header-logo header-logo

Don’t put it in writing?

12 February 2016 / Peter Breakey
Issue: 7686 / Categories: Features , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

Peter Breakey reports on the SRA clampdown on private correspondence

A recent decision of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) has provided a useful reminder to solicitors of the need to exercise caution whenever they send an e-mail, even if they believe they are engaged in private correspondence. The same decision also considered the relationship between principles and outcomes in the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) Code of Conduct 2011 (the Code) and raised what some may consider to be the rather menacing and Orwellian prospect of the SRA pursuing solicitors for “thought crime”.

Case No. 11380-2015, Solicitors Regulation Authority v Brough, Chaudhary and Story, concerned three former partners of London firm, OH Parsons and Partners. Over a period of around 12 months in 2010 and 2011, while they were still at the firm, they had exchanged a series of e-mails which contained “inappropriate and offensive” comments. The precise contents of the e-mails were not disclosed but they included “abusive, disparaging and insulting comments about colleagues”, contained “sexual and racial references” and included comments about

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll