Skip to main content
discipline 30 September 2026

The duty in context

No bribery or improper gifts integrity

The lawyer must ensure any gift or benefit complies with bribery, corruption and gift rules and must not give anything of value to a judge, juror or tribunal official in a pending matter.

872 cases 75% strike-off 2 with dishonesty finding

How the codes express this duty

E&W Solicitors SRA Principles & Code CCS 2.3; Principle 2 partial 855 cases
2.3 You do not provide or offer to provide any benefit to witnesses dependent upon the nature of their evidence or the outcome of the case. 1.2 in a way that upholds public trust and confidence in the solicitors' profession and in legal services provided by authorised persons.
E&W Barristers BSB Handbook gC18; gC19; gC30.2 partial 1 case
gC18 The following may reasonably be seen as compromising your independence in breach of Rule 8 ... .1 offering, promising or giving: .a any commission or referral fee ... or .b a gift (apart from items of modest value), to any client, professional client or other intermediary; gC30 ... .2 whether in a private or publicly funded case, a referral fee to which the client has not consented may constitute a bribe and therefore a criminal offence under the Bribery Act 2010;
Cayman Islands Legal Services Code 2026 R.7.9; R.10.1 strong
An attorney-at-law shall ensure that any gratuitous benefit received from a client, whether monetary or non-monetary, is compliant with applicable legislation on bribery and corruption, and any other regulation applicable to attorneys-at-law and recognised law entities in respect of gifts.
AU Solicitors Solicitors' Conduct Rules no clear equivalent
AU Barristers Uniform Barristers Rules r45 partial 7 cases
A barrister may not give a commission or gift to any person by reason of or in connection with the introduction of professional work by that person to the barrister.
IE Solicitors Law Society Guide Ch3 — Prohibition on payments to clients; Ch6 — Inducements partial
A solicitor should not, directly, or indirectly, make or offer to make any payment to or on behalf of any person as an inducement to obtain or retain instructions... A solicitor must not encourage or offer inducements to any third party with a view to obtaining instructions from any person.
IE Barristers Bar Code of Conduct no clear equivalent
JM Attorneys Canons of Professional Ethics Canon V(h) strong
An Attorney shall not give, lend or promise anything of value to a Judge, juror or official of a tribunal before which there is a pending matter in which he is engaged.
JE Lawyers Law Society of Jersey Code R.6.9 partial
This Rule applies alongside, and is without prejudice to, applicable legislation on bribery and corruption, and the requirement on a firm to keep a register of gifts.
ON Lawyers LSO Rules of Prof. Conduct r 5.1-2(d) partial
When acting as an advocate, a lawyer shall not ... endeavour or allow anyone else to endeavour, directly or indirectly, to influence the decision or action of a tribunal or any of its officials in any case or matter by any means other than open persuasion as an advocate
BC Lawyers BC Code r 5.1-2(d) partial 1 case
When acting as an advocate, a lawyer must not: ... (d) endeavour or allow anyone else to endeavour, directly or indirectly, to influence the decision or action of a tribunal or any of its officials in any case or matter by any means other than open persuasion as an advocate;
NZ Lawyers Conduct & Client Care Rules r 5.9 partial
A lawyer must not directly or indirectly offer to, or receive from, a third party any reward or inducement in respect of any advice given, referrals made, products or services purchased, or any work done for a client.
SCO Solicitors LSS Standards of Conduct no clear equivalent
SG Lawyers Professional Conduct Rules 2015 no clear equivalent
HK Solicitors Solicitors' Guide no clear equivalent
HK Barristers Bar Code of Conduct para 10.10 partial
A practising barrister must not give a commission or present or make any payment (other than a payment for practice promotion permitted by this Code) to any person for the purposes of procuring professional instructions or rewarding the giving or introduction of professional instructions.

Cases dealing with this duty

Clear

872 decisions · link basis: found breached = a tribunal finding; rule cited = the mapped provision is cited in the decision; text match = high-precision text pattern

  • Ashley Simon Hurst
    SDT solicitor 12612/2024 2025-05-16 rule cited

    Breaches, Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, SRA Principles 2019

    Fine 1 PDF View decision
  • Stephen Brian Simmons
    SDT solicitor 12484/2023 2025-05-16 rule cited

    Breaches, Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, Dishonesty, Lack of Integrity, SRA Principles 2011, SRA Principles 2019

    Strike off 1 PDF View decision
  • Tolhurst Fisher LLP
    SDT solicitor 12720/2025 2025-05-16 rule cited

    Breaches, Code of Conduct 2007, Code of Conduct 2011, Money Laundering Regulations, SRA Principles 2011

    Fine 1 PDF View decision
  • Shah Syed Rashid Masood Sahib
    SDT solicitor 12649/2024 2025-05-12 rule cited

    Criminal Convictions, SRA Principles 2019

    Strike off 1 PDF View decision
  • Zahid Akhtar
    SDT solicitor 12518/2023 2025-05-12 rule cited

    Authorisation of Individuals Regulations 2019, Breaches, SRA Principles 2019

    Suspend - Fixed Period 1 PDF View decision
  • Shaune Kerry Irving
    LSC-QLD solicitor Moloney MacCallum Abdelshahied Lawyers 2025-05-03 text match

    Charges 1, 2 & 3 of disciplinary application 110/24 and 181/24 there is a finding of professional misconduct.

