Susan Humble, clerk to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, states in her letter ‘Checks and balances’ that: ‘Statistically, only a small proportion of SDT decisions are appealed and it speaks volumes for the quality of the decision-making process that its decisions are overturned in very few cases.’

The real reason only a small proportion of decisions are appealed is that very few solicitors can afford to bring such an appeal by the time they have suffered the financial consequences of an SRA investigation and prosecution.

Moreover, the real reason few decisions are overturned is that, until very recently, the courts were reluctant to interfere with the decisions of the tribunal because the expert professional disciplinary tribunal was considered to be best placed to weigh the seriousness of professional misconduct.

The High Court’s decisions do not, therefore, ‘speak volumes for the quality of the decision-making process’ at the tribunal. It is disingenuous and misleading of the clerk to suggest that they do.

Chris Kirk-Blythe, Director of risk & compliance, LBS Legal, Leeds