While the debate over ethical issues arising from the use of domestic and international legal outsourcing continues to mature, recent statements by an Australian justice suggest that a growing number of jurisdictions are taking on LPO ethical issues as adoption increases.
Despite flip-flopped seasons and toilets flushing in opposite directions, it appears Australian legal professionals are subject to some of the same pressures as their US and UK counterparts.
Recently, Chief Justice of New South Wales Jim Spigelman issued some provocative comments. He said, “Those responsible for purchasing legal services in commercial corporations are subject to pressure to reduce costs, in the same way as those responsible for any other cost centre… Outsourcing through the use of Indian-based support services, such as digital dictation transcription and document management for discovery and due diligence, is an available way of containing such costs… However, overseas legal services are not limited to administrative matters of this kind."
The expansion of LPO adoption beyond US and UK clientele is something we projected in our annual trending report – Ten for 2011: Top Ten Trends for Legal Outsourcing.
#4 Expanding Client Geographic/Jurisdictional Reach
In 2011, LPO services will be increasingly adopted in expanded areas domestically within the US and UK, as well as international destinations… Buyers of LPO services are likely to expand into other geographic destinations around the world such as Australia, South Africa and major business hubs in the Asia-Pacific region.
More details on the free report here.
The Australian markets are a growing area of focus lately with lots of movement in the industry. Firms Down Under continue seeking to address the changing needs of their international clients. Major UK firms like Clifford Chance and Norton Rose jockeying for an Australian partner. Advent continues to take strides forward as a leading LPO-integrated law firm. And fallout from the Rio Tinto deal, which seems so long ago, continues. Add the mix the recent comments made by Chief Justice Spigleman, and it’s no surprise perspectives are changing in the world below.
For additional details on the continuing LPO ethics debate and regulatory updates, check out our online resource; www.LPOethics.com
Showing posts with label Legal Ethics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Legal Ethics. Show all posts
Monday, March 7, 2011
Monday, February 7, 2011
Stay on Top of LPO Regulation in 2011
After flying under the radar for several years, legal process outsourcing (LPO) has finally caught the attention of regulators around the globe. In the three main LPO markets – the United States, the United Kingdom and India – there is the potential for rule changes which could place outsourcing agreements under increased scrutiny or even have a material impact on the ability of law firms and companies to send legal work to external providers.
For example, Connecticut has introduced a bill designed to prevent law firms and corporations from offshoring the drafting, reviewing and analyzing of legal documents to workers overseas. Under the bill, proposed by Connecticut state representative Patricia Dillon, "unlicensed'' offshore workers who engage in these activities for clients in Connecticut could be charged with unauthorized practice of law. If the bill is passed, there is the risk that other US states may pass similar laws.
Fronterion’s January newsletter focuses on the changing regulatory landscape for legal outsourcing in 2011. To keep up to date on the changing ethical and regulatory environment in the coming year, sign up for our newsletter by emailing forefront@fronterion.com, visit the LPO Ethics Resource Center, and review our most recent press release.
Also, to learn more about legal outsourcing strategies, be sure to register for this new LPO conference scheduled for February 14-16, 2011 at The Sentry Center in New York, NY.
For example, Connecticut has introduced a bill designed to prevent law firms and corporations from offshoring the drafting, reviewing and analyzing of legal documents to workers overseas. Under the bill, proposed by Connecticut state representative Patricia Dillon, "unlicensed'' offshore workers who engage in these activities for clients in Connecticut could be charged with unauthorized practice of law. If the bill is passed, there is the risk that other US states may pass similar laws.
Fronterion’s January newsletter focuses on the changing regulatory landscape for legal outsourcing in 2011. To keep up to date on the changing ethical and regulatory environment in the coming year, sign up for our newsletter by emailing forefront@fronterion.com, visit the LPO Ethics Resource Center, and review our most recent press release.
Also, to learn more about legal outsourcing strategies, be sure to register for this new LPO conference scheduled for February 14-16, 2011 at The Sentry Center in New York, NY.
