COMMONS AMENDMENT (Hansard, 24 October 1990)

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 39.
In moving Amendment No. 39, I should also like to speak to Amendments Nos. 128, 165, 167, 168, 170, 172 and 215 which deal with international practice. They provide a framework within which multinational partnerships consisting of English and Welsh solicitors and foreign solicitors and incorporated bodies managed and controlled by such solicitors and foreign lawyers acting together can be subjected to the minimum regulation necessary to provide protection for the clients of such partnerships.
Your Lordships will remember that it was agreed in principle that that would be permissible. The detailed provisions were to be considered with the Law Society. A great deal of detail is involved. I hope that your Lordships will feel that this is an appropriate way in which to fill out the detail. I therefore invite your Lordships to agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 39.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 39.—(The Lord Chancellor.)

§ Lord Mishcon
My Lords, the whole House will welcome these provisions, which are so sensible and useful, especially in view of the advent of 1992. However, there is some worry that, having made these rules, there will not be sufficient reciprocity with other countries. I know that the noble and learned Lord has a considerable amount of influence in those countries and with their professional bodies. May we rely on him to see that as much reciprocity is granted to our own lawyers?

§ Lord Renton
My Lords, I have been looking for some guidance as to what is a registered foreign lawyer. It is not set out in the general definitions clause at the end of the Bill; nor is it in Clause 20(11). Can my noble and learned friend enlighten us?

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, it is a foreign lawyer who is registered in the new register of foreign lawyers that will be kept by the Law Society as a means of control for the protection of people in this country in that respect.
So far as concerns the question of the noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, I do my best to persuade people in other countries to follow our good example.

§ Lord Shaughnessy
My Lords, I am not sure whether the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor spoke to Amendments Nos. 232, 263 and 277 in connection with Amendment No. 39. If this is the appropriate time, I should like to refer to those latter three amendments, which cover the qualification of Commonwealth solicitors. I am somewhat baffled by the cross-references in the three amendments, and I should like to ask the noble and learned Lord whether the amendments give effect to the new rules for qualification of Commonwealth solicitors on which I tabled an amendment at Report stage on 1st March and to which the noble and learned Lord agreed in principle subject to further consideration of the language proposed in that amendment. I should be very happy to hear that that was the case.

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, the amendments have a bearing on that question. I believe that we have been able to resolve the problem to which the noble Lord referred to his satisfaction.