The duty in context
No baseless or threatened misconduct report profession
The lawyer must not make or threaten a professional-misconduct allegation or report without a genuine, reasonably held and bona fide belief that it applies.
How the codes express this duty
E&W Solicitors SRA Principles & Code no clear equivalent
E&W Barristers BSB Handbook rC67 strong 28 cases
rC67 You must never make, or threaten to make, a report under Rule rC66 without a genuine and reasonably held belief that Rule rC66 applies.
BSB Handbook Part 2: Code of Conduct · 5.0 · archived copy · official source ↗
Cayman Islands Legal Services Code 2026 no clear equivalent
AU Solicitors Solicitors' Conduct Rules Rule 32.1 strong 198 cases
A solicitor must not make an allegation against another Australian legal practitioner of unsatisfactory professional conduct or professional misconduct unless the allegation is made bona fide and the solicitor believes on reasonable grounds that available material by which the allegation could be supported provides a proper basis for it.
Australian Solicitors' Conduct Rules · 2015 (June 2026 compilation) · archived copy · official source ↗
AU Barristers Uniform Barristers Rules no clear equivalent
IE Solicitors Law Society Guide no clear equivalent
IE Barristers Bar Code of Conduct no clear equivalent
JM Attorneys Canons of Professional Ethics no clear equivalent
JE Lawyers Law Society of Jersey Code no clear equivalent
ON Lawyers LSO Rules of Prof. Conduct r 3.2-5(b); r 7.1-3 commentary [1] partial
3.2-5 A lawyer shall not, in an attempt to gain a benefit for a client, threaten, or advise a client to threaten, without reasonable and lawful justification ... (b) to make a complaint to a regulatory authority. [7.1-3 commentary [1]: In all cases, the report must be made without malice or ulterior motive. 3.2-5 commentary [1]: It is an abuse of the process of a court or, ordinarily, a regulatory authority to threaten to make or advance a charge or complaint in order to secure the satisfaction of a private grievance.]
Law Society of Ontario — Rules of Professional Conduct · current · archived copy · official source ↗
BC Lawyers BC Code r 7.1-3, commentary [2] partial 37 cases
Nothing in this paragraph is meant to interfere with the lawyer-client relationship. In all cases, the report must be made without malice or ulterior motive.
Code of Professional Conduct for British Columbia (BC Code) · 2017 · archived copy · official source ↗
NZ Lawyers Conduct & Client Care Rules r 2.10 strong
A lawyer must not use, or threaten to use, the complaints or disciplinary process for an improper purpose.
Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 · SR 2008/214 · archived copy · official source ↗
SCO Solicitors LSS Standards of Conduct no clear equivalent
SG Lawyers Professional Conduct Rules 2015 r 29 (Allegations against another legal practitioner) partial 6 cases
29 Allegations against another legal practitioner
Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules 2015 · 2015 · archived copy · official source ↗
HK Solicitors Solicitors' Guide no clear equivalent
HK Barristers Bar Code of Conduct para 10.50 partial
A practising barrister shall not make any allegation of misconduct or dishonesty against another barrister unless such allegation is supported by reasonably credible evidence.
Code of Conduct of the Bar of the Hong Kong SAR · 2018 · archived copy · official source ↗
Cases dealing with this duty
505 decisions · link basis: found breached = a tribunal finding; rule cited = the mapped provision is cited in the decision; text match = high-precision text pattern
-
-
Anthony Burns
Breaches, Code of Conduct 2011, Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, SRA Principles 2011, SRA Principles 2019
-
-
Mark Christopher Sander
1. On 1 May 2014, the Practitioner opened a trust account. The Legal Practitioners Act 1981 (Act) imposes obligations on Practitioners who open trust accounts including an obligation to provide written notice of the ope…
Multiple Disciplinary Action Conditions on Practising Certificate Fine Reprimand Submit to medical treatment / counselling View decision -
(unnamed)
Client Money, Failures
-
-
Rohan Slater
Charge is proved and professional misconduct is established
-
David Bray
Charges 1 & 2 constitutes professional misconduct
-
Anthony De Fraine
Charge 1-4 is proved and constitutes professional misconduct
-
-
McCarron, Christopher Francis
The solicitor acted in a conflict of interest in connection with the sale of properties in circumstances where he and his wife, were: (a) the creditors and second mortgagees at the time of the sale of one property; and/…
Costs Fine Reprimand The Respondent’s application for an order for confidentiality pursuant to s 64 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 (NSW) (“the NCAT Act”) is dismissed. $3,000.00 1 PDF View decision -
Roderick Wayne Kirkham
Rule 3-7.1 Consent Agreement
-
Matthew David McCormick
The Respondent’s conduct identified in Charges 2 and 6 in the discipline application is proved and is found to constitute professional misconduct.
-
David Roger Edwards
The Respondent’s conduct subject of charges 1 and 4 is characterised as professional misconduct.
-
Mahony, John Francis Thomas
Allegation 1: The Respondent Solicitor did not properly account for monies received on trust on behalf of the Complainant Allegation 2: The Respondent Solicitor failed to provide a costs agreement and/or costs disclosur…
Fine Lawyer to undertake and complete further ethics education Reprimand Within three (3) months from notification of the Committee’s determination, the Respondent Solicitor provide a written apology to the Complainant in a form approved by the Director, Legal Regulation (s299(1)(c) of the Legal Profession Uniform Law) $10,000.00 About About the OLSC The Commissioner History Mission statement Structure Contact Contact the OLSC Give us your feedback: online surveys Access to information (GIPAA) Community information Information for lawyers Fact sheets FAQs Other regulatory and complaint-handling organisations Contact LawAccess NSW for legal information " You and Your Lawyer", Hot Topics 78 Legal Information Access Centre (LIAC), State Library of NSW , provides access to information about the law in NSW regarding your lawyer Privacy Copyright and Disclaimer Website accessibility View decision -
-
Neil Robert Lawler
OCR198-23 Charges 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 - professional misconduct. OCR050-25 Charges 1 to 4 - professional misconduct
-
Christopher Matthew Henaghan
The respondent engaged in professional misconduct
-
Douglas John Winning
Charges 1 and 2, there is a finding of professional misconduct.
-
Stephen Richard Picken
Conduct can be characterised as professional misconduct
-
Shaune Kerry Irving
Charges 1, 2 & 3 of disciplinary application 110/24 and 181/24 there is a finding of professional misconduct.
-
David William McDermott
Breaches, Code of Conduct 2011, Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, Dishonesty, Lack of Integrity, SRA Principles 2011, SRA Principles 2019
-
Talha Jamil Ahmad
Breaches, Code of Conduct for Firms 2019, Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, Failures, Lack of Integrity, SRA Principles 2019
-
Loukas, William (Bill) Vasilios
Ground 1: The respondent engaged in professional misconduct by acting unprofessionally, rudely and in an intimidating manner towards [Person A] and [Person B] in his written correspondence. Ground 2: The respondent enga…
The Tribunal orders, by consent, that the Respondent (1) be reprimanded (2) pay a fine to the applicant of $5,000 (3) undertake, complete and pass any reasonable educative course within 12 months from the date the orders are made (4) provide a statutory declaration to the applicant within 1 month of completing the educative courses (5) agrees to pay the applicant’s costs and disbursements incurred to date on the indemnity basis $5,000.00 Disciplinary Action 1 PDF View decision -
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
Breaches, Code of Conduct 2011, Code of Conduct for Firms 2019, Money Laundering Regulations, SRA Principles 2011, SRA Principles 2019
Duty classification does not yet cover every jurisdiction (Ontario, New Zealand and Singapore decisions are indexed but not yet duty-classified), so counts here understate those corpora.