Monday, November 29, 2010
ABA Draft Ethical Amendments Release
Perhaps the most influential announcement on the topic of LPO made by the ABA following the 08-451 Formal Opinion publication in August 2008, the Commission recently proposed minor changes to existing ethical guidance.
The ABA 20/20 Commission recommends modifications to the commentary of the Model Rules 1.1, 5.3 and 5.5.
Basically, this is what we expected, but it does provide some additional clarity about the Commission’s outlook going forward.
These proposed amendments are to be debated over the next 6 to 8 months with a possible final presentation to the ABA House of Delegates during the annual meetings in August 2011.
More details on the announcement are available here
For more background information on the announcement and the ABA 20/20 Commission check out Fronterion’s LPO Ethics Resource Center.
The ABA 20/20 Commission recommends modifications to the commentary of the Model Rules 1.1, 5.3 and 5.5.
Basically, this is what we expected, but it does provide some additional clarity about the Commission’s outlook going forward.
These proposed amendments are to be debated over the next 6 to 8 months with a possible final presentation to the ABA House of Delegates during the annual meetings in August 2011.
More details on the announcement are available here
For more background information on the announcement and the ABA 20/20 Commission check out Fronterion’s LPO Ethics Resource Center.
Monday, October 18, 2010
ABA Favors Less Invasive Approach to LPO
This past week I had the opportunity to address the ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20 during their October 15th meetings. We see the decision to abandon significant rule changes regarding LPO as a very positive development.
More details about the Commission and the meetings are available on our LPOethics.com website. The article, ABA Abandons Significant Rule Changes, includes an insightful summary of the proceedings.
More details about the Commission and the meetings are available on our LPOethics.com website. The article, ABA Abandons Significant Rule Changes, includes an insightful summary of the proceedings.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Imminent Ethics?
As the regulatory focus on the ethics of LPO heats up in the US and UK, a growing body of knowledge about LPO ethics is emerging.
Most recently, an article featured in the UK-focused publication Outsource, Mark Ross of Integreon provides a summary of ethical guidance on legal outsourcing currently available and a glimpse of what we may expect in the future.
In the article Ross said, “I expect there will be more to report on the ethics of legal outsourcing over the coming months from both sides of the Atlantic as the relevant bodies continue to study this rapidly growing industry. Whether in the form of amendments to the model rules of professional conduct (in the U.S.), or to the Solicitor’s Code of Conduct (UK), lawyers will welcome more detailed guidance. Watch this space!”
I will be speaking on LPO ethics this week at an event hosted by The Law Society. More on that shortly.
Most recently, an article featured in the UK-focused publication Outsource, Mark Ross of Integreon provides a summary of ethical guidance on legal outsourcing currently available and a glimpse of what we may expect in the future.
In the article Ross said, “I expect there will be more to report on the ethics of legal outsourcing over the coming months from both sides of the Atlantic as the relevant bodies continue to study this rapidly growing industry. Whether in the form of amendments to the model rules of professional conduct (in the U.S.), or to the Solicitor’s Code of Conduct (UK), lawyers will welcome more detailed guidance. Watch this space!”
I will be speaking on LPO ethics this week at an event hosted by The Law Society. More on that shortly.
Friday, August 6, 2010
Friday, August 6, 2010 ABA Commission on Ethics: Day 2 and Public Hearing
Today has been the second day of meetings for ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20.
The event of most interest to me was the public hearing concerning the legal outsourcing industry. Michael Ford of UnitedLex and Mark Ross of Integreon, two thought leaders in the legal outsourcing industry, spoke.
I commend the Commission for soliciting outside perspectives as they shape their recommendations for their members concerning the ethical implications of outsourcing. The Commission made an important distinction between outsourcing and offshoring, which is key in all discussions about LPO.
The extent to which law can be practiced reciprocally between international jurisdictions drew quite a bit of discussion. India was the main focus. The issue is examined further in a recent Economist article.
I was glad I attended this year’s meeting. It was encouraging that the ABA, and more legal firms and educational institutions as well, are recognizing and discussing seriously the role of legal outsourcing as part of the ever-changing legal profession.
The event of most interest to me was the public hearing concerning the legal outsourcing industry. Michael Ford of UnitedLex and Mark Ross of Integreon, two thought leaders in the legal outsourcing industry, spoke.
I commend the Commission for soliciting outside perspectives as they shape their recommendations for their members concerning the ethical implications of outsourcing. The Commission made an important distinction between outsourcing and offshoring, which is key in all discussions about LPO.
The extent to which law can be practiced reciprocally between international jurisdictions drew quite a bit of discussion. India was the main focus. The issue is examined further in a recent Economist article.
I was glad I attended this year’s meeting. It was encouraging that the ABA, and more legal firms and educational institutions as well, are recognizing and discussing seriously the role of legal outsourcing as part of the ever-changing legal profession.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Thursday, August 5, 2010 ABA Commission on Ethics: Day 1
The ABA annual meetings are being held at the Palace Hotel in downtown San Francisco today and tomorrow. (And, yes, I have escaped hot, humid Chicago for a cooler climate for a few days.)
Today’s proceedings commenced at 9:00 am with introductory remarks given by the Commission chairs, followed by updates from the heads of various working groups. Short speeches were also given by outgoing president Carolyn Lamm and incoming president Stephen Zack.
When reports touched on outsourcing, the Commission leadership recognized that it is a “complex topic” – something we’ve understood since Fronterion was founded.
Discussions included the ethical obligations law firms face when they work with outside vendors, especially, the relationship dynamics in a tri-party engagement when law firms, their clients and outside vendors collaborate.
Relating to legal process outsourcing, the Commission discussed different approaches to the current rules model and the implications of each of those various approaches.
A list of the prominent members of the he ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20 in available here. I anticipate that this week’s – and future – dialogs on LPO by the Commission will be fruitful because capable people are working hard to create more understanding of ethical challenges of outsourced legal services domestically and abroad.
More on the meetings tomorrow.
Today’s proceedings commenced at 9:00 am with introductory remarks given by the Commission chairs, followed by updates from the heads of various working groups. Short speeches were also given by outgoing president Carolyn Lamm and incoming president Stephen Zack.
When reports touched on outsourcing, the Commission leadership recognized that it is a “complex topic” – something we’ve understood since Fronterion was founded.
Discussions included the ethical obligations law firms face when they work with outside vendors, especially, the relationship dynamics in a tri-party engagement when law firms, their clients and outside vendors collaborate.
Relating to legal process outsourcing, the Commission discussed different approaches to the current rules model and the implications of each of those various approaches.
A list of the prominent members of the he ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20 in available here. I anticipate that this week’s – and future – dialogs on LPO by the Commission will be fruitful because capable people are working hard to create more understanding of ethical challenges of outsourced legal services domestically and abroad.
More on the meetings tomorrow.
Monday, August 2, 2010
ABA Annual Meetings: LPO Ethics
The American Bar Association (ABA) is holding its annual meeting this week in San Fransciso. The main focus for my visit will be the ABA’s Commission on Ethics 20/20 with sessions that will include public hearings on several topics of interest, specifically ethical considerations of legal outsourcing.
I am looking forward to attending the meetings to survey the lay of the land, according to the Commission and its members.
The more we at Fronterion are aware of the concerns of the ABA, the 20/20 Commission, it’s lawyers and their clients, the better off we will be as we advise our clients on all outsourcing ethical issues.
An added plus – I will be able to get away from the hot and humid weather that engulfs Chicago in August!
I am looking forward to attending the meetings to survey the lay of the land, according to the Commission and its members.
The more we at Fronterion are aware of the concerns of the ABA, the 20/20 Commission, it’s lawyers and their clients, the better off we will be as we advise our clients on all outsourcing ethical issues.
An added plus – I will be able to get away from the hot and humid weather that engulfs Chicago in August!
