The commission was led by Sir Henry Benson, and also had a sub-committee looking at legal education, which was led by
R.G. Dahrendorf. The commission's report was presented to Parliament in October 1979. It did not propose any radical changes, with one editorial describing it as "characterised by an over-anxiety not to offend the professional establishment". It also upheld the idea of a split profession (one with both solicitors and barristers, in contrast to a
fused profession), saying that:
"with regard to the administration of justice, the weight of evidence is strongly to the effect that a two-branch profession is more likely than a fused one to ensure the high quality of advocacy that is indispensable, so long as our system remains in its present form, to secure the proper quality of justice" The report also rejected the suggestion to allow solicitors
rights of audience in the
High Court The report concluded that the practice of law was a profession, and that a profession had to be independent of government, because without independence the interests of a client cannot be a primary consideration. It did not challenge the existing professional self-regulation through organisations such as the
Law Society and Bar Council. The Commission did recommend an examination of the court and legal procedures to see if time and money could be saved for the parties involved. The report also left the
conveyancing monopoly of solicitors intact, although it did pave the way for the system of
licensed conveyancers established by the
Access to Justice Act 1975. In other ways, however, the report was revolutionary – it recommended a Council of Legal Services to advise the
Lord Chancellor (something eventually realised in the
Lord Chancellor's Advisory Committee on Legal Education and Conduct), a movement of advice services such as the
Citizens Advice Bureau into the legal fold, and a single unified body to regulate
barristers, rather than a fragmentation between the
Bar Council and
Inns of Court. ==Impact==