## **Learning Outcomes**

This article covers:

- The meaning and legal significance of Principle 2 and its continuous application to professional and personal conduct
- Behaviours that undermine public trust, with realistic examples, aggravating/mitigating factors, and thresholds of seriousness
- How to analyse and apply Principle 2 in SQE2 fact patterns and client-facing advice
- Distinguishing Principle 2 from honesty (Principle 4) and integrity (Principle 5), and understanding their overlap
- The SRA Enforcement Strategy: assessing intent, harm, recurrence, vulnerability, remediation, and cooperation
- Likely regulatory outcomes and sanctions, including SRA fines, conditions, suspension, and referral to the SDT
- Notification and reporting duties (cautions, charges, serious breaches), and the impact of failure to notify or report
- Practical steps for firms and managers to foster a trustworthy culture, prevent breaches, and respond proportionately

## **SQE2 Syllabus**

For SQE2, you are required to understand the practical operation and impact of the SRA Principles, particularly the expectation of upholding public trust in the solicitors' profession, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

- understanding the definition and role of Principle 2 (public trust and confidence) within the SRA Principles framework
- recognising actions, omissions, or behaviour which may breach this Principle in both personal and professional contexts
- assessing the regulatory and disciplinary outcomes of a Principle 2 breach, including how the SRA approaches enforcement
- appreciating how honesty (objective test) and integrity interact with Principle 2, even where no crime or dishonesty is present
- understanding managers’ and firms’ responsibilities (including COLP/COFA roles) in preventing and addressing conduct that risks public trust
- knowing when cautions, charges or other events must be notified to the SRA and when serious breaches must be reported

## **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. What is required of solicitors under Principle 2 of the SRA Principles?
2. Can a solicitor breach Principle 2 through conduct in private life?
3. Which of the following will most likely breach Principle 2: persistent rudeness to colleagues, a minor motoring conviction, or involvement in a fraudulent investment scheme? Explain.
4. Are there circumstances where a solicitor may breach Principle 2 without acting dishonestly or committing a crime?

## **Introduction**

Principle 2 of the SRA Principles requires every solicitor to act in a way that upholds public trust and confidence in the solicitors’ profession and in legal services provided by authorised persons. This core requirement goes beyond technical compliance and demands the highest ethical behaviour. Public trust is the bedrock for clients' willingness to place their money, interests, and secrets in the hands of solicitors.

> **Key Term: Principle 2 (public trust and confidence)**  
> The SRA Principle requiring all regulated persons to act in a way that upholds public trust and confidence in the solicitors’ profession and legal services.

### The Purpose of Principle 2

Principle 2 is not only directed at preventing unlawful activity. Its purpose is to protect the profession's reputation, so the public remains willing to rely on solicitors as honest and ethical practitioners. Even a perception of impropriety can erode public confidence and damage the standing of the profession as a whole. Case law has long emphasised that the profession’s collective reputation is its most valuable asset and must be safeguarded—conduct undermining confidence can justify severe disciplinary outcomes even absent client loss.

> **Key Term: SRA Enforcement Strategy**  
> The published approach the SRA uses to assess seriousness and decide regulatory action in the public interest, considering intent, harm, vulnerability, recurrence, mitigation, and cooperation.

### Who Must Comply?

The obligation to uphold public trust applies to all solicitors, Registered European Lawyers (RELs), Registered Foreign Lawyers (RFLs), authorised persons, and firms regulated by the SRA. The Principle also affects managers, employees, and compliance officers. It applies irrespective of role, seniority or practice environment, and binds the regulated community inside and outside practice.

> **Key Term: authorised person**  
> Any person authorised by the SRA or another legal regulator to carry on legal activities.

### When Does Principle 2 Apply?

Principle 2 applies continuously to both professional and personal conduct. The SRA will consider behaviour outside of work if it could reasonably bring the reputation of the profession into disrepute, regardless of whether the act relates to legal practice. Offensive communications, discriminatory behaviour, violence, financial misconduct or criminal activity occurring in private life can have direct regulatory significance because they signal whether the public can trust those admitted to this profession.

### What Conduct Might Breach Principle 2?

The SRA's approach to Principle 2 is broad. Conduct may breach Principle 2 even if:

- it is not a crime or regulatory violation
- it occurs outside legal practice (for example, on social media or in community activities)
- it does not involve dishonesty or intent to mislead

Severity, context, audience, recurrence, and risk of harm are all relevant. Single serious events (such as violence, hate speech or fraud) and persistent patterns (such as bullying or abusive communications) may both undermine public trust. At the same time, genuinely trivial or isolated lapses with no broader implications may fall below the threshold of seriousness, but solicitors should adopt a cautious view: public confidence is easily damaged.

### **Worked Example 1.1**

A solicitor attends a private party and repeatedly makes racist and sexist comments. The party is not work-related and there are no clients present. A video of this conduct is shared online. The solicitor argues it was "off duty" behaviour.

> **Answer:** The solicitor is at risk of breaching Principle 2. Even though the conduct was outside the workplace, racist or sexist behaviour is likely to undermine public trust and confidence in solicitors as a whole.

