The devolution of the Faculty’s stables has been touted as the biggest shake-up at the Faculty of Advocates for many years. There are still alot of decisions to be made and a period of re-structuring will ensue as advocates shift around and position themselves within a stable or chamber that suits their needs. But what does the top man, Dean of the Faculty Roy Martin, think will happen? The firm asks him the questions.

Sitting within the relative safety of his Parliament House office just off the Advocate’s Library, Dean of the Faculty of Advocates Roy Martin appears to be a man with little on his mind. However, with recent developments at the Faculty and its services arm Faculty Services Limited, he clearly has a lot to consider and the expectations of many individual members of Faculty to live up to.
For some Faculty members the news that Faculty Services Limited is set to allow the ten advocates stables to devolve and take more control over how they are structured, how they operate and how they sell their services to the Scottish public is long overdue. The system of autonomous chambers has been in operation in England for many years and it is not uncommon to see advertisements for various chambers in the national and international legal press, but this is something new for Scotland.
As The Firm went to press leading QC’s Heriot Currie, Richard Keen, Paul Cullen and David Johnston announced the formation of Axiom Advocates, the first stable to form as a home for commercial and public law. Founded by a core group of seven, a further 22 have come on board after being chosen on the basis on merit.
It is believed that all ten stables have now voted to devolve from FSL with the exception of the Mackinnon Stable, so, no doubt, the next few months will see more announcements similar to Axiom Advocates. But what does Roy Martin, Dean of Faculty think about the changes? The Firm puts its questions to the Dean on the way forward.

Why has devolution come about now?
“It is a natural evolution of a legal marketplace which is increasingly recognising the individual talents of legal practitioners. I think it is something that not only applies to members of the Bar but also to solicitors, because nowadays clients are much more demanding of the particular experience and qualifications of the legal practitioners that they employ. That is a consequence of a more sophisticated attitude towards all aspects of business. I think the old days of the traditional Scottish solicitor who was the man of business who represented a client, whether an individual or a business, in a whole range of affairs, is a thing of the past. Individuals and business now have a whole range of different needs and they will tend to go to the legal practitioner who can fulfil the particular needs by virtue of qualification and experience. Exactly the same thing has happened with the Faculty because we are now tending to be recognised as individual practitioners with particular experience in distinct fields. For that reason grouping together, in ways which allow us to perhaps promote the individual practices in a way that is more focused on the fields of those in the stables, is a natural development.”

How has devolution come about?
“It is difficult to identify any particular aspect as to how this development has come about. It is something that has been developing over a number of years. For example, I am a member of the Murray stable and since the Murray stable was formed in its current guise, we, as the Murray stable, recognised that there were opportunities for us to promote the sorts of practices the members of the Murray stable undertook in a particular way. I think we were one of the first to develop a website, for example, as a number of our members dealt with administrative law and matters relating to employment law and so forth. I am not saying that the Murray stable is special in any way, but it was part of a process which led to where we are now. I think the opportunity under the devolved arrangements that FSL has put in place for individual members to be in a stable of their choosing, where they can provide the clerking and other administrative and support services in a way that best suits their particular area, is a recognition of all these factors, and is something that has been evolving and emerging for a number of years.”

What will be the major impact of devolution?
“I would like to think that it will consolidate and strengthen the position of the Bar and all of its members, because I think the opportunity for individual stables to have a more distinct identity will actually result in a focusing of the right sort of work to the advocates who can best do it, and that will be a benefit to everyone; not just members of the Bar but the public and members of the legal profession. You must always remember that advocates exist as individual practitioners and unlike solicitors we are not in partnership. We exist because we provide advocacy services and it is the demand for those advocacy services which ultimately provides us with our opportunities to perform as advocates. I don’t think that will ever go away. If it can be provided in a way that is more efficient and recognises the individual needs within the marketplace then it is bound to be of benefit to the Bar and the public in general.”

Any potential disadvantages of devolution?
“I don’t think there are because it seems to me, although any change gives rise to uncertainties, ultimately every advocate is an individual practitioner competing with all others. That is always going to be and that is always what we will be as far as I am concerned. The fact that people will have the opportunity to be in stables where their individual experience is perhaps put forward more positively than it might have been in the past, doesn’t in any sense undermine, it seems to me, the fundamental characteristic of each advocate as an independent and individual practitioner. I should say in that context, for all that has been said about these matters, none of this is in any sense a break up of the Faculty of Advocates or people leaving the Faculty. For hundreds of years we have all been individual practitioners. For well over a century we have been served by clerks in ways that have changed over time. Simply because there are these changes in the way advocates’ support services are provided does not in any way undermine the nature of the Faculty of Advocates, the people practicing within this library as individual advocates that nevertheless are members of the Faculty. All of those who are taking advantage of the changes that are now available, whether going out to set up an individual stables or chambers, or indeed those who are becoming involved in devolved stables, are all remaining as members of the Faculty in the way they were and it doesn’t effect their relationship with each other or with Faculty to any extent.”

