header-logo header-logo

13 March 2024
Issue: 8063 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Company
printer mail-detail

Solicitors Regulation Authority focuses on in-house community

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has published a raft of resources for in-house solicitors, including draft guidance for employers

The draft guidance aims to explain the professional obligations and standards of solicitors, including what they are unable to do. It clarifies, for example, that solicitors cannot be pressurised to change their legal advice to meet commercial goals or destroy correspondence that might be relevant to future litigation or any investigation.

It highlights that solicitors have duties of confidentiality and legal professional privilege, which means ‘there may be occasions where some individuals or departments will be unable to see what a solicitor has advised on in relation to a particular issue’.

The other draft guidance and case studies, published last week, cover running internal investigations, identifying your client when working in-house, and reporting concerns about wrongdoing when working in-house. It sets out the processes to go through, as well as what to do when, having reported the wrongdoing, the governing body lets it continue. In that case, the draft guidance suggests in-house solicitors avoid doing anything ‘that helps to facilitate the wrongdoing. For example, you should not draft a contract or agreement which you know your employer will have to breach the law to fulfil.’ Nor should the solicitor do ‘anything which suppresses exposure of the information’.

More than 34,500 solicitors—one in five solicitors—work in-house at more than 6,000 organisations.

Juliet Oliver, general counsel at the SRA, said: ‘As well as ongoing feedback from those working in the sector, recent high-profile cases such as the Post Office case have really shone a light on the unique challenges and issues which in-house solicitors can encounter.

‘We have been working closely with the in-house community over the past year to consider what support we can offer to address some of these challenges. We believe these resources will provide valuable support and guidance to in-house solicitors across a range of important issues. But to make sure this is the case, we want to take this opportunity to invite those working in the sector to input.’

View the draft guidance and provide feedback by 19 April on the SRA's website.

Issue: 8063 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Company
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
back-to-top-scroll