header-logo header-logo

12 February 2015
Issue: 7640 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Law Society storage ruling

The High Court has held that the Law Society can destroy files relating to poorly performing firms which cost it £344,000 per year to store.

The 1.5 million files come from Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) interventions into law firms. The Law Society archived the files but could not destroy them due to concerns over practice money held under statutory trust.

Delivering judgment in The Law Society (Solicitors Regulation Authority) [2015] EWHC 166 (Ch), Iain Purvis QC said the court must weigh “the cost and inconvenience of retaining the files, together with the data protection risks involved in doing so” against “the risk of damage to clients through the loss of documents of real value if the files are destroyed”.

He made an order that would allow the immediate backlog of files to be destroyed and for future files to be destroyed after seven years.

Issue: 7640 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—William Hallett & Lorna Scully

Anthony Collins—William Hallett & Lorna Scully

Anthony Collins hires two talented legal directors

Switalskis—five appointments

Switalskis—five appointments

Firm expands national abuse compensation team

Mathys & Squire—nine promotions

Mathys & Squire—nine promotions

IP firm announces new partners and senior promotions across UK offices

NEWS
A High Court ruling has sent a jolt through the legal profession after a newly qualified solicitor used an internal AI tool to produce court correspondence containing a fabricated legal citation
A significant data privacy ruling has clarified what counts as valid consent under UK data protection law
Executors may be overlooking billions of pounds in estate assets hidden in forgotten investments and misplaced share certificates
Britain’s booming non-surgical cosmetics market is operating in what some critics describe as a regulatory ‘Wild West’
Family contact disputes are becoming an increasingly prominent feature of Court of Protection litigation
back-to-top-scroll