Friday, July 16, 2010
Fronterion “Wall of Silence” Survey Round-up
Our survey findings released this past week have captured the attention of a number of online publications and blogs. The survey results seem to have number of people hypothesizing why US firms are so hesitant to acknowledge or deny their use of LPO vendors, even on a confidential basis. Based on our experiences, we would purport that uncertainty with ethical guidelines is one of the key drivers to this silence. Worries of negative press may be another.
Below is a short news round-up.
ABA Journal
Above the Law
About.com
Below is a short news round-up.
ABA Journal
Above the Law
About.com
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
India Writ Petition: Update
As earlier reported on the blog, a petition was filed in the Madras High Court by the Association of Indian Lawyers against an array of international law firms and one LPO vendor, Integreon. The bases for the petition being that the named firms were practicing law in Indian jurisdictions.
Because of what many consider a notoriously slow legal system, is comes with little surprise that the next hearing on the issue has been pushed back to August 4th, as reported by Bloomberg.
The wider implication for the LPO market is yet to be seen. Many industry participants don’t feel that the position taken by the Association of Indian Lawyers is merited nor will influence the use LPOs, but it may raise more concerns for potential clients.
As aptly stated by a partner at the US-based Fulbright & Jaworski, “That’s not what a globalizing country and corporate sector needs.”
Additional commentary was also released by Legally India.
Because of what many consider a notoriously slow legal system, is comes with little surprise that the next hearing on the issue has been pushed back to August 4th, as reported by Bloomberg.
The wider implication for the LPO market is yet to be seen. Many industry participants don’t feel that the position taken by the Association of Indian Lawyers is merited nor will influence the use LPOs, but it may raise more concerns for potential clients.
As aptly stated by a partner at the US-based Fulbright & Jaworski, “That’s not what a globalizing country and corporate sector needs.”
Additional commentary was also released by Legally India.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
SRA Public Announcement
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has released their first public statement on the application of outsourced legal services for solicitors practicing in England and Wales.
As originally reported by our LPO Ethics Resource Center (www.LPOethics.com), the SRA release states, “Where law firms are outsourcing some of their legal or administrative work to other law firms or non law firms, the SRA's guidance is that this is allowed on the basis that all relevant rules are complied with (Solicitors’ Code of Conduct 2007) and that the arrangement is made transparent and is agreed with the client.”
The statement continues with the SRA citing existing ethical guidelines deeming them applicable to outsourced legal services.
In conclusion, the SRA notes, “In accepting work from a client, the firm must always consider whether the work should be outsourced at all as they should have the necessary resources and competency to undertake the task. In summary a firm must act in the best interests of their client and comply with their core duties.”
It’s been reported the Law Society is currently exploring these issues, but has yet to formally comment on the topic of LPO.
The recent announcement to UK solicitors by the SRA stands in contrast to lawyers in US jurisdictions who have been able to rely on ethical guidance provided as early as 2006 in some jurisdictions. The most notable guidance in the United States is Opinion 08-451 issued by the American Bar Association Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility in 2008.
Additional details on the complete SRA legal outsourcing statement are available on our recently launched LPO Ethics Resource Center (www.LPOethics.com).
The LPO Ethics Resource Center is a free resource that allows legal professionals to keep abreast on up-to-date information on the ethical policies and opinions relevant to outsourced legal services. This site compiles all of the latest information and breaking news regarding legal process outsourcing into one convenient resource.
As originally reported by our LPO Ethics Resource Center (www.LPOethics.com), the SRA release states, “Where law firms are outsourcing some of their legal or administrative work to other law firms or non law firms, the SRA's guidance is that this is allowed on the basis that all relevant rules are complied with (Solicitors’ Code of Conduct 2007) and that the arrangement is made transparent and is agreed with the client.”
The statement continues with the SRA citing existing ethical guidelines deeming them applicable to outsourced legal services.
