Acting against a former client whose confidential information you hold (SRA Code paras 6.3-6.5)
Two years ago Omar, a solicitor at Ashby Cole LLP, advised Lyndon Ltd on refinancing its debts and learned detailed confidential information about its cash flow and lenders. That retainer has ended. Petra Hale now asks the firm to act for her in a claim against Lyndon Ltd for an unpaid debt, and Lyndon's ability to pay is likely to be central to her tactics. The firm still holds Lyndon's file, and the information on it is material to Petra's matter. Petra says she is happy to sign anything to get Omar's help.
Which of the following best describes whether Ashby Cole LLP may act for Petra?
Choose one answer to see the reasoning.
Worked answer
Correct answer E: It may act only if effective measures leave no real risk of disclosing Lyndon's confidential information, or Lyndon gives informed consent, given or evidenced in writing.
THE RULE TO REMEMBER
A solicitor may act against a current or former client whose material confidential information they hold only if effective measures leave no real risk of disclosure or that client gives informed consent, given or evidenced in writing.
Acting against a former client whose confidential information you hold (SRA Code paras 6.3-6.5)
Paragraph 6.3 of the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs, RFLs and RSLs requires solicitors to keep the affairs of current and former clients confidential unless disclosure is required or permitted by law or the client consents. Paragraph 6.5 provides that a solicitor must not act for a client in a matter where that client has an interest adverse to another current or former client of the solicitor or their business, for whom confidential information material to the matter is held, unless (a) effective measures have been taken which result in there being no real risk of disclosure, or (b) the client whose information is held has given informed consent, given or evidenced in writing, to the solicitor acting, including to any protective measures. Petra's interests are adverse to Lyndon's and the firm holds material confidential information, so it can act only if one of those conditions is met.
Why A is wrong: Para 6.3 expressly extends confidentiality to former clients.
Why B is wrong: The para 6.4 duty to tell a client of material information does not override the para 6.3 duty to keep Lyndon's affairs confidential, which applies unless the law requires or permits disclosure or Lyndon consents; this tension is why para 6.5 restricts acting at all.
Why C is wrong: Under para 6.5(b) the relevant consent is that of the client whose confidential information is held (Lyndon), not the new client.
Why D is wrong: Para 6.5 permits acting where there is no real risk of disclosure through effective measures, or with the informed written consent of the former client.
That's today's practice done. Another featured question tomorrow.
Related questions
Co-defendants whose accounts conflict: acting for both (Code 6.2 and 6.5)
Which of the following best describes the firm's position?
Privileged advice mistakenly sent by seller's solicitor: must the buyer be told? (Code 6.4(d))
Under paragraph 6.4 of the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors, is Zainab obliged to tell her client what the letter says?
Joint clients forming a company who then disagree on a shareholders' agreement term (Code 6.2)
Which of the following best describes the firm's position under the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs, RFLs and RSLs?
A GOOD HABIT, DELIVERED
Tomorrow's question.
In your inbox.
One free question a day, with the answer and reasoning.
No course pitches. Just your daily practice.