The SRA held its monthly media briefing last week on a board meeting held, in secret as usual, almost a month earlier. The papers included a report on the collapse of Axiom Ince. It was redacted in full.

So the key item for the briefing in a week when the Horizon Post Office scandal, in which several lawyers are involved, dominated the news agenda? The latest spot fines imposed on firms failing to tick boxes on transparency. Oh, the irony.

The sporadic nature of SRA media briefings (the last one was in September) means that issues pile up. Naturally, journalists wanted to ask about the SRA’s decision to postpone any action on the Post Office until after the public inquiry has finished. Chief executive Paul Philip appeared to suggest that the SRA had scope to act sooner – but then seemed to row back. Eventually he gave up and opted to consult the lawyers, promising a response the next morning. Naturally, the response landed in inboxes at almost 4pm.

We shall see how long the SRA’s position lasts in the current, febrile political climate.

The regulator was also pressed by the Gazette’s reporter about the decision not to apply a cap on Axiom Ince client compensation claims – the outcome of which may land the profession with a considerable bill.

‘Should there have been a consultation on this?’ we asked.

Philip tersely responded that the SRA makes a lot of decisions without consulting on them. That this one potentially affects every lawyer in the pocket seems not to be a consideration.

Topics