The solicitor did not respond to the SLCC when a statutory request was made for the relevant case file for the complaint to be investigated. Without any response from the solicitor, the SLCC raised a petition with the court. When no response was forthcoming to the court order served on the solicitor, a contempt hearing was set. The solicitor did not attend or provide any explanation for their absence. On that basis, the court found the solicitor to be in contempt of court and awarded expenses to the SLCC at the higher rate. This was despite the solicitor no longer practising, as the requirement to comply with professional commitments remains.

After the SLCC raised concerns with the lord president about the level of non-compliance of solicitors in producing documents to the SLCC, he asked both the Law Society and SLCC to work together, where appropriate, to build on what they were already doing to secure compliance.

Commenting on the decision, Juliet Smith, case investigations manager said: “While we’re grateful to the court for its decision, this is a wholly unsatisfactory situation. As a regulated profession and officers of the court, solicitors are expected to comply with their regulatory duties and to engage with their regulators and the court. Not doing so risks bringing the profession into disrepute and harming public confidence.

“This is only the second time a solicitor has been found in contempt of court in relation to non-compliance with a request from us for a file to investigate a complaint. However, we regularly see delays, excuses and a lack of response from firms, requiring us to take further action in more than a quarter of cases last year. That is simply unacceptable and causes additional cost and delay while eroding public trust in the profession.”