The International Working Group on the Legal Profession conference will take place between the 6th and the 9th of July 2014 in Frauenchiemsee, Germany
We will meet on Sunday evening, and the sessions will start on Monday morning app. 8.30. We will have sessions all Monday and on Tuesday till app. 4 p.m. and then the excursion and then on Wednesday sessions from 8.30 to noon.
People should arrive on Sunday evening as the boats to the island do not go that frequently.
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »
The Master programme in Onati is still taking students.
This is the Onati website in English:
http://www.iisj.net/?sesion=1347
The information about the masters is here:
http://www.iisj.net/iisj/dm/2012-13-master.asp?cod=6793&nombre=6793&prt=1
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »
Sunday, July 1st
Arrival
From 6 p.m. Informal meeting at Haus Schlesien
Possibility for dinner at own expense
Monday, July 2nd
07.00 – 09.00 Breakfast at Haus Schlesien (for all) Rübezahlstube
09.00 – 09.15 Welcome and organisational details
09.15 – 10.45 Plenary 1 Riesengebirge
Change in the legal profession – for better or worse?
Introduction and chair: Ulrike Schultz
1. International Aspects
Kath Hall: Lawyers as Global Elite
Don Fleming: Regulation of Practice by Foreign Lawyers in the APEC jurisdictions
Eyal Katvan: Overcrowding of the profession – the professional melting pot
2. News from Common Law Countries
Margaret Thornton: Recent Developments in the legal profession: The view from theAntipodes
Leslie Levin: The US legal Profession: Shockwaves from the economic crisis
10.45 – 11.15 Coffee Break Eichendorff Saal
11.15 – 13.00 Plenary 1 on change in the legal professions (continued)
Avrom Sherr: “The Legal Services Act, new regulation approaches and alternative business structures inEnglandandWales”.
Lisa Webley: The introduction of compulsory diversity monitoring inEnglandandWales
3. News from Civil Law Countries
Matthias Kilian: Update onGermany: Situation of young lawyers, effects of specialisation
Anne Boigeol: Current professional issues inFrance
Leny de Groot: News from theNetherlands
Jacek Kurczewski: Politicians against professionals or how to regulate the deregulation of legal services inPoland
13.00 – 14.00 lunch break, Eichendorff Saal
the subgroup heads meet over lunch.
14.00 – 15.30 parallel sessions
Family, Policy and the Law Irmler
Chair: Benoit Bastard, Mavis Maclean
Mavis Maclean: Family Courts without lawyers (EnglandandWales)
Rosemary Hunter: Fact finding hearings. Perceptions of lawyers and judges (EnglandandWales)
Benoit Bastard/David Delvaux/Fred Schonaers: No delay in the court – divorce inFranceandBelgium
Aurelie Filloud Chabaud/Helene Steinmetz/Emilie Biland: Dealing with mass litigation inFranceandQuebec– family judges work in a comparative perspective
Legal Education 1 Wohlau
Chair: Anthony Bradney
Jessica Guth: Internationalization and Law degrees
Aleksandra Nyzinska: The ethics in legal education in the face of widening access of the legal professions inPoland
Huub Spoormans: Massification of legal education in theNetherlands
Cora Hisae Hagino: A critical approach to legal education inPortugal:UniversityofCoimbracase study
15.30 – 15.00 Coffee Break Menzel
16.00 – 17.30 parallel sessions
Legal Education 2: Author meets reader Irmler
“Privatising the public university” the case of law (Margaret Thornton)
Introduction and chair: Fiona Cownie
Huub Spoormans / Avrom Sherr / Ulrike Schultz/Anja Rudek / Lynn MatherUSA
Management in/and Justice 1: Wohlau
Chair: Fred Schonaers
Mavis Maclean: Proposal for a family justice system inEnglandandWales
Pablo Ciocchini: Campaigning to eradicate court delay: power shifts and new governance in the criminal justice
Christophe Dubois: Prison governors or prison managers? NPM (re)shaping Belgian prison policy and organizations
18.00 – 19.45 parallel sessions
International Lawyering: Notaries and Patent Lawyers
Chair: Don Fleming Irmler
Matthias Kilian: Liberalising the profession of notary
Gisela Shaw: Notaries in Europe– a British view
Ter Voort: Notarian ethics in difficult times
Lynn Mather: Patent Lawyers in theUS
Alex Jettinghoff: IP-lawyers play the European patent system
Judiciary 1 Wohlau
Chair: Anthony Bradney
Peter Mascini: Choosing between sentence types: judges’ classifications, verdicts and their intended and unintended consequences
Francesca Scamardella: Client’s voice in the lawyering process: cases of silence and reticence
Les Moran: English judges in the news
Ruth Herz: Judges Visual Culture – through the eyes of Juge Pierre Cavellat
Nancy Marder: Judging American television reality judges
Management in/and Justice 2 TBA
Planning session:
Transversal study topics – Discussion on the work in this new group
20.00 dinner at Haus Schlesien depending on weather: Rübezahlstube
Tuesday, July 3rd
07.00 – 09.00 Breakfast at Haus Schlesien (for all) Rübezahlstube
09.00 – 10.45 parallel sessions
Women/Gender in the Legal Profession 1 Irmler
Session chair: Nancy Marder
Richard Collier: Fatherhood male lawyers and work/life balance in the legal profession: reframing laws “women problem”
Rita Maria Bartolomei: “Fighting gender violence and discrimination. The role of the Women Lawyers Associations inItaly,TanzaniaandZambia”
Anne Boigeol: French women lawyers beyond the glass ceiling
Gabriele Plickert: Effects of professional work on women lawyers’ timing of family formation in German and U.S. Cities
Gisela Shaw: Unsung Heroines: Women Notaries in the GDR. A Retrospective after 20 years
Legal Education 3 Wohlau
Chair: Fiona Cownie
Avrom Sherr: LETR The legal education and training review inEnglandandWales
Anthony Bradney: Difficult Judgments: Performance Management andUniversityLawSchools
Penny Kent/Maureen Spencer: University Sabbaticals and the Production of Pedagogic Space
Rosemary Auchmuty: Challenging the textbook: women’s different history of property law
10.45 – 11.15 Coffee Break Eichendorff Saal
11.15 – 13.00 Plenary 2 Riesengebirge
Gender and Careers in the Legal Academy
Introduction and Chair:
Ulrike Schultz/Anja Rudek/Ilka Peppmeier: De jure and de facto: Women in the legal academy inGermany. Outline of a research project
Fiona Cownie: Gender in the legal academy….what can history tell us?
Margaret Thornton: The legal academy inAustralia, gender aspects
Malgorzata Fuszara: The legal academy inPoland, gender aspects
13.00 – 14.00 lunch break
14.00 – 15.30 parallel sessions
Legal Professional Values & Identities Irmler
Chair: Hillary Sommerlad
Mao Lin: the role of Chinese Public Lawyers in expropriation cases
Hillary Sommerlad: ‘Bleached out’ professionalism versus white macho masculinities, pathologies of black masculinities or black professionalism? How to succeed as a black male solicitor
Anna Krajewska: Law experts? The role of lawyers providing service to local governments inPoland
Lisa Webley: Diversity and the Legal Profession: The Importance of the ‘Right’ Academic Background
Rob Rosen: The Law: Business or One of the Professions?
