The Large Law Firm Group is hopeful that the National Legal Profession Reform Taskforce will seek further consultation from the industry before making its final submission to the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) on February 14.

Chair of the Large Law Firm Group (LLFG) and chief executive partner at Mallesons Stephen Jaques, Robert Milliner, said the group had made submissions on the draft through the Law Council of Australia and had asked for further consultation. “We were disappointed at the end of last year when it was decided the draft would be given to COAG without further consultation,” he told ALB. “While some of the proposals in the draft have made good progress we think there is still further work to be done.” 

The taskforce submitted a draft proposal to the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General on 10 December 2010. “The LLFG are very supportive of having a consistent set of national rules; however, we believe they need to be balanced to ensure the profession can be efficient and effective,” said Milliner. “The increasingly international market place Australian firms compete in was further evidence of the need for a national system. We would certainly like to think that the federal and state governments will continue to consult and have open dialog with the firms so that the new system is right from the start,” he added.

During the consultation period the taskforce received 162 submissions and has made a number of changes to its original proposals based on the feedback from the legal industry, but Milliner says there is still a lot of debate around what will be changed in the new arrangements to produce better cost outcomes for firms and individuals. “Cost savings can be achieved while providing a better system for everyone, lawyers and their clients,” said Milliner. 

The taskforce has indicated there would be an upfront cost of A$1.69m for the construction of the National Legal Services Board and National legal Services Ombudsman and an annual operating cost of A$4.03m thereafter, paid for by the legal industry through admission fees. As firms pay the practicing certificate for each of their lawyers, there will be significant cost savings for firms under a national system where they have lawyers practicing in more than one state.  However, firms will also be required to train staff and implement new procedures to deal with the changes. “The view of the LLFG is that the reform will provide long term benefits to the firms and they are therefore willing to cover the additional upfront costs,” he added. Along with the large national law firms Milliner says there are a significant number of smaller firms operating across one or two states, as well as clients, face the same regulatory burden, from having state-based regimes.

While the legal regime is one of many areas of the economy undergoing reform at present, Milliner said getting the legal industry reform completed could demonstrate to other industries that reform is beneficial, despite the process having been a little slower than they would have liked.  “We would like to have the draft fully completed by the end of this year, with appropriate consultation, so that it can be introduced next year,” he said. However, he also added that getting it right from the start was more important than a date.