Independent Comparative Case Review Published

Est. read time: 3 min
"The Royal Courts of Justice" by Seth Anderson (Flickr - CC BY-SA 2.0)

“The Royal Courts of Justice” by Seth Anderson (Flickr – CC BY-SA 2.0)

The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has published the report of the Independent Comparative Case Review (ICCR), conducted by Professor Gus John.

The report presents the results of case reviews and of a statistical analysis of SRA data. The terms of reference of the review were:

“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.”

The 248-page report is the result of one of the most extensive pieces of independent research and analysis into regulatory outcomes for BME solicitors and builds on work previously commissioned by the SRA from Sir Herman Ouseley (2008) and Pearn Kandola (2010).

The review comprised:

  • a statistical analysis of regulatory outcomes by ethnicity and gender;
  • a comparative case file review;
  • a review of a sample of closed cases where discrimination had been alleged;
  • surveys, focus group sessions and follow-up interviews with a range of individuals and groups, including solicitors who had been subject to regulatory action and those who defend themselves in the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT).

It found that:

  • the data examined provided no evidence of the SRA applying its policies and procedures in a manner that amounts to discrimination against BME practitioners;
  • the data did provide evidence of disproportionality at a number of stages in the regulatory process, including in the number of complaints brought against regulatory outcomes for BME practitioners, as well as in the sanctions that were imposed upon them both by the SRA and by the SDT;
  • a number of factors rendered BME practitioners and small firms more vulnerable to cases being raised against them and to regulatory action than their white counterparts;
  • the results of the review should not be interpreted as evidence of discrimination or racism, but that a number of complex socio-economic factors must be considered as part of a comprehensive discussion of proportionality;
  • there was no evidence of discrimination in the cases reviewed where discrimination had been alleged.

The report makes 50 recommendations for consideration by the SRA, SDT and Law Society.

Professor John said: “I hope this review will help to deepen the SRA’s understanding and encourage it to review its approach to regulation. The issues that arise are not intrinsically connected to the ethnicity of BME practitioners themselves, but relate more directly to their structural location in the legal services marketplace, in the profession and in society generally.

“My expectation is that the SRA will examine the report, its findings and recommendations and identify the implications it has for its practices, policies and procedures, so that such assessment can feed in to its response to the report. There are also recommendations for others, such as the Law Society and other representative groups, as to how they can contribute to addressing the disproportionality which exists and support BME solicitors in providing access to justice for, typically, vulnerable communities.”

Paul Philip, SRA Chief Executive, added: “I am grateful to Gus John for taking such a thorough approach, and for his analysis and insight. Disproportionality of outcomes for BME lawyers is, unfortunately, not confined to regulatory outcomes. The report identifies that there is not a simple, single, cause of this disproportionality and, similarly, there is not a single, simple, solution. Therefore addressing the issue will need the help and engagement of a wide range of individuals and organisations.

“Building on the previous body of work on this subject, we now have a better understanding of the challenges we, and others, face. We will take a short period of time to consider this comprehensive report, and use that time to engage and discuss these issues with a range of interested individuals and organisations. Our aim is to provide a full, public, response by the end of May.”

The full report can be accessed here.

Photo (home): “london 16082008-66” by Walwyn (Flickr – CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

Leave a Reply

2 Comments on "Independent Comparative Case Review Published"

avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
trackback

[…] report was published on 13 March 2014. In their Press Release, the SRA […]

trackback

[…] to be the first audience that Prof John spoke to about his ground-breaking research – an Independent Comparative Case Review – commissioned by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) in […]

Pin It on Pinterest