Editor, Solicitors Journal

LETR report delayed

14 Jan 2013News

Weight of evidence means researchers need more time

Legal Education and Training Review’s recommendations are still to be finalised despite being already weeks behind schedule.

Due to the “weight of evidence” and “the importance and complexity” of the Legal Education and Training Review (LETR) the research team has been given more time to finalise the report, the Solicitors Regulation Authority said in a statement.

The deadline has been subject to several subtle extensions over the past few months, with the research team saying that the report would not be released in December as initially scheduled because it had to be submitted to the regulators first.

The report was expected to reach the regulators on the original December deadline and be published by mid-January. The LETR website still states that final recommendations will be made in December 2012.

The review, under the impetus of steering panel co-chairs Dame Janet Gaymer and Sir Mark Potter, has been monitored closely by the profession since it began in June 2011.

Touted by some commentators as the “biggest shake-up” in legal education and training since the Ormrod Report in 1971, the review kicked off by proposing a raft of “radical” changes to stimulate sector involvement, and it certainly worked.

Over the past year and a half lawyers, law teachers, students and policy makers have waited to see whether any of the more radical suggestions will make it to the final report, such as scrapping the qualifying law degree and a softening of the distinctions between, and definitions of, the vocational side of training.

The objective of the review is to ensure that the legal education and training system advances the regulatory objectives of the Legal Services Act 2007, in particular it aims to protect and promote the interests of consumers and ensure an independent, strong, diverse and effective legal profession.

Described as a “moving target” by one research team member last summer, the ever-changing nature of the legal services market has inevitably thrown up a range of challenging unforeseeables, for the research to factor into their findings.

The SRA has not confirmed a revised publication date.

Legal News desk contact: editorial@solicitorsjournal.com

Latest Articles

When pets become a family law issue

As pet ownership rises, family law struggles to reconcile animals’ sentience with their continued treatment as property

Shipping cartel settlement approved for consumers

The Competition Appeal Tribunal has finalised a £92.75 million settlement for affected vehicle purchasers

Consultation launched for housing offences

The Sentencing Council is inviting public input on new sentencing guidelines for housing offences

Abraaj Investment Management v Kes Power: Commercial estoppel and the assignment of receivables

High Court validates security assignment despite technical flaws through estoppel by convention principles.

Director of Public Prosecutions v Boureanu: Confiscation orders and the meaning of conviction

Romanian confiscation order enforced despite limitation preventing custodial sentence following corruption conviction.

Odusanya v Pennine Care Foundation Trust: witness evidence discussions and the right to representation

Strike-out appeal partially allowed where claimant denied consultation with representative during proceedings.

Smithstone v Tranmoor Primary School: Court of Appeal clarifies Part 36 costs in settled claims

90:10 liability offers viable but require actual determination to trigger enhanced costs

Network Rail Infrastructure Limited v Karl List: Advertising rights and railway hereditaments

Court of Appeal clarifies rating liability for advertising sites within operational railway stations under business rates legislation.

Cubic Transportation Systems v Transport for London: High Court lifts automatic suspension in £800m procurement challenge

TfL revenue collection contract dispute demonstrates adequacy of damages in major infrastructure procurement challenges.

Ioan Mailat v Hunedoara City Court: European arrest warrant particularisation requirements

High Court clarifies when missing offence details constitute wholesale failure in conviction warrants

High Court allows trial against Dyson

A High Court ruling sets the stage for a trial next year regarding claims against Dyson companies

Home Secretary gains power to dismiss chief constables

Under the new laws, Home Secretaries will gain statutory authority to force the retirement, resignation, or suspension of chief constables based on their performance

Hogan Lovells reveals bribery outlook 2026

Global law firm Hogan Lovells has launched its Bribery, Investigations & Enforcement Outlook report for 2026 focusing on emerging trends in compliance for multinational organizations

Limbu v Dyson: High Court orders liability trial for migrant workers' exploitation claims

Split trial approved over preliminary issues in Malaysian factory conditions case

Phullar v Ofsted: Employment tribunal failures in disability discrimination and unfair dismissal appeal

Dismissal for capability during cancer recovery raised procedural and reasonable adjustment failures throughout.

SJ Interview: Joelle Grogan

Dr Joelle Grogan is a legal scholar specialising in the rule of law in times of crisis. She presents The Law Show on BBC Radio 4, and is Co-Academic Director of the Rule of Law Clinic at the CEU Democracy Institute (Budapest), and a Senior Research Fellow at the UCD Sutherland School of Law. Her work focuses on constitutional accountability, emergency powers, and legal misinformation. In this interview, she examines the pressures facing the rule of law in the UK, from executive power and court delays to media narratives, emergencies, and the impact of AI on legal practice.

Justice reform risks targeting the wrong fix

As 2026 approaches, ministers eye jury trials while ignoring deeper causes of England’s criminal justice crisis