The Law Society of Northern Ireland and its agents accept no responsibility for the accuracy of contributed articles or statements appearing in this magazine and any view or opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the Law Society’s Council, save where otherwise indicated. No responsibility for loss or distress occasioned to any person acting or refraining from acting as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by the authors, contributors, editor or publisher. The editor reserves the right to make publishing decisions on any advertisement or editorial article submitted to this magazine and to refuse publication or to edit any advertisement or editorial material as seems appropriate to the editor. The Law Society of Northern Ireland and its agents do not endorse any goods or services advertised, nor any claims or representations made in any advertisement in this magazine. No part of this publication may be reproduced without the written permission of the copyholder and publisher, application for which should be made to the publisher.
Foreword David Lavery, CEO of the Law Society of Northern Ireland
Welcome to the Autumn edition of The Writ. As we begin the new legal year I hope that you are all recharged after the summer break and ready to embrace the demands of professional life once more.
It is some of the current challenges facing legal professionals that are again our focus at this time. In a popular issue in 2023, The Writ centred on ‘Risk’, and building on from that our Head of Professional Conduct, Laura McCullough, explores some recent developments and considerations for the sector. We also hear from more of the Conduct team as they outline the importance of tools and protocols such as digital verification and Call, Check, and Confirm, as well as highlighting key findings from the UK National Risk Assessment of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing 2025.
These articles are particularly timely in light of the increasing number of cyber threats to the profession, as recently highlighted by our President, Colin Mitchell.
Other articles include an illuminating interview with a solicitor who recently went through the process of closing her practice, and a topical piece by the former Director of Law Centre(NI), Les Allamby, on the Human Rights Act, as it celebrates 25 years.
I hope that you enjoy this issue, and if you have any comments or ideas for future content, please let us know at writ@lawsoc-ni.org
David Lavery CEO Law Society of Northern Ireland
Risk Management
A Professional Conduct Perspective
The Law Society of Northern Ireland reinforces that it is the responsibility for everyone within the legal sector to continue to reflect and build on what measures can be implemented to manage risk.
Our role does not sit purely within the realms of regulatory compliance but also to ensure members are supported to be aware of the risks and to take proactive steps to manage and mitigate those risks.
These measures are taken to ensure the success and protection of firms into the future and to protect clients using their legal services.
The work of the Professional Conduct Department is broad, but it provides a valuable insight into the risks facing solicitors and their clients, the mitigations which are effective and the consequences of ineffective risk assessment and mitigation.
In this context it is timely to be able to share with readers some of the Professional Conduct Department’s work in support of solicitors in the following risk-related areas.
Client Complaints
Implementation of the Legal Complaints and Regulation Act (Northern Ireland) 2016 brings new client complaints arrangements and the Solicitors Complaints Committee came into operation from 1 September 2025.
In preparation for this the Society has this year:
• Provided continuing Professional Development (CPD) training for its members on the implementation of the Act, the new client complaints arrangements and the role of the Solicitor Complaints Committee.
• Provided further information on the new client complaints arrangements and the Solicitors Complaints Committee which is located in the Members Dashboard of the Society’s website.
• Consulted with members on proposed procedural rules for the Solicitors Complaints Committee.
• Issued guidance and resources on in-house complaints for members when dealing with complaints,
• Provided in-house complaints procedure and complaints register templates.
• Delivered a bespoke CPD training series on client complaints across practice areas.
More information is available for readers in the article provided by the Law Society’s Solicitor Complaints Manager on page 18
Cybercrime
Scammers continue to actively target solicitors and their clients with increasingly sophisticated attacks on money transfers. Scammers target email correspondence between solicitors and their clients in relation to the transfer of money by intercepting, misdirecting and defrauding the client into making payments into the scammers’ bank accounts.
The Society has so far this year had cause to issue six dedicated Scam Alerts following reports to it by members. The need for solicitors to remain vigilant when dealing with transactions and to remember to follow the Call, Check and Confirm advice and resources published by the Law Society to support members remains paramount.
The Society continues to make extensive Cyber Crime Resources available to its members. During the year the Society has:
• Promoted the Government backed Cyber Essentials scheme, providing members with access to free Cyber Essentials accreditation via NI Cyber Security Centre.
• Held dedicated Cyber Awareness CPD events focused on the increasing threat of cyber-attacks on the legal sector
• Run three in-person cyber training events, including real-time phishing attack simulations. These have been held at locations outside of Belfast to support rural practices who remain vulnerable.
• Partnered with Gallaghers/Coalition to provide free network monitoring and cyber support to members.
We continue to emphasise the need for firms to invest time and resources to understand risk from Cyberattacks, the importance of proper systems, security, processes, training, policies and vigilance. We highlight again the vulnerability of free email addresses and the need for robust passwords.
More information is available for readers in the article by the Society’s Professional Conduct Manager on page 9
Money Laundering
Solicitors continue to take their place at the forefront of advising and assisting members of the public in the provision of legal services. Whether it is purchasing a first home, establishing a new company, resolving a contractual dispute or seeking advice on an accident at work, a solicitor remains the trusted point of contact. However, with the trusted position, comes the fact that solicitors themselves need to remain vigilant to the risks their services provide.
The recently published fourth UK National Risk Assessment of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (the NRA), continues to assess legal professionals at high risk of money laundering, with conveyancing, trust or company services and misuse and exploitation of client accounts again assessed as the highest risk services.
The NRA acknowledges that the majority of legal firms invest in ensuring their services are not used for criminal purposes and that, across the UK, in 2023/24 only 16% of firms reviewed were deemed non-compliant with their obligations under the Money Laundering Regulations 20171. However, it states that
‘….where legal professionals are complacent, take a ‘tick box’ approach to compliance, or lack sector specific knowledge and/or training on the money laundering threat, the risk of the services provided being exploited increases’.
The NRA is an essential tool in ongoing efforts to tackle money laundering and terrorist financing, providing a clear and comprehensive assessment of the current and emerging threats. It sets out how criminals try to move illicit funds through the UK and the risk this poses.
For the regulated sector, including solicitor firms, it provides essential insight into how their services may be exploited for illicit purposes, and guidance on how these threats can be identified and mitigated.
More information is available for readers in the article by the Law Society’s Head of AML Policy on page 10
Also available in this edition is information and guidance on mitigating money laundering risk through effective use of digital identification services to apply client due diligence measures.
Professional Conduct
It is a common misconception that only clients can file professional conduct complaints against solicitors. In fact, anyone impacted by a solicitor’s actions, such as third parties or other professionals, can report concerns to the Society.
1. Undertakings
I give you my word…
Undertakings are an integral part of the legal process. A breach of an undertaking is a matter of professional conduct and non-performance would constitute a breach of the Society’s regulations. Complaints concerning Undertakings weighs heavily on matters considered by the Professional Conduct Committee and frequently stem from a failure to respond promptly or at all. Such lapses undermine professional obligations and the legal process. Proactive engagement and prioritising timely communication is essential to mitigate the risks of escalation to the Society.
Practical tips
• Consider if an Undertaking should be given! Question, is it in the best interest of the client? Is it more suitable as a contractual condition? Is it within my control or would I have to rely on a third party?
• Undertakings should form part of the firm’s risk management policies and procedures including the use of an Undertakings Register.
• Build awareness through staff training and regular checks and balances.
• Consider a designated solicitor who will review and authorise non-standard Undertakings.
• Compliance with Undertakings should be diarised as a key date.
The Society is continually monitoring complaints to identify key themes and trends arising. In turn, this highlights areas to practitioners that they should be aware of within their practice.
2. Conflicts of Interest
To act or not to act, that is the question…
Conflicts of interest can arise when a solicitor’s duties to one client compromise their obligation to another or their own interests. Such conflicts can lead to complaints. Solicitors must identify, disclose, and manage conflicts promptly to uphold client trust and to mitigate the risk of a complaint to the Society.
Practical Steps – how to manage the risk
• Consider if you can act in all the clients’ best interests
• Is there any reason why you can’t act in each of the clients’ best interests? You should also consider any ‘own’ interests.
• If I do this for client A, will it be detrimental to client B?
• Would my advice be any different if I only acted for one of these clients?
• Conflicts of interest should form part of the firm’s risk management policies and procedures.
• Who is the point of contact in the practice to escalate consideration of a potential conflict of interest.
• Complete your conflicts checks at the outset, using case management system or accounts system. Ensure you don’t breach confidentiality when completing the conflict checks.
• Keep the conflict checks under review, it is an ongoing duty.
• Keep a conflict register.
• Create awareness through regular training and file reviews.
• Ensure conflict letters are provided to clients at an early stage and are kept under review.
This year we have noted the following top three areas of complaint as follows:
3. Vulnerable Persons
Does the client have capacity?
Complaints made often involve concerns about handling cases with clients who lack mental capacity or are vulnerable. These issues typically arise from failures to assess capacity, communicate effectively, or act in the client’s best interest. Solicitors must exercise heightened diligence to protect vulnerable clients, ensuring compliance to mitigate the risk of a complaint.
Practical tips
• Consider red flags and make reasonable enquiries with the client, their family, any care home and/or medical professionals
• Identify who the client is and assure yourself that the correct legal authority is in place before you agree to accept instructions from a third party acting on your client’s behalf
• Keep a record of steps and enquiries made.
The Society will be building on these themes and rolling out bespoke training on specific areas for the membership.
Monitoring and Inspection
The Society adopts a risk-based approach to its supervision. This enables the Society to allocate resources to areas with higher risk and to use its resources more effectively, while considering the likelihood of unwanted outcomes.
Simply put, our Risk Based Approach means:
• Reviewing firms and the legal services they provide. Including:
- the nature and complexity of services provided by firms
- the types of services provided (nature of transactions)
- size
- business model
- corporate governance arrangements
- client profiles
- geographic location
- countries of operation
• Identifying and assessing Inherent Risk around those services
• Considering the Risk Mitigation measures firms have in place as part of the inspection process including:
- the quality of the firm’s Risk Assessment (policy) –
- their internal oversight functions, how these work
- the adequacy of staff training
Other Risk Areas for Solicitors
In addition to the above noted risk areas for solicitors, the Society has in its Compulsory Risk Management CPD, this year under the theme of Managing Risk in Legal Practice –considered other priority risk areas of:
• Those legal practice areas subject to most claims
• File management
• Supervision within firms of work being completed for clients
• Wellbeing and workplace culture
• Technology risks, with emerging technologies, such as generative AI posing both opportunities and threats to the legal sector.
The need for such risks to be managed effectively is vital given the potential for reputational harm, financial loss and regulatory action when they are not.
• Conducting our own Risk Assessment, informed by:
i. Our Sector Specific Knowledge; ii. Knowledge and Experience of solicitors and firms- compliance.
iii. External and Internal Information; this can include the use of historic firm data we hold in relation to Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) referral outcomes, Inter-professional (or other) Complaints and Statutory Annual Accountants Reports etc
The Society also seeks to support members by:
• Applying effective, proportionate and dissuasive enforcement measures
• Issuing warning letters to drive improvement
• Issuing Guidance and regulatory notices
• Publishing its AML/CTF Sector Risk Assessment and Supervisor’s Annual Report
– AML (Regulation 46A Report)
• Contributing to the HM Treasury approved, Legal Sector Affinity Group AML Guidance for the Legal Sector and making same available to members
• Providing targeted CPD training events, with recordings remaining available to members
• Producing targeted resources to assist members with their compliance
Regarding trends, in the last reporting period (6 April 2024 to 5 April 2025), the top types of non-compliance by solicitor firms with their obligations under the Money Laundering Regulations that the Law Society encountered were:
1. Inadequate Source of Funds/Source of Wealth checks/procedures
2. Inadequate Customer Due Diligence procedures
3. Inadequate (or no) Firm Wide Risk Assessment
4. Inadequate record keeping
The Professional Conduct Department will assist firms who are unsure of any aspect associated with compliance or queries that may arise and may be contacted at regulation@lawsoc-ni.org
For example, the risk-based approach is embedded in UK legislation and AML best practice. 97% of solicitor firms in Northern Ireland have reported providing services in scope of the Money Laundering Regulations. As such these firms are required under the said statutory Regulations, to identify and assess the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing to which their businesses are subject and to target their resources to put in place controls to mitigate and manage those risks which are highest.
To support firms in their risk assessments, the Society’s AML Hub has recently undertaken Firm Wide Risk Assessment (FWRA) project work. This has included a review and categorisation of a sample of FWRAs obtained from firms of across all types, sizes and risk categories.
Findings from the Review have informed the development of FWRA resources for solicitor firms including a template FWRA, which will be issued later this term. The Society is committed to assisting firms meet compliance as demonstrated via this project.
The effective management of risk should be top of everyone’s agenda. It serves to:
• Protect the public
• Drive high professional and ethical standards.
• Protect the reputation of the profession; and
• Maintain confidence in the Society as the statutory regulator and professional body supervisor.
Laura McCullough Head of Professional Conduct
The Year of the ‘Cyberattack’
Looking back on what is now 11 years within ‘PSNI Cyber’, 2025 stands out perhaps more than any other, as the year in which cybercrime became household news (and we are yet to reach Q4).
From Belfast to Bristol and the office to the kitchen, in May alone the public discussed local and national headlines covering ransomware attacks against bodies such as the Co-op, West Lothian Council Educational Network and of course M&S.
Underreported across the UK and Ireland, ransomware attacks continue to impact organisations across all sectors in Northern Ireland and, as recent experience shows, they have the potential to target a law firm whether they operate as a sole practice or large partnership.
While incidents such as that experienced by M&S have the potential to impact operations to the extent it becomes public news, in general terms incidents reported to the Cyber Crime Centre over recent year have started to involve manageable operational impact. This is in some way explained by organisations’ increased understanding of the threat, along with the development of robust backups and recovery plans, as well as engagement with parties such as NCSC Assured Providers. But increasingly, the challenge faced by local organisations is dealing with a reported or confirmed loss of data.
Those with a role in data security or involved in data breach incidents will be aware of the CIA triad of ‘Confidentiality, Integrity and Availability’. Based on encryption, ransomware by its very nature has always targeted the ‘Availability’ strand of the CIA triad and for those without the necessary backups and recovery plans, this remains a significant risk. Just as organisations have developed a better understanding of how to prevent, detect or recover from a ransomware incident, so too have threat actors developed a better understanding of the pressure points likely to increase the chances of receiving a payment, moving their focus towards data exfiltration and the threat to publicise or auction data via online data leak sites.
As shown in the following message received by a local victim, threat actors have also taken steps to make direct contact with organisations in an effort to apply pressure:
“I represent a group of hackers. My message is a question for your company. Are you planning to contact the hackers or you don’t care if your files are published by the hackers? They just want to know your final decision. If you don’t care there’s no need to react your files will be published soon… Your company could be involved in some legal issues and even court cases because of the leak of information, you should understand that… You still have an opportunity to resolve that issue as soon as possible and peacefully.”
In less than 50 seconds, the polite intermediary in this and similar calls raised a number of key points such as, ‘you don’t care if your files are published’, ‘legal issues’ and ‘leak of information’, reflecting the fact threat actors understand the regulatory and reputational risks ‘data loss’ can pose to an otherwise functioning organisation.
Those familiar with UK GDPR legislation will be aware of the need to ensure personal data is protected against ‘unauthorised or unlawful processing’ or to come back to the CIA triad, that its ‘Confidentiality and Integrity’ is maintained (Art 5(1)(f) UK GDPR) with appropriate measures (Art 32 UK GDPR).
The attack against M&S resulted in an impact I am sure many readers experienced first-hand, be that issues with payments, online ordering or receiving emails notifying of potential data loss.
