Our regulator, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), has issued a new rule book which comes into force on the 26th November 2019. It is much shorter than the last one, which means that we have moved to ‘principles’ based regulation. Solicitors will be subject to 7 ethical standards.

At the heart of them are the principles of honesty and integrity. In truth, when things go wrong, situations will be judged in hindsight to see if we got things right. Good day-to-day decision-making about situations that arise is even more crucial.

At a training course last week, the delegates (all lawyers) were asked some ethical questions.

For instance, if you go to a restaurant and when the bill comes you notice that a bottle of wine has been omitted, do you immediately tell the waiter to ensure the bill is amended? Do you say to yourself that the meal was a bit overpriced anyway and keep quiet; or perhaps you just leave a bit of a more generous tip? 

53% said that they would tell the waiter whilst the rest were split between the two other suggestions. 

One person piped up that the only honest ones were the 47% who admitted to the temptation of benefiting from a bit of good fortune.

A second question to test honesty was about our service to clients. 

You say to a client that you will definitely issue their case in court before the end of the month; but come the first week of a new month, you have not gotten round to it.

When the client asks, do you say that it has been sent to the court or do you admit your error and apologise for overlooking it? 

Most said they would admit to it, but one or two amongst us said they would not.

This did raise in my mind the question of integrity and honesty, whether in the line of business or outside in ordinary everyday life.

There have been a number of recent cases where lawyers acting dishonestly in their personal lives has led to them being struck off the Roll of Solicitors, probably never to be admitted again.

I actually think this is the right approach, however draconian that may seem. Whether the bottle of wine scenario comes into the fold of situations that would lead you into trouble I rather doubt. However, dodging train fares has been found to be sufficient for a lawyer to be struck off.

We were also asked whether, in our personal lives, we had ever tried to use our position of lawyer for our own benefit.  One example given was a letter written to a school on a work e-mail about the lawyer’s child and a complaint about a teacher.

That example has actually occurred in my experience and we did take to task our member of staff for a misjudgement.

The dishonest explanation to a client about the issue of proceedings is definitely a serious issue.

Trying to cover up a default, when it occurs, is just not acceptable in a legal practice.  If we make an error, we just have to own up to it.  If we do not, how can we act effectively for the client in the future whether we get away with it or not? Going forward, there is an issue between us and the client because we have not been candid, and that must surely damage our relationship.

I have always insisted upon openness and integrity in our relationship with clients when things go wrong.

Being a solicitor carries very high standards of honesty and, quite frankly, clients should expect nothing less. Indeed, anyone coming into contact with my firm can expect the highest standards of honesty and integrity.

The ethical principles contained in the new Rule Book are challenging to apply but honesty and integrity are integral to the way we work now; they will remain so when the new rules are brought in force.