Ethics Webinar

Hello. My name is Sue Heads, and I would like to welcome in doing this webinar all professional ethics in the legal profession, the Web in our is aimed at solicitors. Andi, I'm including in math solicitors. Andi registered European lawyers on registered foreign lawyers, and anybody who works in an organisation which is run by one of them on is regulated. We're going to be looking at what we mean by professional ethics. Whether the question of ethics is something which has changed in the 21st century on in a very competitive market, I'll get to look at how you will deal with those difficult ethical questions that may confront you during the course of your careers. So what do we need them by professional ethics and why does it matter? Well, in 1993 in the case of Bolton, Lord Bingham, then Sir Thomas Bingham, master of the Rolls, said it's required of lawyers practicing in this country that they should discharge their professional duties with integrity, probity and complete trustworthiness. Although that comment was made in a case in 1993 on arguably the political and legal landscape has changed significantly since then, It nevertheless sets out the rules on ethics and to require the solicitor these days, So do solicitors. Building ethics are still relevant to their practice? Well, in 2000 and 16 the Law Society conducted a survey ultra visitors and what it means to be in solicitor on, the respondents replied. And 99% of them believe that the ethical behavior required of a solicitor still sets them apart from the ethical behavior expected of the general public. Furthermore, 83% believed, but it sets them apart from other competitors in the legal market on arguably, therefore, it's the defining factor being solicitor. So what is the issue with ethics in a competitive market? Well, the legal services that set out with the legal activities which are those pieces of work. Such a litigation, for example, which can only be undertaken by regulated professions such as solicitors, barristers, legal executives and other lawyers, as defined by the act, any other legal services can be provided by unregulated individuals on as we know, there are a lot of unregulated individuals and firms currently in the market. Now, the Competition and Markets Authority estimates that around half of those providers have signed up to a voluntary organisation, for example, the society will Reuters. But that still leaves a significant number off individuals and organizations who are providing legal services but who are not subject to any rules or professional comfort. This doesn't, of course, mean that those providers necessarily have lower standards, but it does mean that it's harder to hold them to account for unethical behavior. Now it can be difficult for solicitors to compete commercially with providers who do not have the same regulatory burdens is waiting. But it can also be difficult for those solicitors in a BSS, for example, who find themselves in business with unregulated individuals who may have different ethical standards. But they may also have the power to make important financial decisions about the future of the legal practice. I'm in a competitive legal market. It can be a fine line between smart financial practice on unethical conduct. So why are ethnics still important? But solicitors? Well, one of the main reasons, obviously, is public confidence in legal ethics. Andi. That's the defining factor off solicitors practising in that competitive market. So the reasons that ethics matter are threefold, there is the moral reason that ethical behavior is still at the heart of what it means to be a solicitor. There is, of course, illegal reason. Failure to behave ethically may well breached legal on regulatory requirements, and it may undermine the administration of justice. There also is the course. The commercial reason in that the reputation of solicitors, both individually and collectively, is a profession is crucial in maintaining professional status on public confidence. So what do we mean them by ethics? On what do we think? All the important ethical standards? Well, in 2000 and 16 the solicitor's regulation ability conducted its question. Trusts like where solicitors are members of the public were asked what be important ethical issues were. It's interesting to note that there were a number of issues on which the public having the professional were in agreement. For example, dishonesty miss you supplied money, deliberate acts involving criminality by solicitors. Although clients I'm taking advantage of clients. However, it's worth noticing also that there were a number of issues which the public viewed as being more serious than solicitors did. In particular, the public felt with information security and solicited competence were both particularly serious who on the public felt that serious sanctions should be imposed. Those listers who fail to safeguard flights confidential details all those solicitors who take a work which they're not fully competent to carry out now. This may suggest that solicitors underestimate the importance of these issues to their own clients. So how do we find out what the main principles being solicitor are? Well, the solicitors coda calm that has 10 overarching principles, which are the guidance on the standards of the key ethical requirements of solicitors on their employees. These are high level statements of conduct on that lytle professional situations that you find yourself in. It's worth noticing also that three off the principles apply for solicitors, including registered foreign lawyers and registered European noise in their private life as well. Outside practice on that emphasizes that these issues are at the heart of what it means to be a solicitor. These principles are principal one, which requires you to uphold the rule of law on the proper administration of justice principle, to which is to act with integrity on principle six, which is that you are required to behave in a way that maintains the trust, the public places in you. Andi, in the provision of legal services be solicitors disciplinary tribunal has consistently rejected any arguments that dishonest or unethical behavior in private life is irrelevant. Private practice. They have found that solicitors who lack integrity in personal issues to be fundamentally unsuited, to be learned with depression, profession, the outcomes and the indicative behaviors off. The ConEd provide more detail on guidance on the conduct requiring some solicitors in specific circumstances. But it is made expressly clear of the provisions of the code must always be interpreted in the light of the principles. So the question arises of what happens when two principles. Conflict on example of this is where I client doesn't want you to disclose information to the court, for example, on it may well be in his best interest that you keep that information from the court. However, your duty to act with integrity is in conflict with that. In those circumstances where there are conflicting principles, the public interest must always take precedence. And that's especially to a principal world on your duty to uphold the administration justice in a situation like that that you would have to act in the interests of justice and provide the information to the cool. So sometimes as a solicitor he will be making difficult decisions on. You have to remember that making the right decision may be the more difficult decision you may be. Under pressure from clients, you may be under pressure from management to cut corners. However, you should never be persuaded to do something that you don't feel comfortable with. And if you are a manager in a firm, then it is your responsibility to set unethical example. You must remember also that you will be held responsible for the conduct of the old star in many situations, particularly if you have established the situation in the for where combat is not required to be on the highest ethical standards, you should have clear procedures in place so that people understand what to do, whether it's a difficult ethical dilemma. You should have a whistle blowing policy in place so that star feel that they can report serious misconduct even by the management on. You must support your staff in making difficult decisions. This is particularly important. Perhaps if you fail with a member of your stop is under pressure from a client, you may find it helpful to discuss ethical dilemmas openly to ensure that stuff understand their professional responsibility, and they also see the firm's commitment to ethical standards. So what do you do then, when you are faced with an ethical dilemma where the answer is not obvious? Inevitably, in most circumstances, the right thing to do on the appropriate way to behave will be very clear. But that's not always the case. So what do you do? Well, start by reading the principles. This doesn't just mean thinking that you know what they say, but reading the principles and seeing what the actual wording is, what decision would be in the best interest of justice? Remember, you are a solicitor of the Supreme Court on your primary concern is for justice rather than your kind. One of the main thing that you should think to yourself is what feels right here, because if it feels right to you, it may well be, but it is the correct thing to do. So we're going to look at some examples off ethical dilemmas. Andi, think about how you would behave in each of the circumstances on how you would make that decision. So our first example, your I T supplies have been chasing unplayed in boards for two months now, but your firm is that its over dropping. You can't afford to pay it. It's a busy Friday afternoon. Deadlines are approaching, and your I T systems crutches on. The suppliers say they will only come out if their bills type. Our client has just dropped off a check for Bill, which will easily cover the supplies involved. But it's not going to care till Monday how she got work without Like you. You know that clients are going to be inconvenience. Your cast share suggests a temporary transfer, replying to count to office account to pay the supply. This could then be reversed on Monday after an accounting error. Andi, nobody will suffer. Do you think in these extreme self circumstances, given the Giants will be inconvenienced by the lack of 19? But this would be a justified course of action, okay, against pause for five minutes now to how to think about how you would reactively circumstances or what you think would be the appropriate way to behave. Okay, so let's have a think about the situation that you are in the answer to this is really fairly straightforward. Taking clients money in a circumstance which you know to be improper is never acceptable. And it would constitute misuse of Brian's funds. If such an accounts role bridge came to light, it would constitute serious misconduct on it would almost inevitably be, beauties decides, because you were using clients money for the benefit of the firm in circumstances which you were inappropriate. There is, of course, always the risk that the clients check may not clear, and then on Monday would be in a position where you were unable to transfer my money back. However, regardless of whether that happened, the accounts will Breach, which had already taken place, would be serious and it would not be justifiable. Okay, let's look at our second example. So this is one of those examples off where you are in a personal dilemma. One of your partners is in the middle of an acrimonious tables and has instructed solicitors outside the firm to act in relation to his personal affairs. However, he likes to use you as a sounding board and over lunch one day he tells you that the situation is causing in significant stress, particularly is earlier in the air. His favorite art died in Canada. While she talking about this. He tells you that he's inherited a large sum of money in her well, but he has decided not to mention this was matrimonial solicitors because he says, I'm blowed. If my wife is going to get her hands on miles money, he tells you that he sworn a statement of means in the course of the proceedings. But he hasn't made reference to be inheritance. What would you do here? Is this any of your business? Given that he's one of your partners? Okay, this clearly put you in a very difficult personal situation. You may well feel loyalty to your partner. You may also feel that this is actually none of your business because there's nothing to do with the work of your firm. However, you also have a duty to uphold proper administration of justice on, and you also have a duty under the code of conduct. Report serious misconduct by regulated individual. In the circumstances, you may wish to talk to your partner mounted, make it clear that you feel that this is inappropriate behavior. But ultimately you would have a duty to report this to the blisters Regulation authority because you are aware that he has made a false statement in court documents. Interesting in this world. Based on a real case where the solicitor did exactly these. Andi failed to mention in his own divorce proceedings that he had inherited a large sum of money. But when this came to light based Lister was prosecuted for driving on WAAS struck off the roll for dishonesty on when the solicitor maintained that the conduct was outside practice and related to his personal life, only the court nevertheless felt that any person who was a solicitor on would knowingly lie and mislead. The court was fundamentally unsuited to practice solicitor. So example three. And we're looking at the question off conflict of interest. So you are acting for two business associates who are setting up a partnership together on taking out at least on premises. So, during in financial enquiries, you discover that one off the partners was previously adjudged bankrupt. When you raise this with that, she asked you not to mention it to her partner because she's now being discharged from the bankruptcy in any way relevant. She says she is concerned that if I part knows, he maple after the deal. You know, however, that the bankruptcy could well affect the partnerships ability to raise funds in the future. So do you think that you can continue to act for either or both of them on What will you say to the clients again? Let's pause for a few minutes. Then we can have a think about this from Andi suddenly doing the circumstances. Okay, I hope you've had the opportunity to give that some thought. This is a very difficult, but not particularly on Colin situation. The interests of your two clients now conflict through no fault of your own. Even more difficult, the second client is unaware of the conflict of interest in these circumstances. You cannot act for both as being stand because your duty of disclosure to want one conflict with your duty off confidentiality to your other client in this circumstance, the best thing to do would probably to tell at the first client that she must advise her partner off the bankruptcy in order that you can consider the possible consequences of that otherwise you cannot continue to act for both of them. If she declines to tell him, then you would have to cease acting for both partners on you would be unable to give the second client the reason for your withdraw from instructions other than the fact that you are in a conflict situation on would be unable to act. This does put you in a very difficult position. Okay, I hope you have found this useful Looking at some of these ethical dilemmas, there are a number of further ethical dilemmas that could be found after this Webinar on. You can have a think about those and you might find it useful to discuss men within your firm. So if you have such ethical Dolomites, where can you find guidance on how to deal with issues that you haven't address before? Firstly, of course you can. Looking me handbook. Look at the prince balls on be other content in there, which may help you make the decision for yourself. You can contact the S R A for guidance, or you can look at the Law Society's Support Services ethics page and they will have further information on all lines support that you can access. I hope we found this useful. Thanks very much.