Skip to main content
discipline 4 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

Lois Yvonne Bayliss

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number12496/2023
Date21/10/2024
OutcomeFine

Allegation / charges

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

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

SanctionFine
FineGBP 2,500
CostsGBP 30,000
Dishonesty foundNo

Solicitor Lois Yvonne Bayliss sent letters on her firm's headed notepaper to up to 450 individuals at up to 247 schools during the Covid-19 pandemic, containing implied legal threats that recipients could face civil and/or criminal liability if they required face masks, carried out routine lateral flow tests, or facilitated child vaccinations. The Tribunal found Allegation 1.1 proved in part (implied threats found, but not that she encouraged others or sent letters to GP surgeries), Allegation 1.2 (that threats were misleading) not proved, and Allegation 1.3 (improper reliance on her solicitor status) proved in full. She was found to have breached Principles 2 and 5 and Paragraph 1.2 of the Code by exploiting the asymmetry between solicitors and lay people. No dishonesty was alleged or found (only lack of integrity). Her Article 10 rights were engaged but interference was justified. She was fined £2,500 and ordered to pay £30,000 costs (reduced from claimed £59,726).

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Conduct was deliberate, repeated and calculated over an intensive period
  • Letters sent to up to 450 recipients at up to 247 schools
  • Sent implied threats during a national emergency (Covid-19 pandemic)
  • Used status as a solicitor to add weight to her personal cause
  • Little if any insight into her conduct
  • Failed to disclose that she was one of the individuals who reported the alleged crime to police

Mitigating factors:

  • Previously unblemished 18-year regulatory record with no prior disciplinary findings
  • Genuinely held belief based on scientific evidence that measures harmed children
  • No financial gain or benefit from the conduct
  • No dishonesty alleged or found
  • No evidence of actual harm caused
  • Cooperated fully with the regulator
  • Did not conceal conduct or blame others
  • Significant public support (around 1,000 letters of support)

Codes & rules applied

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/12496/