header-logo header-logo

In-house and under pressure?

16 March 2023
Categories: Legal News , Profession , Legal services , Regulatory
printer mail-detail
One in 20 corporate counsel have come under pressure to suppress or ignore information in conflict with their regulatory obligations, according to research by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).

Moreover, one in ten have found their regulatory obligations compromised while trying to meet their employer’s priorities, particularly when faced with heavy workloads, the In-house solicitors thematic review found. Some senior in-house counsel acknowledged that balancing regulatory responsibilities while maintaining effective working relationships can be challenging.

However, most of the more than 1,200 in-house lawyers responding to the survey felt their independence was valued in their organisation, and most said they would feel comfortable advising their employer against unethical action. The majority were confident they could act ethically even if under pressure from their employer.

The SRA concluded some in-house teams need to have formal policies and controls in place to guard against such pressure. It committed to publishing new guidance for the in-house sector, launching dedicated online resources and running events to share best practice and get further feedback on areas where more support is needed.

Paul Philip, SRA chief executive, said: ‘The in-house sector continues to grow, with 8,000 more in-house solicitors than a decade ago.

‘They now make up around a fifth of practising solicitors. The findings of this review are generally encouraging. Yet a minority struggle.

‘We heard frequently that heavy workloads were a significant challenge. That is a problem if it means some in-house solicitors struggle to commit appropriate time to training or careful consideration of key decisions.’

Philip said the review also found one in ten in-house lawyers do not have enough time to keep their skills and knowledge up to date.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Red Lion Chambers—Maurice MacSweeney

Red Lion Chambers—Maurice MacSweeney

Set creates new client and business development role amid growth

Kingsley Napley—Tim Lowles

Kingsley Napley—Tim Lowles

Sports disputes practice launchedwith partner appointment

mfg Solicitors—Tom Evans

mfg Solicitors—Tom Evans

Tax and succession planning offering expands with returning partner

NEWS
The rank of King’s Counsel (KC) has been awarded to 96 barristers, and no solicitors, in the latest silk round
Can a chief constable be held responsible for disobedient officers? Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth, professor of public law at De Montfort University, examines a Court of Appeal ruling that answers firmly: yes
Neurotechnology is poised to transform contract law—and unsettle it. Writing in NLJ this week, Harry Lambert, barrister at Outer Temple Chambers and founder of the Centre for Neurotechnology & Law, and Dr Michelle Sharpe, barrister at the Victorian Bar, explore how brain–computer interfaces could both prove and undermine consent
Comparators remain the fault line of discrimination law. In this week's NLJ, Anjali Malik, partner at Bellevue Law, and Mukhtiar Singh, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, review a bumper year of appellate guidance clarifying how tribunals should approach ‘actual’ and ‘evidential’ comparators. A new six-stage framework stresses a simple starting point: identify the treatment first
In cross-border divorces, domicile can decide everything. In NLJ this week, Jennifer Headon, legal director and head of international family, Isobel Inkley, solicitor, and Fiona Collins, trainee solicitor, all at Birketts LLP, unpack a Court of Appeal ruling that re-centres nuance in jurisdiction disputes. The court held that once a domicile of choice is established, the burden lies on the party asserting its loss
back-to-top-scroll