Share |
Dear Mr Robinson,
Re: Your Freedom of Information Act request
Thank you for your email of 26 May 2011.
In your request you have asked for the following information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000:
“Could you ask those who deal with FOI Act requests to provide a list to me of those firms who attended these recent meetings (as reported in today's Law Society Gazette) and to indicate who organised the event and how attendees were chosen for invitation?”
I write to acknowledge that we are dealing with your request under the terms of the Act and will provide a response as soon as possible and no later than 24 June 2011.
Please note the above reference and log number which should be quoted in any further communication with the Commission relating to this request.
If you have any queries about this request, please do not hesitate to contact the FOI e-mail address: FOI.STAFF.CF@legalservices.gsi.gov.uk.
Yours sincerely,
Governance Team
Chief Executive’s Office
Legal Services CommissionThe First Letter: Dear Michael,
R.E. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST
Thank you for your email of 26 May, which was forwarded to us by Deborah Challis for a response under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). For clarity I will address each of your questions in turn.
“a list those firms who attended these recent meetings (as reported in today's Law Society Gazette)”
Attendees were asked to document their attendance by the organisers and we would like to consult with them about whether to disclose this information to you.
As context please note that there was a request by the LSC that verbatim reporting of discussions was not shared – in other words Chatham House rules applied and this was requested in order to allow for free and frank discussion and exchange of views.
We therefore consider that section 36(2)(b)(ii) of the FOI Act applies to this attendee list. This section gives provision for information to be withheld where its disclosure “would, or would be likely to inhibit the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation”.
Under section 10(3) of the FOI Act public authorities are permitted to extend the deadline for response in specific circumstances where certain exemptions are considered to apply and where these exemptions require a balancing exercise to be carried out between the interests of the parties affected by disclosure and the wider public interest.
As this is a qualified exemption it is necessary to balance your legitimate interest in seeking this information against the individuals’ legitimate interests in maintaining confidentiality.
Therefore, I would like to inform you that we are currently considering this part of your request and that we hope to be able to provide a final response to this part of your request by Wednesday 6 July.
“who organised the event and how attendees were chosen for invitation?”
The LSC has attended two conferences, in Sheffield on Friday 20 May and London on Wednesday 25 May. The meeting in Sheffield was organised by Howells Solicitors and is one to which the Commission has been invited for a number of years. We suggested that a similar meeting in the south might be appropriate and David Emmerson of Edwards Duthie agreed to arrange this. We suggested to both organisers that an objective criteria to send invitations would be to any provider that took £2M a year or more from legal aid funds excluding payments to barristers. The suggested threshold of £2M was arrived at solely to make the meetings manageable in that around 70 providers meet this criteria. However, it was for the meeting organisers rather than the LSC to decide who to invite, and they did in fact invite some providers which did not take over £2M a year.
You may wish to note that David Emmerson said in his introduction that the way forward for these meetings must be on a business basis and involve representatives from small, medium and specialist firms.
Other information
Outside of the scope of the FOI Act, you may also wish to note the following background information.
The policy for legal aid resides with the Ministry of Justice and we are currently waiting for the response to consultation before we are in a position to publish our commissioning strategy. We have also received input from the Law Society and others on the family retender and intend to publish our proposals for comment as soon as practicable after the consultation response. In the circumstances there is no possibility of a “competitive advantage” being given at these meetings.
In addition, there is currently no preferred or minimum volume requirement for the award of contracts.
Right to review
As part of our obligations under the FOI Act, the Commission has an independent review process. If you are dissatisfied with the handling of the FOIA aspects of your request, you have the right to ask for internal review. Internal review requests should be submitted within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your original letter and should be addressed to: Legal Director, Legal Department, Legal Services Commission, 4 Abbey Orchard Street, London SW1P 2BS.
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have a further right of external appeal which can be made to the Information Commissioner who can be contacted at the following address: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.
If you have any queries about this letter, please contact us at the above address. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future correspondence.
Yours sincerely
JOHN SIRODCAR
Second Letter:
Dear Mr Robinson,
R.E. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST
Further to my letter to you of 24 June, I am now able to provide a final response to the question below from your email of 26 May.
“a list those firms who attended these recent meetings (as reported in today's Law Society Gazette)”
Attendees were asked to document their attendance by the organisers and I have provided at Annex 1 the lists of those that did so at the two meetings.
Thank you for your patience in relation to this final part of your request. As mentioned in my earlier response, we needed time to consider the public interest in disclosure having already concluded that - because the meeting took place under Chatham House rules to allow for free and frank discussion and exchange of views - section 36(2)(b)(ii) of the FOI Act applies to this attendee list.
