Services A-Z     Pricing

Changes to the ICAS Code of Ethics – what do the changes mean for ICAS firms?

2 July 2026

In our first blog, we discussed the changes made to the ICAS Code of Ethics and what those changes mean for members.
 

The 2026 updates to the ICAS Code of Ethics have significant implications that extend well beyond individual members. For firms, the strengthened framework around professional behaviour raises important questions about how they respond when a member employed by or practising within the firm may have fallen short of the expected standard. Those questions touch on reporting obligations, internal investigations, and the practical steps firms need to take to ensure they are meeting their own regulatory duties.

ICAS member firms are not bystanders

ICAS member firms carry their own obligations, and the 2026 changes make it more important than ever that accountancy firms understand what those obligations require of them in the context of behavioural misconduct.

The starting point is the duty to report. Member firms have a duty to report conduct which might fall foul of the ICAS regulations to the conduct department. It is not a discretionary matter; where a firm becomes aware of facts or matters which, in its reasonable opinion, indicate that a member may be liable to disciplinary action, the obligation to report arises. The strengthened framework around professional behaviour under paragraph 115.1 A2 means that this duty is now directly engaged by a wider range of conduct than may previously have been appreciated, including conduct at work social events, on business trips, and in other settings that fall within a member's professional life.

The practical consequence is that firms can no longer treat behavioural misconduct as purely an internal HR matter. Where the conduct in question involves an ICAS member, the firm must consider whether a referral to ICAS is required, and that consideration needs to be made carefully and with appropriate advice.

The reporting obligation in practice

The duty to report does not necessarily require a firm to make an immediate referral to ICAS the moment a concern arises. Where a firm has an internal reporting or investigation process, it is reasonable to direct concerns through that process in the first instance. A firm may await the outcome of an internal investigation before deciding whether to report to ICAS, provided that decision is made in good faith and without unreasonable delay.

However, firms should be aware that delay can itself become a problem. The decision about whether and when to report should therefore be kept under active review throughout any internal process.

When an internal investigation is required

In many cases, a firm will need to conduct an internal investigation before it is in a position to assess whether a report to ICAS is warranted. An investigation is often an important and necessary step in that process. It allows the firm to establish the facts, assess the seriousness of the conduct, and make an informed decision about next steps.

However, conducting an internal investigation into behavioural misconduct is not straightforward, and firms should approach it with care. A poorly conducted investigation can undermine the firm's position, compromise the integrity of any subsequent regulatory proceedings, and expose the firm to additional risk. There are a number of important considerations that should be addressed before an investigation begins, including the following.

  • Establishing the core investigation group. The firm should identify at the outset who will be responsible for conducting the investigation. Those individuals should have no personal involvement in the matters under review and should be sufficiently senior to carry the necessary authority. In some cases, it may be appropriate to appoint external investigators, particularly where the conduct involves senior members of the firm or where there is a risk that internal investigators may be perceived as lacking independence.
     
  • Drafting terms of reference. Clear terms of reference should be agreed before the investigation commences. These should set out the scope of the investigation, the issues to be examined, the process to be followed, and the timescales involved. Well-drafted terms of reference help to ensure that the investigation remains focused and that its conclusions are capable of withstanding scrutiny.
     
  • Preserving evidence. Steps should be taken at an early stage to preserve relevant evidence, including emails, messages, documents, and any other records that may be material to the investigation. Failure to preserve evidence can seriously damage the credibility of the investigation.
     
  • Legal professional privilege. Firms should consider carefully whether legal professional privilege applies to the investigation or to parts of it. Firms should take advice on this question early, as decisions made at the outset of an investigation can affect whether privilege is available later.
     
  • Confidentiality and data protection. Investigations of this kind may involve the processing of personal data, and firms must ensure that they are complying with their obligations under data protection legislation throughout. Consideration should also be given to how confidentiality is managed during the investigation, both to protect the integrity of the process and to protect the individuals involved.
     
  • Criminal conduct. Where there is any possibility that the conduct under investigation may be criminal in nature, the firm must proceed with particular caution. It is essential to avoid taking steps that could interfere with any potential criminal investigation or prosecution. If there is any doubt about whether the conduct may be criminal, the firm should seek legal advice before proceeding further.