In considering ‘appropriate measures’, PSNI Cyber Protect and partners such as the NICSC (Northern Ireland Cyber Security Centre) continue to support the adoption of Cyber Essentials Plus as a way of both baselining an organisation’s current level of cybersecurity and demonstrating to third parties that a tangible step has been taken to minimise the risk posed by common Cyberattacks.
Focused on prevention, measures such as Cyber Essentials need to be complimented by steps taken to ensure the ‘Integrity and confidentially’ of relevant data is maintained and that organisations are resilient in the event of an incident.
To help organisations assess their cyber resilience, the National Cyber Security Centre (ncsc.gov.uk) offers the Cyber Assessment Framework (CAF). Designed to be ‘outcome focused’, ‘compatible with the use of appropriate existing cyber security guidance and standards’ and as ‘straightforward and cost-effective to apply as possible’, the CAF provides a framework to those looking to carry out cyber resilience assessments on objectives such as ‘Managing Security Risk’ and ‘Minimising the impact of cyber security events’, providing ‘Indicators of Good Practice’ (IGPs) on key topics such as ‘Supply Chains’ and ‘Stored Data’.
For those organisations without an internal Cyber/Information Security team, the CAF offers areas to explore with contracted third party Managed Security Service Providers and a recognised pathway towards improving overall cyber resilience as you seek to achieve IGPs across relevant topics.
For information on Cyber Protect services please visit psni.police.uk/cyber-protect
Samuel
Kinkaid Regional Cyber Protect Officer PSNI
Safeguarding Legal Transactions
The Vital Role of Call, Check, and Confirm
In an increasingly digital world, where emails fly back and forth at lightning speed, fraudsters are unfortunately becoming more sophisticated at targeting solicitors.
As a regulator dedicated to upholding the highest standards in the legal profession, the Law Society of Northern Ireland is committed to equipping practitioners with tools to protect their clients, firm, and reputation. One such essential protocol is ‘Call, Check, and Confirm’- a straightforward three-step process designed to verify critical information before any financial transaction. This approach isn’t just best practice; it is a crucial defence against the rising tide of cyber fraud. By publicising and promoting this method, we aim to mitigate the devastating impacts of fraud, ensuring solicitors can operate with confidence and integrity.
At its core, Call, Check, and Confirm is a simple yet powerful verification framework.
Step one, the - ‘Call’ - involves contacting the client or relevant party directly using a phone number already verified and on file, never one supplied in an email or unsolicited message. This guards against impersonation tactics when fraudsters hijack communications.
Step two - ‘Check’ - requires scrutinising the details of the instruction, such as bank account information, transaction amounts, and assessing the overall legitimacy of the request. Does it align with previous interactions? Are there red flags like urgency or unusual changes?
Finally, step three - ‘Confirm’ - demands documenting the verification in writing and obtaining explicit approval before proceeding. An attendance note of any conversation is essential. This protocol acts as a robust firewall, preventing fraud, miscommunication, and errors that could otherwise lead to catastrophic outcomes.
Why does this matter so profoundly for solicitors?
Legal professionals routinely handle highvalue transactions, from conveyancing deals involving property sales and purchases to settlement payments in litigation, and divorce proceedings. These are prime targets for fraudsters, who exploit the substantial sums involved. Recently, homebuyers and sellers have been hit hard by transfer scams, where deposits or proceeds are intercepted and diverted. For instance, a fraudster might pose as a client or solicitor, sending last-minute emails with ‘updated’ bank details that funnel funds straight to their accounts. Fraudsters don’t stop at one victim; they often target multiple clients simultaneously, amplifying the damage.
According to our data, email impersonation remains the top threat. Fraudsters hijack legitimate email threads between solicitors and clients, inserting fraudulent instructions that mimic familiar tones and reference confidential details gleaned from prior exchanges. The consequences of falling for such deceptions are severe. Solicitors owe a duty of care to act in their clients’ best interests, and failing to verify instructions can breach this ethical obligation.
Under Regulation 5.1 of the Solicitors’ Accounts Regulations 2014, any breach must be remedied promptly, including replacing misdirected funds from the firm’s own resources. Beyond monetary loss, there’s the spectre of professional negligence claims, investigations by the Information Commissioner’s Office for data breaches, and irreparable harm to a firm’s reputation. In short, the stakes are too high to rely on trust alone.
Implementing Call, Check, and Confirm doesn’t require overhauling a firm’s entire operation, it’s about smart integration. Start by updating processes to make it mandatory for all financial transactions; that there will be no authorisation without completion of the checks.
Engage clients early by outlining the procedure in retainer letters, email footers, and even enclosing our Call, Check, and Confirm leaflet. Establish clear methods for sharing and receiving bank details, emphasising they will not change unexpectedly. Train your full team comprehensively, from paralegals to partners, with regular sessions to reinforce vigilance. Leverage technology securely, store verified contacts in protected systems and enable two-factor authentication. Above all, document every step of the calls, checks, and confirmations, as evidence of due diligence.
Sceptics might view this as an added burden in a hectic workday, but the alternative is far costlier - untangling fraud can consume weeks or months, not minutes.
In essence, Call, Check, and Confirm is more than a checklist – it is a mindset of caution and professionalism amid escalating threats. By adopting this approach, solicitors not only comply with regulatory expectations but also safeguard the public interest. Let’s make it standard practice, for the protection of all.
More information on cybercrime awareness, including our Call, Check, and Confirm leaflet, can be found on our website: https://lawsoc-ni.org/ members/practice-careers/practiceinformation-support/cyber-crimeawareness
Caroline Glover Professional Conduct Manager Law Society of
Northern Ireland
UK National Risk Assessment of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing 2025
The UK’s fourth National Risk Assessment of Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing, jointly developed by HM Treasury and the Home Office was published in July. The Law Society of Northern Ireland’s Head of AML Policy, Brian Carson, reviews the 2025 NRA, its key findings for the legal sector and its importance for solicitors and their firms.
What is the National Risk Assessment (NRA) of Money Laundering (ML) and Terrorist Financing (TF)?
The NRA is the UK’s stock-take of money laundering and terrorist financing risks.
Under the Money Laundering Regulations 2017 HM Treasury and the Home Office must undertake a risk assessment to identify, assess, understand, and mitigate the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing affecting the United Kingdom and prepare a joint report setting out the findings of the risk assessment.
The 2025 NRA is the first update since 2020 and draws on information collected by the government, supervisors, law enforcement agencies, and the private sector and takes account of the latest developments and information.
For the regulated sector, including solicitor firms, it provides essential insight into how their services may be exploited for illicit purposes, and guidance on how these threats can be identified and mitigated.
Are there any differences to the structure of the 2025 NRA?
In addition to setting out the overarching money laundering risks faced by the UK and explaining the main crime threats that generate illicit funds, the 2025 NRA now includes greater detail on the main money laundering typologies in section 3.
Section 3 is relevant to all sectors and should be read in addition to the sectorspecific activities in section 5. Sectors include ‘Legal Service Providers’ and ‘Trust or Company Service Providers’.
The included typologies ‘Property’, ‘Companies and Trusts’, and ‘Professional Enablers’ are of note.
Section 3 also contains information about how to relate the NRA to System Prioritisation. As part of the government’s commitments in the Economic Crime Plan 2 2023-26, System Prioritisation aims to publish a list of economic crime priorities to inform public-private resource.
Trust or Company Service
(TCSPs)
What are the key findings for the legal sector?
• Legal Service Providers continue to be assessed at High risk of ML and Low risk of TF
• Trust or Company Service Providers (TCSPs) continue to be assessed at High risk of ML. However, TCSPs have been assessed at an increased (from Low) to Medium risk of TF (see table above).
• There has been no significant change in vulnerabilities to ML risk for Legal Service Providers since the 2020 NRA.
• Non-compliance levels remain relatively low across the legal sector, but the vulnerabilities the sector is exposed to and the scale of ML involving the legal sector have also remained high since 2020.
• Conveyancing, trust or company services and misuse and exploitation of client accounts continue to be assessed as the highest risk services.
• Solicitors (and other Legal Service Providers) that offer a combination of legal services are at the greatest risk in the legal sector.
• Sham litigation, identified as an emerging area of risk in the 2020 NRA, is not currently assessed to be a widespread or common issue.
• The volume of Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) submitted by the legal sector is referenced. The decrease in the volume of Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) submitted by the legal sector since 2020 is reported in the 2025 NRA but this decrease ‘is not judged to be indicative of a decrease in the scale of misuse of legal professionals.’
• The strength of risk mitigations for legal service providers considered in the 2025 NRA include:
- Compliance by legal professionals with their obligations under the Money Laundering Regulations
The 2025 NRA acknowledges the investment by the majority of firms in ensuring their services are not used for criminal purposes and the low levels of non-compliance by firms. But it is reported that ‘where legal professionals are complacent, take a ‘tick box’ approach to compliance, or lack sector specific knowledge and/or training on the money laundering threat, the risk of the services provided being exploited increases.’
- Effectiveness of supervision of legal professionals by Professional Body Supervisors (PBSs), where ‘weaknesses in supervision can increase these vulnerabilities.’ The 2025 NRA reports that compliance levels at PBSs have improved since the creation of the Office for Professional Body AML Supervision (OPBAS), with an increase in the number and total value of fines issued by PBSs, from 33 fines in 2022/23 to 240 fines issued in the 2023/24 highlighted.
• The NRA 2025 reports that the increased risk of TF for TCSPs from Low to Medium has been caused by an increased understanding of how the TCSP sector is exposed to organisational TF risks and there is no information to show a change in scale of TF through the TCSP sector since 2020.
• The TF risks relate to trusts, partnerships and companies which are formed in the UK for legitimate reasons but are at risk of benefiting from proceeds generated from businesses who operate in locations where there are higher terrorist activity risks, or areas under the control of terrorist groups.
Why is the 2025 NRA important for solicitors and their firms and what should they do next?
The 2025 NRA has confirmed that the threat of money laundering within the legal sector remains high, showing little movement since 2020, and solicitors must remain vigilant to this threat. For those providing TCSP services the change to Medium risk of terrorist financing will also be of note.
All solicitor firms should review the 2025 NRA and consider how its findings apply to their practice, the services that they provide and their client base and update their own firm-wide risk assessments and corresponding policies, controls and procedures as appropriate.
Brian Carson Head of AML Policy Law Society of Northern Ireland
Digital Identity Verification and Risk Mitigation
Given the trusted position that solicitors have and the value, nature and combination of the professional services that they provide, it is unfortunate, but not surprising, that the risks of criminals seeking to exploit their services are inherent for solicitors. Identity verification of clients is therefore a crucial step for solicitors in mitigating these risks.
Know your client (KYC) checks support solicitor firms in recognising those individuals or entities who may pose a higher risk of money laundering (ML) or terrorist financing (TF). Thorough and effective processes can also reduce the risk of the use of stolen identities or forged documents, common features of certain types of economic crime.
For these reasons, verification of client identity is a fundamental part of the Client Due Diligence (CDD) measures required by the Money Laundering Regulations 2017.
However, it is recognised that identity verification can be complex and resourceintensive for solicitor firms, and timeconsuming for legitimate clients or customers. In its 2024 Consultation on Improving the Effectiveness of the Money Laundering Regulations (the MLRs), the government stated its commitment to considering ways to minimise the burden of identity verification for firms and clients while ensuring it remains effective at reducing the risk of ML/TF. The government committed to making it easier to comply with identity verification requirements in the MLRs, including by encouraging the uptake of digital identity technologies.
Traditionally identity verification and CDD checks have relied on manual procedures. This often entails in-person meetings with clients, manual identity verification, and email exchanges to gather essential documents. But as technology has developed, use of digital or electronic identification and verification (EID&V) tools has increased.
Many of these digital identity services are available from various third-party commercial providers and can be used by solicitors in meeting their identity verification requirements. A challenge in their use can be that, under the MLRs, solicitors can never outsource their ultimate responsibility through reliance on third-party providers. The onus is on the solicitor to take appropriate steps to understand how the digital identification process works, where it derives its data from, how it searches and to be satisfied as to the validity and reliability of the information the process is reporting.
In response to the increasing use of EID&V tools and to support solicitors in their compliance, the Law Society of Northern Ireland has published guidance on using EID&V tools for CDD on the Members Dashboard of its website (available here).
Section 7 of the Anti-Money Laundering Guidance for the UK Legal Sector also considers in detail and underscores the importance of the use of such technology and EID&V tools. This single sector Guidance has been approved by HM Treasury and is produced by the Legal Sector Affinity Group (LSAG) which comprises all the UK legal sector professional body supervisors, including the Society.
The accompanying case study concerns a firm which was identified by the Society on inspection as requiring more robust CDD measures in order to highlight some of the issues that should be taken into consideration when utilising EID&V providers.
The use of EID&V is clearly permitted by the MLRs, with Regulation 28 of the MLRs setting out the minimum requirements for EID&V processes. The correct use of EID&V also offers many potential benefits to support compliance with the MLRs and the mitigation of risk through applying CDD measures. However, any decision about whether to use EID&V should be based on a comprehensive understanding of what the system does and how it will help to meet a firm’s CDD obligations, which obligations remain with the firm under the MLRs, and address the ML/TF risks presented by the individual client or matter.
The Society’s guidance for EID&V gives further detail on the different factors for solicitor firms to consider when deciding whether to use EID&V, including:
• Does the EID&V process meet the requirements of Regulation 28(19) of the MLRs?
• Does the EID&V process properly establish the client’s identity rather than just establishing that the identity exists, and can the firm adequately demonstrate that the process does so to the Law Society as its supervisor?
• Does the EID&V process offer a higher degree of comfort e.g. are multiple sources of data used; do sources use robust underlying data sources where individuals are forced to prove identity in some way; biometric identification?
• Does the EID&V provider have proof of registration with the Information Commissioner’s Office for the purposes of storing personal data?
• Does the EID&V provider seek assurance testing and certification by the government, an approved expert body, or another internationally reputable expert body?
• Does the firm understand and can it demonstrate an adequate understanding of:
- Inputs to the system;
- The data sources used by the system to verify identity;
- The outputs from the system and what they mean; and
- How the system complies with relevant sections of the MLRs.
“It is recognised that identity verification can be complex and resourceintensive for solicitor firms”
• Tiered services – are these provided and does the firm understand and is it using the correct tiered service appropriately?
• Are the firm’s staff who are responsible for conducting searches using the EID&V process adequately trained to ensure the validity and accuracy of client data input, and that all necessary data is submitted in the right fields?
• Are necessary record-keeping and data protection considerations being met?
The Society’s guidance for EID&V also sets out FAQs, other available guidance and links to the LSAG AML Guidance for the Legal Sector regarding the use of EID&V. The Society’s guidance does not endorse any specific EID&V product or service provider.
As already noted, the government is committed to encouraging the uptake of digital identity technologies to support compliance. In this regard, the government has recently announced in its published Consultation Response (July 2025) that HM Treasury and the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) will jointly produce guidance on using digital identities for MLRs’ identity verification checks across all sectors, including the legal sector. This guidance will:
• Provide clarity on the definition of a digital identity;
• Give further detail on how digital identities can be used in line with the MLRs’ risk-based approach; and
• Seek to clarify how MLRs’ requirements interact with the UK Digital Identity and Attributes Trust Framework of standards and governance for trustworthy and secure digital identities services, underpinned by the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025.
Once available, this government guidance should provide greater clarity for firms on the use of EID&V services and the legitimacy of digital identity providers, which is welcomed.
Brian Carson Head of AML Policy Law Society of Northern Ireland
Case Study - Electronic ID & Verification (EID&V) – Firm A
• Firm A received an integrated accounts inspection by the Law Society’s Compliance Officer. Notable deficiencies in client due diligence measures were found on case file reviews, with no evidence of CDD or source of funds checks having been undertaken on several files and a lack of documentary records.
