Kingsley Napley Spotlight Series

More clarity needed from the SRA on boundaries concerning sexual misconduct and harassment in law firms

25 March 2021

This article was first published by The Times on 25 March 2021 which you can read in full by clicking here (subscription required).

The solicitors’ watchdog is right to take charge of misconduct cases but it needs firmer guidance to succeed .

Compared with other watchdogs, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has been one of the most vocal and active on so-called #MeToo issues. 

However, its approach is still a jumble after Ryan Beckwith, a former partner at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, last November overturned a disciplinary tribunal for misconduct. As a result, the profession urgently needs clarity. 

The authority has rightly formed the view that sexual misconduct in law firms is a regulatory matter. This move was critical to bolster and support its role in encouraging and enforcing diversity and equality. 

But however justified that stance, it came in an area where there were no existing principles that indicated what the parameters of any misconduct would be. This arena was, and still is, such new territory that a policy view would have been helpful at the outset, setting out the SRA’s position on what behaviour should be categorised as misconduct, where the line falls in respect of public and private life and what distinguishes serious and less serious cases. 

The SRA has produced warning notices on various closely linked topics including the use of non-disclosure agreements. It is not clear why it has not done so in relation to sexual misconduct in the workplace. 

If guidance had been issued and cases strategically selected to illuminate the boundaries, then policy from the SRA coupled with subsequent disciplinary tribunal decisions would have provided clarity. 

The SRA has still not issued any detailed policy guidance and the cases it has brought have not brought clarity. While some cases have succeeded, Beckwith clearly did not and the High Court ruling in November muddied the water further. 
Three key areas were engaged by the facts of the case: consent, the private life boundary and abuse of power. On consent, the SRA did not, for reasons that are not entirely clear, allege any wrongdoing. As to abuse of power, no evidence was advanced. As a consequence of this approach, the High Court clearly was reluctant to find professional misconduct without a sound basis. 

The decision in Beckwith, the first to reach the High Court on this important topic, did not take the issues any further forward and if anything is a backward step for the SRA. But anyone that thinks it will stop the regulator from investigating and referring matters to the tribunal is mistaken. 

Firms and individuals need to understand where the boundaries lie so that they can make informed decisions on reporting obligations. Understanding the boundaries will also help drive forward the cultural change that is necessary in some parts of the profession. 

The SRA must consider the lessons from the cases it has brought, as well as those it has not, and share that learning with the profession. 

FURTHER INFORMATION

If you have any questions about the issues discussed in this article, please contact Iain Julie or a member of our regulatory team.

 

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Iain Miller is a Partner in the Regulatory department and specialises in advising law firms and the legal professionals on legal ethics, investigations, and public law matters.   He is General Editor of the leading textbook on legal services regulation, Cordery on Legal Services as well as Chair of the Association of Regulatory and Disciplinary Lawyers.  

Julie is a partner in the Regulatory Team. She predominantly acts in the professional services sector, advising lawyers, accountants and built environment professionals on regulatory compliance, investigations, adjudication, enforcement and prosecutions. 

 

 

You can  also download our recently published white paper summarising the points highlighted in this article and key insights discussed during  the teams  Spotlight Series webinar , Insights into Legal Services Regulation in 2021: The Impact of Beckwith v SRA, using the form below. 

5f9fea43aec9a90ca1d3a104542a6e39deef6b40

The white paper produced following on from this webinar forms part of a series that Kingsley Napley will be running through 2021, covering a range of some of the most important regulatory issues and/or developments facing the legal professions in 2021.

We are delighted that a number of thought leaders in the sector will be joining us during the series to share their insights. If you would like to be kept informed in relation to these events please click here.

Share insightLinkedIn Twitter Facebook Email to a friend Print

Email this page to a friend

We welcome views and opinions about the issues raised in this blog. Should you require specific advice in relation to personal circumstances, please use the form on the contact page.

Leave a comment

You may also be interested in:

Skip to content Home About Us Insights Services Contact Accessibility