Six-month countdown to new competence regime starts now

20 Apr 2016News

CPD is no longer a 'box to be ticked', explains managing partner

With just over six months to go until the old continuing professional development (CPD) requirements consigned to the dustbin of regulatory history, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has reminded practitioners and firms to prepare for the new approach to continuing competence.

All solicitors must move to the new competency-based approach on 1 November 2016, whereby the traditional counting of CPD hours will no longer be needed.

In addition, requirements to complete particular types of training, whether accredited or not, have also been scrapped.

Instead, solicitors have been encouraged to 'reflect' on their practice and the quality of their work, before undertaking 'meaningful training' to ensure they stay competent.

The new approach to continuing competence is linked to the SRA's Competence Statement published in April 2015, which defines the standards required of all solicitors.

Paul Philip, the SRA's chief executive, said: 'This approach is about protecting the public by making sure solicitors remain competent, ethical, and up to date. We take this obligation seriously and will continue to require all solicitors to make an annual declaration about their continuing competence.

'We recognise that each individual solicitor and firm is different and will have different approaches to learning and development. We believe that removing the blanket 16 hours requirement will reduce the cost of regulation for some solicitors and their employers, while encouraging meaningful continuing professional development.'

A recent SRA survey showed that almost half of firm and solicitor respondents have already moved to the new approach.

Of these, 60 per cent said they did this at no extra cost to their business and were able to align it with their firm's existing systems. Three-quarters said adopting the new approach took three months or less to implement.

Stuart Snape, the managing partner at Graham Coffey & Co, who has already moved to the new regime, said: 'This change of approach gave us the opportunity to stop seeing CPD as something "only for solicitors" or a "box to be ticked" and to better understand how it benefits our business.

'We know that it is in our firm's interest to welcome a more personalised and flexible approach to continued training as it helps maximise our staff's potential. This means we will continue to deliver a high quality, professional service to the public.'

Legal News desk contact: editorial@solicitorsjournal.com|

All solicitors must move to the new competency-based approach on 1 November 2016, whereby the traditional counting of CPD hours will no longer be needed.

In addition, requirements to complete particular types of training, whether accredited or not, have also been scrapped.

Instead, solicitors have been encouraged to 'reflect' on their practice and the quality of their work, before undertaking 'meaningful training' to ensure they stay competent.

The new approach to continuing competence is linked to the SRA's Competence Statement published in April 2015, which defines the standards required of all solicitors.

A recent SRA survey showed that almost half of firm and solicitor respondents have already moved to the new approach.

Employment tribunal cases rising sharply

Recent Ministry of Justice figures reveal a significant increase in open Employment Tribunal cases and challenges faced by employers

SRA updates guidance for litigation supervision

The Solicitors Regulation Authority has enhanced its supervision guidelines to clarify litigation conduct after recent court rulings

Millions of fathers lack parental responsibility

Many fathers may be surprised to learn about their parental responsibility rights and how to secure them

Re Poundstretcher: cross-class cramdown survives even when six landlord classes say no

The Chancery Division sanctions Poundstretcher's restructuring plan despite six dissenting landlord classes, applying the Adler and Petrofac framework.

Ponsford v Sali: a property partnership's messy divorce shows why documentation wins partnership disputes

The Chancery Division takes a pragmatic, evidence based approach to untangling a property partnership built on undocumented cash dealings.

North Somerset District Council v Secretary of State: failing the flood sequential test is not the end of the story

The Planning Court confirms that a failed flood risk sequential test still gets weighed in the planning balance, not treated as an automatic refusal.

Thomas Armstrong (Aggregates) v Housing Secretary: when landfill buries a quarry's right to be reviewed

The Planning Court applies Pilkington and Hillside to find a 1954 quarry permission can no longer be revived under the ROMP regime.

Clerkenwell Lifestyle v HG Construction: be careful what you call "agreed" in extension of time correspondence

The TCC enforces a £955,943 adjudication award after rejecting a contractor's late attempt to recast email exchanges as a binding settlement.

Ward v Donnellan: when both sides lie, "no order for costs" is not a free pass

The Court of Appeal overturns a no order for costs ruling, finding a judge let a dishonest claimant off too lightly.

London Borough of Camden v BW: when a single missing fact can decide a capacity case

The Court of Protection finds an expert's failure to explore one consequence, losing a placement, was enough to undermine his capacity assessment.

Griffiths v Essex County Council: EAT clarifies causation in discrimination remedy awards and sends pension loss back for recalculation

A single act of indirect disability discrimination can ground a full loss of earnings award, even where a later constructive dismissal claim was framed only...