Background:
Interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is central to effective care around the globe. This practice is structured by an array of laws, regulations and policies but the literature on their impact on IPC is scarce. Using the managerialization of law theory as pilar, a novel mixed-method approach was design.

Methods:
The study of the legal framework of IPC must be seen in a global way. A design was built using a convergent parallel mixed-method approach. One arm was a legal analysis of all the elements coming from all relevant legal field and the second arm was a survey to clinicians to complete perceptions, knowledge and prioritization of law in the clinicians themselves.

Results:
Analyzing each fragment in isolation only gives an incomplete portrait due to the interrelation between several elements. The legal knowledge and perception of the law of health professionals are quite different from those of lawyers. Their perception of the increase in responsibility when working in a team, of the standard of practice which is determined by the usual continuum of care of their institution, of the team liability and their hierarchical vision are indicators of their ""with the law"" position. This attitude is the result of several interrelated elements: an intrinsic ignorance of the principles of liability and case law, an implicit bias in the acquisition of this knowledge from the main sources of knowledge and infrequent interaction with the legal system that is limited to conflict and adversarial situations.

Conclusion:
This study potentially can impact the outcome of any legal change. A single change in the law will only have limited effects if it is not accompanied by teaching of the principles of law and a thorough examination of the clinical practice legal framework.