Solicitors Regulation Authority Character and Suitability Assessment Dishonesty, Integrity and Financial Conduct Syllabus

Dishonesty, Integrity and Financial Conduct syllabus — full chapter and topic list

Expand any chapter to see its topics and sub-topics. This is the whole examinable outline for Dishonesty, Integrity and Financial Conduct in Solicitors Regulation Authority Character and Suitability Assessment, not a summary of it.

1. 1

   Dishonesty and Lack of Integrity

   4 topics

   • The centrality of honesty to the solicitor's role
     • Honesty as a fundamental professional principle
     • The objective test of dishonesty (Ivey v Genting)
   • Lack of integrity as a distinct concept
     • Integrity beyond strict dishonesty (Wingate v SRA)
     • Examples: misleading, recklessness, abuse of position
   • Academic and assessment misconduct
     • Plagiarism, cheating and exam malpractice
     • SQE assessment integrity breaches
   • Dishonest conduct in employment or prior regulated work
2. 2

   Financial Probity and Behaviour

   4 topics

   • Personal insolvency events
     • Bankruptcy orders and bankruptcy restrictions
     • Individual Voluntary Arrangements (IVAs)
     • Debt relief orders
   • County Court Judgments and unmanaged debt
     • Outstanding CCJs as evidence of financial irresponsibility
   • Director disqualifications and company failures
     • Disqualification under the CDDA 1986
   • Evidence of financial mismanagement and its relevance
3. 3

   Misuse of Position and Property

   4 topics

   • Misappropriation of money or assets
     • Theft or misuse of employer or client funds
   • Improper handling of confidential information
     • Unauthorised access to or disclosure of data
     • Data protection breaches
   • Abuse of a position of trust
     • Exploiting vulnerable persons or clients
   • Fraud, deception and obtaining advantage

Dishonesty, Integrity and Financial Conduct flashcards for Solicitors Regulation Authority Character and Suitability Assessment

20 of 48 cards from the Dishonesty, Integrity and Financial Conduct deck — real questions with worked answers.

1. Why is honesty described as central to the solicitor's role?

   Because solicitors are trusted to handle clients' money, confidential information and legal interests, and the public, courts and clients must be able to rely on their word; honesty underpins the entire fiduciary and officer-of-the-court relationship. The SRA Principles require solicitors to act with honesty (Principle 4) and integrity (Principle 5).

2. Which SRA Principle expressly requires acting with honesty, and which requires integrity?

   Principle 4 requires solicitors to act with honesty; Principle 5 requires them to act with integrity. They are listed as two separate, distinct Principles.

3. What is the legal test for dishonesty applied in solicitor regulation, and from which case does it come?

   The objective test from Ivey v Genting Casinos (2017), confirmed for regulation in Wingate v SRA (2018): first ascertain the individual's actual (subjective) state of knowledge or belief as to the facts, then ask whether their conduct was dishonest by the (objective) standards of ordinary decent people. There is no separate requirement that the defendant appreciated their conduct was dishonest.

4. How does 'lack of integrity' differ from 'dishonesty' as a distinct regulatory concept?

   Per Wingate v SRA (2018), integrity is a broader concept than honesty: a person can lack integrity without being dishonest. Integrity connotes adherence to the higher ethical standards of the profession, so conduct may breach integrity (e.g. recklessness, abuse of position, allowing standards to slip) even where dishonesty is not proven.

5. Does proving a lack of integrity require proof of dishonest intent?

   No. Lack of integrity can be established without dishonesty. It does not require a subjective dishonest state of mind; it captures a failure to meet the profession's ethical standards, including reckless or seriously careless conduct.

6. Give an example of conduct that may show lack of integrity but not dishonesty.

   Recklessly making a statement without caring whether it is true, allowing a misleading impression to persist, or improperly mixing client and office money without intending to deceive. Such conduct breaches integrity even if the person genuinely (if carelessly) did not realise it was wrong.

7. Why is academic and assessment misconduct relevant to an SRA character and suitability assessment?

   It can demonstrate dishonesty or lack of integrity that bears directly on fitness to be a solicitor. Cheating, plagiarism, falsifying results or impersonation in exams suggests a willingness to gain advantage by deception, which the SRA treats seriously when assessing character.