• After review of the inspection report by the Law Society’s Professional Conduct Committee, the Committee directed that a follow-up discrete onsite AML/CTF inspection be carried out by the Law Society’s AML Compliance Officer.
• On inspection the AML Compliance Officer found that the firm had since commenced using digital identity verification services provided by a third-party provider offering ‘full compliance with the MLRs’.
• While general compliance by the firm with the MLRs and improvements in the firm’s CDD measures were noted, issues were identified with the EID&V services being used by the firm.
• The checks being undertaken in the particular EID&V process used limited data sources, with corresponding limited outputs. Only screening for Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs) and sanctions were evident over the identification and verification of the client’s identity.
• The EID&V process used did not demonstrate sufficient capability to provide assurance that the person claiming a particular identity was in fact the person with that identity, to the degree necessary for effectively mitigating any risks of money laundering and terrorist financing as required by Regulation 28 of the MLRs. There was, for example, no liveness check nor equivalent documented check by the solicitor.
• The EID&V process as currently used was not by itself sufficient to meet all CDD requirements.
• The AML Compliance Officer’s reported findings were raised with the firm’s Money Laundering Reporting Officer (MLRO) who engaged positively, and guidance was provided. The firm’s MLRO was also referred to the LSAG AML Guidance for the Legal Sector.
• On further enquiry it was discovered that the third-party provider offered tiered services with some misunderstanding regarding the level of service currently used. The correctly tiered service was identified for appropriate use by the firm.
• After review by the Professional Conduct Committee, the solicitors were reminded of their obligations under the MLRs, again directed to the available guidance, and the necessary corrective actions were taken. An AML/CTF revisit inspection was directed at a future date to monitor ongoing adherence.
The Risks of AI A Northern Ireland Perspective
AI is reshaping legal practice in Northern Ireland, offering efficiency but posing risks to confidentiality, liability and ethics. Solicitors must act now to ensure responsible, secure and informed adoption.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is no longer a futuristic concept confined to science fiction or tech labs. It is now embedded in everyday life and increasingly present in the home and work lives of people in Northern Ireland. From automating document review to generating legal advice, AI tools are reshaping how solicitors work and how clients engage with legal services. This transformation brings both promise and peril, particularly for Northern Ireland’s legal community, which comprises legal practices of varying size, specialism and accessibility, and which must navigate a unique landscape.
The urgency of addressing AI’s legal risks to firms and solicitors in Northern Ireland stems from its rapid adoption by many of our clients. As we navigate AI adoption, our work in the best interests of our clients is two-fold: firstly, we must have a clear understanding of the risks of AI; and, secondly, we must use our professional skill and curiosity to explore how we can deliver a client service which is enriched by AI. While AI offers efficiency and innovation, it also introduces new liabilities, ethical dilemmas, and regulatory challenges.
“Solicitors must be proactive in understanding these risks to safeguard their clients, their firms, and the integrity of the justice system.”
Risks for lawyers using AI
Solicitors who integrate AI into their practice face a range of professional risks. One of the most pressing concerns is liability. If an AI tool produces incorrect or misleading legal advice, the solicitor remains responsible for the outcome. Courts and clients are unlikely to accept the argument that the error was the fault of the technology. This places a heavy burden on legal professionals to, firstly, understand how to use AI appropriately, and, secondly, to have a human process to verify and validate AI-generated outputs.
Confidentiality is another critical issue and, for solicitors in Northern Ireland, there are two crucial aspects to this:
• Compliance with clients’ GDPR rights and solicitors’ GDPR obligations
• Confidentiality as a fundamental part, and foundation of, privilege.
Many AI systems require access to large datasets, which may include sensitive client information. Without proper safeguards, there is a risk of breaching legal privilege or violating data protection laws such as the UK GDPR. Firms must ensure that any AI tools they use comply with strict confidentiality standards and are not inadvertently exposing client data to third parties or insecure platforms. Using open-access or public AI should be approached with the greatest caution by solicitors
The question of authorship and accountability also arises when AI is used to generate legal advice. If a chatbot or automated system provides guidance that leads to a negative outcome, determining who is responsible becomes complex. Is it the developer, the firm, or the individual solicitor who deployed the tool? While this area remains largely unlitigated, and the legal risks are unclear; the uncertainty and potential exposure to claims of negligence or misconduct are clear.
Risks for clients using AI
Clients are increasingly turning to AI-powered platforms to handle legal tasks, from drafting contracts to contesting fines. While these tools can offer convenience and cost savings, they are not substitutes for qualified legal advice. Misuse of AI can result in flawed decisions, unenforceable documents, or missed deadlines, all of which carry serious legal consequences. A particular risk, which will be apparent to any solicitor in any practice area who has used AI, is that, very often, AI-generated output contains references to laws outside of this jurisdiction which do not apply here. In a number of areas, due to large amounts of data in England and Wales on a point and little Northern Ireland data on the same point, a response to a legal question (even if the user prompts that it is an NI legal problem), English and Welsh-only legislation will “leak” into the response. These responses may sound compelling to the lay reader, but be very obviously and immediately wrong to a solicitor.
Relying on non-human advice also presents risks. AI lacks the contextual understanding and ethical judgement of a human solicitor. It may offer technically correct solutions that are practically harmful or fail to consider the broader implications of a legal strategy. Clients who depend solely on AI may find themselves in difficult situations without the support of a professional who can navigate the nuances of the law.
Solicitors in many, if not all, practice areas, will have to consider how AI can be used as a form of generative harm. Deepfake technology and AI-generated misinformation pose growing threats to legal proceedings. From forged evidence to impersonated communications, the potential for fraud is escalating. As AI outputs become more sophisticated, solicitors must be prepared to detect and counteract these threats, and clients must be educated about the dangers of using unverified AI tools.
Regulatory and compliance challenges
Northern Ireland faces a particularly complex regulatory environment when it comes to AI. The UK government has adopted a light-touch, pro-innovation approach to AI regulation, which leaves significant gaps in areas such as liability, transparency, and ethical standards. However, under the Windsor Framework, Northern Ireland remains aligned with certain aspects of EU law, including, to some extent, the EU AI Act. The EU AI Act introduces a tiered, risk-based framework that bans certain high-risk applications and imposes strict obligations on others. In practical terms, solicitors may prudently want to consider:
• Conducting an inventory of AI products being used by the business and their employees (and clients);
• Auditing the use of AI in their business and supply chain, mapping how the data is used, where it is hosted and how it is handled; and,
• Reviewing and updating contracts, documentation and policies.
Currently, the Law Society of Northern Ireland is working on guidance on AI use and will use this as an opportunity to engage with the membership about what their AI-related needs are. This will include providing Continuing Professional Development (CPD) training and a clear regulatory roadmap tailored to the needs as expressed through membership and stakeholder feedback.
Access to justice and ethical implications
AI has the potential to improve access to justice by reducing costs and increasing availability. Automated platforms and chatbots can help individuals navigate legal issues without the need for expensive consultations. This could be particularly beneficial in areas with limited Legal Aid or rural communities where solicitors are scarce. This could also be a false economy: as noted above, the vast amount of data on certain issues outside the jurisdiction, compared to the volume within the jurisdiction, may result in flawed advice (which may appear compelling to the lay reader).
However, the benefits of AI are not evenly distributed. Access to technology and digital literacy vary widely, and those who lack these resources may be left behind. There is a risk that AI could deepen existing inequalities rather than alleviate them.
Legal professionals must be mindful of these disparities and work to ensure that AI tools are inclusive and accessible.
Bias in AI systems is another serious concern. If an AI tool is trained on biased data, it may produce discriminatory outcomes. In legal contexts, this could affect decisions in areas such as employment, immigration, or criminal justice. Solicitors must ensure that the AI tools they use are audited for bias and comply with equality legislation.
Ultimately, solicitors have a duty to uphold justice and protect client interests. This includes scrutinising the ethical implications of AI and advocating for transparency, fairness, and accountability for everyone. The legal profession must play a central role in shaping how AI is used and regulated.
The risk of doing nothing: ghost adoption of AI
One of the most insidious risks is the informal or unregulated use of AI tools within legal practices. Firms may already be using AI without formal policies or oversight. Staff may rely on tools like ChatGPT for drafting or research, unaware of the potential risks. This “ghost adoption” can lead to inconsistent quality, ethical breaches, and legal exposure.
Without proper oversight, firms risk losing control over how AI is used. This can result in data leaks, flawed advice, or reputational damage. Internal audits, staff training, and governance frameworks are essential to ensure that AI is used responsibly and effectively.
Real-world examples have already highlighted the dangers. In one high-profile case (Frederick Ayinde -v- The London Borough of Haringey, [2025] EWHC 1040 (Admin)), a solicitor and barrister submitted, to court, case law which did not exist and may have been generated by an AI tool. Such incidents underscore the need for clear internal policies, professional standards, and a culture of accountability. While some solicitors may not be using AI themselves, it is prudent to consider whether clients are using AI. A stark example of this was another, similarly high-profile case (Al Haroun v Qatar National Bank QPSC & Anor [2025] EWHC 1588 (Comm)) earlier this year in London, where a client provided AI-generated content to their legal team which was submitted to the court, where the Judge hearing the case did not recognise one of her quotations or the case cited. Both were considered by the High Court, which, using its Hamid jurisdiction, reiterated that the ‘administration of justice depends upon the court being able to rely without question on the integrity of those who appear before it and on their professionalism in only making submissions which can properly be supported.’ The subsequent judgment lists the potential professional ramifications for solicitors and barristers misusing AI. These are grouped into eight categories and are sobering reading.
The AI Guidance for Judicial Office Holders in England and Wales is a short and accessible guide, which will be useful to solicitors, pending Northern Ireland specific guidance. The Institute of Professional Legal Studies, Queen’s University, Belfast, now delivers lectures and tutorials which consider AI risk as part of the Professional Skills module.
A call for awareness and action
AI is transforming the legal landscape, and practitioners must respond with urgency and foresight. The risks are real and multifaceted, affecting lawyers, clients, and the justice system as a whole. From professional liability and data protection issues to ethical dilemmas and climate impact concerns, the challenges are complex but not insurmountable.
In understanding the risks of AI, solicitors can properly and fully embrace this exciting innovation while safeguarding its core values of justice, integrity, and public trust.
The Law Society of Northern Ireland has a vital role and will be providing guidance, education, and advocacy around AI, to ensure that it is used responsibly, ethically and to the benefit of the profession and our clients. Member feedback is particularly welcome and will enrich the Society’s approach.
Jude Copeland leads the Legal Technology Group in Cleaver Fulton Rankin and serves in the Law Society of Northern Ireland as Chair of the Law Tech Sub Group with responsibility for AI, and as a member of the Future of the Profession Committee. Jude has delivered lectures on AI at Ulster University and the IPLS and has spoken about legal tech and AI at various conferences in the UK and Ireland.
To contact Jude, please email J.Copeland@cfrlaw.co.uk or connect on Linkedin https://www.linkedin.com/in/ judecopeland/
This article is the first of two which explore the impact of the Human Rights Act as it reaches 25 years old. The articles are a prelude to the publication of the 5th edition of Rights in Progress – a Guide to the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act by the Law Centre which was funded by the Law Society of Northern Ireland. The first article explores the role of the European Court of Human Rights and assesses whether some of the criticisms hold water when examining judgments in practice.
Introduction
The Human Rights Act 1998 (‘the Act’) is now 25 years old. Coming into effect from 2 October 2000, there was speculation that the Act would change the domestic legal landscape beyond recognition.
In practice, the impact of the Act has not been quite so seismic. Nonetheless, it has received fierce criticism, initially from its architects – the Labour government and, more recently, the previous Conservative administration. In particular, it has been argued that sovereignty has been ceded to the Strasbourg Court and unelected Judges.
In June 2022 the (then) Conservative government indicated it would repeal the Act and published its Bill of Rights. The President of the Law Society for England and Wales at the time, I. Stephanie Boyce, described this Bill as ‘presenting a grave challenge to the UK human rights law’ and that ‘it would reduce government accountability and shield public bodies from scrutiny.’ Ultimately, the Conservative government shelved the Bill.
The current Labour government, while not seeking to repeal the Act, has also signalled its desire to amend the Act to cover Article 8 (the right to family life) in order to make it easier to deport individuals in certain circumstances. More recently, the UK Reform party signalled its intention to leave the ECHR if it ever gained power. To date, the only countries to leave the Council of Europe and the Convention are Greece after a military coup in the 1970s, and Russia shortly after its invasion of Ukraine in 2022. While the immediate future of the Human Rights Act remains secure, it is not certain that the Act will not be amended and diluted in parts, and it remains politically contentious.
The Convention and the application of principles
The European Convention on Human Rights is an international treaty of the Council of Europe. It was adopted in 1950, was ratified by the United Kingdom government in 1951 and entered into effect in 1953. Alongside the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD) and the UN Convention Against the Discrimination of Women (CEDAW) the Convention allows individuals, voluntary organisations or other social groupings to petition the European Court of Human Rights to argue that they have been the victims of a breach of one or more articles of the Convention.
A number of key principles underpin the interpretation of the Convention. The role of the Court in reaching its decision is not to substitute its own assessment for one carried out by a domestic court. Instead, the Court examines whether the individual state has applied the Convention appropriately. The Court gives individual countries a ·margin of appreciation (discretion to take account of cultural traditions and values) when considering the scope of some of the human rights contained in the Convention. The extent of the margin of appreciation afforded by the Court will depend on the context. Generally, a wide scope has been given to issues of national security, taxation, moral questions and social and economic policy. On the other hand, a narrow margin of appreciation has been afforded in cases concerning criminalising homosexual conduct between consenting adults, freedom of speech concerning political debate or matters of public interest.
In addition, the Court will consider whether there is a general consensus on how particular issues are dealt with across the European countries see Petrovic v Austria (1998). Moreover, the Convention is interpreted as a living and evolving document. The Court will take into account developments in social attitudes and social provision within individual states and across signatory states as a whole and has adopted a mantra within judgments that rights must be ‘practical and effective and not theoretical and illusory’ see Goodwin v UK (2002) para 74.
The Court also regularly examines the legality of any restriction on a Convention right by considering whether the restriction has a legitimate aim, corresponds to a pressing social need and is necessary and proportionate.
The application of the proportionality test varies according to the type of issue under review. A strict approach is adopted when questions of freedom of expression arise: see Sunday Times v UK (No 2) (1979), or intimate private or moral matters: see Dudgeon v UK (1981).
On property issues, a less rigorous test is applied; namely, whether there is a reasonable relationship between the interference and legitimate aim pursued or a fair balance has been struck between the competing general community interests and individual interests at stake: see James v UK (1986), Hatton v UK (2003) and JA Pye v UK (2008). This is further reflected in the Grand Chamber judgment of MA v Denmark (2021), which outlined that when assessing proportionality, the Court will pay particular attention to the quality of Parliamentary and judicial review in determining the necessity of the measure and the margin of appreciation given to the national authority.
In all situations, the Court looks carefully at whether the restriction impairs the very essence of the right contained in the Convention. Where this occurs, the Court will often overrule a restriction applied in an individual country.
Judicial approaches
The relationship between the judgments of the domestic and the Strasbourg Court has evolved over time. In Ullah v Special Adjudicator (2004), the House of Lords held that while not strictly bound by Strasbourg cases, courts should do so where there is a clear and constant line of Strasbourg judgments unless there are special circumstances to justify not doing so.
Specifically, the Lords observed the duty of national courts is ‘to keep pace with Strasbourg jurisprudence as it evolves over time, no more, but certainly no less’ The legitimacy of this approach was endorsed in JR87 (2024) by the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland: see paras 58 and 59. There are examples of the Supreme Court not following Strasbourg case law, for example, R (Quila) v SoS for the Home Department 2011 (paras 35-43). Moreover, in R v Horncastle (2009) the Supreme Court took a different view to the Strasbourg court in Al-Khawaja v UK (2009), which had held that unless the accused had an opportunity in a criminal trial to cross-examine the person making the statement, reliance on such evidence was contrary to Article 6 (the right to a fair trial). The Supreme Court did not follow this approach in Horncastle in upholding convictions for serious criminal offences based on evidence from victims’ statements where one had died and the other did not give evidence due to fear. Ultimately, the appeal to the Grand Chamber was deferred until after the Horncastle judgment. Al-Khawaja v UK (2011) GC then overturned its earlier decision that the use of hearsay statements playing a decisive role in a criminal trial was not inevitably a breach of Article 6. A further illustration of this two-way process can be found in the approach to the imposition of whole life sentences on prisoners: see Hutchinson v UK (2017) GC. In particular, the primary responsibility for protecting rights in the Convention lies with the domestic authorities: see para 71. This trend in judicial deference at Strasbourg can be seen, most recently in the judgment of the Grand Chamber in Nealon and Hallam v UK (2024).
The courts in the United Kingdom had begun to allow arguments based on other international human rights conventions to be introduced in limited circumstances, even though such Conventions have not been incorporated into domestic law.
However, the Supreme Court in its decision in R (SC, CB and Others) v SoS for Work and Pensions (2021) held at paras 74-84 that it is not appropriate for domestic courts to decide whether obligations have been breached from unincorporated international human rights treaties, including the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, on the basis that unincorporated international treaties do not form part of UK law. The Court in Strasbourg has also reiterated that its jurisdiction is limited to ensuring the Convention is adhered to and does not extend to ensuring compliance with other international treaties though it observed that it had ‘consistently held that the Convention should be interpreted, as far as possible, in harmony with other rules of international law’, see Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v Switzerland 2024 (GC) at para 455. Moreover, in this case, the Grand Chamber also clarified its role in terms of holding that:
‘judicial intervention, including by the court, cannot replace or provide any substitute for the action which must be taken by the legislative and executive branches of government. However, democracy cannot be reduced to the will of the majority of the electorate and elected representatives, in disregard of the rule of law. The remit of domestic courts and the court is therefore complementary to those democratic processes. The legal basis for the Court’s intervention is always limited to the Convention, which empowers the court to also determine the proportionality of general measures adopted by the domestic legislature.’ (para 412).
The Act has received enormous criticism, often populist and ill-informed. In practice, the role of the Convention and the relationship with domestic courts is considerably more nuanced than the public debate would suggest. There is little evidence that domestic courts are in thrall to Strasbourg. Instead, the Act has made a significant and valuable contribution to the development of law and policy because of individual judgments. The Act has helped to publicly cement the link between domestic and international human rights legal instruments; placed human rights at the forefront of administrative decisionmaking by government departments and other public authorities; helped promote a rights culture, and reinforced the importance of proportionality in decision-making. It has meant that human rights cases are almost always dealt with on the domestic stage rather than at Strasbourg. This is considerably easier for applicants and ensures that the UK is less often exposed on the international stage through human rights judgments.
Les Allamby Solicitor and Former Director of Law Centre (NI) and Former Chief Commissioner of the NI Human Rights Commission
Legal Complaints & Regulation Act
(Northern Ireland) 2016
Finally a new beginning for Complaints
The Solicitors (Northern Ireland) Order 1976 sets out the Society’s obligations to determine upon regulatory conduct and service provision complaints.
The Bain Review proposes recommendations aimed at improving the existing system for service provision complaints handling by professional bodies.
The draft Legal Complaints and Regulation Bill consultation is completed to make way for a more independent and lay-friendly complaints handling system.
Introduction and enactment of some provisions of the 2016 Act including the role of Legal Services Oversight Commissioner with enhanced powers to audit, investigate, make recommendations, and set targets on the Law Society and Bar complaints handling processes.
Ms. Marian Cree takes up the post of Northern Ireland’s first Legal Services Oversight Commissioner (and continues the dual Lay Observer role).
In April 2017 the Society published an article in The Writ on pending legislative changes which would alter the complaints landscape as we knew it. Eight years later, we are finally at the apex of these changes with the commencement of the Legal Complaints and Regulation Act (Northern Ireland) 2016 (‘the 2016 Act’) on 1 September 2025.
To understand how and why the complaints system is changing, it is important to acknowledge the history of its progression.
The Society has been undertaking significant preparatory works to ensure a smooth transition for practitioners and members of the public alike, as noted in the Lay Observer’s 2023/24 Annual Report. Whilst these changes have been almost two decades in the making, the Society is committed to ensuring that members understand and are prepared for what is to come.
The Society continues to provide a bespoke complaints series of CPD and Part 2 of the Society’s compulsory Risk Management CPD this year was dedicated to educating practitioners in this area. Updated communications have been issued throughout the year, and the Society’s website has been updated to ensure key developments are communicated effectively and accessibly for all. Members can now access published guidance and template documents to assist with ensuring compliance.
So, what is changing?
A Solicitors Complaints Panel has been established to consider in-house complaints received against sole principals who may not necessarily have the impartiality, or capacity, to dedicate time or resources to responding to complaints at an in-house level. The primary aim of this is early-stage complaint resolution to save both the client and solicitor the time (and sometimes expense) involved in pursuing or defending a complaint before the newly appointed Solicitors Complaints Committee (SCC).
A Solicitors Complaints Office (SCO) has been established within the Society to administer these applications and act as secretariat to the new SCC. The SCC will operate at arm’s length from the Society with a greater emphasis on independence and transparency of process. Whilst the SCO will deal with the administrative aspects of the investigation, all decisions will be made by the SCC.
Mr. Hill has commented ‘I’m grateful to those solicitors who have joined the committeewe can’t provide the service without their help. I am also delighted with the diverse range of experienced lay members who bring their skills to the role.’
Mr. Hill’s intention for the SCC is ‘to build a robust complaint handling mechanism with appropriate oversight which will contribute to building public trust and assurance in the legal profession in Northern Ireland.’
The SCC will have increased sanctioning powers where service provision falls short of expected standards. Such new sanctions include:
a) Directing a solicitor to issue an apology to the complainant;
b) Awarding compensation to a complainant, up to a maximum of £5,000; and
c) Awarding costs against either the complainant or solicitor or both.
The Society has been successful in persuading all stakeholders that the additional sanction within the 2016 Act for the SCC to make a finding and direct compensation for negligence, would inevitably introduce unnecessary legal complexity in what is intended to be a consumer-friendly process. The 2016 Act as commenced on 1 September 2025 therefore does not enact this provision.
Lastly, the powers of the Legal Services Oversight Commissioner are now fully enacted which brings increased oversight of the complaints handling process. By consequence, the Society is required to collate statistics to monitor the effectiveness of these new changes. All firms are therefore required to submit an annual return of their in-house complaints.
Historically, the complaints statistics demonstrate that the majority of complaints stem from a lack of communication and understanding. This is likely to remain the common thread within the new complaints landscape; however, as each of the Lay Observer’s Annual Reports have commented, ‘the level of complaints made against solicitors in Northern Ireland remains very low.’
The Society is optimistic therefore that this will remain the case for the new system as practitioners familiarise themselves with the new processes, and ensure clear, consistent communication with their clients to avoid the possibility of complaint.
The commencement of the 2016 Act on 1 September 2025 brings a new era for service complaints raised against members of the legal profession.
The independent and majority lay-composed SCC has been established with Mr. Rick Hill appointed as Lay Chair, together with twenty-four new legal and lay members.
Shauna Thompson Solicitor Complaints Manager Law Society of Northern Ireland
Society retains Diversity Mark Accreditation
Introduction
The Law Society of Northern Ireland has reaffirmed its commitment to advancing diversity, equality and inclusion across the solicitor profession, with the successful retention of its Diversity Mark Accreditation.
This recognition, confirmed following an independent annual review earlier this summer, marks another important step in the Society’s ongoing journey towards its vision:
‘To achieve an equal, diverse, inclusive and equitable solicitor profession in Northern Ireland, which is open and accessible to all, and reflective of the society solicitors serve.’
Commitment to change
The Diversity Mark Accreditation, widely recognised as a “Mark of Progress”, begins at bronze level, where organisations are required to set measurable targets focused on gender diversity.
The Society became a Diversity Mark Charter Signatory in September 2022, making a public commitment to advance diversity and inclusion within the solicitor profession. Within six months, it achieved Bronze Accreditation after establishing three gender diversity targets. These targets were informed by research that highlighted barriers women face within the profession, particularly around retention and progression, and aligned with key priorities of the Society’s Diversity and Equality Action Plan 2022.
Progress so far
Since obtaining its initial accreditation, the Society has pursued a range of initiatives, aimed at addressing the issues identified in the Diversity and Equality Study 2022, and subsequent research. Some highlights include:
• Launching a Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) Toolkit – providing members with practical resources to embed inclusive workplace practices within their firms.
• Re-launching the Mentoring Programme – a valuable opportunity for solicitors to gain knowledge, insights, guidance, and professional support from colleagues within the profession.
• Undertaking research into women leaving private practice – gathering important evidence to better understand the challenges around retention and career progression.
• Establishing the Women’s Network – offering a space for networking opportunities, peer-to-peer support, and professional development at all career stages.
Together, these initiatives seek to drive positive change and deliver benefits for the profession as a whole.
Reflecting on the recent re-accreditation, Emma Lyttle, Head of Engagement at Diversity Mark, said:
‘Diversity Mark is delighted to congratulate the Law Society on successfully retaining their Diversity Mark Accreditation. This significant accomplishment reflects a strong and ongoing commitment to advancing equality, diversity, and inclusion across the organisation and beyond. It marks another important milestone in their journey towards creating a more inclusive and representative workplace.’
The Society’s first successful review confirms that it is not only maintaining commitments but is also building momentum for further change.
Looking Ahead
While the Society’s work under the Bronze Accreditation has focused mainly on gender, its ambitions extend further. Under the Diversity Mark Framework, organisations who retain Bronze Accreditation for at least two years are eligible to move towards Silver Accreditation. This next stage requires broadening diversity targets beyond gender to include areas such as ethnicity, disability and socio-economic background.
The Society’s Diversity, Equality and Inclusion Strategy 2024-28 provides a roadmap for this journey, recognising that meaningful change is not achieved overnight but requires sustained effort, informed by data-driven research, targeted interventions and continuous review.
Looking ahead, the Society is committed to building on the progress already made at Bronze level and working towards Silver Accreditation at its next annual review.
Its goal is to ensure that diversity, equality, inclusion and equity are strengthened across multiple dimensions, driving lasting and positive change within the solicitor profession in Northern Ireland.
Why not start your journey?
Meaningful change cannot be achieved by the Society alone – it requires a shared journey, with collective effort required by the Society, member firms, and individual solicitors.
The Society’s own experience to date shows the practical benefits of engaging with the Diversity Mark process. Accreditation is not simply a badge of recognition – it is a catalyst for change. It provides organisations with a clear framework to set, monitor and achieve goals; access to a network of accredited organisations to share learning and best practice; and accountability through independent annual reviews.
By pursuing Diversity Mark Accreditation, firms can join the Society in leading this change through making a public commitment to equality, diversity and inclusion, while taking practical steps to deliver it, with benefits not only to colleagues, but also to clients and communities.
For more information on how to start your journey, please see: https://diversity-mark-ni. co.uk/
Nuala McMahon Senior Policy Officer, Law Society of Northern Ireland
Women’s Network
Why, in 2025, do we need a Women’s Network?
Earlier this year, the Law Society of Northern Ireland launched its Women’s Network. When I heard a Women’s Network was being created, I knew I had to be involved though I never anticipated being appointed as the first Chair.
I can understand that question. More than a couple of years ago now, a much younger Claire McAleer sat in a lecture theatre in Lennoxvale, training to qualify as a solicitor in a predominantly female cohort. I felt so fortunate to live in a time where women had achieved equality.
Until I realised that they haven’t. For me, my lived experience as a mother was my feminist awakening. Sadly, it feels like ‘feminism’ has now replaced the four letter ‘f’ word as the worst of words, but I am using it regardless, and I hope you’ll sit with your discomfort and stay with me.
Feminism isn’t about angry women hating men. It is about challenging the systemthe patriarchy- which puts women at a disadvantage for no reason other than the fact that they are women. Feminism is about equality, yes, but also equity. It’s not about women trying to be men, it’s about us trying to be women in a world that was never designed for us- for our skills, our challenges and our realities.
How is this relevant to the legal profession in Northern Ireland? Well, while a younger, fresher Claire may have been right in recognising that what was once a predominantly male profession is now predominantly female, we are struggling to retain our female solicitors. We are seeing a significant amount of women solicitors leaving private practice, often the profession entirely, and I was one of them.
For those women who do remain, we are not seeing them ascend through the profession to partnership, or indeed to sitting on the Society Council.
This is not a new trend. Research in the 1990s showed the issues with female solicitors leaving the profession. As the trend has not changed, despite increasing numbers of women entering the profession, the Society has taken action and created the Women’s Network.
The Women’s Network was set up by the Society with a Steering Group of female solicitors who have now been joined by Local Association representatives, and who I would like to publicly thank for all their hard work and commitment to date in coordinating the Network. Our aim is to amplify female voices and experiences and make the profession somewhere that women not only fit but have room to grow.
Peer support is invaluable, something that I really experienced during my eight years away from the profession. In that time, I did both paid and unpaid work in the community and voluntary sector. Witnessing the power in women sharing their lived experience with each other, finding common ground and community, was life-changing for me. It set me on a path of always trying to use my voice and share my experiences because there will always be someone that needs to hear it.
Naomi Long (Minister for Justice), Colin Mitchell (LSNI President), Dr Esther McGuinness (Head of School of Law, Ulster University) and Claire McAleer – Event on overcoming the challenges throughout a career in female leadership held in Law Society House in April
The Women’s Network provides this peer support, and I have loved seeing this and its impact in real time at the events we have hosted since our creation.
Our aim is to hold three events a quarterone in Belfast, one online and one in a Local Association. Earlier, I mentioned the need for equity - we are keen to address additional barriers to rural female professionals. Events being mainly in Belfast is a barrier to all those women in practice outside of the city, particularly when you factor in things like school drop off on top of the time (and cost) of travel.
Most recently, we held an event on the importance of networking in Dungannon led by Lynette Fay. While the information shared by Lynette was important, what really struck me from the day was how when one woman opened up, the other women joined in to share their experiences and to support and encourage each other. I’m proud that at this early stage the Network is already providing a safe and comfortable space for women to open up and share with each other.
Through our events to date, there has been one common thread that has run through them all, from the women leading the sessions to the attendees - confidence. And as one male attendee of our Women in Leadership event with Dr Esther McGuinnees and Justice Minister, Naomi Long, remarked, he could never imagine sitting in a room of men and a lack of confidence being discussed. I had to admire his honesty!
Our first Association event was in Omagh and was a public speaking session with former solicitor, Sinead Lunny, of Vocalis Public Speaking. A couple of weeks after the event, a colleague I view as extremely confident and accomplished let me know how she used the techniques learned at this seminar to help deal with her nerves. I could never have imagined this woman being nervous. As well as being delighted that our seminar had such an immediate impact, I have to be honest that I also got reassurance and community in the revelation that this colleague got nervous!
I also attended a ‘Next 100 years: Women in Law’ event in London to meet English colleagues and learn from what they are doing and, again, the same common threads appeared in my conversations there. How we navigate caring for relatives, whether to have a family, juggling our responsibilities as well as the expectations of those around us, and of ourselves and, of course, a lack of confidence.
