Report comment

How have the solicitors funded their defences to date? I'm assuming that they have either had pro bono help or financial assistance from their current employers.

That's yet another issue: other professionals have insurance (or professional membership) which meets the costs of defending disciplinary proceedings. Most solicitors don't.

As is clear from the judgment of Flaux LJ, the current system means that dishonest doctors get more leeway than dishonest solicitors. Can that be right? Solicitors need to be "trusted to the ends of the earth" but doctors don't?