The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) recently introduced a significant change in its approach to the publication of regulatory and disciplinary decisions. Effective from 2nd June 2025, the new rules aim to provide a more nuanced system for how long these decisions remain in the public domain. This article explains the SRA's updated rules and guidance on the publication of decisions, the rationale behind the changes, and some reactions.

The SRA's Previous Approach

The SRA previously published details of regulatory and disciplinary outcomes in most cases for a fixed period of three years. Whilst straightforward, it did not account for the varying degrees of seriousness associated with different types of misconduct. As a result, both minor and severe contraventions were treated in the same way, which raised concerns about fairness and proportionality. The SRA do not publish decisions made by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.

The New Rules and Guidance

The new approach introduces varying publication periods based on the seriousness of the misconduct. The publication periods relating to the different outcomes can be found HERE. This change is designed to ensure that the length of time a decision remains public is proportionate to the severity of the breach. According to the SRA, this will better serve the public interest and provide a more balanced approach. Paul Philip, Chief Executive of the SRA, stated:

"Our new publication policy reflects a more considered approach to how long regulatory and disciplinary decisions should remain in the public domain. By linking publication periods to the seriousness of the misconduct, we aim to ensure that our actions are fair, proportionate, and in the best interest of the public."

For the most serious outcomes, such as cases involving dishonesty or significant harm to clients, the decisions will remain public for longer periods, potentially indefinitely. Less severe infractions will have shorter publication periods. The SRA's new approach was developed following extensive consultation with stakeholders including solicitors, law firms, and the public. The feedback highlighted the need for a more flexible and fair system. The principles are aligned with the 'better regulation' approach, aimed at ensuring that the SRA's actions are transparent, accountable, and proportionate.

Lubna Shuja, President of the Law Society, said:

"We welcome the SRA's new publication policy, which takes into account the varying degrees of seriousness in regulatory and disciplinary matters. This change is a positive step towards ensuring that solicitors are treated fairly while maintaining the necessary transparency for the public."

The SRA's publication policy is guided by the principle of protecting the public interest. This includes maintaining public confidence in the legal profession and ensuring that regulatory decisions are made transparently. Challenging a decision by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) to publish a regulatory or disciplinary outcome involves a few key steps. If you disagree with the SRA's decision to publish, you can request an internal review. This request must be made within 28 days of the decision being published. The review request must clearly state the grounds on which you believe the decision should be reconsidered. This might include new evidence, procedural errors, or other relevant factors. The review is carried out by a different team or individual, not involved in the original decision. Following the review, the SRA will either uphold, amend, or overturn the original decision. If you are not satisfied with the outcome of the internal review, you can appeal to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT). This appeal must be lodged within 28 days of the internal review decision. The SDT can uphold, amend, or overturn the SRA's decision. The Tribunal's decision is binding, although there may be further avenues for appeal to higher courts in certain circumstances.

Conclusion

The SRA's introduction of varying publication periods for regulatory and disciplinary decisions marks a significant shift in its approach. By tailoring publication durations to the severity of the misconduct, the SRA aims to provide a more balanced and just system. The positive reactions from the Law Society and industry experts indicate broad support for these changes, highlighting the importance of a fair and proportionate regulatory framework. As the new rules take effect, it will be crucial to monitor their impact on the legal profession and the public's trust in the regulatory system. Monitoring the SRA's commitment to continuous improvement and stakeholder engagement will be key to ensuring the success and fairness of this new approach.

Evan Wright is a barrister and partner in JMW’s professional regulation team.