Applying the RITP test

When assessing whether the conduct of a member may fall within the scope of paragraph 115.1 A2, the relevant standard is the reasonable and informed third party (RITP) test. The question is not whether the firm considers the conduct to have been acceptable, but whether a reasonable and informed third party, with the relevant knowledge and experience to evaluate the conduct objectively, would be likely to conclude that it brings discredit to the profession.

Firms should apply this test when assessing the outcome of an internal investigation and when deciding whether a report to ICAS is required. Where the conduct, viewed objectively, would be likely to be regarded as falling below the standard expected of a chartered accountant in their professional life, the reporting obligation is likely to be engaged.

It is also worth bearing in mind that the RITP test applies regardless of the seniority of the member involved. The obligations under paragraph 115.1 A2 apply equally to partners, directors, managers, and more junior members of staff. Firms should resist any temptation to apply a different standard depending on the seniority or commercial importance of the individual concerned.

The importance of taking advice

Given the complexity of the issues involved, firms facing a potential conduct matter of this kind should seek legal advice at an early stage. The decisions made in the initial stages of a matter, including whether to investigate, how to structure that investigation, and when to report to ICAS, can have a significant bearing on how the matter develops and on the firm's own regulatory position.

Early advice can help to ensure that any investigation is conducted robustly, that the firm's reporting obligations are properly understood and met, and that the firm is well placed to respond to any subsequent regulatory proceedings. It can also help to identify and manage the various legal risks that arise in this context, including those relating to employment law, data protection, and privilege.

further information

At Kingsley Napley, we advise firms on regulatory and disciplinary matters across the professional services sector, including conduct investigations and the management of referrals to professional bodies. If you would like to discuss any concerns in confidence, please do not hesitate to get in touch.

 

Latest blogs & news

ICAEW’s new Guidance on Disciplinary Sanctions: what accountants and accountancy firms need to know

The regulatory landscape for accountants is progressively evolving, driven by heightened public expectations, increased scrutiny of professional conduct, and a greater push for transparency across regulated professions.

Updated Insolvency Code of Ethics: what do insolvency practitioners need to know?

The Joint Insolvency Committee, in collaboration with the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW), the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland (ICAS) and the Insolvency Practitioners Association (IPA), has approved and issued a revised Insolvency Code of Ethics. The updated Code took effect from 1 October 2025.

Law students: academic misconduct and the SRA early character & suitability assessment

Pursuing a career in law is already a significant challenge without the added stress of worrying whether past mistakes could block your path to becoming a solicitor. Early-life convictions, cautions, academic disciplinary actions, or financial issues may all impact your eligibility for admission by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA).

Mythbusting: Motivation in Starting a Private Prosecution

Private prosecutions provide an effective way to seek justice; and particularly in circumstances when the traditional prosecuting agencies are unable or unwilling to act. Conducted appropriately they can be a useful, efficient and cost-effective tool to secure punishment of the guilty.  Conducted badly they can be an expensive mistake with far reaching consequences. 

In this blog series we draw on our experience of both bringing and defending private prosecutions to help clarify some of the common myths and misunderstandings about private prosecutions. In this blog we look at whether having an ulterior motive in starting a private prosecution can lead to problems down the line.

Mythbusting: Recovery of Costs in Private Prosecutions

Private prosecutions provide an effective way to seek justice; and particularly in circumstances when the traditional prosecuting agencies are unable or unwilling to act.   Conducted appropriately they can be a useful, efficient and cost-effective tool to secure punishment of the guilty.  Conducted badly they can be an expensive mistake with far reaching consequences. 

In this blog series we draw on our experience of both bringing and defending private prosecutions to help clarify some of the common myths and misunderstandings about private prosecutions.  In this blog we look at whether the private prosecutor is entitled to recover their full investigation and legal fees at the end of the case.

Harcus Sinclair v Your Lawyers - Another nail in the coffin of solicitors’ undertakings?

Every solicitor knows that an undertaking is serious stuff.   Arguably it is the greatest power available to a solicitor.  A promise, if broken, that will lead to immediate and serious consequences for the giver.  As such it can be relied upon to the ends of the earth.  The power of undertakings has meant that they sit at the heart of every property transaction, bridging the time gap between the sending of money and the receiving of title.  They are also used in other areas of commercial life and as part of litigation.  The “brand” of a solicitor’s undertaking is so powerful that little thought is given as to where their power comes from. 

eSports vs. the Law

Gone are the days of computer gaming being viewed as a secluded activity; gaming is now a thoroughly social experience that attracts a global audience of millions and players can compete for large sums of money and celebrity. This burgeoning industry is largely in a virtual world and has developed in a blockchain, decentralised fashion. Often the UK government talks up the UK gaming industry and how keen the government is to support this sector, and there have been instances that show support, but when it comes to playing games competitively, law and regulations have not yet caught up.

