header-logo header-logo

01 February 2013 / Tim Kerr , Charles Banner
Issue: 7546 / Categories: Features , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

How high a hurdle?

hires_7_3

What standard of proof must the SDT apply to allegations of solicitors’ misconduct, ask Tim Kerr QC & Charles Banner

Under r 7.7 of the Solicitors (Disciplinary Proceedings) Rules 2011, where the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) makes a disciplinary decision itself without referring the matter to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT), the civil standard is expressly applied. The rules are silent, however, as to the applicable standard in cases referred to the SDT. This contrasts with the rules governing proceedings before the Bar Disciplinary Tribunal, which specify that the criminal standard of proof is to be applied (see reg 11 of the Disciplinary Tribunals Regulations 2009). In the absence of statutory provision for the SDT, it is for the common law to determine the applicable standard.

This issue was raised, but not decided, in Richards v The Law Society [2009] EWHC 2087 (Admin). In that case, the Law Society maintained that the criminal standard applied, while the SRA contended for the civil standard. Sir Anthony May held that the issue

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

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll