UK: Changing Standards – The Standard Of Proof In Lawyers' Disciplinary Proceedings

Last Updated: 18 December 2017
Article by Sarah Clover and Lisa Jones

The Bar Standards Board (BSB) announced on 24 November that it has decided to change the standard of proof applied when barristers, and others regulated by the BSB, face disciplinary proceedings for professional misconduct. Subject to approval from the Legal Services Board (LSB), the standard of proof will change from the criminal standard ("beyond reasonable doubt") to the civil standard ("on the balance of probabilities").

The BSB proposes to apply the civil standard to alleged breaches of its code occurring after 31 March 2019, in order to allow a period of preparation. The announcement follows the BSB's consultation on the issue over the Summer (see BSB Consultation on Standard of Proof in Lawyers' Disciplinary Proceedings).

The appropriate standard of proof in lawyers' disciplinary proceedings has been a source of debate for some time, with the discussion intensifying last year following the judgment of The Solicitors Regulation Authority v Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal [2016] EWHC 2862 (Admin) (known as the 'Arslan judgment'). The question will now be whether the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT), will make the same change.

Background to the BSB Decision

To date both the Bar Tribunals and Adjudication Service (BTAS) and the SDT have applied the criminal standard of proof in disciplinary proceedings. Towards the end of last year, Mr Justice Leggatt, in obiter comments in the Arslan judgment, expressed sympathy for the view that it is unsatisfactory and illogical for the SDT, acting as primary fact finder, to apply a different standard of proof from the SRA when carrying out a similar fact finding role. Further, he described the authorities in support of the current approach as 'ripe for reconsideration' (see Standards of Discipline: Judicial Comment on the Standard of Proof in SDT proceedings).

Following the Arslan Judgment, the BSB revisited the question of whether it should change its approach. The consultation received 101 responses, the majority of them opposing a change. The Bar Council and the Commercial Bar Association indicated that their members were evenly split as to whether there should be a change, and the Inns were also divided. The BSB announcement will not therefore be met with universal approval by the profession.

The BSB has stated that the change is an important step forward in modernising the regulation of the Bar in the public interest, and its view is that this, along with the new disciplinary tribunal regulations, should give confidence to the public and barristers that the BSB's arrangements are robust, thorough and fair to all concerned.

Position of the SDT

It has always been the view of the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) that both the SDT and BSB should lower the standard of proof to the civil standard, the standard also used by the SRA. This was the position argued by the SRA in the Arslan judgment.

The SDT indicated in July 2017 (in response to the BSB consultation) that it will, as part of the exercise of bringing forward its proposed new rules, be consulting on the appropriate standard of proof that should be applied in deliberations.

The SDT is governed by the Solicitors (Disciplinary Proceedings) Rules 2007, which do not specify a standard of proof. Without any specific written requirement (unlike the BSB) the SDT is reliant on case law for its source of authority as to the appropriate standard of proof to apply. Until the Arslan Judgment, the main case authorities, (Re a Solicitor [1993] QB 69 and Campbell v Hamlet [2005] UKPC 19) upon which the SDT relies, provided that the correct standard in disciplinary proceedings concerning the legal profession is the criminal standard.

Like the Bar, the solicitors profession is also divided on the appropriate standard of proof. The SRA's view is that if both the SDT and BSB utilise the civil standard, this would put the interests of the public first, rather than the individual members of the profession, give the public confidence in the regulatory system and deliver a consistent, fair and more efficient disciplinary process.

To support its position, the SRA has referred to the fact that the civil standard is used widely by other regulators including: all health professions regulators, the Accountancy and Actuarial Discipline Board and the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. This discrepancy is also highlighted by the BSB in its consultation paper.

It could be argued however that the lower standard of proof applied by the SRA in its dealings with disciplinary matters reflects its more limited disciplinary sanctions. For instance, the SDT and SRA can both impose fines but the SDT can impose higher fines and while the SRA can restrict the scope of a solicitor's ability to practice, the SDT can suspend or strike a solicitor from the Roll.

On 16 October 2017, the Law Society published its own discussion paper (before the BSB announcement) and sought members' views ahead of the SDT's own consultation. Its view is that the SDT should continue to apply the criminal standard of proof as this is the position reflected in the case law and because it is the most appropriate standard when a solicitor's livelihood is at risk. It argues for an evidence based approach and states that it 'has yet to see any evidence that the current system is problematic in practice. Evidence should be gathered and analysed carefully before a decision is made and there should be a thorough impact assessment'.

The Law Society acknowledges the counter arguments, namely that it would be easier and cheaper for the SDT to prosecute cases using the civil standard; the criminal standard affords greater protection for solicitors than clients; and that most other sectors use the civil standard. However, the Law Society says that the arguments for change do not accord with the evidence. Furthermore it does not consider relevant the standard that other regulators apply, rather that 'any decisions that are made [to change the standard] should be evidence-based and appropriate to the solicitors' profession'.

The American Approach

The Law Society sets out what it considers to be a third possible option, that adopted by the American Bar Association (ABA). ABA disciplinary proceedings use a standard of proof of 'clear and convincing evidence' which is described in the commentary to Rule 18 of the ABA Model Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement as a 'higher than "preponderance of the weight of credible evidence" which is usually deemed sufficient in civil proceedings, yet not as stringent as "beyond a reasonable doubt" required in criminal cases'.

The difficulty with this approach is that there is existing case law on the civil and criminal standard of proof, and therefore parties are clear what they mean. Introducing a new standard would bring uncertainty, at least in the short-term, until there is indication from the SDT and case-law indicating how this standard should be applied.

The Way Ahead

Now that the standard of proof used in barristers' disciplinary proceedings will change (subject to LSB approval), this will leave the SDT as the only legal services regulator to maintain the criminal standard and it would be one of only two professional regulators not utilising the civil standard, along with the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons.

However, there remains a significant body of opinion within the profession that the serious nature of the allegations before the SDT, and the far reaching consequences for the individual solicitor if misconduct is found proven, justifies the status quo.

With the SDT issuing increasing penalties in recent months, and the SDT reportedly forecasting an increase in cases in light of the recent change to the test for dishonesty (see Ivey v Genting Casinos) the decision may have wider consequences for solicitors than ever before.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions