Dan Adams of Arbor Law argues that the freelance revolution in law is far bigger than the official figures would suggest.

Following the introduction by the Solicitors Regulation Authority of the freelance solicitor model in 2019, the number of registered freelancers increased from around 300 in 2019 to 650 in 2024. But that figure only scratches the surface.

Far more lawyers are working independently in practice, even if they don’t tick the official boxes. The freelance revolution in law is bigger, and more complex, than the numbers suggest.

One of the most significant drivers of the increase in freelance lawyers was the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) reforms in 2019. These changes, particularly the introduction of the freelance solicitor model, made it easier for qualified solicitors to offer legal services independently without having to establish a regulated law firm.

This allowed more solicitors to become self-employed and offer reserved legal services directly to clients, provided they met the necessary criteria. Under the reforms, a freelance solicitor is “a self-employed solicitor who practises on their own and in their own name, does not employ anyone and is engaged directly by clients with fees payable directly to them without that practice being authorised.”

The choice facing the would-be freelancer is not as stark as the choice between the archaic model of the big city firm and the isolated struggle of the independent freelancer.

Although the emergence of this specific model is clear, a far greater range of lawyers are now operating as freelancers to one degree or another, even if they don’t fit the precise description above. The emergence of the gig economy in the legal services market has been underway for a long time.

Autonomous but precarious

While freelancing as a solicitor offers autonomy and flexibility, the potential challenges include financial uncertainty, the burden of business management, professional isolation and the need for constant client acquisition. Freelancers must be prepared to manage all aspects of running a legal business, from marketing and client relationships to ensuring compliance with complex legal and regulatory standards.

For many, challenges like these might appear too powerful a deterrent despite the desire for greater freedom and autonomy. But the choice facing the would-be freelancer is not as stark as the choice between the archaic model of the big city firm and the isolated struggle of the independent freelancer.

Best of both worlds

“Freelancer” captures a range of lawyers who operate under new business models via platforms that deliver many of the benefits of freelancing, but with the back-office functions and social networking opportunities of a traditional firm.

For example, a revenue-sharing model can offer a platform that connects a network of experienced lawyers who are self-employed but work under the banner of a firm. This resolves the hassle of complying with regulations, such as the need for professional indemnity insurance, and the platform provides many of the functions of a traditional firm as well as the opportunities for collaboration and social interaction you miss out on when going it alone. The idea is to offer the best of both worlds.

Sharing the benefits

This model is particularly appealing to the entrepreneurial lawyer. Under a model like the one above, revenue is split between the firm, the lawyer who brings in the work and the lawyer who carries out the work. It is therefore more lucrative for lawyers skilled in the art of winning business.

Whereas a freelancer working alone has a limit to how much work they can take on at any one time, an entrepreneurial lawyer working for a firm that operates a revenue share model can share their additional work with their colleagues and continue to make money on these projects depending on how the revenue is divided.

An entrepreneurial lawyer working for a firm that operates a revenue share model can share their additional work with their colleagues and continue to make money on these projects.

This model is also increasingly appealing to clients. While certain areas of legal work like large multi-national mergers will always remain the preserve of large city firms, there are many other areas of legal practice where the traditional firm is under threat.

Cost-effective capability

Without the high overheads of traditional firms, alternative legal services providers can offer the same high-quality legal services without the rates of the big city firms. Although clients might still be less willing to trust sole practitioners, they are increasingly realising the benefits of placing their trust in law firms with alternative business models.

The SRA’s data confirms that more solicitors are choosing to work independently, but those figures tell only part of the story. A growing number of lawyers are moving beyond traditional firms without going entirely solo, instead joining platforms that offer both autonomy and support.

It’s this shift in how legal services are structured, rather than the 2019 regulatory changes alone, that will have the more lasting impact on the profession.

Visit

Arbor Law

Connect with Dan Adams via LinkedIn