In conclusion, the SRA notes, “In accepting work from a client, the firm must always consider whether the work should be outsourced at all as they should have the necessary resources and competency to undertake the task. In summary a firm must act in the best interests of their client and comply with their core duties.”
It’s been reported the Law Society is currently exploring these issues, but has yet to formally comment on the topic of LPO.
The recent announcement to UK solicitors by the SRA stands in contrast to lawyers in US jurisdictions who have been able to rely on ethical guidance provided as early as 2006 in some jurisdictions. The most notable guidance in the United States is Opinion 08-451 issued by the American Bar Association Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility in 2008.
Additional details on the complete SRA legal outsourcing statement are available on our recently launched LPO Ethics Resource Center (www.LPOethics.com).
The LPO Ethics Resource Center is a free resource that allows legal professionals to keep abreast on up-to-date information on the ethical policies and opinions relevant to outsourced legal services. This site compiles all of the latest information and breaking news regarding legal process outsourcing into one convenient resource.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Law Society Exploration
Recently, The Lawyer broke the story highlighting the first public reporting of the Law Society’s activity to address the changing legal profession, with a specific aim on outsourced legal services.
As reported, the Law Society expert panel appears to mirror a similar initiative launched by the ABA named the “ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20”.
More details on the LPO ethical developments in the UK as reported by The Lawyer are available here.
As reported, the Law Society expert panel appears to mirror a similar initiative launched by the ABA named the “ABA Commission on Ethics 20/20”.
More details on the LPO ethical developments in the UK as reported by The Lawyer are available here.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Lone Star Sourcing
In addition to the number of other ethical organizations looking into the implications of legal outsourcing, it appears that Texans are studying these issues, as well. As reported by the Fort Worth Business Press, the State Bar of Texas’ 2010 annual meeting being held this week in Fort Worth will address legal outsourcing, among other issues impacting legal professionals.
More information is available through the Fort Worth Business Press.
More information is available through the Fort Worth Business Press.
Saturday, March 27, 2010
Indian Writ Compliant Filed
Something that was simmering below the surface for the past week finally erupted into the mainstream legal press on Friday in a feature by LegalWeek.
It was first reported by in The Hindu and then Bar & Bench, that the Association of Indian Lawyers filed a writ petition with in the Madras High Court alleging that international law firms were “using visitor visa(s) thereby violating immigration norms,” which India laws ban foreign-based law legal firms from entering and operating in India. To date this has not included legal outsourcing operations by international law firms such that legal outsourcing engagements are structured as only providing “legal support” services.
The only LPO vendor cited in the writ petition was Integreon, who swiftly offered their official statement, stating the allegations were “without merit.” No official statements from any of the other major law firm respondents have been released to date.
It does seem a bit peculiar that India, with an economy which is driven largely by it’s attractiveness as a professional services outsourcing destination, would seek to enforce blatantly protectionist measures. Ironically, similar protectionist measures debated in the US have been largely criticised by the Indian government and business community.
I have delayed comment on the petition because I am not sure about the ancillary implications on the legal outsourcing industry. Off the record, most major law firms cited as respondents seem to think the writ petition will not be a major issue such that allegations are not reflective of the work being performed in India. For the time being, however, all respondents seem to be taking the proceedings seriously. Further, per my personal interactions, most firms cited in the petition have not been deterred from advancing their outsourcing initiative plans. Lines have also been drawn linking the writ petition to the Newman McIntosh & Hennessey case* which was readily withdraw shortly after filing in 2008.
In addition to the protectionist notions of the writ petition, Indian law firms may also be partially reacting to increased competition from LPO’s who are recruiting more of India’s qualified lawyers.
More to follow as the petition proceeds.
