Chamber and committees

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

Will the member take an intervention?

I appreciate that Mr O’Kane’s amendment 135 is a Law Society amendment, but, as we have all known throughout the passage of the bill, there has to be a balance for consumers and the legal profession. My view is that amendment 135 would weaken the SLCC’s authority to set complaints handling standards. Consumer bodies support the strengthening of independent oversight by the SLCC.

Amendment 2 makes it clear that any request that is made by the Scottish Parliament to the Lord President to review the performance of a category 1 or a category 2 regulator can be made only following a resolution of the Scottish Parliament in plenary.

I move amendment 2.

I thank Tess White for her engagement and contribution to the bill through amendments 130 to 134 and 142. Those amendments significantly enhance the clarity and structure of the provisions relating to the registration of unregulated legal services providers under the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 2007. The amendments collectively strengthen and enhance transparency and ensure that the process for registration in the voluntary register for unregulated legal services providers is both accountable and consultative.

I ask members to support the amendments in Tess White’s name.

No.

Amendment 59 agreed to.

Section 91—Interpretation

Amendment 138 not moved.

Schedule 1

Amendments 60 to 64 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Schedule 3

Amendments 65 to 67 moved—[Siobhian Brown]—and agreed to.

Amendment 92 will allow the Law Society to contact a solicitor who was required to complete training before being enrolled to ask whether they plan to complete the training, and, if they do not respond within eight weeks or if they fail to complete the training within six months of entering a training contract, the Law Society may remove the solicitor from the roll.

Section 12D of the Solicitors (Scotland) Act 1980 was amended at stage 2 to give registered European lawyers the right to appeal to the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal where the Law Society decides not to restore the lawyer to the register. Amendment 94 ensures that the provisions applying to appeals to the SSDT include appeals under section 12D(2A) of the 1980 act.

Amendments 95 and 96 correct terminologies to make it clear that the power of the SSDT or of the court is to “order the restoration of” the foreign lawyer’s name to the register rather than to carry out the restoration itself.

Amendment 97 will ensure that the SSDT has consistent powers to award expenses in relation to all matters that it deals with, including applications for restoration, rather than just complaints and appeals, as is currently provided for.

I ask members to support the amendments in my name.

I move amendment 92.