The Gazette 1991

GAZETTE

JU LY/AUGUST

1991

From the President. . .

and requirements in different jurisdictions. M.D.P.'s were already in existence in some countries - although the nature of these might not be regarded as objectionable in other countries. For example, in Germany and the Netherlands, there were M.D.P.'s between advocat, notaire, tax advisers but there was a question mark about accountants. The Dutch solution to the problem was that an M.D. Association was allowed provided: — 1. A satisfactory academic training was required. 2. Members of other professions had satisfactory disciplinary rules. 3. The Association did not inter- fere with the free independent exercise of professional duties and advice. Associations with accountants were normally ruled out because of their duty to cer t i fy and report to authorities which could fre- quently be inconsistent with the lawyers duty to the client. Piet also referred to the position of the notary who in many cases acts for both parties but is in a sense, above both. He suggested that it was not impossible to have rules to deal with conflict. Finally, he suggested that the strength of the legal profession was unity, diversity and continuity in change. My personal views in regard to M.D.P.'s were, if anything, confirmed by the discussion. Essentially, it seemed to me more appropriate to proceed by way of a loose association or arrangement for referral (which did not in any way undermine the independence of any of the disciplines involved) is the more apprópriate way forward. This would mean that all services can be conveniently and instantly available where required by a client and provided no conflict of interest arises - each profession however, providing the service independently. Obviously, we should not totally close our minds to any further development - or to the possibility that some further development might be imposed upon us by outside authorities - but it seems to me that before we acquiesce in the establishment of M.D.P.'s, we must first see what solutions if any can be provided to cover the following points: —

ciplines was not really a multi- disciplinary practice. Neither did a loose association whereby members of different disciplines without loss of independence referred work to each other constitute a multi-disciplinary practice proper. The essential point urged for consideration by Tom Burgess was the need of the legal profession to provide a proper service to clients and it appeared to be an increasing requirement of larger corporate clients or international clients that they should be able to get all services under one roof. The matter had to be considered from the standpoint of what served the client and the public interest rather than from what served the interest of the profession. It was clear, however, that any such partnership did raise problems in relation to the independence of the lawyer, possible conflict of interest, clients privilege or confidentiality and discipline or ruling authorities. According to John Curtin, there was, in fact, no American point of view on the question of M.D.P.'s. Under the ABA's current model rule, partnerships between lawyers and non lawyers were prohibited and there was broad agreement that non lawyers should not have any stake or interest in a legal firm. There was an American Com- mittee sitting and reporting on this area at the moment. In America, they referred to the M.D.P. as 'ancillary business' rather than an M.D.P., and there was a view that ancillary business could only be provided to clients of the lawyer firm. John Curtin also gave his definition of a profession as 'a learned art practised as a common calling in the public interest'. He also referred to the existence in the States of litigation support services (possibly from accountants or others) in mega cases. Piet also affirmed that there was no CCBE standpoint on the question of M.D.P.'s, and the CCBE have no power to lay down any rules. He stressed the need for an open mind on the problem, having regard to the different practices

NORTHERN IRELAND LAW SOCIETY CONFERENCE - LAKE DISTRICT, 25th APRIL, 1991 Discussion on Multi-Disciplinary Practices There was a most interesting platform and discussion at the Northern Ireland Law Society Con- ference, which this year was held in the Lake District of England, on Multi-Disciplinary Practices. No papers were actually issued and this is necessarily a selected and personal commentary on some aspects. The platform comprised Tom Burgess of the Northern Ireland Law Society who is also strongly involved in the CCBE, John Curtin, President of the American Bar Association and Piet Wackie Eysten, President of the CCBE. Although last to speak, it was Piet who attempted a definition of a multi-disciplinary practice. In jest, he suggested that the initials meant "most discussed problem". His actual definition, however, I think reads as follows - an associa- tion of a lawyer or lawyers with non lawyers on a permanent basis. Having regard to the differences throughout the community and the different work undertaken by Barristers, Solicitors, Avocats, Notaires and/or Estate Agents, it might be necessary to consider the definition of a lawyer more fully for each jurisdiction. A temporary association for a single project or situation whereby lawyers em- ployed members of other dis-

187