As this is a qualified exemption it was necessary to balance your legitimate interest in seeking this information against the individuals’ legitimate interests in maintaining confidentiality. In reaching the conclusion to disclose this information to you I considered the fact that this issue has received some press attention of late and caused some concern among the provider base, which the LSC believes to be unjustified; the fact that the individual attendees have been consulted and have not objected to disclosure; as well as the fact that the names of individuals who attended and the views that they may have expressed have not been disclosed, as is consistent with Chatham House rules.
Right to review
As part of our obligations under the FOI Act, the Commission has an independent review process. If you are dissatisfied with the handling of the FOIA aspects of request, you have the right to ask for internal review. Internal review requests should be submitted within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your original letter and should be addressed to: Legal Director, Legal Department, Legal Services Commission, 4 Abbey Orchard Street, London SW1P 2BS.
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have a further right of external appeal which can be made to the Information Commissioner who can be contacted at the following address: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.
If you have any queries about this letter, please contact us at the above address. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future correspondence.
Yours sincerely
JOHN SIRODCAR
Head of Contract Management
R.E. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST
Thank you for your email of 26 May, which was forwarded to us by Deborah Challis for a response under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). For clarity I will address each of your questions in turn.
“a list those firms who attended these recent meetings (as reported in today's Law Society Gazette)”
Attendees were asked to document their attendance by the organisers and we would like to consult with them about whether to disclose this information to you.
As context please note that there was a request by the LSC that verbatim reporting of discussions was not shared – in other words Chatham House rules applied and this was requested in order to allow for free and frank discussion and exchange of views.
We therefore consider that section 36(2)(b)(ii) of the FOI Act applies to this attendee list. This section gives provision for information to be withheld where its disclosure “would, or would be likely to inhibit the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation”.
Under section 10(3) of the FOI Act public authorities are permitted to extend the deadline for response in specific circumstances where certain exemptions are considered to apply and where these exemptions require a balancing exercise to be carried out between the interests of the parties affected by disclosure and the wider public interest.
As this is a qualified exemption it is necessary to balance your legitimate interest in seeking this information against the individuals’ legitimate interests in maintaining confidentiality.
Therefore, I would like to inform you that we are currently considering this part of your request and that we hope to be able to provide a final response to this part of your request by Wednesday 6 July.
“who organised the event and how attendees were chosen for invitation?”
The LSC has attended two conferences, in Sheffield on Friday 20 May and London on Wednesday 25 May. The meeting in Sheffield was organised by Howells Solicitors and is one to which the Commission has been invited for a number of years. We suggested that a similar meeting in the south might be appropriate and David Emmerson of Edwards Duthie agreed to arrange this. We suggested to both organisers that an objective criteria to send invitations would be to any provider that took £2M a year or more from legal aid funds excluding payments to barristers. The suggested threshold of £2M was arrived at solely to make the meetings manageable in that around 70 providers meet this criteria. However, it was for the meeting organisers rather than the LSC to decide who to invite, and they did in fact invite some providers which did not take over £2M a year.
You may wish to note that David Emmerson said in his introduction that the way forward for these meetings must be on a business basis and involve representatives from small, medium and specialist firms.
Other information
Outside of the scope of the FOI Act, you may also wish to note the following background information.
The policy for legal aid resides with the Ministry of Justice and we are currently waiting for the response to consultation before we are in a position to publish our commissioning strategy. We have also received input from the Law Society and others on the family retender and intend to publish our proposals for comment as soon as practicable after the consultation response. In the circumstances there is no possibility of a “competitive advantage” being given at these meetings.
In addition, there is currently no preferred or minimum volume requirement for the award of contracts.
Right to review
As part of our obligations under the FOI Act, the Commission has an independent review process. If you are dissatisfied with the handling of the FOIA aspects of your request, you have the right to ask for internal review. Internal review requests should be submitted within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your original letter and should be addressed to: Legal Director, Legal Department, Legal Services Commission, 4 Abbey Orchard Street, London SW1P 2BS.
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have a further right of external appeal which can be made to the Information Commissioner who can be contacted at the following address: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.
If you have any queries about this letter, please contact us at the above address. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future correspondence.
Yours sincerely
JOHN SIRODCAR
Second Letter:
Dear Mr Robinson,
R.E. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT REQUEST
Further to my letter to you of 24 June, I am now able to provide a final response to the question below from your email of 26 May.
“a list those firms who attended these recent meetings (as reported in today's Law Society Gazette)”
Attendees were asked to document their attendance by the organisers and I have provided at Annex 1 the lists of those that did so at the two meetings.
