tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7058786915356669476.post4626775511132811941..comments2024-03-27T08:57:40.383+00:00Comments on SOLO IP <br> for sole and small IP practices<br>: Barristers Terms of Engagement - sharing or bearing the RiskFilemothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15735898485265104580noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7058786915356669476.post-68214289699762768522010-05-08T07:15:11.068+01:002010-05-08T07:15:11.068+01:00These draft terms (or a version of them) have been...These draft terms (or a version of them) have been floating around for years. Some years ago (3 or 4?)the IP Working Party of the Law Society (of which I am a member) was asked to comment on the IP terms (which are now better than they were at the time). But the IP clause was a small issue compared with some of the more fundamental points of difference. I wasn't convinced that there needed to be a set of terms. I had the impression that the document was in the nature of an agenda for long-term, strategic discussion between the Bar and the Law Society, on issues of interest such as solicitors failing to pay their barristers. <br /><br />I don't know what has changed now, that has caused the Bar Council to issue this consultation. Perhaps the document has risen to the top of someone's in-tray. It is difficult to know where this is going. As the Law Society has commented, there are plenty of other, unresolved issues in the relationship betweens Bs and Ss, eg when is it acceptable to return a brief.Mark Andersonhttp://www.andlaw.eunoreply@blogger.com