Chamber and committees

No, thank you, Presiding Officer.

Amendment 68 agreed to.

Amendments 69 to 77 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Amendment 78 moved—[Siobhian Brown].

Amendment 78A moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Amendment 78, as amended, agreed to.

Amendments 79 to 89 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Amendments 139 to 141 not moved.

Amendment 142 moved—[Tess White]—and agreed to.

Amendment 90 moved—[Paul O’Kane]—and agreed to.

Amendment 91 moved—[Siobhian Brown].

I wish to confirm that the provision will not affect the ability of the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission’s consumer panel or Consumer Scotland to request a review.

Amendment 2 agreed to.

Section 20—Measures open to the Scottish Ministers

Does Ms White appreciate the history of the bill and how matters have progressed since 2010? If the bill is not passed today, we will go back to scratch and there will be no reform of the legal profession.

Where a solicitor or authorised legal business is unable to continue to operate, the safeguarding provisions that the bill inserts into the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 enable the Law Society to take on any client account of that former solicitor or authorised legal business. That includes the ability to make a direction requiring the former authorised legal business to take any specified action.

My amendment 34 will allow for an authorised legal business to appeal such a direction to the court. Although the process is a protective one that can be put in place urgently, it is important that such matters can be tested by the court, and the court’s decision is final. I am aware that the Law Society has raised concerns about delay, but we think that that can be catered for by the courts in urgent circumstances. Following stage 2, the Lord President also raised the issue of whether there should be an appeal.

The safeguarding provisions in proposed new section 46A of the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 will apply in relation to an authorised legal business that comprises a “sole solicitor”. Amendment 45 provides a definition of that term. Together, amendments 37 and 38 make it clear that the safeguarding provisions will also apply where the sole solicitor has, for any reason, ceased to practise. At present, similar but not identical requirements to satisfy the Law Society apply in those circumstances under section 46 of the 1980 act.

Amendment 42 follows amendments at stage 2 to set out duties that an authorised legal business must comply with within 21 days of its sole solicitor ceasing to practise. Although the requirements are different, they are not onerous. Vesting in the Law Society, as is provided for in the bill, will not, as the Law Society has said, apply unless the solicitor is disqualified, as in the provision at present. The main point is to give the Law Society the ability to make a direction. The amendment will also enable a solicitor or authorised legal business to whom a direction is given to appeal against it to the Court of Session, as I mentioned previously.

Amendments 31 to 33, 35, 36, 39, 40 to 44, 47, 46, 48 to 58, 60, 62 and 64 are minor technical amendments to update the drafting style and to correct minor errors such as cross-references.

I ask members to support my amendments in the group.

I move amendment 31.

Amendments 59 and 113 respond to concerns raised by the Faculty of Advocates. The amendments put beyond doubt that it is competent for the civil remedy of interdict to be sought with a view to preventing the carrying out of an act that is subject to criminal law penalties under the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 and the Legal Services (Scotland) Act 2010.

For example, an interdict could be sought to prevent a person from pretending to be a lawyer, a regulated legal services provider or a member of the Faculty of Advocates. The Government recognises that interdict could be an effective remedy in preventing the continuance of that kind of deceptive behaviour as a matter of urgency, and could be a useful tool for a regulator.

I ask members to support the amendments.

I move amendment 59.

No, thank you.

Amendment 92 agreed to.

Amendments 94 to 115 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

I thank Paul O’Kane for his question and for reminding me to get to that point, because I might have missed it.

There are consequences to amendment 42 not being agreed to. There will be no right of appeal to the Court of Session for sole solicitors or a sole solicitor business against a direction given by the Law Society of Scotland under proposed section 46A(4)(b) of the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980, which would have been inserted by section 86B(3). Contrast that with the right of appeal for a legal business regarding a direction under new section 46A(4) of the 1980 act.

Obviously, this has just happened, so I will have to take time to reflect. I will get back to members on the specific point in relation to amendment 42.

I ask members to support the motion in my name and to agree to the Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Bill.

No, thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer.

Amendment 3 agreed to.

Section 37—Transitional and saving provision for regulators approved under the 1990 Act

Amendment 4 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Section 39—Requirement for legal businesses to be authorised to provide legal services

Amendments 120 and 121 not moved.

Section 41—Rules for authorised legal businesses

Amendment 122 not moved.

Section 42—Authorisation rules

Amendment 123 moved—[Paul O’Kane]—and agreed to.

Section 44—Practice rules

Amendments 124 and 125 not moved.

Amendment 126 moved—[Paul O’Kane]—and agreed to.

Section 45—Financial sanctions

After careful consideration of amendments 127, 128 and 136, in Paul O’Kane’s name, I am content to support them. I ask members to support Mr O’Kane’s amendments in the group. I will not move amendment 91.

No, we do not share your view and have to agree to disagree. A lot of concessions have been made to the legal profession throughout the bill process. We also have to look after consumer bodies, which is why we will oppose amendment 135.

Maggie Chapman will be aware that amendment 14 was raised at stage 2. We have engaged with the SLCC on the approach to the wording in order to find a compromise and progress with a flexible approach that allows the SLCC to investigate a complaint more quickly while retaining the requirement to reject complaints that are without any merit. That is why we lodged amendment 14.

Amendment 5 agreed to.

Section 57—Commission decision making and delegation

Amendment 129 not moved.

Section 58—Commission review committee

Amendments 6 to 8 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Section 60—Disclosure of information by practitioners etc to the Commission and relevant professional organisations

Amendments 9 and 10 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Amendment 11 moved—[Paul O’Kane]—and agreed to.

Section 61—Power of Commission to request practitioner’s details in connection with complaints

Amendments 12 and 13 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Section 65—Unregulated providers of legal services: voluntary register, annual contributions and complaints contributions