Thank you for your patience in relation to this final part of your request. As mentioned in my earlier response, we needed time to consider the public interest in disclosure having already concluded that - because the meeting took place under Chatham House rules to allow for free and frank discussion and exchange of views - section 36(2)(b)(ii) of the FOI Act applies to this attendee list.
As this is a qualified exemption it was necessary to balance your legitimate interest in seeking this information against the individuals’ legitimate interests in maintaining confidentiality. In reaching the conclusion to disclose this information to you I considered the fact that this issue has received some press attention of late and caused some concern among the provider base, which the LSC believes to be unjustified; the fact that the individual attendees have been consulted and have not objected to disclosure; as well as the fact that the names of individuals who attended and the views that they may have expressed have not been disclosed, as is consistent with Chatham House rules.
Right to review
As part of our obligations under the FOI Act, the Commission has an independent review process. If you are dissatisfied with the handling of the FOIA aspects of request, you have the right to ask for internal review. Internal review requests should be submitted within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your original letter and should be addressed to: Legal Director, Legal Department, Legal Services Commission, 4 Abbey Orchard Street, London SW1P 2BS.
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have a further right of external appeal which can be made to the Information Commissioner who can be contacted at the following address: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.
If you have any queries about this letter, please contact us at the above address. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future correspondence.
Yours sincerely
JOHN SIRODCAR
Head of Contract Management
List of attendees
20 May, Novotel, Sheffield
BenHoareBell
Beswicks
Bhatia Best
Burton Copeland
Cartwright King
Cobleys
David Gray
EAGA
Forbes
Grayson Willis Bennett
Henry Hyams
Howells
Irwin Mitchell
Jackson & Canter
Jordans
Kyles Legal Practice
Legal Services Commission
Parker Bird Gardner
Smith Partnership
Stephensons Solicitors
Stevens Solicitors
Switalskis
The Johnson Partnership
Tuckers
Watson Wodehouse
Williamsons
20 May, Novotel, Sheffield
BenHoareBell
Beswicks
Bhatia Best
Burton Copeland
Cartwright King
Cobleys
David Gray
EAGA
Forbes
Grayson Willis Bennett
Henry Hyams
Howells
Irwin Mitchell
Jackson & Canter
Jordans
Kyles Legal Practice
Legal Services Commission
Parker Bird Gardner
Smith Partnership
Stephensons Solicitors
Stevens Solicitors
Switalskis
The Johnson Partnership
Tuckers
Watson Wodehouse
Williamsons
25 May 2011, Friends House, London
Blackfords LLP
CLSA
Duncan Lewis
Edwards Duthie
Faradays Solicitors
Fisher Meredith
FMW Law
Hine Solicitors
Hodge Jones & Allen
IBB Law
JD Spcier & Co
Kangs Solicitors
Karen Todner LTD
Lansbury Worthington
Lawrence & Co
Lawrence Lupin
Legal Services Commission
Lewis Nedas & Co
Immigration Advisory Service
Makin Dixon
McCormacks
Rodney Warren & Co/Law Society
Shelter
Sternberg Reed
Swain & Co
TV Edwards LLP
Hi
ReplyDeletesee the below good article .it is about legal services.Online retailing is the latest boom in the market. Whether it is Canadian or any other country, everyone wants services on their finger tips. In current business style, online legal services are gaining its audience at the fastest rate. So much has been changes in past few years. The whole concept of in person dealing seems to be outdated. Lots of options are available over internet. Advocates from different fields have joined together and have emerged as a firm to cover the diversity of Canadianlaw.Look about: legal services
Thanks
Alexandra Ariana
Hine Solicitors | Expert legal advice from local specialists | Beaconsfield
ReplyDeleteSolicitors
Solicitors in Beaconsfield
Solicitors in Gerrards Cross
Family Will and Probate
civil disputes
Driving Offence
Hine Solicitors are a specialist law firm situated in 16 different office locations across UK. Our solicitors have a fresh, modern approach to a wide range of legal services including Family, Property, Wills & Probate, Powers of Attorney, Employment, Disputes, Motoring Offence, Inquests, Military Law and Crime. We explain everything clearly in language you understand, and keep you updated so you won’t have to wait for answers. We’re also open about our charges so you always know what to expect.
Along with everything which seems to be building throughout this particular subject material, your viewpoints are generally quite radical. However, I am sorry, because I do not give credence to your whole strategy, all be it exhilarating none the less. It appears to me that your remarks are generally not completely rationalized and in actuality you are yourself not even wholly confident of your argument. In any event I did take pleasure in reading through it. Malvern law firm Australia
ReplyDelete