    Struck off 1 PDF View decision
  • Talha Jamil Ahmad
    SDT solicitor 12662/2024 2025-04-26 rule cited

    Breaches, Code of Conduct for Firms 2019, Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, Failures, Lack of Integrity, SRA Principles 2019

    Suspend - Fixed Period 1 PDF View decision
  • (unnamed)
    SDT solicitor 12672/2024 2025-04-26 rule cited

    Appeals

    S.44E/ S.46/Paragraph 14C Appeals 1 PDF View decision
  • David William McDermott
    SDT solicitor 12654/2024 2025-04-26 rule cited

    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

    Strike off 1 PDF View decision
  • Waheed Ur Rehman Mian
    SDT solicitor 12646/2024 2025-04-14 rule cited

    Breaches, Code of Conduct 2011, Failures, SRA Principles 2011

    Suspend - Fixed Period 1 PDF View decision
  • Raja Shazad Khan; Ishtiaq Ahmed
    SDT solicitor 12540/2024 2025-04-14 rule cited

    Breaches, Code of Conduct for Firms 2019, Dishonesty, Lack of Integrity, Solicitors Accounts Rules 2019, SRA Principles 2019

    Strike off, Suspended period of Suspension 1 PDF View decision
  • Ahmed Ajina
    SDT solicitor 12666/2024 2025-04-14 rule cited

    Breaches, Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, Dishonesty, Lack of Integrity, SRA Principles 2019

    Strike off 1 PDF View decision
  • Claire Letitia Parry
    SDT solicitor 12663/2024 2025-04-14 rule cited

    Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, SRA Principles 2019

    Reprimand 1 PDF View decision
  • Paul Christopher Flaherty; William John Gregory Osmond
    SDT solicitor 12647/2024 2025-04-01 rule cited

    Breaches, Failures, Misappropriation of Client Account, Money Laundering Regulations, Solicitors Accounts Rules 2011, SRA Principles 2011

    Fine, Suspend - Fixed Period 1 PDF View decision
  • Leo Benedict Michael Foster
    SDT solicitor 12655/2024 2025-03-21 rule cited

    Breaches, Lack of Integrity, SRA Principles 2019

    Fine 1 PDF View decision
  • Rashid Ahmad Khan
    SDT solicitor 12644/2024 2025-03-21 rule cited

    Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, SRA Principles 2019

    Allegations not substantiated 1 PDF View decision
  • Robin Edward Stubbings
    SDT solicitor 12641/2024 2025-03-21 rule cited

    Breaches, Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, SRA Principles 2019

    Fine 1 PDF View decision
  • Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
    SDT solicitor 12639/2024 2025-03-21 rule cited

    Breaches, Code of Conduct 2011, Code of Conduct for Firms 2019, Money Laundering Regulations, SRA Principles 2011, SRA Principles 2019

    Fine 1 PDF View decision
  • Craig Cooper; Erich Kurtz
    SDT solicitor 12594/2024 2025-03-18 rule cited

    Code of Conduct 2011, SRA Principles 2011

    Allegations not substantiated 1 PDF View decision
  • Respondent AM
    SDT solicitor 12645/2024 2025-03-14 rule cited

    Code of Conduct 2011, Code of Conduct for Firms 2019, Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, Solicitors Accounts Rules 2011, SRA Authorisation Rules, SRA Principles 2019

    Suspend - Fixed Period 1 PDF View decision
  • David Baynon Crosby
    SDT solicitor 12658/2024 2025-03-14 rule cited

    Breaches, Client Money, Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, Dishonesty, Lack of Integrity, Misappropriation of Client Account, Solicitors Accounts Rules 2019, SRA Principles 2019

    Strike off 1 PDF View decision
  • Simon Jonathan Tager
    SDT solicitor 12630/2024 2025-03-14 rule cited

    Lack of Integrity, Recklessness, SRA Principles 2011

    Fine 1 PDF View decision
  • Matthew Howells
    SDT solicitor 12643/2024 2025-03-14 rule cited

    Breaches, Criminal Convictions, Lack of Integrity, SRA Principles 2019

    Suspend - Fixed Period 1 PDF View decision
  • Jonathan Richard Maurice Gerber
    SDT solicitor 12616/2024 2025-02-24 rule cited

    Breaches, Failures, Solicitors Accounts Rules 2011, Solicitors Accounts Rules 2019, SRA Principles 2011, SRA Principles 2019

    Fine 1 PDF View decision
  • Mark Ian Williams
    SDT solicitor 12626/2024 2025-02-18 rule cited

    Breaches, Client Money, Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, Lack of Integrity, Practice Framework Rules, Solicitors Accounts Rules 2019, SRA Principles 2011, SRA Principles 2019

    Suspend - Fixed Period 1 PDF View decision

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.