Lu v Solicitors Regulation Authority: Admn 6 Jul 2022

No unnecessary Anonymity

The appellant, having been acquitted of misconduct, complained of the anonymisation of various parties by the SDT.
Held: The court was critical of the approach taken by the Tribunal. ‘I see no good reason why Ms Pearson, Ms Stone, Mr Ewing and Mr Blakemore, should have been anonymised by the tribunal. They were individuals properly doing their jobs. Their role was not remarkable or particularly controversial. There was no reason not to apply the default position of open justice. They had no particular private or family life issues to protect. I can find no justification in rule 39.2 for continuing their anonymity in this judgment.’


Mr Justice Kerr


[2022] EWHC 1729 (Admin)




England and Wales


CitedRe a Solicitor (No.6119/92 4-May-1994
. .
CitedSolicitors Regulation Authority v Spector Admn 15-Jan-2016
The SRA challenged an anonymity direction given on conclusion of a complaint hearing against the respondent . .
CitedMaitland Hudson v Solicitors Regulation Authority Admn 2017
. .
CitedAli v Solicitors Regulation Authority Limited Admn 11-Oct-2021
The solicitor appealed from disciplinary findings after she had sent extraordinary text messages. She complained hat the tribunal had wrongly refused to anonymise the activity and or hat it had wrongly anonymised the identity of the two law firms . .
CitedScott v Scott HL 5-May-1913
Presumption in Favour of Open Proceedings
There had been an unauthorised dissemination by the petitioner to third parties of the official shorthand writer’s notes of a nullity suit which had been heard in camera. An application was made for a committal for contempt.
Held: The House . .
CitedAttorney-General v Leveller Magazine Ltd HL 1-Feb-1979
The appellants were magazines and journalists who published, after committal proceedings, the name of a witness, a member of the security services, who had been referred to as Colonel B during the hearing. An order had been made for his name not to . .
CitedSingh v Dass CA 7-Mar-2019
. .
CitedPink Floyd Music Ltd and Another v EMI Records Ltd CA 14-Dec-2010
The defendant appealed against an order made on the claimant’s assertion that there were due to it substantial underpayments of royalties over many years. The issues were as to the construction of licensing agreements particularly in the context of . .
CitedIn re Guardian News and Media Ltd and Others; HM Treasury v Ahmed and Others SC 27-Jan-2010
Proceedings had been brought to challenge the validity of Orders in Council which had frozen the assets of the claimants in those proceedings. Ancillary orders were made and confirmed requiring them not to be identified. As the cases came to the . .
CitedIn re Officer L HL 31-Jul-2007
Police officers appealed against refusal of orders protecting their anonymity when called to appear before the Robert Hamill Inquiry.
Held: ‘The tribunal accordingly approached the matter properly under article 2 in seeking to ascertain . .
CitedIn re S (a Child) (Identification: Restrictions on Publication) HL 28-Oct-2004
Inherent High Court power may restrain Publicity
The claimant child’s mother was to be tried for the murder of his brother by poisoning with salt. It was feared that the publicity which would normally attend a trial, would be damaging to S, and an application was made for reporting restrictions to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Legal Professions

Updated: 14 July 2022; Ref: scu.679101