8. List common forms of academic/assessment misconduct the SRA would scrutinise.

   Plagiarism, collusion, cheating in examinations, impersonation, fabrication or falsification of data or qualifications, contract cheating (paying for work), and bringing prohibited materials into an exam.

9. How does the SRA weigh assessment misconduct that occurred years before application?

   It considers the seriousness, whether dishonesty was involved, how long ago it occurred, the person's age and maturity at the time, evidence of rehabilitation and insight, and whether it was disclosed. Older, isolated, fully disclosed incidents with genuine insight carry less weight than recent or concealed dishonesty.

10. What is the relevance of dishonest conduct in prior employment or regulated work?

    Dishonesty in any employment, especially in another regulated profession or financial role, is highly relevant because it shows the applicant's propensity and demonstrates how they behave when trusted. Examples include falsifying records, theft from an employer, or misleading a previous regulator.

11. If an applicant was dismissed from a previous regulated role for misconduct, must they disclose it?

    Yes. The character and suitability rules require disclosure of any behaviour suggesting they should not be admitted, including dismissals for misconduct, regulatory findings, and dishonesty in prior roles. Non-disclosure is itself treated as a serious aggravating matter.

12. Define personal insolvency in the regulatory context.

    Personal insolvency refers to formal events where an individual cannot pay their debts, principally bankruptcy, an Individual Voluntary Arrangement (IVA), or a Debt Relief Order (DRO). These are 'evidence of behaviour' the SRA assesses for financial responsibility.

13. What is the difference between bankruptcy and an Individual Voluntary Arrangement (IVA)?

    Bankruptcy is a court-ordered formal insolvency where assets vest in a trustee and debts are typically discharged after 12 months. An IVA is a binding contractual arrangement with creditors, supervised by an insolvency practitioner, to repay an agreed portion of debts over a fixed period (often 5 years), avoiding bankruptcy.

14. What is a Debt Relief Order (DRO) and how does it differ from bankruptcy?

    A DRO is a lower-cost insolvency option for people with low debts, minimal assets and little surplus income. Unlike bankruptcy it does not vest assets in a trustee and is administered by the Official Receiver; debts are written off after a moratorium period (usually 12 months) if circumstances do not improve.

15. Is being made bankrupt an automatic bar to admission as a solicitor?

    No. Insolvency is not an automatic bar. The SRA assesses the circumstances, particularly whether dishonesty or a lack of financial integrity was involved, the cause (e.g. misfortune vs. recklessness), and the applicant's openness and current financial management.

16. What concerns the SRA most about insolvency events: the debt itself or its cause?

    The cause and conduct surrounding the debt. Insolvency from genuine misfortune (illness, business failure, redundancy) is viewed more sympathetically than insolvency arising from dishonesty, reckless spending, gambling, or evasion of financial obligations, which raise suitability concerns.

17. What is a County Court Judgment (CCJ)?

    A CCJ is a court order in England and Wales confirming that a person owes a debt and must repay it, obtained by a creditor through the County Court when the debt is not paid. It is recorded on the public Register of Judgments, Orders and Fines and affects creditworthiness.

18. How long does a CCJ stay on the public register, and how can it be removed?

    A CCJ remains on the Register of Judgments, Orders and Fines for 6 years. It is removed if paid in full within one calendar month of judgment; if paid after a month it is marked 'satisfied' but remains for the 6-year period.

19. Why does the SRA treat unmanaged debt and unsatisfied CCJs as a suitability concern?

    Multiple or unsatisfied CCJs and unmanaged debt may indicate poor financial management or a disregard for legal obligations to pay. Because solicitors handle client money, a pattern of ignoring debts or court orders raises doubts about financial integrity and responsibility.

20. What is the regulatory significance of a single satisfied CCJ versus multiple unsatisfied CCJs?

    A single, satisfied CCJ from genuine financial difficulty is usually a minor concern. Multiple unsatisfied CCJs, or a pattern of ignoring court orders to pay, indicate a sustained failure to manage finances and meet obligations, which is a much more serious indicator of unsuitability.

See more Dishonesty, Integrity and Financial Conduct flashcards →

Planning Dishonesty, Integrity and Financial Conduct for Solicitors Regulation Authority Character and Suitability Assessment

Dishonesty, Integrity and Financial Conduct (Solicitors Regulation Authority Character and Suitability Assessment) FAQ