The more that we have these conversations, the more awareness is raised and the more we are able to identify the barriers. This is important because, once we see them, we can work on removing them. Which is what the Women’s Network is all about- with a bit of craic and plenty of nibbles along the way.
We have a programme of events scheduled into 2026, full details of which will be shared on the Women’s Network page of the Society’s website, and you can also sign up to our mailing list by contacting womensnetwork@lawsoc-ni.org
As you will no doubt be aware, Council elections are coming up in November and the Network is keen to support any women who are interested in running for election. Some of the current female Council members were on hand on 17 September to answer questions on the realities of being on Council, and we also have a recorded webinar in the Women’s Network section of the Society’s website giving information on the process, as well as lived experience of female Council members.
If we are to bring meaningful change, Council needs to be representative of the profession it represents, which means more women around that table, speaking to the lived experience of female solicitors in Northern Ireland and creating that space for us to join, remain and thrive in the solicitor profession in Northern Ireland.
Claire McAleer Chair Women’s Network
Brigid Napier, Lynette Fay, Naomi White and Claire McAleer – Master the Art of Networking Workshop with Lynette Fay in Dungannon in July
Sinead Lunny (Vocalis Public Speaking) and Claire McAleer – Public Speaking Workshop in Omagh in June.
The Price of Time The Hourly Rate Review
The legal profession in Northern Ireland has faced more than its fair share of challenges over the last decade, particularly with rising cost pressures and increased competition in the labour market. A persistent level of underfunding across the judicial system has not helped matters either, with the Hourly Rate remaining unchanged for over 10 years.
There’s no doubt that during this time the commercial viability of doing certain types of legal work has eroded, unfortunately contributing to a deterioration of legal services and the creation of the so-called ‘Legal Desert’.
The Hourly Rate
The Hourly Rate is viewed by many in the legal profession as being the foundation upon which solicitor fees are measured and negotiated.
After a decade of stagnancy, the Law Society of Northern Ireland led key stakeholders within the sector to challenge and realign the historic Hourly Rate. As a result of these efforts, on 29 April 2025, the Taxing Master announced an increase in the Hourly Rate from £102 to £155, effective from 1 June 2025.
This increase of over 50%, whilst long overdue, has been well received by Society members and goes some way to helping deal with the ongoing financial challenges facing the profession at present.
BDO Northern Ireland independent report
As part of the journey, BDO NI was engaged by the Society to prepare an independent, evidence-based Report to assess the Hourly Rate. Our work spanned a period of nine months and involved a detailed survey issued to the entire profession of 448 member firms, which was followed up by one-to-one interviews with 15 legal firms.
We worked closely with the Society to help prepare our findings, with our Report and presentation ultimately presented to Mr Justice McAlinden and the wider Working Group.
We would like to thank the Law Society of Northern Ireland and the wider Working Group chaired by Justice McAlinden for all their support and input into our independent Report. We also want to specifically thank the firms and individuals who completed the survey and took part in the interview process.
The evolution of the legal profession
Northern Ireland boasts almost 450 legal firms, and in 2022 accounted for 2.5% of all UK employment in the legal sector. Due to the region’s cost competitiveness, combined with an assured pipeline of world class talent and sound infrastructure, it is no surprise that there have been over 15 mergers in the last decade between existing NI firms and top 100 UK law firms, with this trend set to continue given the congruence between English, Welsh and Northern Irish law.
Whilst the influx in investment from international law firms has been welcomed from an NI economy standpoint, it has had a knock-on impact on indigenous firms who have struggled to compete on salary levels, resulting in staff retention issues. Noting the age-profile of partners in regional law practices, there is a real concern regarding the sustainability of the high street practice, with c. 25% of firms considering a merger at present.
Challenges faced by the legal profession
Since the last review was carried out over a decade prior, the legal profession and the environment in which law firms operate in NI, has changed considerably:
1. Underfunding
The justice system in NI has been impacted threefold: by persistent underfunding; the impact of COVID-19 on the courts; and the volatility in inflation. This ultimately has resulted in a reduction in access to justice for NI citizens.
2. Legal Aid deserts
As a direct result of underfunding, access to Legal Aid provision has deteriorated. Our research found that many of the firms interviewed were carrying out progressively less Legal Aid-related work, or, simply not taking on any more cases due to the service being commercially unviable. We understand that the Society is currently pursuing an increase in the Legal Aid rates linked to our research.
3. Staff retention
Our Report also highlighted the issue of staff retention in recent years. Many practitioners interviewed attributed the loss in staff to the competition with public sector jobs and the rise in international law firms that have established offices in NI in recent years.
Key Findings and Outcome of our Review
The primary purpose of our survey was to establish the composition of legal firms in NI, with the objective to determine the average cost of production for a professional fee- earner. Of the 131 firms that responded, we identified that:
• 87.84% of firms indicated that the cost of doing business had increased, with wages and salaries increasing the most, over 20% in the last 10 years.
• 68.81% indicated that the low level of Hourly Rate legal fees was restricting employment opportunities.
• The average professional salary across the profession was c. £87,000 for equity partner, £72,000 for salaried partner/director and £55,000 for a qualified solicitor.
• The average non-professional salary across the profession was c. £61,000 for a consultant, £26,000 for a paralegal, £23,000 for support staff, and £21,000 for an apprentice.
• The average overhead cost (excluding salaries) of a firm was £466,000, with insurance being the main office overhead averaging at c. £63,000 per annum.
• We were guided by Mr Justice McAlinden to use 1,100 chargeable hours as the basis for our fee-earner cost of production. However, from the research conducted and the interviews performed, fee-earners indicated that they were working fewer billable hours, having to spend more time dealing with business development, regulation, training and time away from the office.
• The blended Hourly Rate in England and Wales was found to be £207 at present, with the Hourly Rate in Scotland currently at £180, both well ahead of the existing rate in NI.
• Overall, the average cost of production for a fee-earner charging 1,100 hours per annum calculated at £151.17 across Northern Ireland. An additional four calculations were assessed within our Report to justify and recommend an Hourly Rate of between £150 and £160.
Feedback from Members
It is encouraging to hear from Law Society members that the uplift in the Hourly Rate is having a positive impact on firms going forward, with the cost of production from our Report being used to reassess staff hourly rates and produce enhanced firm budgets for 2025.
Future Proofing
Whilst the uplift goes a long way to address the historic lack of increase over the last decade, we were keen to ensure that the Rate was future-proofed, recommending that the Hourly Rate be index-linked to the Services Producer Price Index (SPPI) each year. This Index would appear to be the most appropriate rate to use going forward, with its relevance to legal services and its recent use by the Master of Rolls covering England and Wales noted.
The Master has confirmed that the Rate will be reviewed periodically; however, no formal commitment has been made as to the period, with the new rate of £155 now applicable for the 2 years to 1 April 2027.
BDO NI and the Legal Profession
For over 35 years, BDO NI has worked closely with the legal profession in Northern Ireland, and our clients within it, to help support and promote continued success. It is an area in which we have developed considerable experience, not only as accountants and tax advisors for many local practices, but also through our work as business advisors and forensic accountants.
Despite the headwinds being faced by legal practices in Northern Ireland, we believe that there are still opportunities to grow profitably. Through consolidation, we have already seen a number of legal firms benefit from cost synergies and extended service offerings.
In the months and years ahead, we fully expect more and more legal firms to avail of this opportunity, and with our experience, we would be happy to explore this with you.
David Warnock
Director in the Advisory team specialising in Corporate Finance, Forensics and Restructuring BDO NI
Conveyancing Spotlight New Builds
The new build process is one which conveyancing solicitors are becoming increasingly wary of. There are many issues to consider where new builds are concerned, and the nature of the process is not without risk given that developments can take years to complete. This article will consider some matters which can cause concern. The Conveyancing and Property Committee has formed a sub-group to consider all aspects of the new build process and work remains on-going in drafting documents and agreeing procedures which are practical and developed with a view to clarifying the process and making it work in practice.
Compliance with the Home Charter Scheme
The Procedures for New Build Developments set out documents and information which must be provided. Correspondence sent to the Conveyancing and Property Committee from a range of solicitors evidences difficulties. This can cause friction between managing clients’ expectations (which may not be focused on certifying title as good and marketable) and complying with the solicitors’ own obligations under the Home Charter Scheme, particularly those required by UK Finance and which may not be understood or appreciated by the client and indeed other stakeholders in the process.
A1. Legible copy estate/location layout plan
This has posed difficulties for conveyancing solicitors in obtaining such maps, especially where larger developments are concerned. Whilst those larger developments can be difficult to map, especially regarding scale, they are key to understanding the development.
A2. Confirmation of which specific documents of title relate to the site in sale
The revised Practice Direction is intended to clarify the documents that are provided and a summary which will allow a purchaser’s solicitor to identify where the property is located, the relevant folio and the relevant road or sewer bonds which will affect the property directly. This is helpful to provide context and clarity if a large title pack is provided and is considered good conveyancing practice.
A11. Draft site map
The draft site map is helpful to consider the property in sale, though practitioners should be wary that changes can be made to this.
B1 Engrossed Transfer Deed / Lease (as appropriate) and counterparts, with final maps suitable for registration in the Land Registry
Delays and other issues with postage delivery have been widely noted which can create potential difficulties regarding undertakings and registration.
Whilst final maps may be provided, further to Land Registry Practice Direction 1/2019 layouts of common areas are not examined and encroachments are not raised prior to finalising registration. This may mean that the full extent of the property is not registered, requiring further rectification.
B3. Building Control Completion Certificate
There are many things to consider when fixing a completion date. A developer will, understandably, not want to leave a completed property vacant for any undue period of time and often in practice, final matters such as warranty and Building Control inspections are carried out mere days before completion. This can pose difficulties for solicitors to obtain the full Completion Certificate in sufficient time however it is a requirement, and this will require forward planning by a developer, when setting completion dates to account for this period. The Society is proactively engaging with Building Control and consideration of how best to manage this in practice forms part of the work of the new build sub-group. From information requested from the local Councils on the timescales for Completion Certificates, the production of these is not unduly lengthy, subject to all documentation being provided. It is incumbent on the developer and their team to ensure that Completion Certificates are available on completion.
Article 161 agreements
Recent discussions in the Assembly have been focused upon the number of outstanding bonds. The number of outstanding bonds in Northern Ireland is estimated to be in the region of 1,800. It can be difficult for a solicitor to evaluate a bond and will often depend on the circumstances at the time, including the stage of the development and likely timescales for completion. The Society has been representing to UK Finance for some time that “suitable” should be removed from the UK Finance Handbook regarding a bond, since a solicitor is not qualified to determine whether a bond is suitable, only whether it is in place. The Society has also been proactively engaging with NI Water regarding the form and content of Regional/ Mid Ulster Property Certificates, to seek further information in relation to bonds such as their status and any enforcement action that may be in place. Conveyancing solicitors may have noted some changes to these Property Certificates, where for properties constructed since 2013 and where NI Water hold records, the response will indicate if NI Water’s records indicate a connection. The Society has also made representations to the Committee for Infrastructure on the issue and will be responding to the current Unadopted Developments Private Member’s Bill Consultation. Ultimately where bonds are concerned, to mitigate risk, external involvement from the statutory undertakers in the granting and prompt and rigorous enforcement is required to give any level of certainty that a bond is sufficient to rely upon when certifying title as good and marketable. This is a matter which is not within a solicitor’s direct control and the Conveyancing and Property Committee continues to work to secure the certainty that practitioners need.
Management companies
Management company issues can be complex. Where a management company has dissolved, the Guidance on reversionary and insolvency issues for developments and management companies sets out the possible methods by which to reinstate the company. The transfer deed or lease will also be key to ensuring that there are satisfactory arrangements to deal with the long-term management of a development such as ensuring that privity of estate will endure for any successors in title, including the transfer of any reversionary interest. Sinking funds and reserve funds, especially for properties which may be likely to need future funds for maintenance, are also important to consider, especially where a lift is on site, which can attract significant costs. Suitable insurance is also key to consider. The Society understands that the Assembly is considering this issue and will seek to work closely with the Civil Law Reform Division to see how potential issues with management companies may best be managed.
The annual Conveyancing Conference will look at these issues in greater detail, and will offer opportunities to engage with some of the statutory undertakers and stakeholders. Taking place on Tuesday 14 October 2025 at Titanic, Belfast, register to attend here.
Claire McNamee
Conveyancing and Non-Contentious Business Lead Law Society of Northern Ireland
Modernising Land Registers
The current LandWeb IT system has been operating for two decades and has served Land Registration well. However, as time and technology have advanced, Land Registration has been working on procuring a new IT system to replace LandWeb which will be digitalfirst and provide user-focused services to support the changing needs of solicitors and clients across Northern Ireland.
As Director of Land Registration, I am pleased to share an update on the Land Registration Implementation Project, a key component of Land & Property Services’ (LPS) wider programme of modernisation and transformation. In March 2025, we formally appointed our delivery partners for the new IT solution.
Working with our delivery partners we are designing and delivering a bespoke digital platform that will replace the existing LandWeb system over a series of phased rollouts beginning in 2026. The first changes implemented will be in support of Ground Rents and Registry of Deeds, with Statutory Charges Register and Land Registry to follow in 2026 and 2027.
This new platform will support the online submission of all applications, incorporate digital signatures and e-payment options, and offer enhanced register search capabilities. Automation will reduce the need for manual intervention, and applicants will be able to track progress throughout the registration process. An e-discharge service will enable lenders to cancel charges online and surveyors will be able to submit digital shape files and outline boundaries on a digital map base. Alternative options will remain available – this is a digital-first, not digital-only, approach.
Since 2022, we have been engaging with members of the legal profession to understand what you want and need from any future service. Your feedback and insights have helped us to develop our case for change and have provided many of the requirements for the future service.
The legal profession has consistently told us that the current system presents challenges –from rigid submission requirements to delays in communication and limited real-time visibility. The new platform has been shaped directly in response to these concerns. Our approach has been to design a system with solicitors to address your pain points.
To support a smooth transition, all solicitors who interact with Land Registration will receive comprehensive training. In-person and virtual engagement events will begin in Autumn 2025, with further opportunities to participate in system demonstrations, feedback surveys, and CPD-linked information sessions. We are committed to providing clear, accessible information at each stage of the rollout.
In parallel, a dedicated working group is reviewing the legislative changes required to underpin the new digital services. We are grateful to the Law Society of Northern Ireland for its engagement in this work ahead of public consultation later this year. This collaboration will help ensure the new system is not only operationally effective, but also legally sound.
This project is part of LPS’s wider transformation, focused on customer value, service standards, and integrated, scalable solutions. Sharing information across LPS to improve service response is a key driver of this change.
We are proud of the collaborative relationships built so far and grateful to the Society for its ongoing support. If you would like to know more or get involved in future engagement opportunities, please contact the LPS Communications Lead, Donna Morrow, at Donna.Morrow@finance-ni.gov.uk
We look forward to continuing to work closely with the profession as we take this important step forward for land registration in Northern Ireland.
Christine Farrell Registrar of Titles and Director of Land Registration Land & Property Services
‘Just A Minute, please’
How JAM Card partnerships are transforming legal services
Developed by the NOW Group, the JAM Card may be small, but it carries a powerful message. Three simple words – ‘Just A Minute’ - are reshaping the way the legal sector thinks about accessibility. Across Ireland and Northern Ireland, law firms are discovering that inclusion isn’t a slogan or a trend; it’s a business imperative. And with the JAM Card, it’s becoming a tangible reality.
A quiet revolution in accessibility
Invisible disabilities such as autism, ADHD, dyslexia, and other health-related concerns affect millions, yet they often go unrecognised. Nearly 1 in 5 adults live with a disability, and for too long, navigating professional services has felt like fighting through fog.
Enter the JAM Card, a discreet way for people to ask for ‘Just A Minute.’ It lets someone signal they might need extra time or understanding, without having to explain why. Available as both a physical card and a free mobile app, the JAM Card is already embraced by more than 186,000 people.
And now, it’s making its mark in the legal world.
Transform client interactions with just 20 minutes of training
For law firms, becoming a JAM Card-friendly business isn’t about charity; it’s about changing culture. At the heart of the initiative is JAM Card eLearning, a quick but powerful training programme.
Fifteen to twenty minutes - that’s all it takes for staff to learn how to recognise invisible disabilities, adjust their communication styles, and create a more welcoming environment for clients and colleagues alike.
The impact? Fewer misunderstandings, smoother consultations, a reputation for empathy and professionalism, and an alignment with diversity and inclusion strategies that modern clients and employees now expect.
Join the Law Society of Northern Ireland in setting the standard
If you want to see leadership in action, look at the Law Society of Northern Ireland. It became the first legal regulatory body in the region to roll out JAM Card training for all staff.
Colin Mitchell, the Society’s President, didn’t mince his words:
‘At the Society, we want to make sure no one is left behind. Rolling out JAM Card training equips our staff to recognise and support card users, creating a more welcoming and inclusive environment.’
The Society even hosted a high-profile webinar featuring Maeve Monaghan, CEO of the NOW Group, and Keavy Ryan, Partner at A&L Goodbody, to help other law firms see that accessibility isn’t complicated - it’s achievable.
Fiona Dowds, Head of People and Organisational Development of the Society, highlights that:
‘The introduction of the JAM Card within the Society represents an important development in our commitment to inclusivity. By equipping our staff with the skills and awareness to better support individuals with invisible disabilities, we are fostering a more understanding and accessible environment across the organisation and the wider profession.’
A&L Goodbody’s three-year commitment
Private law firms are stepping up too. A&L Goodbody (ALG), one of Northern Ireland’s leading firms, has gone all in with a three-year strategic partnership with the NOW Group.
Every staff member gets JAM Card training. But ALG hasn’t stopped there. The firm is offering pro bono legal advice to support the wider NOW Group and is also adopting inclusive recruitment practices to open doors for people with disabilities.
For Sinead Smith, Head of Responsible Business, the initiative is as much about culture as compliance:
‘This partnership supports our ambition of being a more diverse and inclusive organisation. It fosters a culture where different perspectives are valued, and staff feel supported and empowered.’
For ALG, inclusivity strengthens not just its workplace but also the service it delivers to clients.
Stand out as a firm that truly cares
The legal sector might not be known for rapid change but as the Society and A&L Goodbody have demonstrated, accessibility isn’t a radical overhaul, it’s a series of small, meaningful steps.
Becoming a JAM Card-friendly firm means consultations where clients feel understood instead of rushed. Workplaces where colleagues feel supported instead of overlooked. And businesses that show, not just say, they care about diversity and inclusion.
It’s also a chance to stand out. Clients notice when firms go the extra mile. So do potential employees. A culture of empathy and inclusion isn’t just good ethics, it’s good business.
Shape the future of accessible legal services
Law firms across Ireland and Northern Ireland have the opportunity to lead on accessibility or risk falling behind. Partnering with the NOW Group is simple, and rolling out JAM Card eLearning takes less than half an hour per employee. The costs are minimal. The benefits are enormous.
Firms that take the leap will find themselves better equipped to serve clients, more attractive to top talent, and aligned with the growing expectation that businesses should be forces for good.
Because at its heart, the JAM Card isn’t just about disabilities - it’s about dignity. It’s about recognising that sometimes, the most powerful thing you can give someone is a minute of patience and understanding. And the law firms that understand this will be the ones shaping the future of legal services.
Discover how JAM Card training can transform your practice, strengthen client relationships, and showcase your commitment to inclusion. Visit www.jamcard.org to learn more and begin your journey toward becoming a JAM Card-friendly law firm today.
Sinead Smith, A&L Goodbody, Aisling Muldowney, A&L Goodbody, Seamus Callagy, Department of Justice, Mark Osmer, NOW Group Board Member & Maeve Monaghan, NOW Group
Closing your Practice
An Interview with Kelly Shaw, former principal at Shaw & Co Solicitors
Can you share a little bit about your journey to starting your own practice and what you valued about being a principal?
My journey to starting my own practice was a combination of opportunity and a desire for independence. After working as an associate for a number of years, I felt that I had the experience to go out on my own. Starting from the beginning without an existing client base was difficult but I am lucky that word of mouth and referrals quickly built a client base.
I valued the autonomy of being a principal – the ability to set my own hours, shape the firm’s culture, and make decisions that I felt were in the best interest of my clients. It was a chance to build something from the ground up and see my vision for a firm come to life.
What brought you to the decision to cease acting as a sole trader and join another firm? Was there a particular turning-point?
The decision to close my practice was not an easy one, and it didn’t happen overnight. It was more of a gradual realisation that my priorities were shifting. I wanted more flexibility in my life, and it felt that it was the right time to explore a new chapter. There wasn’t one single turning-point but a series of smaller movements that made me consider what I wanted in the future. It was about recognising that it was time for a change. With so many regulatory and technological changes happening it also seemed like a good time to step away from being a sole practitioner. It is very difficult to manage those things without the infrastructure and support of a larger practice.
Even at the point of realising I wanted a change I wasn’t sure that I was making the right decision but that came from finding a position that was the right fit for me. I had various interested parties, and I spoke with a number of people about options in moving forward after I closed my practice. However, from the first time I met with the directors at MKB Law I knew that this was an opportunity that I was genuinely interested in, and it offered me the change I wanted with the support of a larger practice. It was the chance to specialise in Matrimonial Law as Head of its Matrimonial Department and to have my existing clients from other practice areas looked after by colleagues within the firm. The firm was interested in retaining the relationships I had built with clients over the years and that was important to me.
How long did the process of closing your practice take?
The entire process from the initial decision to close to the final closing took approximately four months. However, that was just the closing of the physical doors of the office - the accountant’s final report for the Law Society of Northern Ireland and final taxation of cases for legal aid, as well as recovery of fees, is still ongoing. I think the advice I would give to anyone considering the process is to be patient and be prepared for things to take longer than you initially anticipate.
What were the biggest obstacles or issues you encountered during the process?
The biggest obstacles were definitely in the details. Preparation of all of the files, financial records and administrative paperwork was a huge undertaking. With the best preparation in the world, you are ultimately reliant on third party companies and providers as regards the closure or transfer of accounts and you are reliant on clients replying to you. It was definitely a challenge clearing the client account funds to enable the closure of the office. Not all clients responded promptly with consent to transfer their files or with bank details to enable the return of monies held on account. The office could not close until the client account was clear and therefore this was probably the most difficult part of the process as I could not control the timing.
What support did you have in the process?
I was very lucky to have great support throughout the process. My bookkeeper’s and my accountant’s advice and support were invaluable. The Law Society of Northern Ireland was very helpful in answering queries as they arose and I was also in the very lucky position to have support from my new firm MKB Law throughout the process. MKB had experience of joining with other sole practitioners’ firms previously and had a wealth of advice and moral support which was of great assistance. They also assisted in the archiving, destruction and transfer of files. I cannot imagine having to have dealt with the process without the support of a firm with that technology and infrastructure behind them.
How did you manage the relationship with clients and/or colleagues throughout? Was there any particularly challenging?
I found the most difficult part of managing relationships to be the timing of the announcement to clients and colleagues. I wanted to give clients plenty of notice about the upcoming changes, but I also didn’t want to cause unnecessary stress for existing clients. I obviously wanted to retain a relationship with clients and for them to want to transfer their files with me to MKB Law, in Belfast. It was a very delicate balance to strike.
Is there anything that in hindsight you would have done differently?
In hindsight I would have had an exit plan before I ever intended to use it. I would have started the process of organising my records even earlier. I would also have spent more time networking with other principals who had closed their practices. There is very little information readily available on the process, and I think I could have benefited from some peer-to-peer advice before I began the process. The difficulty is you do not want to spread the word that you are considering closing until you have made the final decision to do it.
You advertised your practice anonymously through the Law Society of Northern Ireland website and weekly E-nformer email. Is there anything you can share about advertising it this way and the interest that it generated?
I can recommend advertising anonymously through the Society’s website. It allowed me to gauge interest and options without alerting clients prematurely. This method helped me control the flow of information and maintain confidentiality. However, I ultimately made the decision to join MKB Law, which was searching for a new Head of its Matrimonial Department.
This has been a big transition in your legal career. How do you feel about the next chapter?
I am feeling very positive about the next chapter of my career, it is exciting to say the least. The opportunity to work in a boutique commercial practice while focusing solely on family and matrimonial matters was attractive. It was quickly apparent to me that MKB is made up of a strong group of lawyers and support staff who work collaboratively and collectively to service the needs of their clients. The collaborative and holistic approach really stood out for me during our discussions. It is definitely a different working environment for me. Going from a sole trader to being a part of a wider commercial team is something that I was considering for some time. I am passionate about family and matrimonial law and representing my clients remains the main motivator in my professional life.
Family law is evolving, however, and the changing commercial realities of running certain types of cases are at the forefront of your mind when taking on new instructions. It was important to me to balance the desire to provide representation to my clients with the commercial pressures that we all feel in the profession. With a strong commercial and private client background, MKB really was the perfect fit for me.
What advice would you give someone who is considering closing their practice?
My advice would be to start preparing well in advance. Get your financial house in order, organise your files, don’t hesitate to reach out to the Society with any queries you have, and talk to a professional you trust who has been through the process. Don’t underestimate how stressful the process will be and give yourself time to work through everything that will be required. Lastly be patient – the right opportunity will come along, and you will know it when it does.
If you are considering closing your practice, please remember there are certain regulatory steps you must take, including notifying the Society, returning client monies, and arranging a final Accountant’s Report. For guidance or support, contact the Society at records@lawsoc-ni.org
Kelly Shaw Head of the Matrimonial Department MKB Law
BSA Golf Day
The Belfast Solicitors’ Association Annual Golf Day took place on 12 June at Belvoir Park Golf Club
A yellow weather warning had threatened to jeopardise the event but the golfers remained undaunted and were rewarded with fairly benign conditions before the heavens opened as the last group made it into the clubhouse.
The overall winner and recipient of the BSA Cup was Padraig Walsh whose round included four birdies and an eagle while the Best Visitor Prize was taken by Presiding District Judge Steven Keown with a score of 40 Stableford Points.
The other prize winners on the day were McCartan Turkington Breen Solicitors (Best Team), Conor Woods (Nearest The Pin), Mark McKenna (Longest Drive) and Anselm Henry (Best Gross).
Marchons, marchons
The Quadrangular Cup is a golf event involving the Belfast Solicitors’ Association (BSA), Dublin Solicitors’ Association, Liverpool Solicitors’ Association and Lyon Solicitors’ Association, and is a major event in the BSA’s social calendar.
The competition moves from jurisdiction to jurisdiction on a yearly basis. Lyon was the host for the 2025 event and Belfast Solicitors’ Association will host next year. Next year’s Cup will also incorporate BSA’s annual golf day.
The 2025 competition was played over three days with Liverpool emerging as victors, taking home the coveted trophy. But that was only half the story. The camaraderie and craic both on and off the golf course were something to behold.
Lyon put on a first-class event and, to that end, its Captain, Tim Hughes, deserves a huge round of applause.
Not only did he get 60 golfers from the airport to hotels and then onto golf courses, he ensured they were all fed and watered at an evening BBQ, a Gala Dinner and a French bistro (the escargot was not to everyone’s taste!).
Speaking after the event, BSA Past Chair Ciaran Maguire said:
‘The Golf Day is one of the highlights of the year for the BSA and we are delighted that it was such a success in spite of concerns about the weather! Thanks to all of the golfers who took part and to the staff at Belvoir Park Golf Club who made us so welcome as usual. We look forward to hosting teams from Dublin, Liverpool and Lyon next year in the quadripartite competition and encourage our members and visitors to get involved in what is sure to be a fantastic event.’
The talk over the three days was how the BSA would follow such style and generosity of spirit, but as Captain of the 2026 Outing, I know Belfast will put on a warm welcome to Dublin, Liverpool and Lyon. To that end, in the words of Sherlock Holmes, ‘the game is afoot’.
Our event will be over two days - 28 and 29 June 2026 - and those wishing to participate should contact myself at paul.moylan@mccannandmccann.com
For more information about the BSA please visit https://belfast-solicitors-association. org/
Paul Moylan McCann and McCann
2025 Quadrangular Cup Captain of the BSA team
The Northern Ireland Young Solicitors’ Association A Round-Up of Key Events in 2025
This year has been a busy and engaging time for the Northern Ireland Young Solicitors’ Association (‘the NIYSA’). From wellness activities and social gatherings to professional development and international engagement, the Association has continued to build a strong, supportive community for solicitors at the early stages of their careers.
Social events
The year began with a refreshing focus on wellbeing through a Pilates session led by Leila O’Neill. This event was a welcome opportunity for members to unwind, connect, and prioritise their mental and physical health—an increasingly important aspect of life in the legal profession.
One of our recent memorable social events was the Summer BBQ held at The National generously sponsored by Achuman Capital. This sold-out evening was a great success, bringing together a lively crowd for food, fun, and networking.
In collaboration with the Young Bar Association and our sponsor Achuman Capital, the NIYSA also hosted a quiz night that tested legal knowledge and general trivia in equal measure. This event fostered camaraderie between solicitors and barristers, encouraging cross-professional relationships and a bit of friendly competition. It was a great example of how the NIYSA continues to create spaces where young professionals can connect beyond the courtroom.
CPD workshops
On the professional development front, the NIYSA’s CPD series was particularly impactful. The sessions featured a stellar lineup of speakers, each bringing their expertise to the table. Topics included representing minors in police stations (Katherine McAuley, Joseph Magee & Co), Conveyancing (William Wilson, Lacey Solicitors), Employment Law (Emma Doherty, Tughans), Introduction to Personal Injury Law (Emma Falloon, Kennedys LLP), AI (Jude Copeland, Cleaver Fulton Rankin) and an employability workshop (Andrew Currie & Nuala Darragh, Achuman Capital).
The NIYSA has been selected to host the European Young Bar Association’s Autumn Conference from 2-5 October 2025. The conference will bring together young lawyers from multiple jurisdictions for a weekend of learning, networking and socialising in the selected host city. At the time of writing, we have secured an exciting line-up of speakers, sponsors and venues including the Game of Thrones Studio Tours for our gala dinner on 4 October 2025. We would like to thank the Law Society of Northern Ireland for its support in hosting this prestigious event.
Looking ahead, the Northern Ireland Young Solicitors’ Association remains committed to fostering a vibrant, inclusive, and supportive environment for young legal professionals. The success of this year’s events is a testament to the dedication of its members and the strength of its partnerships. Whether through wellness initiatives, educational workshops, or international conferences, the NIYSA continues to empower young solicitors to thrive both personally and professionally.
As the legal landscape evolves, the Association’s adaptability and forwardthinking approach ensure that it remains a vital resource for its members. With more exciting events and initiatives on the horizon, the NIYSA is poised to build on its achievements and continue making a meaningful impact in the legal community.
Other events
Beyond local events, the NIYSA has also made its mark on the international stage. Members attended both the Spring and Summer Conferences of the EYBA, held in Amsterdam and Rome respectively. These Conferences provided a platform for Northern Irish solicitors to engage with their European counterparts, exchange ideas, and build lasting professional relationships. The experience of participating in these global events has broadened perspectives and reinforced the importance of international collaboration in the legal field.
Our chair, Emma Falloon, was invited to speak at the ceremonial event in Parliament Buildings, Stormont to mark the Opening of Signature of the Council of Europe Convention on the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer and the formal promotion of the Law Society’s Rule of Law Pledge.
Morgan Pennie, a solicitor with Pinsent Masons and active member of the NIYSA, also represented the NIYSA at the Law Society’s Connecting Trainees Evening. As a panel member, Morgan spoke to prospective trainees about the realities of legal training, offering guidance and encouragement to those considering a career in law. Members of our Association have also spoken at career events in Queen’s University Belfast and Ulster University.
For more information about the NIYSA please visit https://www.linkedin.com/ company/northern-ireland-young-solicitors-association/about/
Morgan Pennie Solicitor at Pinsent Masons and Trainee Rep within the NIYSA
EYBA Conference
Meet the Trainee
Chiara Clarke, from Bursary Recipient
to Newly Qualified Solicitor
In 2023, Chiara was awarded the Centenary Bursary, an initiative created by the Law Society of Northern Ireland designed to widen access to the profession, ensuring that financial circumstances are not a barrier for talented individuals with the potential to make a difference in law. Just two years later Chiara is preparing to qualify as a solicitor — a milestone made possible in part by the opportunities and encouragement the bursary provided.
Opening doors with the bursary
Reflecting on her experience, Chiara explains:
‘The bursary wasn’t just financial support — it was an investment in me. It allowed me to focus on my studies and training contract without the same financial pressures, but it also gave me a sense of confidence that others believed in my potential.’
Looking ahead
Now preparing to qualify as a solicitor at Murray Kelly Moore, Chiara is excited for the next step.
‘I’m proud of what I’ve achieved and incredibly grateful to the Law Society for the support at the very beginning. Without the bursary, my path to qualification would have been much more difficult. I hope my story shows others that these opportunities can be life-changing.’
‘You can’t be what you don’t see. When I applied for the Centenary Bursary, I wasn’t sure someone like me belonged in this profession — but the award showed me that I do. If you’re passionate about becoming a solicitor but feel that financial barriers stand in your way, I’d encourage you to apply. It could be the first step in making your ambitions a reality.’
Celebrating the impact of the bursary
At the Law Society, we are proud to celebrate Chiara’s success. Her journey demonstrates the lasting impact the bursary has in shaping not only individual careers but also the future of the profession — making it more diverse, inclusive, and accessible.
We congratulate Chiara on her upcoming qualification and look forward to seeing her career continue to thrive.
Feeling anxious about mistakes?
You’re not alone
Mistakes are a normal part of life. But in the legal sector, where accuracy and high standards are expected, the fear of making a mistake can feel overwhelming. At LawCare, we often hear from people who worry about past mistakes or feel anxious about what could go wrong in the future.
Why does this happen in the legal sector?
The legal sector places high expectations on its people. Lawyers, paralegals, trainees, and support staff often work in environments where mistakes can have serious consequences - for clients, cases, the reputation of the employer and careers.
There are several reasons why people have a strong fear of making mistakes:
• Pressure to be perfect – Many people in law feel they must get everything right, often setting impossible standards for themselves. The work can be complex with tight deadlines and high regulatory standards.
• High stakes – In legal work, even small mistakes can feel significant due to the potential for serious outcomes.
• Fear of judgement – Worrying about what colleagues, supervisors, or clients think can make mistakes feel like personal failures.
• Blame culture – In some workplaces, mistakes aren’t treated as learning experiences, making it hard for people to admit errors or move forward after making one.
For some, this fear takes over. We’ve spoken to people who keep going over past decisions, questioning themselves, and believing they’ve made a huge mistake they can’t fix. Others worry so much about making a mistake that they struggle to focus, put things off, doubt their choices, or even avoid tasks completely.
The impact of constant anxiety
When the fear of making mistakes takes over, it doesn’t just affect work - it can harm mental and physical health too. Constant worry can lead to burnout, making it harder to focus and stay motivated. It can also knock confidence, causing self-doubt even when things are going well. Some people start putting off tasks or avoiding opportunities because they’re afraid of getting things wrong. Anxiety can also show up in physical ways, like headaches, stomach problems, tense muscles, and trouble sleeping.
Moving forward: how to manage fear of mistakes
If this all sounds familiar, here are a few ideas that might help:
1. Acknowledge negative thoughts –It’s common when we’re under stress to jump to worst-case scenarios, particularly in law where it’s often part of the training. If you keep stressing over a mistake, take a moment to acknowledge those thoughts. What would you say to a friend feeling the same way? Indulge in some self-care, which might free up some headspace to think things through more clearly.
2. Speak to someone you trust –Whether it’s a mentor, colleague, or a support service (like LawCare). Talking about your worries can help you see things more clearly.
These worries don’t just disappear when the workday ends. Many legal professionals tell us they struggle to sleep because of anxious thoughts, replaying case details or conversations in their heads late into the night. Some describe waking up with a racing heart, feeling physically sick at the thought of what might happen if they make a mistake.
3. See mistakes as a chance to learn –No one gets everything right 100% of the time. Instead of viewing mistakes as failures, try to see them as opportunities to grow and improve.
4. Be realistic –No one is perfect. Focus on doing your best instead of trying to be flawless.
It is so important to be kind to yourself. Mistakes don’t define you; they’re a normal part of life.
You’re not alone
If you’re feeling anxious about making mistakes, you’re not alone - lots of people in the legal sector feel this way too. Support is available, and you don’t have to deal with it on your own.
Talking about your worries can help. At LawCare, we provide confidential, non-judgemental support to anyone in the legal sector who is struggling with stress, anxiety, sleep problems, or anything else that’s making life difficult. We’re here for you.
Call LawCare for a confidential chat on 0800 279 6888 Use LawCare’s online chat at www.lawcare.org.uk to connect with a real person who understands Email LawCare at support@lawcare.org.uk
Business Relief and Agricultural Relief
Significant Changes Ahead
From April 2026, important changes to Agricultural Relief (AR) and Business Relief (BR) will take effect, with significant implications for clients who own farms, trading businesses, or qualifying shares. These long-standing reliefs, which have been part of the inheritance tax (IHT) framework for decades, will be curtailed for the first time in a generation. The change means that assets which previously attracted full relief from IHT could now face a sizeable tax bill.
A quick refresher –what are AR and BR?
Agricultural Relief is designed to prevent farms from having to be sold to pay an IHT bill when they pass between generations. If the land and buildings are actively used for agriculture, and certain occupation and ownership conditions are met, AR currently provides up to 100% relief from IHT on their agricultural value.
Business Relief operates on a similar principle for certain business assets, including ownership of a trading business, an interest in a partnership, or qualifying shares in unlisted companies (including many AIM-listed shares). It allows businesses to be passed on without triggering a potentially crippling tax charge, thereby supporting continuity and preserving jobs.
The numbers in practice
To illustrate, take the case of a single individual who owns:
• A farm worth £2 million (qualifying for AR)
• A trading business worth £1.5 million (qualifying for BR)
• AIM shares worth £500,000 (currently qualifying for 100% BR)
• NRB otherwise utilised
Under the current rules, all of these assets would receive 100% relief. The IHT bill: zero. From April 2026, the first £1 million of the farm’s value may still qualify for 100% AR. The remaining £1 million would attract only 50% relief, leaving £500,000 taxable. The £1.5 million trading business would face a similar calculation: £750,000 taxable after 50% relief. The AIM shares, at £500,000, would see £250,000 subject to IHT.
In total, £1.5 million would be taxable. At the standard IHT rate of 40%, that’s a £600,000 bill, money that would need to be found from elsewhere in the estate, or by selling part of the business or farm.
What’s changing in April 2026?
At present, both AR and BR can offer 100% relief on qualifying assets. From April 2026, the maximum relief for many of these assets will be cut to 50%. While the rules retain some nuances – certain assets may still qualify for full relief depending on their nature and ownership structure – the broad impact will be that a substantial portion of asset value will now fall into the taxable estate.
The change also interacts with the way AR and BR are applied. Relief is not “pooled” across assets; instead, each applies to specific assets in a set order. The outcome is that the first £1 million of agricultural property may still receive 100% AR, but any excess value may be subject to only 50% relief. The same principle applies to BR for business assets.
The £1 million relief is combined across AR and BR, so a person owning assets that qualify for AR and separate assets qualifying for BR will have a total allowance of £1 million between the two.
Knock-on effects for clients and advisers
For solicitors, the implications are clear. Estates that were once comfortably below the IHT threshold for agricultural or business assets may now find themselves exposed. The compressed timescales of probate and the illiquidity of these assets mean executors could be faced with difficult decisions: take on borrowing, sell off core assets, or restructure holdings at short notice.
Clients may also underestimate the change. Many will have planned their wills and estate strategy years ago on the assumption of full relief. Without a review, those plans could now deliver a very different financial outcome.
Planning considerations
The good news is that there is still time to prepare, but that time should be used wisely. Potential strategies include:
• Lifetime gifting: Passing on assets more than seven years before death can remove them from the taxable estate, but this requires early action.
• Reorganising business structures: In some cases, restructuring can help preserve 100% relief for certain asset classes.
• Maximising other allowances: The nil-rate band and residence nil-rate band can help reduce overall exposure.
• Succession planning for farms and businesses: Ensuring the next generation is actively involved in operations can help maintain eligibility for reliefs.
• Relevant life insurance: This type of policy can provide a tax-free lump sum to cover the anticipated IHT liability, ensuring heirs aren’t forced to sell assets. Importantly, it can also be used to bridge the gap whilst more time consuming solutions are considered and implemented. The table below shows the cost savings of using a Relevant Life policy through a Limited Company vs paying for the cover personally:
Why early action matters
Insurance underwriting, restructuring, and lifetime transfers all take time. Delays can result in fewer options, higher costs, and in some cases the complete loss of eligibility for relief. For clients with illiquid estates, the lead time is even more critical –a smooth handover takes planning.
How we can help
Law Society (NI) Financial Advice specialises in helping solicitors and their clients navigate complex changes in tax legislation. We can model the impact of the 2026 reforms, explore tailored solutions, and work alongside legal advisers to ensure estates are structured in the most tax-efficient way possible.
Law Society (NI) Financial Advice is a trading name of Succession Wealth Management Limited, which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Financial Services Register number 588378. Please check here for full risks and disclosures: Succession Key Disclosures
Casenotes
From the CourtsAbstracts of recent Case Law
Below are headnotes and links to the full text of selected judgments from the High Court and Court of Appeal. Please note that these headnotes are for guidance only. Members can access these cases and more on the Library’s searchable catalogue, KnowAll.
Commercial Law
Martin Sheehan v Herbert Lusby and Daniel Lusby
Application to request that the court appoint Mr Daniel McAteer to act as his McKenzie friend at a hearing in which he is applying to strike out the first defendant’s defence. - McKenzie Friend Practice Note 3/2012. - strike out summons. - Mr McAteer is a company director with “substantial experience” in the High Court as a witness and litigant in person. - no “personal interest in the case”. - Mr McAteer to be paid for his role by Mr Sheehan. - plaintiff claims damages for breach of contract and failing to honour an agreement following a previous mediation in 2021. - Mr McAteer was a defendant in the earlier proceedings dated 2015 and acted as an accountant for the defendant, Mr Daniel Lusby. - Mr McAteer has an acrimonious relationship with the defendant’s legal advisers. - HELD THAT application is refused to appoint Mr McAteer as a McKenzie friend. - latter could be a witness in the proceedings as he witnessed a key document in the centre of the dispute. - he does not understand the role of a McKenzie Friend and he has acted as an accountant for the defendants. - plaintiff has time to engage a lawyer if he so wishes.
Master Harvey King’s Bench Division 4 July 2025
Contract Law
Fone Zone Telecommunications Ltd
v Tailored Facility Solutions Ltd
Debt action. - plaintiff agreed to provide its software product, Workpal, to defendant. - plaintiff claims £35,100.00 monies due. - breach of contract. - plaintiff supplies telecommunications and software products and services. - defendant is a provider of bespoke facility management, recruitment
and logistic solutions. - defendant was a customer of plaintiff. - defendant signed a workplace order form which set out the terms of the contract. - defendant paid a setup fee but did not pay the agreed monthly instalments - plaintiff issued a termination fee invoice of £35,100.00. - whether breach of contract. - whether plaintiff had waived the debt. - whether defendant had issues using Workpal. - repudiatory breach. - term of 36 months had initially been agreed for payment. - HELD THAT parties had agreed a 36 month payment term and defendant is ordered to pay £35,100.00 and £4562.00 in interest to the plaintiff.
McBride, J
Commercial Division 11 December 2024
McCausland Holdings Limited v Tesco
Underwriting Limited
Application by defendant to strike out action. - plaintiff, a company, entered into a “rent to own” agreement with Hamid Mahmoud (driver) whereby the plaintiff provided a car to the driver subject to terms of the agreement. - agreement to run for 182 weeks so long as the driver is neither in default of payments nor in breach of obligations in the agreement. - driver involved in a collision. - denied liability. - repairable report provided. - diminution report. - driver sought £11,387.26 for repairs to vehicle, hire and loss of earnings. - defendant made a payment into court of £4000. - civil bill served. -diminution. -whether abuse of process. - at time of accident driver was not the owner of vehicle and therefore would not benefit from the proceedings. - bailment. - whether diminution in value is strictly limited to the cost of repairs. - HELD THAT diminution in value of the vehicle has already been advanced and was included in the cost of repairs and the additional amount for depreciation was already settled. - plaintiff’s action is ill-founded and the civil bill is struck out.- defendant awarded costs.
DJ Logue
County Court
1 July 2025
Criminal Law
R v Derek George Lammey and Stephen Matthews
Defendants jointly charged with unlawful assembly, affray, intimidation. - both pleaded not guilty. - assembled with others in the vicinity of Pitt Park/Fraser Pass. - police witnesses recognised the defendants; CCTV and body worn video camera footage from officers at the scene. - visual identification. - whether defendants were part of a group of men observed on the day.
- consideration of Turnbull [1977] QB 224.HELD THAT Lammey was part of the group observed by police on the day in question, but Judge was not firmly convinced that Matthews was present and was acquitted of all charges. - Lammey found not guilty of unlawful assembly and affray and guilty of intimidation.
HHJ Kerr
Crown Court 1 May 2025
Defamation
Donna Sands and Neil Sands v Sebastian Bond, Yuzu Zest Ltd, Kumquat Tree Ltd operating as “Tattle Life”
Online vilification and abuse over a period of time towards plaintiffs. - anonymous posters. - defamation and harassment. - both plaintiffs have been grossly defamed and severely harassed by the posts. - destruction of reputation. - HELD THAT each plaintiff is entitled to £75,000 for general damages and aggravated damages and an additional award of £75,000 each for exemplary damages.
McAlinden, J King’s Bench Division 1 December 2023
Discrimination
Suresh Deman v Queens University Belfast Appellant applied for position of Senior Lecturer/Reader in Management at QUB in June 2019. - appellant was not shortlisted for interview. - appellant made an application to the tribunal in November alleging discrimination on the grounds of race and religious beliefs and that he had been victimised. - claim was dismissed in its entirety. - litigation history. - appellant had become the subject of a restriction of proceedings order in England and Wales as he had habitually and persistently instigated vexatious proceedings before the employment tribunals. - appellant also has a history of pursuing private law proceedings, engaging the statutory torts of discrimination. - hearing of this appeal delayed due to appellant’s family bereavement , a trip overseas, been the victim of an assault and also had ENT surgery. - remote hearing took place in April 2025 and appellant did not appear. - court proceeded with paper determination.candidate had not been shortlisted as his research publications were not extensive in the subject areas of the expected quality for inclusion in the Research Excellence Framework. - whether the correct appointments procedure was used. - whether essential criteria was enhanced to exclude the appellant and his fellow
Hindus. - HELD THAT the criteria had been properly applied and the appellant was not subject to any unfair disadvantage. - the process was methodical and transparent. - claim dismissed. - appellant referred to the Attorney General in order that she may decide whether to bring a restriction on proceedings application. - appellant must pay the costs of this appeal.
Humphreys, J Court of Appeal 28 May 2025
Extradition
Catalin-Marian Nechifor v Judecatoriei Brasov, Romania
Extradition warrant. - convictions in Romania for various offences of dishonesty.extradition sought from Northern Ireland to enable him to serve out remaining part of a six year four month prison sentence. - already served 43 months in prison in Romania before his release on conditional basis.applicant lived in Northern Ireland with his partner and her daughter and was building a new life for himself. - applicant had already served a significant portion of his sentence, with only five months left to serve and had not been in any trouble while in Northern Ireland. - whether learned trial Judge was correct in his decision to extradite the applicant to Romania. - HELD THAT decision of LTJ is affirmed and appeal is refused.
Horner, LJ and Sir Paul Maguire King’s Bench Division 19 June 2025
Inquests
In the matter of an inquest touching upon the death of William Victor McClean
Mr McClean died in Antrim Area Hospital in October 2022, aged 78 years old. - at the time of his death he was a resident at Rose Court Care Home (“home”), a residential home. - suffered a fall which resulted in an acute chronic subdural haematoma to his brain. - diagnosed with vascular dementia and subject to a Deprivation of Liberty .family had concerns about his care in the home. - deceased appeared unkempt and lost significant amount of weight quickly.home referred to latter as “sunset syndrome” where the deceased was up all night and sleeping during the day resulting in missed mealtimes. - frequency of falls and admission to hospital. - deceased required one-to-one care. - social worker had concerns about the level of care given in the home to residents. - low staff to patient ratio. - care plans had not been updated to reflect changes.ineffective governance. - deceased required nursing care at a higher level than what was
provided in the home. - high risk of falls and immobility. -HELD THAT in the months leading to his death, there had been a number of missed opportunities and failings in the care and treatment provided to the deceased. - ineffective governance and lack of a proper comprehensive care plan reflecting the evolving and changing needs of the deceased. - Trust to be commended for the actions they have taken to remedy issues and concerns highlighted in the inquest with the introduction of protocols and procedures and progress has also been made at Rose Court Care Home.
Coroner Fee
Coroners Court
26 June 2025
In the matter of an inquest touching upon the death of John Alexander McHugh Deceased, John Alexander McHugh died in Altnagelvin Hospital on 3 August 2019.diagnosed with squamous cell carcinoma of left side of tongue in June 2019. - following surgery on 29 July 2019 the deceased passed away in hospital on 3 August 2019. - prior to his death, the surgery had gone well and the surgeons were pleased with his progress. - loss devastated family and friends including his partner, Ms Swatish, who had visited him while in hospital every day. - deceased had difficulty breathing and despite CPR had died. - doctor was unable to intubate the deceased. - whether an alternate surgery would have been possible. - whether there was a need to carry out such an extensive surgery and whether a smaller operation may have prevented the death. - whether tracheostomy had been removed too soon. - whether sub-standard care. - HELD THAT the deceased’s death was avoidable. - less invasive surgery and the tracheostomy remaining in situ for a longer period would on the balance of probabilities have meant a different outcome. - Death was due to pharyngeal oedema following surgical operation for carcinoma of tongue and coronary artery atheroma.
Coroner Dougan Coroners Court
22 May 2025
Landlord & Tenant
MBCC Foods (Ireland) Limited v Lesley Bloomfield Limited
Plaintiff applies for an interim injunction preventing the defendant from granting, executing or otherwise entering into a lease with an entity known as Jamaica Blue Ltd or allowing or permitting access to Jamaica Blue for the purpose of fit-out works or for trading as a coffee shop. - plaintiff is a limited company operating under the trading
name of Costa Coffee. - whether breach of restrictive covenant. - application for interim injunctive relief. - damages. - consideration of American Cyanamid Co v Ethicon Ltd [1975] AC 396. - whether a serious question to be tried. - whether Jamaica Blue is in direct competition to Costa Coffee.whether Jamaica Blue’s main business was the sale of food and not coffee. - HELD THAT damages are not an adequate remedy as the plaintiff’s claim relates to a permanent loss of market share and calculation of loss is difficult. - plaintiff is entitled to interim injunctive relief restraining the defendant from allowing or permitting Jamaica Blue to trade in breach of Clause 6.2 of lease. - Jamaica Blue must obscure all branding and signage before it commences trading and not to identify with any Jamaica Blue promotional material.
McBride, J Commercial Division 5 June 2025
Legacy
Jacqueline Doherty on her own behalf as personal representative of the estate of Eileen Doherty (deceased) v Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland
Difference of opinion as to how pleadings ought to be drafted and whether pleadings may simply contain bare assertions pending discovery whether plaintiffs must allege particular material facts in their Statement of Claim. - Eileen Doherty, sister of the plaintiff was aged 19 in 1973 when she escaped from a taxi that had been hijacked. - hijackers returned and shot her three times and she later died. - original police investigation did not make any person amenable for the murder. - in 2005 following the introduction of computer software and following new evidence Robert James Shaw Rodgers was convicted of the murder, R v Robert James Shaw Rodgers [2013] NICC 2. - plaintiff issued proceedings in 2018 for negligence, misfeasance in public office, assault, battery, trespass to the person, conspiracy to commit trespass to the person and conspiracy to injure. - collusion with terrorists by police.striking out. - whether Micawber approach, “something will turn up”. - whether speculation and suspicion. - vicarious liability of defendant. - HELD THAT as there are no facts to back the claim at this stage the court must strike out the case.
Master Bell
King’s Bench Division 7 August 2025
Matrimonial Property
Madonna Marie Quinn v Anthony John Quinn
Court of Appeal had ruled that Judge had fallen into error of law into accepting the valuation report provided by Templar Consultants on behalf of Mrs Quinn when Mr Quinn did not have sight of it until after the hearing. - procedural unfairness. - case was remitted for adjudication to allow Mr Quinn opportunity to consider and respond to the valuation report. - since the Court of Appeal ruling, Mr Quinn advised the court that he had been made bankrupt and had failed to engage in the court proceedings, attend court, provide written submissions or give instructions to his McKenzie Friend. - In January 2025 the Judge gave an extempore ruling affirming the earlier court order.following the hearing Mr Quinn advised the court that he had only become aware of the hearing date and had been medically unfit to attend the court. - he contended the Templar valuation adopted the wrong valuation methodology and court erred on relying on it. - whether Mr Quinn failed to comply with the orders of the court requiring updated medical information. - HELD THAT the Order dated 23 October 2019 is affirmed.
McBride, J
Family Division
6 June 2025
Medical Law
R v Nichola Hawes
Sentencing. - defendant arraigned on 21 May 2024 and entered not guilty pleas to all counts. - trial began in February 2025.defence sought to introduce new material during the trial which necessitated entire case to be re-opened with a date set of 1 September 2025. - intervening months defendant pleaded guilty to Counts 1-24 and Count 31 on full facts basis. - selling and supplying drugs, possessing a medicinal product with intent to supply. - fraud by misrepresentation. - defendant owned business, Nichola Hawes Aesthetics (NHA). -
Medicines Regulatory Group (MRG) received information regarding the prescribing and supplying practices of defendant. - defendant had deliberately ordered prescriptions in the names of clients without their knowledge and for treatments they neither requested or needed. - whether administrative convenience. - whether defendant had an advantage over competitor businesses. - consideration of professional career.difference in regulations with other parts of UK regarding holding of stock. - HELD THAT defendant had breached regulation and committed fraud and fined £8,000.
HHJ Millar Crown Court
9 July 2025
Planning
In the matter of an application by Liam Haberlin for leave to apply for judicial review
Applicant seeks leave to challenge a decision of the Planning Appeals Commission (PAC) to grant planning permission for a housing development in Eglinton. - planning application for 97 units was refused previously. - notice party submitted a revised site layout plan reducing the number from 97 to 77, together with a new access and infrastructure and permission was granted. - flood mitigation measures. - whether development complied with the Derry Area Plan. - whether development was compliant with Planning Policy Statement 15 (PPS 15). - illegality. - procedural unfairness.irrationality. - human rights. - HELD THAT leave to apply for judicial review is dismissed. Humphreys, J King’s Bench Division 26 June 2025
Policing
In the matter of an application by Caolan Reynolds for judicial review
Appellant challenges the legality of the conduct of police officers on several occasions between July 2019 and July 2020.
- conduct of officers entailed stopping and searching the vehicle of the appellant and searching the appellant outside the vehicle. - whether offending searches were unlawful on the grounds of ultra vires and failure to comply with a code of practice requirement. - munitions and transmitters.stop and search. - HELD THAT the appellant failed to establish the stopping and search of his person by police officers on any of the occasions were unlawful. - appeal dismissed. McCloskey, LJ, Horner, LJ and Humphreys, J Court of Appeal
27 February 2025
Sentencing
R v Robert Atkinson
Sentencing . - conspiracy to do an act with intent to pervert the course of public justice. - false information to police. - defendant a serving member of Royal Ulster Constabulary reserve on duty the day of the murder of Robert Hamill in 1997. - whether defendant tipped off Allister Hanvey by a phone call advising him to get rid of the clothes he had been wearing at the time of the attack. - falsifying evidence. - conspired with the McKees to give the police a false account as to who had made the call.consideration of health issues of defendant. - significant health conditions. - whether a breach of reasonable time requirement.HELD THAT defendant is sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment.
Lynch, HHJ
Crown Court 14 June 2025
The Director of Public Prosecutions and John Dillon
Sentencing remarks. - convicted on 20 February 2025. - actual bodily harm. - intentionally applied pressure to throat or neck of Joanne McKenna and intended to affect her ability to breathe. - offences aggravated by reason of involving domestic abuse. - couple were in a relationship at the time of the assault. - presentence report. - no mental health
issues or no previous relevant offending. - failure to take responsibility for his actions, lack of insight. - victim blaming behaviour. - consideration of victim impact statement. - nonfatal strangulation.sentencing guidelines. - aggravating factors to be considered. - HELD THAT defendant is sentenced to 16 months of which eight months are to be served in custody.concurrent sentence of nine months to include a section 15 uplift of three months.offender levy of £25.
DJ King
Magistrates’ Court 4 April 2025
R v Emmanuel Quinn
Renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence. - conspiracy to rob.robbery. - possession of offensive weapon. - receiving stolen goods. - applicant and co-accused had entered the premises of Winemark off-licence, masked and carrying a knife and proceeded to steal £2000 and unknown quantity of cigarettes. - both men were sentenced on a joint enterprise basis. - degree of pre mediation and planning before the robbery. - 167 prior convictions. - remorse and regret by applicant. - family responsibilities. - addiction issues.whether starting point of eight years was too high and whether Judge failed to give sufficient weight to the applicant’s domestic circumstances. - HELD THAT Judge took into account the mitigating domestic circumstances and correctly applied the principles of Devlin [2023] NICA 71.sentence was neither wrong nor manifestly excessive. - leave to appeal is refused.
McLaughlin, J
Court of Appeal
20 June 2025
In the matter of an application by Secretary of State for Northern Ireland for judicial review and in the matter of a decision of the Sentence Review Commissioners for Northern Ireland
Applicant challenges the decision of the Sentence Review Commissioners (SRC) of 13 November 2012 to grant the application of Mr Robert Clarke for a declaration of eligibility of early release under s. 3(1) of Northern Ireland Sentences Act 1998. - Re Clarke’s Application [2024] NIKB 110. - whether SRC’s decision was unlawful, having been taken in error of law. - whether further relief should be granted to the applicant in the form of an order quashing the SRC decision and voiding the resulting life licence. - whether return to prison. - Mr Clarke was arrested and charged in 2011 with the murder of Mr Alfredo Fusco in 1973, R v Clarke [2011] NICC 12. - sentenced to a life
sentence with a minimum term of 25 years. - 25 year tariff due to expire on 27 February 2036. - previously served a 15 year sentence for the murder of Margaret O’Neill in June 1975. - exercise of the royal prerogative of mercy. - eligibility of early release as offending had occurred on a date prior to the period covered by the early release scheme under the 1998 Act. - remedy. - delay. - time limits. - HELD THAT it is appropriate to grant an order of certiorari to quash the SRC decision.- Mr Clarke has no longer a right to be released and is liable to be returned to prison. - time allowed to allow for practical arrangements to be made by Sentence Review Commissioners, to allow Mr Clarke to put his affairs in order and to make an application for a stay of the order of the court.
Scoffield, J King’s Bench Division
30 May 2025
R v Jason Murray
Sentencing. - defendant charged with murder of Paul Rowlands. - body found in car park in Portrush. - defendant initially charged with murder. - following medical reports charged with manslaughter by reason of diminished responsibility. - defendant and Mr Rowlands had been living rough in tents in Portrush. - alcohol and drugs misuse by both. - defendant had attacked and killed Mr Rowlands, leaving him slumped on the ground whilst he went to a bar to play pool and drink alcohol. - blunt force head injury. - victim impact statements considered by family members. - Mr Rowlands had moved from England to Portrush following separation from his wife. - aggravating factors. - whether he poses future risk.HELD THAT he is sentenced to eight years which is the minimum period he will serve.Parole Commissioners to determine whether he will be released after the eight-year period.
O’Hara, J Crown Court
8 July 2025
R v Hazel Stewart
Application for leave to appeal a sentence of double murder. - applicant sentenced to life imprisonment for two murders. - minimum tariff of 18 years. - appeal is substantially out of time. - whether to extend time.admit new evidence. - deceased were the spouses of the applicant and Colin Howell who is also serving a prison sentence for the murders. - both spouses were murdered by carbon monoxide poisoning in 1991. - Howell admitted to the murders to church elders in 2009. - assessment of applicant’s culpability. - whether it should have been lower due to a mental impairment (depression and PTSD)
due to coercive control of Howell. - whether fresh evidence meets the requirements of the Criminal Appeal Act. - HELD THAT no new evidence can be admitted and extension of time is not allowed. - original sentence remains unaltered.
Keegan, LCJ
Court of Appeal
25 June 2025
R v Clive Weir
Appellant challenges a determinate custodial sentence of three years equally divided between custody and ensuing licence release. - cultivation of cannabis. - converting criminal property and using criminal property for the purchase of fuel. - appellant’s farm building was used for cannabis cultivation. - purchased generator and provided fuel also. - whether financial benefit to appellant from the cultivation. -appellant contested amount of financial benefit.consideration of Newton [1982] 77 Cr App R 13. - consideration of convening a Newton hearing. - HELD THAT appeal is dismissed and sentence of lower court is affirmed.sentencing language should in the future be plain and simple and comprehensible to all in the court.
McCloskey, LJ Court of Appeal 20 June 2025
Sexual Offences
R v WF
Appeal with leave from a sentence imposed on the appellant for historical sexual abuse offences over 30 years ago - in relation to two complainants. - appellant pleaded guilty to one count of indecent assault and four counts of gross indecency. - whether Judge paid insufficient regard to mitigation/low culpability given the offending occurred when the appellant was a child himself.whether Judge erred in refusing to suspend the sentence. - both complainants in their victim impact statements have highlighted that the abuse had a significant impact on their lives and relationships. - consideration of pre-sentence report. - low likelihood of reoffending. - no previous convictions. - symptoms of social anxiety disorder.consideration of expert report. - Judge failed to make adequate adjustment for personal mitigation and low culpability. - HELD THAT a probation order is recommended for 18 months. - appellant has already served some months in prison and would benefit more from a probation order.
Keegan, LCJ and McBride, J Court of Appeal 11 August 2025
