There is an example at the beginning (0).

CONTRACT

ENFORCE

SOURCE

STRONG

OBLIGE

PROVIDE

In the USA, attorneys are prohibited from forming law firm partnerships with

People who are not practising lawyers. 0

Some observers believe that the prevailing organisational framework of law

Practices will ultimately be replaced by something else.

Professional associations have established regulations which ensure that law

Partnerships differ from other commercial partnerships.

Increasingly, law firms are adopting behaviour typical of businesses.

40 A partnership structure could interfere with a legal counsel's obligations to his

Clients.

41 The US legal system has traditionally favoured the notion of a lawyer's

Personal liability for actions taken on behalf of clients.

US attorneys may not receive payment for services rendered together with a

Business associate who is not a lawyer.

Partnership:Canit survivein today'smega-firms?

A One of the most striking changes in the

Evolution of the American legal market in

Recent years has been the extraordinary

Growth of law firms. In 1980, the 250

Largest law firms in the country averaged

Only 95 lawyers. By 2001, the 20 largest

Firms in the US averaged 1,220 lawyers,

And there were 12 firms in the country with

More than 1,000 lawyers. This growth has

Caused many law firms to take measures to

Increase their commercial viability, such as

Reorganising their governance and

Management systems to marshal their

Resources, marketing their services, and

Managing their client relationships more

Effectively. The move toward more

Centralised governance and management

Systems has, however, placed increasing

pressure on the concept of 'partnership' as

The organising model for large law firms.

Indeed, it has led many to question

Whether partnership can survive as the

Dominant form of law firm structure.

B The organisation of law firms as

Partnerships has its roots in the history of

English law, in the traditional role of the

English barrister as the 'personal

representative' of his client. To assure the

Effective operation of the adversary

System, barristers were required to take

Oaths to the courts to conduct themselves

Objectively and in the best interests of their

Clients, without any conflicts of interest

Whatsoever. As a consequence, barristers

Were required to operate as individuals

And were not permitted to be in

Partnership with others. They were

Personal representatives of their clients,

And they were liable to both the courts and

Their clients for the conduct of their office.

C This idea of the lawyer as personal

Representative was transplanted to

America along with the English Common

Law itself. American law rejected the

Notion that lawyers should be required to

Practise only as separate individuals.

It did, however, embrace the concept

That lawyers should have personal

Relationships with their clients and should

Remain personally liable to their clients for

Their actions. That led to the requirement

Date: 2015-12-11; view: 882