Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.Data accumulated from Consumers' Association surveys are designed to be used by the consumer. The surveys are, therefore, very specific in nature and the subjects covered diverse. The Data Archive holds 19 such surveys. Readers are asked to note that, with the exception of the surveys on the Telephone Service - 69004, 69016, respondents surveyed are self selected from subscribers to the Association's magazine Which? and so the surveys cannot singly be used in descriptive accounts of the British public. Surveys 69005-69012 cover various aspects of the housing experiences of Which? readers who moved house in 1967 and 1968. It is here particularly important to remember that the choice strategies and the resources of Which? readers are unlikely to be typical. Main Topics: Number of different matters over which respondent has consulted a solicitor in last 5 years; whether has a regular or family solicitor; number of different solicitors used over last 5 years (if more than one used, reason given, matters for which solicitor used (18 categories); method of choice of solicitor (29 categories); whether used solicitor for legal advice only, non-legal advice only, for non-advice matters (e.g. probate), if so, frequency of use, amount paid and opinion of utility service given are recorded. Also stated is whether respondent has been represented by a solicitor in any of 9 types of court. Information also includes; opinion on amount of money that respondent has had to pay solicitor (on a 6-point value scale), and whether respondent knew the probable cost at outset; time taken to complete legal matter (reason given if time was great), also whether respondent was satisfactorily informed as to what was going on during this time. Knowledge of statutary and voluntary legal advice schemes is tested and use made of advice under such schemes is recorded. Knowledge and use of specialist solicitors is also recorded. Data are also given on whether respondent has ever had cause to make a serious complaint against a solicitor. If yes, action s/he took (7 categories), and his/her opinion as to where the real fault lay (12 categories - e.g. system, individual solicitor etc.). Whether respondent has ever had a document signed or attested by an official person. If so, who (9 categories); opinion of ease of access to the Commissioner of Oaths and to the Notary Public (4-point scale in each case); whether respondent has bought or sold property in last 5 years without using services of a solicitor - reason for doing so is recorded (who helped respondent with legal work is also noted). A record is made of any other legal work respondent was involved in without the aid of a solicitor. Background Variables Marital status; occupation of self and spouse.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. The aim of this survey was to investigate the use of lawyers' services by the general public in England and Wales, at the request of the Royal Commission on Legal Services. Main Topics: Attitudinal/Behavioural Questions A) Household Questionnaire (each person aged 18+) Use of solicitor's/lawyer's services during 1977, number of matters advice was sought on, whether any other household member was involved, person most closely in contact, if more than two matters - exact nature of problems. B) Individual Questionnaire Number of occasions during year on which a solicitor's advice would have been of help, whether advice sought from anyone else, whether considered consulting a solicitor, reasons for not doing so. Whether used solicitor's services before 1977 and details, whether ever felt had cause for complaint against a solicitor and reasons, whether complaint carried through and outcome, whether satisfied, whether ever attempted to sue for professional negligence, whether experienced any difficulties. Knowledge of Law Society, Legal Aid. Method of choosing a solicitor if advice needed (non-users only). C) Use Questionnaire (sole or main contact between household and lawyer) Exact nature of problem for which advice was sought, lawyer's place of work, whether second opinion was sought and from whom, whether matter concerned self only/other only/self and other jointly. Whether received advice from anyone else outside household (who), whether it was suggested that respondent should engage solicitor, date of first consultation, whether solicitor had been previously consulted by members of household and date, why particular solicitor was originally chosen, whether approached directly by respondent, whether contact was direct or by telephone/letter, whether saw him alone and number of times, whether action taken or only advice given, details of advice and whether it has been followed, details of any action taken, whether solicitor explained things fully and kept respondent informed of progress, whether any indication of cost was given, whether problem resulted in a court or tribunal case and details, whether barrister involved, whether action is still continuing, if completed - outcome, opinion at time taken and of outcome, opinion of solicitors handling of matter, whether would consult same solicitor in future. Amount charged, and by whom paid, whether considered to be good value for money. One-stage stratified or systematic random sample parliamentary constituencies in England and Wales were stratified by region and population density and by car ownership (as an indicator of social composition); 125 were then selected randomly with probability proportional to size of electorate. Within each constituency, 2 polling districts were selected randomly with p.p.s. and within each district 40 private addresses were randomly selected from the electoral registers. (In addition, special measures were taken to cover private addresses not appearing in the electoral registers)