### Types of Conduct Likely to Breach Principle 2

- Breaching Principle 2 may arise from, for example:
- Involvement in or connection to fraudulent schemes, financial misconduct, or criminal activity (even if not convicted)
- Sending or reposting offensive or discriminatory material on social media, whether in personal or professional capacity
- Bullying, harassment, or discriminatory conduct to colleagues, clients, or others
- Abusing the trusted role of solicitor for personal gain or to take unfair advantage of others
- Serious incompetence or reckless disregard for regulatory rules
- Persistently rude, threatening, or abusive written or verbal communications
- Violence or sexual misconduct, or behaviour reflecting strong discriminatory views
- Repeated disregard of court orders or rules in litigation which signals contempt for the administration of justice

> **Key Term: public trust and confidence**  
> The expectation by society that members of the solicitors’ profession behave ethically and can be relied upon to act in clients’ and the public's best interests.
>
> **Key Term: offensive communication**  
> A message or statement (including emails or social media posts) that is abusive, discriminatory, or likely to cause serious offence to a reasonable person.

### **Worked Example 1.2**

A solicitor reposts a Tweet in support of a public call for violence against a political group. The repost is from the solicitor's private account, and the solicitor claims strong political views.

> **Answer:** Principle 2 may be breached here because the action is likely to reduce public trust and confidence in the legal profession, irrespective of the solicitor acting in a personal capacity.

### Regulatory Approach and Consequences

The SRA can and does investigate conduct falling short of Principle 2, even if no client suffered direct harm. The SRA usually assesses:

- seriousness and risk of recurrence
- potential impact on public confidence and reputation of the profession
- whether conduct shows evidence of discriminatory views, abuse of position, or financial unreliability
- the vulnerability of those affected and any harm caused or likely to be caused
- cooperation, transparency, remediation and reflection shown by the individual or firm

Possible outcomes include regulatory advice or warnings, financial penalties, conditions on practising certificates, suspension, and referral to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) for the most serious cases (including possible striking off). Firms may face business controls, publication of decisions and, in significant cases, changes to authorisation or management arrangements. The SDT has wide powers including suspension, imposing unlimited fines, and striking off; the SRA can also impose fines and controls where it is proportionate in the public interest.

> **Key Term: Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)**  
> An independent tribunal which hears serious cases of professional misconduct and can impose sanctions including suspension and striking off.

The SRA Enforcement Strategy seeks proportionate action focused on serious misconduct. Constructive engagement, early remedial steps, and being honest/open with clients can mitigate outcomes; concealment, victimisation of whistleblowers, and repeated patterns aggravate them. Conduct or behaviour outside practice is expressly open to examination where it raises public confidence concerns.

### **Exam Warning**

> The SRA takes a broad view of what may damage public trust. A finding of a criminal offence, even unrelated to practice (such as assault or theft), will almost always breach Principle 2. But even non-criminal behaviour, if grossly inappropriate, can equally trigger a breach.

### Interplay with Other Principles

Breaching Principle 2 does not require dishonesty (Principle 4) or a lack of integrity (Principle 5), but these often overlap. For instance, a solicitor acting dishonestly also undermines the profession’s reputation. A solicitor may behave without integrity (for example, recklessly allowing misleading information to stand) without being dishonest and still breach Principle 2 by eroding trust. Highly unprofessional, bullying or abusive behaviour can be sufficiently serious to breach Principle 2 even if no dishonesty is present.

> **Key Term: honesty (objective test)**  
> The two-stage test applied to dishonesty asks: what was the individual’s actual knowledge or belief as to the facts, and—given that state of mind—was the conduct dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people?
>
> **Key Term: integrity**  
> Adherence to ethical standards expected of professionals; it is broader than honesty and includes scrupulous accuracy, fairness, and avoiding misleading others.

### Principle 2 in Relation to Clients and the Public

Clients trust solicitors with sensitive and valuable affairs. If solicitors act in ways that suggest they are not fit to be trusted, clients may refuse to take advice or may question the objectivity and fairness of the legal system as a whole. Public trust includes faith in the justice system; significant personal misconduct or repeated unprofessional behaviour by legal professionals can diminish respect for the rule of law and the administration of justice.

### Firms’ Obligations

Firms must ensure that systems, training, and supervision encourage ethical conduct at all levels. Repeated failures to address workplace misconduct, such as allowing bullying or discrimination, can lead to firm-wide Principle 2 breaches. Managers are accountable for ensuring compliance with regulatory arrangements and for maintaining business systems to detect and address risks (including offensive communications and harassment). Compliance officers (COLP/COFA) must record, assess and report serious breaches to the SRA and support a culture that prevents behaviour undermining public trust.

> **Key Term: COLP/COFA**  
> The compliance officer for legal practice (COLP) and compliance officer for finance and administration (COFA) are appointed to ensure firm-wide compliance, including recording and reporting serious breaches and safeguarding client money.