The use of artificial intelligence: interesting technological developments in the legal and accountancy sectors

In this second blog in our technology and innovation series, we look at some recent developments in the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the legal and accountancy sectors.

Victims’ Code set to change

On 18 November 2020, the government confirmed that it is proceeding with planned changes to the  Victims' Code, following a consultation that began on 5 March 2020. The changes mean that when the revised Code comes into force, it will be based on a clearly defined set of rights that set out a minimum level of service that can be expected from criminal justice agencies. It is hoped that the changes will mean victims have a greater awareness of their rights, receive the information and support when then need it and have a greater level of satisfaction with the treatment they receive in the criminal justice system. 

Intractable insight: suspension is not enough

On 19 November 2020, the High Court handed down judgment in the Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care’s (“PSA”) challenge to a decision of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal (“MPT”) to suspend a doctor from practice. In her judgment, Mrs Justice Farbey emphasises the significance of lack of insight to the question of sanction.

Fit and proper person requirements for directors in the health and care sector – what does this mean and what are service providers required to do?

All providers registered with the Care Quality Commission (“CQC) must assure themselves that all directors who are responsible for delivering care to service users are fit and proper – in other words, they must be able to diligently carry out their responsibility to ensure the quality and safety of care. This forms part of the providers’ duty to ensure the service is well-led, which is one of the focus points during an inspection. Not only does the CQC monitor compliance at the point of registration, but it is an on-going duty and can lead to enforcement action where it is not met.

Best practice for organisations using private prosecution powers

The House of Commons Justice Committee has made a series of recommendations in its report published today which are likely to have a significant impact on the future of private prosecutions in England and Wales. 

The call for emergency legislation to protect doctors from GMC investigations for rationing decisions made during the Coronavirus crisis

Although everyone hopes the now much enhanced critical care capacity in the UK will meet the demand from patients, there is a growing concern that the time will come during the COVID-19 pandemic when the NHS will be overwhelmed and the need for lifesaving interventions will exceed available resources.

Best practice guide for charities conducting private prosecutions

The Charities Commission has recently warned that fraudsters are exploiting the spread of coronavirus (COVID-19) in order to carry out fraud and cybercrime against charities.  Unfortunately, in our experience, the likelihood of the police taking action against these individuals is low. In the current climate it is easy to understand why the use of private prosecutions is firmly on the rise. In the past, some charities have been criticised for having an overzealous approach to the conduct of their private prosecutions.  In this blog, we highlight the importance of taking a few simple steps to ensure that charities who conduct private prosecutions are beyond reproach.

COVID-19: If you get a fixed penalty notice for non-compliance with lockdown measures – do you have to tell the Solicitors Regulation Authority?

With BBC reports that there have been 178,000 incidents of anti-social behaviour in the last four weeks across England and Wales alone, if a solicitor receives a fixed penalty notice for a non-essential journey away from home - do they have to inform the SRA?

Remote consultations during COVID-19: a doctor’s judgment as to when a face to face appointment is ‘clinically required’

With the COVID-19 lockdown extended in the UK until at least early-May, primary care practitioners and consultants, who have been increasingly turning to remote consultations or telemedicine to treat their patients, will inevitably see an increase in their use to address more complex medical issues. 

Coronavirus Act: updated considerations for healthcare professionals

In our previous blog, we discussed the introduction of the Coronavirus Act and how the emergency legislation impacts healthcare professionals. Understandably however, the situation is constantly evolving and the position must be regularly reassessed. With this in mind, we discuss below some of the recent, key updates impacting the healthcare workforce.

Updates to the Care Quality Commission’s (CQC) COVID-19 Guidance

Last week we provided you with detail on the guidance to be aware of as a manager or owner of a care/domiciliary home in light of the current pandemic. The guidance is of course changing given the nature of the outbreak, so please read on for the key updates:

Testing in Testing Times: WADA Anti-Doping Guidance for Athletes in light of COVID-19

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) has recently issued guidance to athletes in which acknowledges the difficulties that the Covid-19 pandemic will cause, not just for athletes, but for the entire sporting community who are committed to protecting clean sport

You may also be interested in:

Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility