The SRA Principles - Acting with integrity

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this article, you will be able to: define acting with integrity as required by the SRA Principles, recognise how integrity differs from honesty, identify common scenarios where integrity issues may arise for solicitors, and accurately apply the principle to practical SQE2-style situation questions.

SQE2 Syllabus

For SQE2, you are required to understand the nature and requirement of acting with integrity as imposed by the SRA Principles. You must be able to identify breaches of integrity in scenario-based situations and critically distinguish integrity from related concepts such as honesty. Pay particular attention in your revision to:

• how the SRA defines integrity for solicitors and regulated firms
• practical examples of conduct that may lack integrity, especially where not necessarily dishonest
• the overlap and distinction between honesty and integrity
• correctly advising a client or supervisor if you identify potential breaches of integrity in practice

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. Which principle in the SRA Principles 2019 relates to acting with integrity?
   1. Principle 1
   2. Principle 4
   3. Principle 5
   4. Principle 7

2. True or False: Acting without integrity always means acting dishonestly.

3. Which of the following is an example of a lack of integrity, but not necessarily dishonesty?
   1. Fabricating documents
   2. Carelessly giving an undertaking you cannot perform
   3. Stealing client money
   4. Lying to a client about the status of their matter

4. In the context of the SRA Principles, why is it important to distinguish between integrity and honesty when analysing a scenario in your SQE2 assessment?

Introduction

Integrity is a headline obligation imposed on all solicitors and SRA-regulated entities in England and Wales. For the SQE2 assessments, recognising what behaviour meets—or falls short of—this standard is essential. The SRA requires solicitors to act with integrity in their work, as well as in their private lives where this affects public trust in the profession. Understanding this standard, how it is distinguished from honesty, and how to apply it in practice is frequently assessed.

Key Term: integrity
Integrity in the context of SRA regulation means a broader quality than just honesty: it denotes adherence to professional, legal and ethical standards, requiring solicitors to be open, fair, ethical and to uphold the spirit, not just the letter, of the rules.

Key Term: honesty
Honesty is a narrower concept than integrity. It means being truthful, not lying or deceiving. The standard for honesty is judged by the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people.

The requirement to act with integrity

The duty to act with integrity is found in Principle 5 of the SRA Principles 2019. This applies to all regulated solicitors and law firms. Unlike the narrower concept of honesty (which prohibits deliberate lying or deception), integrity is breached by conduct falling short of honesty, including behaviour showing disregard for professional standards or the interests of others.

Integrity compared to honesty

The SRA, supported by the courts, has confirmed that acting without integrity does not always mean acting dishonestly. A solicitor who fails to check the basis for transactions, turns a blind eye to suspicious activity, or acts recklessly with client interests may lack integrity even if not subjectively dishonest.

Key Term: acting without integrity
Failing to maintain professional standards, showing wilful or reckless disregard for regulatory rules, or being indifferent to the potential risk of harm to clients or others.

Worked Example 1.1

A junior solicitor signs several cheques from a client account as instructed by a senior partner, without querying their purpose. Later, the SRA finds the payments were not authorised by the client and some went to the senior partner’s associate. There is no evidence that the junior solicitor benefited or knew of the wrongdoing, but the SRA is investigating.

Question: Has the junior solicitor acted without integrity? Is there necessarily dishonesty?

Answer:
The junior solicitor's lack of enquiries and failure to safeguard client money show a disregard for professional standards expected of a solicitor—hence a lack of integrity. Unless it is shown that the junior solicitor intended any wrongdoing or realised the impropriety, they have not acted dishonestly. Dishonesty requires a subjective element; integrity is breached by reckless or indifferent conduct.

Examples of conduct showing lack of integrity

• Failing to safeguard client money
• Knowingly or recklessly breaching SRA rules or undertakings
• Allowing or enabling misleading statements to persist by omission
• Acting when professionally conflicted without proper steps or disclosure
• Taking unfair advantage of clients or third parties

Key Term: undertaking
An undertaking is a legally binding promise by a solicitor or law firm, given orally or in writing, to do or not do something in the course of practice, on which the recipient can reasonably rely.

Worked Example 1.2

A solicitor gives a written undertaking to transfer funds on completion of a transaction. The solicitor knows funds are not yet available and fails to inform the recipient. The transfer is not made. Is this a lack of integrity?

Answer:
Yes. Giving an undertaking that is impossible or reckless as to its fulfilment demonstrates a lack of integrity, even if there was no intent to deceive. Such conduct jeopardises public trust in solicitors' undertakings and fails to meet professional standards.

Relationship to other SRA Principles

A lack of integrity usually also causes a breach of other Principles. For example, acting without integrity often means:

• risking public trust (Principle 2)
• failing to act in the client's best interests (Principle 7)
• failing to comply with legal or regulatory obligations (Principle 1 or Principle 6)

However, it does not always automatically equate to dishonesty or result in criminal liability. The distinction is important both for exam analysis and for practical decision-making in legal settings.

Exam Warning

For the SQE2 exam, do not assume that the absence of dishonesty or personal gain means there is no breach of integrity. Integrity is judged by objective professional standards. Always analyse the facts for recklessness, carelessness, or disregard for required conduct, not just intent.

Common scenarios in SQE2 assessments

Assessors expect you to:

• Identify lack of integrity in both overt acts (e.g. covering up mistakes) and failures to do the right thing (e.g. not correcting a client’s misunderstanding).
• Distinguish when a solicitor is liable for lack of integrity without being dishonest.
• Explain what practical steps should have been taken to act with integrity.

Worked Example 1.3

A solicitor is instructed in a property transaction and notes some facts that do not add up (e.g. the client wishes to pay unusually large sums in cash). The solicitor does not raise any queries or record any investigation, and proceeds as normal.

Question: What principle is engaged? Is there a problem with integrity?

Answer:
The solicitor's lack of active enquiry breaches the duty of integrity—by failing to act with the alertness and scepticism required to prevent wrongdoing. Even without evidence of dishonesty, the conduct does not meet professional expectations.

The test for lack of integrity

The key legal test for lack of integrity is whether the solicitor was wilfully or recklessly indifferent to the standards required of the profession. It is an objective assessment based on what is expected of a competent and ethical solicitor. This is different from dishonesty, which requires that the solicitor themselves realise—or would be sure to realise—that they were deceiving or misleading.

Revision Tip

For scenario questions in the SQE2 exam, always consider both honesty and integrity. Assess whether a solicitor was simply careless or crossed into recklessness or deliberate wrongdoing. If in doubt, explain the risk regarding integrity, even if dishonesty may not be proved.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• The obligation to act with integrity is set out in Principle 5 of the SRA Principles 2019 and applies to all solicitors, employees, and firms regulated by the SRA.
• Integrity is distinct from, and broader than, honesty. Lack of integrity may exist even where there is no dishonesty.
• Conduct demonstrating a lack of integrity includes wilful or reckless indifference to proper standards, failing to enquire as appropriate, or allowing misleading impressions to persist.
• Common exam scenarios include breaches involving undertakings, client money, professional conflicts, and carelessness with professional duties.
• When analysing breach of integrity for SQE2, focus on the objective standards of the profession—not just the subjective intent of the solicitor.

Key Terms and Concepts

• integrity
• honesty
• acting without integrity
• undertaking