The regulatory body will now be able to agree punishments with errant lawyers in situations such as where the offence relates to a system within a firm, rather than an individual failure, and it is clear that the problem has been addressed.
The arrangements could see lawyers agree to come off the solicitors’ roll for a set length of time and the reprimanded solicitors would be required to admit their failings and pledge improved performance.
As part of the changes the SRA will begin to publish agreements made between the SRA and a solicitor under investigation, which will outline details of each case and its findings.
Other examples of cases that could be settled include failure to identify potential conflicts of interest, provided the solicitor at fault agrees to better procedures with training and verification.
However, the most serious cases will continue to be heard at a formal hearing before the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT).
The new set-up is designed to help the SRA avoid a regulatory log-jam. It comes in the wake of the high-profile, three-year conflicts investigation into Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer’s former corporate chief Barry O’Brien over his role in the firm’s decision to accept an instruction bidding for Marks & Spencer. He ultimately apologised to the SDT for what he called a “bona fide” error and was handed a £9,000 penalty plus £50,000 costs.
Commenting on the changes, SRA chief executive Antony Townsend said: “[The agreements] should help to contain our costs. For solicitors they will mean a more timely and generally less costly process than going to the SDT.”