(1) Does the court have inherent jurisdiction to supervise the conduct of an authorised body through which a solicitor practises?
(2) Can the court’s inherent supervisory jurisdiction in respect of a solicitor be engaged if a solicitor gives an undertaking on behalf of an authorised body through which he or she practises and fails to ensure that the undertaking is performed?
(3) If an undertaking given by a solicitor or authorised body restrains its trade, is its construction, validity and enforcement under the court’s inherent jurisdiction to be determined in accordance with contractual principles?
(4) Where an undertaking given by a solicitor is alleged to be contrary to public policy under the doctrine of restraint of trade, is the fact that it is a solicitor’s undertaking relevant to the question whether is enforcement in contract is contrary to public policy?
(5) Is the undertaking given by Mr Parker on behalf of HHSLLP unenforceable on the ground of public policy under the doctrine of restraint of trade?
Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Briggs, Lady Arden, Lord Hamblen, Lord Burrows
[2021] UKSC 32
Bailii, Bailii Press Summary, Bailii Issues and Facts
England and Wales
Updated: 23 July 2021; Ref: scu.666155 br>