Report comment

There is a serious lesson for junior solicitors here. And, for that matter, all solicitors. And the SRA cannot ignore this given its own guidance on solicitors perceiving themselves as "hired guns".

To say that this incident has damaged the reputation of solicitors would be to grossly understate the situation.

But how far can a solicitor go in damaging the interests of non-clients while pursuing instructions which are, at least, lawful? 

The Law Society Gazette ran an article in 21 September 2001 titled “Death of the hired gun”. The article concerned a disciplinary case in which a solicitor was fined £25,000 and ordered to pay substantial costs. The solicitor had pursued his client’s interest energetically – too energetically. Counsel for the solicitor ran the “hired gun” defence. The defence failed.

In March 2015, the SRA produced a document headed “Walking the Line”. This document uses the term “hired gun” four times. For example: “It has been argued that lawyers owe little or no duties beyond those to their clients and that they are "hired guns”. The legal and regulatory rules governing professional practice, however, clearly cover impropriety arising from behaviour that was in the best interests of the client.”

And “Although solicitors must fearlessly advance their clients' cases, they are not "hired guns" whose only duty is to their client. They also owe duties to the courts, third parties and to the public interest. Breach of those duties can give rise, for example, to wasted costs orders or to findings of misconduct.”

It will be interesting to see if the SRA will take note of the actions of the solicitor in this case.