header-logo header-logo

Adjudicators ‘acting as investigators’

16 November 2022
Issue: 8003 / Categories: Legal News , Regulatory , Profession , Professional negligence
printer mail-detail
Solicitors have not been offered adequate safeguards since the Solicitors Regulatory Authority (SRA) took over professional misconduct fines in the summer, the Law Society has warned.

In July, the SRA’s fining powers for law firms and solicitors increased from £2,000 to £25,000, with the SRA planning to decide more cases of alleged misconduct in-house instead of referring them to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal. Alongside their increased powers, the SRA proposed additional safeguards to ensure its enforcement processes are sufficiently transparent and accountable. Its consultation, Financial penalties, ended in February 2022, and it has now set out its final position.

Commenting this week on the SRA’s plans, however, the Law Society said it had ‘serious concerns’ SRA adjudicators would be acting as ‘investigators rather than decision-makers’.

It also dubbed SRA proposals to increase fines against firms from a maximum of 2.5% to 5% of turnover ‘excessive and unjustified’.

Law Society president Lubna Shuja said: ‘Adjudicators, as SRA employees, have access to the regulator’s records and can see a solicitor’s past regulatory history.

‘This could prejudice their views and could lead to an unfair decision. We therefore suggest the information adjudicators can access be restricted to ensure a fairer process.

‘The SRA also proposes giving adjudicators sole discretion to invite witnesses to be interviewed to test their evidence and credibility. Adjudicators would then be acting as investigators and not decision-makers. The SRA also proposes that a respondent would not be present at such an inquisition. This cannot be fair.’

The SRA says increasing the fine threshold will reduce the cost, time and stress for those involved, while raising the turnover threshold will ensure fines are proportionate and act as an effective deterrent. It said it received ‘general support’ for its increase in fining powers and ‘mixed views’ on raising the threshold for firms, in consultation feedback.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Gilson Gray—Linda Pope

Partner joins family law team inLondon

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Jackson Lees Group—five promotions

Private client division announces five new partners

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Taylor Wessing—Max Millington

Banking and finance team welcomes partner in London

NEWS
The landmark Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd—along with Rukhadze v Recovery Partners—redefine fiduciary duties in commercial fraud. Writing in NLJ this week, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley analyses the implications of the rulings
Barristers Ben Keith of 5 St Andrew’s Hill and Rhys Davies of Temple Garden Chambers use the arrest of Simon Leviev—the so-called Tinder Swindler—to explore the realities of Interpol red notices, in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] has upended assumptions about who may conduct litigation, warn Kevin Latham and Fraser Barnstaple of Kings Chambers in this week's NLJ. But is it as catastrophic as first feared?
Lord Sales has been appointed to become the Deputy President of the Supreme Court after Lord Hodge retires at the end of the year
Limited liability partnerships (LLPs) are reportedly in the firing line in Chancellor Rachel Reeves upcoming Autumn budget
back-to-top-scroll