A. Usecase/Applications possible with the data:

1. Keep yourself updated- You can fetch and store daily updates of legal cases from multiple courts of your choice, allowing you to be informed about ongoing and pending cases.

2. Keep a check on your clients- You can make searches about your clients by using their names or case numbers to see if their legal cases are open across multiple courts. You can also build your client base as you go along.

3. Systematize your services- Fetch, store, and organize data of various legal cases from multiple sources of your choice to systematically optimize your services by searching for repeated clients or cases. You can do so by a. Searching for your client in multiple databases b. Grouping similar pending legal cases c. Putting forth your service for cases that lack attorneys

How does it work?

• Analyze sample data
• Customize parameters to suit your needs
• Add to your projects
• Contact support for further customization

This dataset was created through an anonymous survey of solicitors in England and Wales, conducted between 12 November 2019 and 13 January 2020. Respondents answered a series of questions regarding their use of AI technology, as well as their training for and attitudes to the use of technology in their work. After discarding partial responses, the dataset comprises a total of 353 valid responses.The proposed research will explore the potential and limitations of using artificial intelligence (AI) in support of legal services. AI's capabilities have made enormous recent leaps; many expect it to transform how the economy operates. In particular, activities relying on human knowledge to create value, insulated until now from mechanisation, are facing dramatic change. Amongst these are professional services, such as law. Like other professions, legal services contribute to the economy both through revenues of service providers and through benefits provided to clients. For large business clients, who can choose which legal regime will govern their affairs, UK legal services are an export good. For small businesses and citizens, working within the domestic legal system, UK legal services affect costs directly. Yet unlike other professions, the legal system has a dual role in society. Beyond the law's role in governing economic order, the legal system is more fundamentally a structure for social order. It sets out rules agreed on by society, and also the limits of politicians' ability to enact these rules. Consequently, the stakes for AI's implementation in UK legal services are high. If mishandled, it could threaten both economic success and governance more generally. Yet if executed effectively, it is an opportunity to improve legal services not only for export but also for citizens and domestic small businesses. Our research seeks to identify how constraints on the implementation of AI in legal services can be relaxed to unlock its potential for good. One major challenge is the need for 'complementary' adjustments. Adopting a disruptive new technology like AI requires changes in skills, training, and working practices, without which the productivity gains will be muted. We will investigate training and educational needs for lawyers' engagement with technology and programmers' engagement with law. With private sector partners, we will develop education and training packages that respond to these needs for delivery by both universities and private-sector firms. We will investigate emerging business models deploying AI in law, and identify best practice in governance and strategy. Finally, we will compare skills training and technology transfer in the UK with countries such as the US, Hong Kong and Singapore, and ask what UK policymakers can learn from these competitors. To the extent that these issues are also faced by other high-value professional services, these parts of our results will also have relevance for them. However, the dual role of the legal system poses unique challenges that justify a research package focusing primarily on this sector. There are constitutional limits to how far law's operation can be adjusted for economic reasons: we term this second constraint 'legitimacy'. We will map how automation in dispute resolution might trigger constitutional legal challenges, how these challenges relate to types of dispute resolution technology and types of claim, and use the resulting matrix to identify opportunities for maximum benefit from automation in dispute resolution. A third constraint is the limits of technological possibility. AI systems rely on machine learning, which reaches answers by identifying patterns in very large amounts of data. Its limitations are the size of the datasets needed, and its inability to provide an explanation for how the answer was reached. This poses particular difficulties for law, where many applications require or benefit from reasons being given. We will explore the possibility for frontier AI technologies to deliver legal reasoning. The research will involve a mix of disciplinary inputs, reflecting the multi-faceted nature of the problem: Law, Computer Science, Economics, Education, Management and Political Economy. Working closely with private-sector partners will ensure our research benefits from insights into, and testing against, real requirements. The survey was run anonymously using the Qualtrics platform. Invitations to participate were distributed by email to 10,000 randomly-selected solicitors. In order to increase survey participation, subsequent survey invitations were sent to under-represented groups of respondents. Further details of survey methodology, participant information, and the survey questions are included in the data documentation.

Data collection comprises two parts, reflecting the two parts of the study. Part one comprises a database of 400 or so ABSs licensed by the Solicitors Regulatory Authority (SRA) in which their key characteristics are recorded. This includes: name of firm, location, legal status, sector origin, total number of people in firm, total number of managers approved by the SRA, total number of solicitors in firm, external investment. Part two comprises transcripts of 18 interviews with ABS firms and a small number of investors. In 2007, the UK government introduced the Legal Services Act 2007 in England and Wales, which removed historic restrictions relating to the financing, management and ownership of legal practices. Breaking with normative tradition, the Act permits non-lawyer ownership and management of law firms through the introduction of a new organizational form – ‘Alternative Business Structures’ (ABS). Despite generating extensive international commentary and controversy, academic research on ABSs is virtually non-existent; an oversight that is particularly intriguing since ABSs symbolise a radical departure from the professional partnership – the traditional structure through which lawyers organize themselves. This mixed-method study addresses this gap and represents the first study examining the ABS population and its impact on the legal services sector. Phase One: The study was undertaken in two phases. Phase one entailed compiling a database of 400 ABS firms which were licensed by the Solicitors Regulatory Authority between 2012 and 31st August 2015. As well as presenting a detailed profile of the key characteristics of these entities, Phase one examined the degree to which ABSs has resulted in a change in the solicitor firm population and the degree to which non-lawyer providers have entered the sector. It also explored the extent to which the ABS population has adopted the two innovations that differentiate them from the traditional professional partnership: the appointment of non-lawyers as owners/managers of law firms and the ability to raise external investment (e.g. from private equity firms, stock flotation). In exploring these innovations Phase one assessed the degree to which proposals considered to be radical are producing radical change. Phase Two: The second phase entailed qualitative interviews with ABS firms that had accessed external investment and a small number of private equity investors. Eighteen interviews were conducted and they explored motives for accessing investment and ways in which management practices had changed. Phase 1: A Database of ASBs The database is confined to ABSs licensed between March 2012 when the SRA first started issuing licenses and 31 August 2015. It is based on archival data encompassing a range of media documents and the collection of routine data complied from several sources. A key aim of creating a database of ABS firms was to identify the types of firms that had chosen to do so, and to record their key characteristics in order to ascertain similarities and differences within the population and how they differed from the wider solicitor firm population. The development of the database involved a number of steps. We started with the SRA’s online register of ABS firms, which provides basic information about each firm. From this, we were able to identify the location of the headquarters ABS firms, their legal status (i.e. LLP, limited company), and whether they were part of publicly quoted companies. We then turned to an online directory compiled by the Law Society, called ‘Find a solicitor’, which is based on data supplied by the SRA and provides details about the organizations and people providing legal services in England and Wales. A profile page is created for each organization, which includes contact details, identifies the type of firm it is (ABS or recognized body) and contains links to other pages providing more detailed information about the firm such as that relating to ‘people’. This includes a list of ‘SRA Approved Managers’, that is, individuals who typically assume the position of Partner, Member or Director and which are regulated by the SRA as being accountable to their organization. In ABS firms, ‘SRA Approved Managers’ include non-lawyers and the online directory provided details of these individuals. We also used the Law Society’s directory to ascertain the size of ABS firms as measured by the number of solicitors and the number of partners (including the number of non-lawyer partners). We also searched the internet for new stories relating to each ABS firm. Although the formation of ABSs was occasionally reported in the national press, most stories originated in trade press, notably, Legal Futures, The Lawyer, and the Solicitors Journal. Taking each firm in turn, we looked for all new stories relating to its formation and supplemented this with any data available from other sources, such as firm websites and sites providing basic searches of companies. We used these news stories to populate further the database where we coded information about whether they were new entrants, conversions, their motivations for becoming an ABS, and attitudes about external investment. This was an iterative process and we revised the coding framework as we uncovered data about different types of ABS firms that did not fit the original categories. Phase 2: Qualitative Interviews In the second phase of the study, our aim was to focus specifically on ABSs that had secured external investment. The initial idea was to four or five in-depth case studies to get a detailed understanding of how these firms operate. However, it as it proved difficult to gain access, we revised our research strategy. Subsequently, we contacted all the ABSs with external investment and private equity investors that had shown interest in investing in the legal services sector to find out about their experiences. We secured 18 interviews altogether. Within the ABS firms, these were undertaken with Directors and partners of the Board / Senior Management team. Typically, they tended to be commercial directors or those with an outward facing role and familiar with undertaking interviews with media. They were willing to participate in the interview because they were interested in the research and reported that colleagues would uninterested and/or too busy to do an interview.

This dataset is a list of those items of spend that have been allowed in Treasury Solicitor’s Department since the announcement (24 May 2010) of five cross-government moratoria: ICT spend above £1m; Advertising & Marketing; consultancy; Property leases & lease extensions; and Civil Service recruitment.

This data set contains qualitative data collected on the career and work experiences of paralegals in five UK law firms. It comprises a dataset of 79 interviews with paralegals, lawyers, members of professional bodies and educators across the UK, specifically England and Northern Ireland. The interviews were conducted either in person or on the phone, average around one hour, were audio recorded and transcribed. The interview schedule included questions on their career journeys and critical career moments, how they perceive career mobility and career success as well as the challenges and advantages of their role. In addition, participant drawings from 28 paralegals were collected, where participants were asked to visually express their experience of their role. One of the key developments in professions over the last decade has been the rise of paraprofessional labour. Given the scarcity of research in this area, the aim of this ESRC Future Research Leader's project is to investigate how paraprofessionals experience working and making a career in contemporary professional environments. Specifically, it focuses on how paraprofessionals experience and attempt to reconcile the tensions of being situated in a changing professional world, characterised by technologicalisation and commodification on one hand, and traditional ways of organising, based on professional expertise and privileged status, on the other. The insights generated will be particularly relevant for the understanding of contemporary professional work and professional careers for both, academics and practitioners. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 79 participants involving paralegals, lawyers, members of professional bodies and educators. 28 participant drawings with paralegals were further collected. The data collection period lasted from May 2017 to February 2019. In total, five law firms participated in this study. These firms were purposely selected in that they all employed paralegals in their firms, allowing for comparability, but also represented different geographical areas across the UK (i.e. England and Wales, North and South) and different organisational approaches to managing paralegals to capture differences in practices.

The data was gathered through: 1) Self-completion survey questionnaires (which were sent to the Heads of litigation departments and family law firms from there relevant sampling frames drawn from the legal directories). The primary quantitative data (from the self-completion survey) should provide information about the statics of the cross-border litigation pattern (e.g. volume; type of cases). 2) Semi-structured interviews which were conducted with legal practitioners in England and Wales. The primary qualitative data (from the semi-structured Interviews) should provide information about the parties’ strategies (i.e. the dynamics of the cross-border litigation pattern). The purpose of this pilot study was to measure the expected initial impact of Brexit on parties’ strategies which would in turn have a bearing on the litigants’ access to legal remedies (as well as on settlement dynamics) in cross-border disputes. The newly generated data should enable researchers to consider the correlation between a possible change in the legal landscape and the parties’ alternative strategies as well as to analyse the relationship between the litigants’ tactics and private parties’ access to justice in cross-border cases before the English and Welsh courts. On this basis, it would be possible to identify the main issues which would need to be addressed by the UK policy-makers as priority with a view to setting up a well-functioning private international law regime in a post-Brexit context. 1) The quantitative data was gathered from the litigation departments or the family law units of all law firms which featured in the relevant sampling frame. The sampling frames for the relevant law firms (re the quantitative survey) was drawn, in April 2018, from the Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners. In family law, the sampling frame included 82 family law firms. They were all approached. 14 responses were received back, with the response rate being approximately 17%. In commercial law, a sampling frame of 144 law firms was drawn. Again, all of them were approached. 28 responses were received which amounted to a response rate of 19.44%. 2) The sampling frame for the purposes of the interviews was based on the one for the EUPILLAR project (See Cross-Border Litigation in Europe, Hart 2017). The names of the actively practising barristers were drawn from the judgments rendered in the EU PIL cases, as identified for the EUPILLAR databases. Lists with names of solicitors were drawn to include the names of the leading individuals listed on the Legal 500 and Chambers and Partners. The solicitors’ lists intended to represent both London lawyers and those working elsewhere in England and Wales by adding names of solicitors from regional law firms and branches of large law firms. After any duplicates were eliminated and the relevant sampling frame was updated to reflect any changes in the status of legal practitioners, the sampling framework included: 393 barristers (civil and commercial law); 217 barristers (family law); 457 solicitors (specialising in commercial law) and 396 solicitors (family law). The potential interview respondents were randomly selected from each category, and invited to take part in the pilot study.

Database of all Forced Marriage Protection Order cases in family courts. Details include name, sex and address of applicant, personal details of third parties, details of solicitors involved (if any) and recorded outcomes.

This dataset has been superseded The newGeoSure Insurance Product (newGIP) provides the potential insurance risk due to natural ground movement. It incorporates the combined effects of the 6 GeoSure hazards on (low-rise) buildings. This data is available as vector data, 25m gridded data or alternatively linked to a postcode database – the Derived Postcode Database. A series of GIS (Geographical Information System) maps show the most significant hazard areas. The ground movement, or subsidence, hazards included are landslides, shrink-swell clays, soluble rocks, running sands, compressible ground and collapsible deposits. The newGeoSure Insurance Product uses the individual GeoSure data layers and evaluates them using a series of processes including statistical analyses and expert elicitation techniques to create a derived product that can be used for insurance purposes such as identifying and estimating risk and susceptibility. The Derived Postcode Database (DPD) contains generalised information at a postcode level. The DPD is designed to provide a ‘summary’ value representing the combined effects of the GeoSure dataset across a postcode sector area. It is available as a GIS point dataset or a text (.txt) file format. The DPD contains a normalised hazard rating for each of the 6 GeoSure themes hazards (i.e. each GeoSure theme has been balanced against each other) and a combined unified hazard rating for each postcode in Great Britain. The combined hazard rating for each postcode is available as a standalone product. The Derived Postcode Database is available in a point data format or text file format. It is available in a range of GIS formats including ArcGIS (.shp), ArcInfo Coverages and MapInfo (.tab). More specialised formats may be available but may incur additional processing costs. The newGeoSure Insurance Product dataset has been created as vector data but is also available as a raster grid. This data is available in a range of GIS formats, including ArcGIS (.shp), ArcInfo coverage’s and MapInfo (.tab). More specialised formats may be available but may incur additional processing costs. Data for the newGIP is provided for national coverage across Great Britain. The newGeoSure Insurance Product dataset is produced for use at 1:50 000 scale providing 50 m ground resolution. This dataset has been specifically developed for the insurance of low-rise buildings. The GeoSure datasets have been developed to identify the potential hazard for low-rise buildings and those with shallow foundations of less than 2 m deep. The identification of ground instability and other geological hazards can assist regional planners; rapidly identifying areas with potential problems and aid local government offices in making development plans by helping to define land suited to different uses. Other users of these data may include developers, homeowners, solicitors, loss adjusters, the insurance industry, architects and surveyors. Version 7 released June 2015.