Judiciary 2 Wohlau
Chair: Anthony Bradney
Yedan Li: Court Mediation inChina: Lessons from labor courts
Nienke Doornbos: The interdependence of judges and law clerks: institutional factors
Reyer Baas: Judicial dilemmas in asbestos litigation
Claire Archbold: What do we mean when we talk about justice for vulnerable people
15.00 – 16.00 Coffee break Menzel
16.00 departure for excursion by bus waiting in front of Haus Schlesien
to Drachenfels, Schloss Drachenburg and Burgruine Heisterbach
20.00 dinner at Haus Schlesien depending on weather Eichendorff Saal or Sommerterrasse
Wednesday, July 4th
07.00 – 09.00 Breakfast at Haus Schlesien (for all) Rübezahlstube
08.45 – 10.15 parallel sessions
Ethics and Deviance 1: Author meets Reader Irmler
Lawyers in practice: ethical decision making in context (Lynn Mather/Leslie Levin)
Introduction and chair: Leny de Groot-van Leeuwen
Comments by:
Kath Hall / Simon Rice / Avrom Sherr / Rob Rosen / Stefan Rutten
Women/Gender in the Legal Profession 2 Wohlau
Chair: Anne Boigeol
Harriet Silius: Gender equality inFinland– model for legislation
Marion Röwekamp: “Women and the legal profession inGermany, 1895-1933”
Celine Bessiere/Muriel Mille: Gender and judging in French family courts
Ulrike Schultz: “I was visible and I was asked …” Women in Leading Positions of the Judiciary inGermany
10.15 – 10.30 Coffee Break MENZEL
10.30 – 12.00 session
Ethics and Deviance 2 Irmler
Chair: Leny de Groot-van Leeuwen: Overview: state of project
Stefan Rutten/Bernard Hubeaud/Jean van Houtte: Belgian report on lawyer deviance and discipline
Leslie Levin: Can we predict lawyer deviance from US bar admissions data
Simon Rice: Australia: The legal ethics of lawyering for change
Alex Jettinghoff: Henry Stimson and international criminal law
12.00 – 12.30 Plenary: Planning of further work and next meeting
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »
Ben "Bad Science" Goldacre has just blogged on the importance of randomised controlled trials in the development of policy and has co-authored a Cabinet Office paper which looks well worth a read. He has also written on paucity of RCTs in criminal justice policy to which I would add the situation is even worse in civil justice. I can think of only one RCT (on the impact of debt advice: see…
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »
A new report by Professor Alan Paterson and Chris Paterson (disclosure: I have worked with Alan on many an occasion) makes an important contribution to the debate on diversity in the Supreme Court. They’ve also written a piece for the Guardian. Here are two key paragraphs: The Supreme Court is a collegiate court, sitting in panels that make binding legal decisions as a collective. Its competence is therefore a corporate competence, not simply an aggregation of the individual competences of its individual members. The law of the land represents the collective code of the whole of society. A key aspect therefore of the competence of such a court is the ability to relate to the experiences of the society it serves and to bring the broad range of perspectives that accompany these experiences into the collective decision making process. It is a powerful argument. Legal judgment is not simply a technical exercise. Judgment is shaped by “our” own experiences and values. As one famous research study shows it may also be shaped by proximity to lunch (an interesting spin on the advocate’s refrain that a decision will depend on whether the judge had a good lunch). I have also been reading Jonathan Haidt’s book on moral psychology. He emphasises the possibility that intuition shapes moral judgment because it shapes what information we process and how we process it. The judicial process and law itself builds in lots of restraint on that intuitive process but judicial reasoning is not likely to escape the clutches of what Kahneman calls System 1 thinking. Even a cursory look at the way the Supreme Court splits, when it does split, is reason enough to suggest that underlying values may have an important influence on how cases are decided. It is also a reminder that diversity of values includes, but extends beyond, concerns with demographic representativeness. *The House of Lords Constitution Committee has also reported on Judicial Appointments.
Posted in Diversity | Leave a Comment »
Regulating legal services in England and Wales
The regulation of legal services is in England and Wales is in the process of major change. The Legal Services Board is considering whether certain ‘legal’ services (notably will-writing, estate administration and probate activities) should be reserved to persons with particular qualifications (or not). There are also LSB reviews ongoing regarding, for example, the regulation of immigration advice and services. The current review of legal education in England and Wales, being undertaken by the LETR, will be assessing how the current regime of legal education in England and Wales is suited to the new post-Legal Services Act 2007 world, which will be allowing new modes of ownership of legal service providers, and is scheduled to recommend changes to meet the challenges at the end of 2012.
The LSB has oversight over eight types of legal actor in England and Wales that are authorised to practice the “reserved activities” in the legal sphere. Will there be consolidation or further fragmentation of the legal professions? What impact might there be on legal education?
