired course of action, which can undermine the solicitor's responsibility to provide an objective, proper standard of service.
What does the author conclude about the effectiveness of current guidance?
The author concludes that while broad principles allow for flexibility, they also create uncertainty that necessitates secondary guidance, thereby leaving room for practitioners to potentially ignore critical risks.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Maximilian Grimmeiß (Autor:in), 2016, “Trusted to the ends of the earth”. Outcomes-focused regulation and risk-taking in the legal profession, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/370671