### Examples of Principle 2 Breaches (by conduct type)

- Sending hidden, derogatory or intimidating e-mails to opposing parties to gain unfair advantage
- Posting or sharing discriminatory material online, even outside working hours
- Participating in or enabling high-risk or fraudulent investment schemes
- Failing to protect vulnerable clients or third parties from abuse or harm
- Ignoring allegations of harassment or discrimination within the firm and failing to take remedial action
- Misleading statements to regulators, the court, or third parties and allowing errors to stand

### **Worked Example 1.3**

A solicitor, in litigation, sends repeated emails to a self-represented party threatening baseless legal action unless the party settles, knowing the party is vulnerable and unrepresented.

> **Answer:** This conduct is likely to breach Principle 2, as it abuses the solicitor’s position of power for unfair gain and risks undermining public confidence in solicitors’ fairness.

### The Importance of Perception

How the public, clients, and courts view solicitors’ behaviour is central. Even if the solicitor’s intent is not to deceive or harm, conduct that creates a risk of lost trust can amount to a breach. Ask whether an ordinary member of the public would have their confidence in the profession reduced if told the full facts—if so, Principle 2 may be engaged.

### Notifications and Reporting

Conduct that undermines public trust often triggers notification/reporting duties. Under the Code of Conduct:

- charges, convictions or cautions must be notified promptly to the SRA (subject to relevant rehabilitation law)
- facts reasonably believed to be capable of amounting to a serious breach must be reported
- cooperation duties require prompt, full and accurate engagement with SRA enquiries

Failure to notify or report can itself undermine public trust and aggravate the regulatory response. Events in private life (for example, cautions for assault or theft) are within scope of notification duties.

### **Worked Example 1.4**

A solicitor receives a police caution for shoplifting. They were not charged or convicted. The incident occurred outside work and the solicitor believes it is a private matter.

> **Answer:** The caution must be notified to the SRA. A caution may engage Principle 2 because it undermines confidence in trustworthiness. Prompt notification and reflection/remediation may mitigate, but failure to notify can itself breach regulatory duties and damage public trust further.

### Managing Risk Through Honesty and Integrity

Public trust cases frequently involve honesty and integrity. The honesty test is objective (assessed by ordinary decent people) once the individual’s actual state of knowledge/belief is known. Integrity requires more than mere truthfulness; it demands scrupulous care to avoid misleading others and to uphold ethical standards. Errors swiftly corrected with openness may not breach Principle 2; knowingly allowing errors to persist or reckless disregard for rules can do so.

### **Worked Example 1.5**

A partner discovers that the firm’s website inadvertently published an inaccurate statement implying guaranteed success rates. The partner hesitates to remove it, fearing reputational harm if corrected publicly.

> **Answer:** Leaving inaccurate, potentially misleading publicity in place risks undermining public trust and may breach Principle 2 (as well as Para 8.8 on accurate publicity). Swift correction, openness, and improved controls are expected; concealment or delay aggravates the risk of regulatory action.

### Principle 2 in Action: Overlaps with Litigation Duties

Misleading conduct in litigation has special resonance because it affects the administration of justice and public perception of fairness. Failing to correct known inaccuracies, being complicit in misleading the court, or intimidating opponents can both breach Principle 2 and separate duties to the court. Where duties conflict, those safeguarding the wider public interest (rule of law, administration of justice, public trust) take precedence over an individual client’s interests.

### Supporting a Trustworthy Culture

- train staff on offensive communications and equality duties
- make clear standards for social media and external communications
- record and review complaints and internal misconduct reports
- ensure undertakings are carefully controlled and honoured; breaches of undertakings damage public trust and may lead to personal liability
- maintain robust response plans for incidents (including immediate remedial steps, client openness, and SRA cooperation)

### **Revision Tip**

> Always ask: “Would ordinary members of the public think less of the profession if they knew what happened?” If yes, Principle 2 may be engaged.

## **Key Point Checklist**

_This article has covered the following key knowledge points:_

- Principle 2 requires solicitors to act in a way that upholds public trust and confidence in the profession and legal services at all times.
- This duty applies both in and outside practice, whether professional or personal conduct is in question.
- Not all improper behaviour will be criminal or dishonest—conduct bringing discredit on the profession may be enough for a breach.
- Offences or serious misconduct outside practice almost always amount to Principle 2 breaches.
- SRA enforcement focuses on seriousness, impact, recurrence and remediation; outcomes range from warnings and fines to SDT sanctions including suspension or striking off.
- Notifications (e.g., cautions, charges) and serious breach reporting duties frequently arise in public trust cases; failure to notify/report can aggravate outcomes.
- Honesty and integrity often overlap with Principle 2; objective dishonesty and lack of integrity can independently undermine public trust.
- Firms must take steps to ensure that their systems, staff and communications do not risk undermining public trust, with managers and compliance officers accountable for effective controls.

## **Key Terms and Concepts**

- Principle 2 (public trust and confidence)
- authorised person
- public trust and confidence
- offensive communication
- SRA Enforcement Strategy
- Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
- honesty (objective test)
- integrity
- COLP/COFA

The SRA Principles - Upholding public trust and confidence in the solicitors' profession