Could it ultimately improve the relationship between Faculty and its members?
“I would like to think that ultimately after the uncertainties which will inevitably arise that this will lead to a stronger and more confident Faculty of Advocates. I certainly think it will be a positive step that will help us in the future.”

Will adopting a specialist stables structure make individual advocates and the stables themselves more competitive?“I don’t know the answer to that because we are all in competition with one another and we always have been. I suspect that. human nature being what it is. there are advocates that are more competitive in general and advocates that are less competitive, simply down to human nature. I am not sure these changes will lead to any alteration in that.”

Will the way that advocates interact with solicitors change in any way?
“It shouldn’t really change at all because we will continue to be a referral profession acting on instructions primarily from solicitors and served by a clerk that deals with the administration and so on. I can’t see it making any structural difference to our relationships with solicitors at all. It may be that the more individual approach to how our services are provided may give a particular advantage to a particular solicitor who wants his work done in a particular way, but there is nothing evolutionary about that.”

Will the devolved stables or chambers all be based in Edinburgh?
“There is the potential for stables to be based elsewhere to Edinburgh, but the intention is that they will be based here to begin with. Obviously, as I say, there are the devolved stables that remain within FSL and there are independent stables. Whether any such independent or devolved stable might ultimately be located outside Edinburgh is something for the future. From a personal point of view I would see that as a positive development as the Faculty of Advocates exists to serve the entirety of Scotland, and while we do that from Edinburgh the fact that we might have a presence of some members in a stable based, say, in Glasgow can only be a good thing.”

What is the general feeling around Faculty about this development?
“There is inevitably those who are uncertain about it, but that is inevitable with change. At the same time the vote in favour of the ability for these changes to be made was unanimous last October, which I believe reflects a general feeling within the Faculty that is positive about the things that are happening. For all the changes that are happening, the Faculty remains strong and confident and I feel that what is happening will be to its benefit.”

Will the reorganisation of specialist stables create a period of unrest at Faculty?
“It is possible but I don’t think it will create too much unrest. We are in a position of change but once that change has been accepted, accommodated and people have gotten used to it I would like to think thatthe transition will be smooth.
At the root of this we are all individual practitioners and in competition with each other. We are not like firms of solicitors who form partnerships that can break up. That is no criticism of solicitors, but our arrangement even with devolution are not the same as that and I would like to think that devolution would not give rise to any significant difficulties.”

How do you think the marketing of individual stables will be embraced in Scotland?
“It is really for each stable to decide how they go about that. The principle of the arrangements that are in place now will let each stable decide whether to market or not to market themselves. There is no set requirement on anybody. As I said, my own stable has taken some steps towards this even before recent events and I think it is a natural way in which the legal world is moving. Solicitors market themselves very heavily now. We have some restrictions on our abilities to market but in the modern world where competition does not accept restrictive practises these are relatively minimal. It remains to be seen the extent to which people will take advantage of this.”

What has been the reaction among solicitors?
“I would like to think that they will all welcome this added flexibility.”

How will this major shake-up affect the Faculty’s public image?
“I don’t think it will affect the Faculty’s image at all, other than demonstrating that we are able to recognise modern circumstances and be flexible. It does not affect the Faculty of Advocates as an institution or the fundamental way in which people practice or the individual independence of each advocate, so I don’t think it affects the Faculty at all other than providing a community which I hope will be stronger and more positive.”

As Dean of the Faculty, how do you feel that these changes have come during your term?
“I feel that these sorts of changes are inevitable and although I don’t speak for FSL, the way in which it has been done in response to the way the legal marketplace is changing is extremely positive and of benefit to all. So, the answer to your question is I certainly do not feel that what is being done is of any disadvantage to the Faculty or members of Faculty.”

Any further changes or developments that are on the horizon?
“I don’t think so. In a sense the Faculty is not changing as such. Obviously the support services are changing and the Faculty itself will continue to evolve. One of the things that I certainly like about being an advocate, and I would like to think is a characteristic shared by all members of Faculty, is the ability to think for yourself and use your own initiative. Obviously, you have to do so within the rules, but this is not an organisation that looks to inhibit people from taking advantage of opportunities as individual advocates, and therefore it will be a situation that will continue to evolve, as we have seen electronic communications evolution in the last 20 years. So who knows what will happen in the next 20 years? I would like to think that members of Faculty and Faculty Services Limited will respond positively when those other opportunities come along.”