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

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll