While the states of Western Australia and South Australia remain uninterested in the proposed national professional reform, the Australian Corporate Lawyers Association (ACLA) has again endorsed the reforms and in particular the introduction of a national practicing certificate.
Legal affairs and communications director for ACLA, Tony de Govrik, says it is ACLA’s belief that the concept of a national practicing certificate will provide greater mobility between states for the movement of corporate and government lawyers in Australia.
ACLA estimates in-house lawyers constitute approximately 25% of the total Australian legal profession, or about 15,000 practitioners. Under current rules, corporate lawyers do not require a practicing certificate however, under the new Legal Profession National Rules all corporate lawyers would be required to have certificates, which if all states were to participate, would cover the entire country. “Many of our members work for large organisations across Australia. In-house lawyers need to be able to provide advice across those inter-state borders without fear of breaching local rules or jurisdictional requirements,” said de Govrik.
In a submission to the National Legal Profession Reform Taskforce ACLA stated: “All lawyers engaged in legal practice in Australia should be required to obtain a standard form of practicing certificate as a minimum requirement, which is subject to a common disciplinary regime.” According to de Govrik this would ensure all lawyers are treated equally when it comes to disciplinary action and pro bono work. “Some pro bono schemes require lawyers to hold practicing certificates, and as some corporate lawyers do not hold them, they are not permitted to participate,” he said. It is also ACLA’s view that there should be no distinction between in-house lawyers and private practitioners.
Commonwealth Bank group general counsel David Cohen has doubts over whether the move is a good idea. "A large legal team like ours has the benefit of having lawyers in most jurisdictions in Australia, so we don't need each lawyer to be licensed in every jurisdiction as we simply ask our locally licensed lawyer to undertake whatever task may require a local practising certificate," he said. However, for smaller teams, he sees advantages in a national scheme, though it will depend a great deal on the work carried out.
ACLA has stated throughout its submissions to that taskforce that it is not in support of corporate lawyers paying for a practicing certificate, as a result of the reforms, in the initial transitional phase of two years. Newly admitted lawyers will be required to pay a standard admission fee of A$795 under the taskforce’s funding proposal. ACLA also maintains that Fidelity Fund contributions should not apply to in-house lawyers unless their role involves a trust.
Related stories: