header-logo header-logo

Misconduct rules updated

09 September 2022
Issue: 7993 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Regulatory
printer mail-detail
Solicitors have been issued with guidance on sexual misconduct, following a rise in complaints made to the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA)

The guidance highlights that intoxication is not a defence, and covers factors such as unequal power relationships, career incentives or disincentives, social media, consensual workplace relationships that become non-consensual and sexualised comments.

The guidance, published last week, illustrates how far a solicitor’s professional obligations apply to their private lives, noting serious non-consensual sexual touching in situations ‘totally removed from legal practice’ and with no criminal proceedings attached may still amount to professional misconduct. It refers to the case of former Freshfields partner Ryan Beckwith, Beckwith v SRA [2020] EWHC 3231 (Admin), in which the High Court endorsed regulation of professionals by reference to private conduct although it quashed the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal finding against Beckwith.

Since 2018, when the SRA issued a warning to law firms about the use of non-disclosure agreements, 251 reports of potential sexual misconduct have been made, compared to just 30 in the preceding five years. The SRA currently has 117 on-going investigations.

Paul Philip, SRA Chief Executive, said: ‘These can be sensitive and difficult issues and we want to be clear about our expectations, not least for firms, as people often come to us because they are dissatisfied with the way their firm has dealt with their concerns.’

The SRA also published guidance on its approach to criminal convictions connected with protests, demonstrations or matters of principle or social conscience. It said it had ‘broad discretion to consider the context’ and was unlikely to take regulatory action if there was no significant harm to others or damage to property involved. Other factors taken into consideration would be whether the offence undermined the rule of law or administration of justice (such as resisting arrest).
Issue: 7993 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Regulatory
printer mail-details

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
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
Early determination is no longer a novelty in arbitration. In NLJ this week, Gustavo Moser, arbitration specialist lawyer at Lexis+, charts the global embrace of summary disposal powers, now embedded in the Arbitration Act 1996 and mirrored worldwide. Tribunals may swiftly dismiss claims with ‘no real prospect of succeeding’, but only if fairness is preserved
back-to-top-scroll