The Practical Lawyer


SRA – ‘honesty’ and ‘integrity’

As solicitors will be aware, the SRA is introducing the new standards and regulations on 25 November 2019. In addition to new, separate codes of conduct for firms and solicitors, the SRA has reduced the principles from ten to seven. The SRA describes these as ‘the fundamental tenets of ethical behaviour that we expect all those that we regulate to uphold’. 
The principles are as follows:
Solicitors must act:
  1. in a way that upholds the constitutional principle of the rule of law, and the proper administration of justice;
  2. in a way that upholds public trust and confidence in the solicitor’s profession and in legal services provided by authorised persons;
  3. with independence;
  4. with honesty;
  5. with integrity;
  6. in a way that encourages equality, diversity and inclusion;
  7. in the best interests of each client. 
The 2011 code includes the obligation to act with integrity (principle 2), but some eyebrows have been raised that the SRA felt the need to require solicitors to be honest – when this is perhaps the most fundamental cornerstone of what it means to be a solicitor.
The SRA makes the point that while someone acting dishonestly can be said to be acting without integrity, the concept of integrity is wider than just acting dishonestly. The distinction has been brought into focus by two cases heard by the CA in 2018 in which LJ Jackson said: ‘Integrity is a broader concept than honesty. In professional codes of conduct the term “integrity” is a useful shorthand to express the higher standards which society expects from professional persons and which the professions expect from their own members’. 
The SRA has given examples of where they are likely to take disciplinary action for lack of integrity:
  1. Where there has been a wilful or reckless disregard of standards, rules, legal requirements and obligations or ethics, including an indifference to what the applicable provisions are or to the impacts or consequences of a breach.
  2. Where the regulated firm or individual has taken unfair advantage of clients or third parties or allowed others to do so.
  3. Where the regulated firm or individual has knowingly or recklessly caused harm or distress to another.
  4. Where clients or third parties have been misled or allowed to be misled (except where this is a result of simple error that the regulated firm or individual has corrected as soon as they became aware of it).
See and Wingate v SRA and Malins v SRA [2018] EWCA Civ 366 (combined appeal).

Most-read articles

LPAs – gifts by attorneys
Wednesday, 13 November 2019
Giving attorneys the power under an LPA to make gifts to others and themselves can invalidate it, the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) has ruled in a test case. The law limits the power of... Read more...
VAT and disbursements – Law Society guidance
Wednesday, 13 November 2019
The Law Society has issued a detailed new practice note ‘VAT Treatment of Disbursements and Expenses’ (8 October 2019) following two recent cases in which the concept of disbursements has been... Read more...
Socialising with colleagues – a thing of the past?
Wednesday, 13 November 2019
 It is not the role of The Practical Lawyer to judge. But firms would be well advised to re-visit their attitude to lawyers socialising with each other following a recent high-profile case of the... Read more...
Trial bundles – careful preparation required
Wednesday, 13 November 2019
Rather like buses, one waits for judicial comment on court documents and trial bundles, and then two come along at once. An article discusses a recent case in which the court was unimpressed with the... Read more...
Infant approval hearing – top tips
Wednesday, 13 November 2019
An interesting article provides some practical advice on achieving the court’s approval in infant approval hearings. This is a mechanism by which the court considers and, hopefully, approves the... Read more...
Tenant Fees Act 2019 – fully into force
Wednesday, 13 November 2019
We have reported in our March 2019 (p27) and May 2019 (p28) editions on the introduction of the Tenant Fees Act which came into force for new tenancies and licences to occupy on 1 June 2019. The Act... Read more...
CVA – use to reduce rent
Wednesday, 13 November 2019
 If a limited company is insolvent, it can use a CVA to pay creditors over a fixed period. If creditors agree, the limited company can continue trading. The CVA has been used by companies in the... Read more...
Rectification of title – what is ‘exceptional’?
Wednesday, 13 November 2019
The HC has considered whether or not to correct a mistake on a registered title. Under Sch 4 LRA 2002 the court can order rectification but no order may be made without the proprietor’s consent in... Read more...
Paternity – best interests
Wednesday, 13 November 2019
What’s the court’s approach to paternity cases when the issue arises years after the child’s birth, and in circumstances where both child and F always believed F was the biological father, but... Read more...
Religious beliefs – not always protected
Tuesday, 12 November 2019
The ET has heard an interesting case relating to a person’s religious beliefs. The Equality Act 2010 legally protects people from discrimination in the workplace and in wider society. It replaced... Read more...


IAG International
Join the IBA now!
In House Lawyer
MSI Global Alliance