Ruling in Carter-Ruck Solicitors and Mohamed Amersi v Solicitors Regulation Authority [2026] EWHC 2416 (KB) this week, Mr Justice Butcher held the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) does not have authority under s 44B, Solicitors Act 1974 to require solicitors to produce documents or information subject to legal professional privilege (LLP).
Both the defamation specialist firm and its client deny any wrongdoing and had sought to reach an arrangement where they could cooperate with the investigation while keeping the files confidential. However, no agreement was reached regarding the provision of documents, and the issue went to court.
The SRA argued the power to override LPP was implied in s 44B ‘whose statutory purpose would otherwise be stultified’. Concluding his judgment, however, Butcher J said the SRA had ‘not surmounted the “high threshold” for such an implication’.
Oliver Schneider-Sikorsky, partner at BCL Solicitors, which represented Carter-Ruck Solicitors and Amersi, said: ‘LPP is a fundamental right of every client.
‘The greater certainty provided by the decision benefits all clients by helping solicitors identify and safeguard privileged information while engaging constructively with regulatory requests.’
Claire Cross, partner at Corker Binning, said: ‘This is a huge blow to the SRA, which has long asserted that it must be able to review legally privileged material to properly investigate misconduct by solicitors.
‘This ruling will make its job far more difficult. In this case, Carter Ruck successfully argued that without explicit wording from Parliament, a regulator cannot simply claim an implied power to dismantle a cornerstone principle. Legal privilege protects a client’s right to be completely candid with their legal advisers, ensuring they get accurate legal advice without fear that their statements will later be used against them.’