The European Dimension
Naturally there is a European dimension to all of this ferment. For one thing many European trained legal actors (members of more than 26 professions) can freely practice law in the UK, and for another the authorised regulators of legal services in the UK (Competent Authorities in EU-speak) have an obligation to admit such professionals to practice, and, in some cases, admit them to their particular legal profession, and, if not admit them immediately, then assess their qualifications and indicate missing elements of knowledge of competence that must be made up before joining the relevant legal profession.
Moreover the European Commission has recently published a review of the economic impact of reserved activities (in the legal and other sectors) and legal services directives themselves are currently under evaluation.
Recognising competence to perform legal activities
This assessment of continental legal professionals by UK regulators is mandated by the Lisbon Treaty single market provisions and, in particular, for our current concern, by Directive 2005/36/EC. This Directive, which consolidated 15 earlier Directives, is now itself subject to revision. When Directive 2005/36/EC itself was initially proposed, it included a provision allowing for access to practice part of the professional activities of a profession by incoming migrants, without joining the profession itself. This did not survive the negotiating process and was dropped. The new proposal revives the idea of partial access. This potentially means that UK legal regulators may have to give access to reserved legal sector activities to persons not belonging to a UK legal profession.
Partial Access to reserved activities
The new provisions on partial access are more carefully drafted than their predecessors. They follow the lead of the CJEU in the Colegio case (C-330/03 Colegio de Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos).
A revised Article 1 indicates the migrants will have ‘partial access to a regulated profession’ and a new Article 4(1) indicates that they will be able to gain access to ‘part of the same profession’, but the new Article 4f is more accurate in indicating that ‘The competent authority of the host Member State shall grant partial access to a professional activity in its territory…’ (my emphasis) if certain conditions are fulfilled. So here we have the separation of the host State profession from the host State professional activity. The activity in question must be lawful in the home State and should be able to be ‘objectively be separated from other activities falling under the regulated profession in the host Member State’. If the activity is autonomously exercised in the home State that would be sufficient to fulfil this criterion. Partial access by a migrant can be rejected if there are sound proportionate public interest reasons to do so.
Partial access is only to be granted where:
‘differences between the professional activity legally exercised in the home Member State and the regulated profession in the host Member State as such are so large that in reality the application of compensatory measures would amount to requiring the applicant to complete the full programme of education and training required in the host Member State to have access to the full regulated profession in the host Member State’.
Professional Identity
Persons permitted to access a reserved activity by these new provisions will normally do so under their home State professional title. So at one level we could say, so what, this is nothing new, already EU lawyers can practice law in the UK under their home State professional titles, but, one difference is that they are currently regulated by the UK professional bodies with whom they must register when they establish. [By virtue of Article 5 of Directive 2005/36/EC lawyers providing services will do so though operation of the provision of Directive 77/249/EEC and Directive 2005/36/EC will not apply.]
Lawyers, or others, seeking partial access to aspects of legal practice on a more permanent basis will be able to use the establishment provisions of the revised Directive should the proposal become EU law. The Member States could argue that regulation would be required by the host State regulator, but, as the new entrants would not necessarily be members of the host State profession so which professional rules and obligations woud apply to them, and how? There will clearly be pressure to atomise professional rules so that individual reserved activities can be effectively autonomously regulated. This disaggregation of professional activities could weaken professional identity. If an EU citizen can use EU law to access a reserved activity in another Member State without joining a host State profession then why logically should a UK national not be able to do so?
See further
See Lonbay, J, ’Assessing the European Market for Legal Services: Developments in the Free Movement of Lawyers in the European Union’, Fordham International Law Journal 1629.
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »
Two papers published this week on legal education underline for me a number of unresolved tensions in professional regulation. The papers come from the Legal Services Board and the College of Law's Legal Services Institute, the latter authored by Stephen Mayson and John Randall. The LSBs paper emphasises the need for the Legal Education and Training Review to focus on the regulatory case for intervening in education and training.
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »
