Advanced

Regleringen av advokatreklam - en jämförande studie mellan USA och Sverige

Almer, Johan (2009)
Department of Law
Abstract
This thesis compares and evaluates the regulatory measures of the United States' and Sweden's Bar Associations in regard to attorney advertising. The comparative study evaluates the American- and the Swedish Bar Associations' Model Rules of Professional Conduct from a consumer perspective. The historical evolution of the Bar in America and Sweden and their respective control over the legal services markets has greatly influenced the regulation of attorney advertising. From a prohibitive stance at the beginning of the 20th century, American restrictions were first lifted by the United States Supreme Court in 1977 and successively liberalised until altered majorities in the court brought the deregulation process to a standstill in 1995. The... (More)
This thesis compares and evaluates the regulatory measures of the United States' and Sweden's Bar Associations in regard to attorney advertising. The comparative study evaluates the American- and the Swedish Bar Associations' Model Rules of Professional Conduct from a consumer perspective. The historical evolution of the Bar in America and Sweden and their respective control over the legal services markets has greatly influenced the regulation of attorney advertising. From a prohibitive stance at the beginning of the 20th century, American restrictions were first lifted by the United States Supreme Court in 1977 and successively liberalised until altered majorities in the court brought the deregulation process to a standstill in 1995. The Swedish Bar also prohibited attorney regulation, but after failing to establish an attorney monopoly for legal services, periodic deregulation was deemed necessary to keep the Bar competitive. Sweden's entry into the European Community in 1994 crippled the Bar's last significant regulatory efforts through the harmonisation pressures brought on by EC-competition law. The United States maintain a separate regulation for attorney advertising, though empirical support for the regulation remains unclear. Economic analysis of the regulatory models shows that the American system inadequately addresses the moral hazard-problems in legal services by restricting consumer access to information through advertising. The Swedish system subjects attorneys to general advertising rules in addition to the Model Rules. The attorney advertising rules are imprecise fragments of the former restrictions to the confusion of attorneys and consumers alike. The author of this thesis contends that a separate regulation of attorney advertising should only be considered where empirical support can be found to establish a systematic market failure and questions that separate advertising rules for legal services are necessary. Given that advertising restrictions have been shown to make legal services more expensive, it is undesirable that Bar Associations should be allowed to regulate the market for legal services. In conclusion the author recommends a removal of attorney advertising restrictions from the ABA Model Rules in the United States as well as in Sweden. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Almer, Johan
supervisor
organization
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Komparativ rätt, Marknadsrätt, Processrätt
language
Swedish
id
1555583
date added to LUP
2010-03-08 15:55:17
date last changed
2010-03-08 15:55:17
@misc{1555583,
  abstract     = {This thesis compares and evaluates the regulatory measures of the United States' and Sweden's Bar Associations in regard to attorney advertising. The comparative study evaluates the American- and the Swedish Bar Associations' Model Rules of Professional Conduct from a consumer perspective. The historical evolution of the Bar in America and Sweden and their respective control over the legal services markets has greatly influenced the regulation of attorney advertising. From a prohibitive stance at the beginning of the 20th century, American restrictions were first lifted by the United States Supreme Court in 1977 and successively liberalised until altered majorities in the court brought the deregulation process to a standstill in 1995. The Swedish Bar also prohibited attorney regulation, but after failing to establish an attorney monopoly for legal services, periodic deregulation was deemed necessary to keep the Bar competitive. Sweden's entry into the European Community in 1994 crippled the Bar's last significant regulatory efforts through the harmonisation pressures brought on by EC-competition law. The United States maintain a separate regulation for attorney advertising, though empirical support for the regulation remains unclear. Economic analysis of the regulatory models shows that the American system inadequately addresses the moral hazard-problems in legal services by restricting consumer access to information through advertising. The Swedish system subjects attorneys to general advertising rules in addition to the Model Rules. The attorney advertising rules are imprecise fragments of the former restrictions to the confusion of attorneys and consumers alike. The author of this thesis contends that a separate regulation of attorney advertising should only be considered where empirical support can be found to establish a systematic market failure and questions that separate advertising rules for legal services are necessary. Given that advertising restrictions have been shown to make legal services more expensive, it is undesirable that Bar Associations should be allowed to regulate the market for legal services. In conclusion the author recommends a removal of attorney advertising restrictions from the ABA Model Rules in the United States as well as in Sweden.},
  author       = {Almer, Johan},
  keyword      = {Komparativ rätt,Marknadsrätt,Processrätt},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Regleringen av advokatreklam - en jämförande studie mellan USA och Sverige},
  year         = {2009},
}