header-logo header-logo

Misconduct outside of legal practice (Pt 2)

18 November 2020 / John Gould
Issue: 7911 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice , Disciplinary&grievance procedures
printer mail-detail
32370
John Gould considers the characteristics which should mark outside conduct as professional misconduct

In brief

  • Existing concepts and approach can obscure the basis upon which the facts of outside conduct should be considered.
  • Whether tribunal decisions and regulators’ policies apply principles consistently and transparently.

In the first part of this article I suggested that in order for conduct outside of practice to be the proper concern of a regulator, it should be both serious and demonstrably relevant to practice. The standard should be that required of a solicitor outside of practice, not a well-behaved member of the public and that standard has to be set on the basis of the requirements of practice not any notion of general ethical worth.

I also cast doubt on two concepts commonly used in allegations to establish a connection between outside conduct and legal practice. These were rules requiring the upholding of the rule of law and the maintenance of public confidence in lawyers.

In this second part, I am

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll