March 18, 2014 in Blog
In 2013, the report of the most comprehensive review of Legal Education and Training (LETR) for 30 years was published. That report was commissioned by the Bar Standards Board (BSB), the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) and the Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEX). Professor Gus John chaired the LETR’s working group on Equality, Diversity and Social Mobility.
Also in 2013, Professor John conducted an Independent Comparative Case Review (ICCR) for the SRA:
‘to identify whether there is disparity in the way the SRA applies its policies and procedures in dealing with BME practitioners as compared to others with a view to identifying potential improvements to such practices, policies and procedures to maximise fairness and consistency…’
Earlier reviews (Ouseley 2008; Pearn Kandola 2010) had revealed evidence of disproportionate regulatory outcomes for black and minority ethnic solicitors. The SRA was keen to establish whether such disproportionality as was found was on account of the ethnicity of BME solicitors, or on account of the application of its own policies and procedures, the result of extraneous factors, or a combination of all those. Professor John’s report was published on 13 March 2014.
The review found evidence of disproportionality at three stages of the regulatory process, namely: at the point at which a case is raised or a complaint is registered against a solicitor or a practice; in the process of investigating that complaint and at the point at which an outcome is determined or/and a sanction imposed. Disproportionality in the number of cases raised is not necessarily as a result of SRA action. Cases could be raised or complaints registered by members of the public, other solicitors, through self-referrals, or by other external agents. Read the rest of this entry →