*Newman McIntosh & Hennessey vs. Bush, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in May 2008 (Civ. No. 08-00787 [CKK] [D.D.C]). The lawsuit alleged that offshoring legal work constituted a waiver of the attorney-client privilege and Fourth Amendment protection, since data sent overseas may be subject to eavesdropping by the US government such as that permitted by the USA Patriot Act. In particular, the complaint alleged that, “This waiver of rights would nullify the reasonable expectation of privacy that American citizens — litigating purely domestic disputes in U.S. Courts — would have in the documents that they produce in the course of civil litigation.” The lawsuit was withdrawn by the plaintiff firm only days after the ABA issued its outsourcing opinion, endorsing the practice of outsourcing. To date, no further litigation has been forthcoming in the US challenging the legality of legal outsourcing. – Implementing a Successful Legal Outsourcing Engagement (fronterion.com/book/)
It was first reported by in The Hindu and then Bar & Bench, that the Association of Indian Lawyers filed a writ petition with in the Madras High Court alleging that international law firms were “using visitor visa(s) thereby violating immigration norms,” which India laws ban foreign-based law legal firms from entering and operating in India. To date this has not included legal outsourcing operations by international law firms such that legal outsourcing engagements are structured as only providing “legal support” services.
The only LPO vendor cited in the writ petition was Integreon, who swiftly offered their official statement, stating the allegations were “without merit.” No official statements from any of the other major law firm respondents have been released to date.
It does seem a bit peculiar that India, with an economy which is driven largely by it’s attractiveness as a professional services outsourcing destination, would seek to enforce blatantly protectionist measures. Ironically, similar protectionist measures debated in the US have been largely criticised by the Indian government and business community.
I have delayed comment on the petition because I am not sure about the ancillary implications on the legal outsourcing industry. Off the record, most major law firms cited as respondents seem to think the writ petition will not be a major issue such that allegations are not reflective of the work being performed in India. For the time being, however, all respondents seem to be taking the proceedings seriously. Further, per my personal interactions, most firms cited in the petition have not been deterred from advancing their outsourcing initiative plans. Lines have also been drawn linking the writ petition to the Newman McIntosh & Hennessey case* which was readily withdraw shortly after filing in 2008.
In addition to the protectionist notions of the writ petition, Indian law firms may also be partially reacting to increased competition from LPO’s who are recruiting more of India’s qualified lawyers.
More to follow as the petition proceeds.
*Newman McIntosh & Hennessey vs. Bush, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in May 2008 (Civ. No. 08-00787 [CKK] [D.D.C]). The lawsuit alleged that offshoring legal work constituted a waiver of the attorney-client privilege and Fourth Amendment protection, since data sent overseas may be subject to eavesdropping by the US government such as that permitted by the USA Patriot Act. In particular, the complaint alleged that, “This waiver of rights would nullify the reasonable expectation of privacy that American citizens — litigating purely domestic disputes in U.S. Courts — would have in the documents that they produce in the course of civil litigation.” The lawsuit was withdrawn by the plaintiff firm only days after the ABA issued its outsourcing opinion, endorsing the practice of outsourcing. To date, no further litigation has been forthcoming in the US challenging the legality of legal outsourcing. – Implementing a Successful Legal Outsourcing Engagement (fronterion.com/book/)
Monday, November 23, 2009
Ethical Considerations in Legal Service Solicitation
Total Attorneys, a Chicago-based legal service and support company that offers web-based software solutions for small law practices and sole practitioners, has meet with tremendous success. This year, they have been named “Number 2” in the Cranes Fast 50, the fastest growing businesses in Chicago.
The firm is currently facing a lawsuit regarding the ethical considerations of soliciting clients on behalf of lawyers over the internet. While not directly pertaining to outsourcing legal services, is an important debate regarding the ethical provisions and the roles of outside vendors who perform the business development function for lawyers.
More information on the case is available in the Forbes article,“Click or Crime?” as well as in the in-depth blog post at Total Attorneys.
The firm is currently facing a lawsuit regarding the ethical considerations of soliciting clients on behalf of lawyers over the internet. While not directly pertaining to outsourcing legal services, is an important debate regarding the ethical provisions and the roles of outside vendors who perform the business development function for lawyers.
More information on the case is available in the Forbes article,“Click or Crime?” as well as in the in-depth blog post at Total Attorneys.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
