297 / 822
G A Z E T TE
Advertising
The Great Debate or the Great Mistake!
In 1986, the members of the Law Society voted at their
Annual General Meet ing not to introduce a limited f o rm of
advertising for the profession; it is intended in this article to
re-examine the issues and to consider the changes both
economic and legislative wh i ch have altered the market place
and, to suggest that the profession needs to change its
attitude towards advertising if it wishes to take an active part
in a changed business environment.
It is generally accepted that the belief that it would increase the
solicitors can market their firm
provided the marketing is not
touting or advertising. There seems
to be no generally ac cep t ed
definition for touting. Advertising is
defined as " t he paid use of the
media".
In 1984 the President of the Law
Society circularised all members
w i th a discussion document on
advertising and invited submissions
on its c o n t e n t s. No serious
reservations were expressed to the
President and thus the Law Society
proceeded to circularise the pro-
fession w i th new draft regulations
on advertising for implementation
at the beginning of September
1986. In August 1986 a group of
solicitors pe t i t i oned the Law
Society to withdraw the draft re
gulations and at the meeting in
November 1986, the members
voted to withdraw the regulation.
The unfortunate aspect of the
affair was that the reservations of
the members to the new draft
regulations were neither aired nor
discussed prior to the meeting. The
meeting was not the place to
debate the issue as most solicitors
who attended the meeting had
made up their minds prior to
travelling to Dublin. The Law
Society must therefore accept
responsibility for failing to take any
steps to have the matter debated
prior to the meeting. All the more
so as they made no attempt either
to support their previously stated
position or to make sure these draft
regulations were approved and
implemented. Their attitude was
reminiscent of recent government
handling of various government
referenda on the Constitution.
The members who supported the
introduction of advertising did so in
earning power of solicitors and
ultimately increase profits. Their
position may be summarised as
follows:
By
John M. Bourke
So l i c i t or
(a) Comp e t i t i on
So l i c i t o r s, pa r t i cu l a r ly t hose
practising in the Dublin area, felt
that as a result of market changes
in recent times, other professions
had expanded their practices into
areas no rma l ly exc l us i ve to
solicitors. Examples given of these
areas included accountants adver-
tising their specialities in company
wo rk and claims consu l t an ts
specialising in accidents. The main
advantage these people had over
solicitors was that they could
advertise their services.
(b) Expans i on of p r a c t i ce
Too many solicitors (this applies
outside Dublin as much as inside
Dublin) are suffering financially
from hard times because of the
economic depression. The intro-
duction of advertising would enable
solicitors to market their services
more widely and, by advertising,
encourage new business into their
offices. Not every Irish person has
a solicitor but it should be the
ambition of our profession to make
sure they do.
(c) Expansion of areas of practice
Many solicitors saw the opportunity
in advertising to expand their
services into new areas, for
examp le c omm i s s i on ea r n i ng
mortgage brokerage which was
extremely well illustrated by Loose-
more and Parsons at their recent
seminars. Furthermore, it was
considered that solicitors who are
specialists in unusual areas of
practice would benefit from being
able to advertise their expertise.
The reasons put forward by
those members who opposed the
introduction of advertising were
summarised in a circular sent to
most members prior to the meeting
in 1986.
fa) No d ema nd f r om t he pub l ic
There was no demand from the
public for the introduction of ad-
vertising for solicitors. It was
suggested that the public con-
sidered that the independence of
the
p r o f es s i on
wo u ld
be
jeopardised by competition arising
from advertising. As an alternative
to individual advertising they pre-
ferred the introduction of ins-
titutional advertising.
(b) So l i c i t o r / c l i ent r e l a t i on s h ip
w o u l d be d ama g ed
The public would not have a better
service available to them from the
legal profession as a result of the
introduction of advertising. It was
stated that the relationship between
solicitor and client is not a normal
commercial relationship, that it is
based on trust, and advertising
would jeopardise this relationship.
John M. Bourke,
Solicitor, Dublin.
61