SRA changes track on discrimination investigation

The SRA has modified its approach to an investigation by equality expert Professor Gus John into whether it discriminates against minority law firms.

Professor John’s independent review was announced by the regulator in August, and scheduled to report by late autumn.

According to the latest figures, 38 per cent of solicitors subject to intervention and 31 per cent of those referred to the SDT are from minority backgrounds, although BAME solicitors make up only 12 per cent of the profession.

Mehrunnisa Lalani (pictured), head of inclusion at the SRA, said the review had not started yet because the terms of reference, which were the subject of consultation, had still not been decided.

“We sent out the terms of reference in draft to consult our stakeholders and have listened to their feedback,” she told Solicitors Journal this morning.

Lalani said a decision on the timetable was likely to be announced following a meeting with minority groups next week, including the Society of Black Lawyers, the Society of Asian Lawyers and the Muslim Lawyers Association.

She also said the SRA had decided to increase the number of cases that Professor John would investigate. However, she said it would look at random and not individual cases.

“Professor John is not looking at anything specific at this point,” she said. “The aim of his review is to find out whether the disproportionality in decision-making is a result of us acting in an unfair or biased manner.

“It will also consider the impact of OFR, which has transformed our approach to regulating the profession.”

When the review was launched this summer Professor John said the evidence gathered by the review “should help the organisation respond to the recent allegation from the Society of Black Lawyers (SBL) that it treats BME solicitors more harshly than their white counterparts.”

Peter Herbert, chairman of the SBL, said the SRA originally proposed looking at only 20 random cases.

“Such a small sample was ridiculous,” he said. “We will not be party to cosmetic exercises. The review has not started and will not start until the terms of reference are agreed. We are not going to be dictated to by the SRA.”

Herbert said the SBL wanted 160 files to be examined, 80 involving minority solicitors and 80 white solicitors. He said the review should also look at individual cases where discrimination had been alleged, those which have reached court and those which have not.

“We are interested in a proper review,” Herbert said. “We are not interested in anything less. If it takes six or nine months, so be it.

“If the review does not have the support of minority lawyers, there will be not be a review and we will go straight to ministers.”

Herbert represents sole practitioner John McLee Robinson, who is appealing against his suspension from practice on the grounds that both the SRA and SDT discriminated against him on racial grounds.

Delivering judgment earlier this week, Mr Justice Haddon-Cave said there was not a “scintilla of discrimination” in the SDT’s ruling and rejected the claims.

Copyright & permissions