© Shutterstock
Rawdon Crozier examines why the Solicitors Regulation Authority could not compel disclosure of a client’s privileged files, & what this means for investigating suspected SLAPPs
- In Carter-Ruck v SRA, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) could not compel disclosure of privileged client material under s 44B of the Solicitors Act 1974; the iniquity exception offers only a narrow route requiring supporting evidence.
- Effective protection against strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) may require wider reform, balancing accountability and affordable remedies with safeguards for privileged legal advice.
In Carter-Ruck Solicitors and another v Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd [2026] EWHC 2416 (KB), Mr Justice Butcher decided a narrow question of statutory construction with potentially broad consequences. Section 44B of the Solicitors Act 1974 (SA 1974) did not authorise the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) to require a solicitor or regulated firm to produce a client’s documents where the client maintained legal professional privilege (LPP). Neither the text nor a necessary implication overrode that fundamental right ([155]).
The investigation concerned Carter-Ruck’s work for a Mr Amersi in bringing or threatening data protection
