Slater & Gordon sanctioned for both sides of Quindell due diligence


Slater & Gordon: Fined for failures on both sides of due diligence

Slater & Gordon has been rebuked and handed a record fine of £80,000 for an alternative business structure (ABS) for inspecting confidential client data during the due diligence that led to its acquisition of Quindell Legal Services (QLS).

The fine was split equally between the main ABS and Slater Gordon Solutions – a separate ABS which at the time was QLS – for allowing the data to be disclosed.

The firm will also have to pay the Solicitors Regulation Authority’s (SRA) costs of £26,000.

Though the SRA’s fining powers are limited to £2,000 for traditional law firms – it has to refer cases to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal if it thinks the level should be higher – the Legal Services Act allows it to fine ABSs up to £250m.

This is the most it has fined an ABS, although the record fine for a firm, as approved by the tribunal, is £500,000 for US law firm Locke Lord.

The main firm was found to have inspected unredacted confidential information and documents from 7,087 client matter files of QLS without the knowledge or consent of the clients during the due diligence that took place in late 2014 and early 2015.

This breached principles 3 (“You must not allow your independence to be compromised”) and 6 (“You must behave in a way that maintains the trust the public places in you and in the provision of legal services”) of the SRA Principles.

It also breached those principles by disclosing the information and documents from a selection of the files to two other unnamed firms, against without the knowledge or consent of the clients.

SGS’s fine was for disclosing the information and documents when it was QLS.

This was in breach of principles 4 (“You act in the best interests of each client”) and 6, and QLS failed to achieve outcome 4.1 of the Code of Conduct, which requires solicitors to keep client affairs confidential.

A Slater & Gordon spokesman said: “We take our obligations relating to confidentiality extremely seriously.

“The SRA carried out a detailed investigation into matters that occurred in 2015, during the Quindell period. It is important to stress the SRA concluded there was no evidence that clients’ data was released outside of firms regulated by the SRA.

“However, we accept the SRA’s conclusion that a breach took place in relation to the due diligence process during this complex business transaction.”

In May, Slater & Gordon announced that it was to combine its two ABSs into one.

The SRA has long campaigned to have equivalent fining powers for traditional firms that is has for ABSs.




Blog


The AI question law firms should answer before a client asks it

Most law firms we speak to are already using AI, whether or not they have approved it, because fee-earners are doing it anyway. The tool people settle on is often Claude.


From chat to Cowork: preparing your law firm for agentic AI

AI is evolving quickly. For law firms still working out how to get consistent value from the tools they already have, the conversation has moved on again to agentic AI.


Why good governance matters when managing Law Society forms

Everyday legal transactions rely on Law Society forms. But they are often treated as static templates rather than what they really are: living documents that change over time.


Loading animation