Attorneys may very well be banned from drafting non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) in circumstances of sexual harassment, discrimination or whistleblowing until the member of workers concerned has requested for one, the Authorized Providers Board (LSB) has recommended.
Legislation corporations is also required to make annual experiences to their regulators on the quantity and worth of NDAs they’ve created, whereas particular person attorneys may face “obligatory coaching”.
The oversight regulator is to problem a name for proof in March on misuse of NDAs by attorneys, adopted by a public session on the difficulty in the summertime.
Regulatory coverage supervisor Sally Al-Saleem wrote on the LSB’s Reshaping Authorized Providers web site that an necessary a part of addressing the “imbalance of energy whereas protecting a complainant’s choices open” was the existence of a “responsive regulatory framework” for attorneys and regulation corporations.
This might contain authorized regulators offering “clearer requirements of conduct for instance by expressly prohibiting attorneys from drafting NDAs for settling sexual harassment, discrimination, whistleblowing, or different critical misconduct, until requested by the complainant who should have entry to impartial authorized recommendation”.
Another choice could be “expressly prohibiting the drafting of NDAs” in comparable conditions “as a part of an employment contract”.
It may additionally contain “requiring regulation corporations to yearly report back to the regulator information on the frequency, nature, rationale and sum of settlement by means of NDAs every year”.
Additional choices have been regulators imposing obligatory coaching for attorneys or adopting “a transparent coverage on the development of NDAs (e.g. plain English, what info is delicate, readability on what occurs if there’s a breach by both events)”.
In a paper for this week’s assembly of its board, the LSB mentioned that following the decision for proof, “we’ll develop coverage choices for session on the expectations of attorneys’ conduct in respect of the usage of NDAs in reference to sexual misconduct, harassment, and discrimination within the office”.
The session in “late summer time” would result in the LSB issuing a coverage assertion or steerage in early 2024.
The LSB mentioned the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) had taken steps to supply steerage to solicitors on the moral use of NDAs, by issuing a warning discover in March 2018, up to date in November 2020.
“We’re additionally conscious that the SRA has issued sanctions in quite a lot of circumstances concerning the inappropriate use of NDAs (though not restricted to sexual harassment), is at the moment investigating some circumstances, and is conducting additional coverage work on this space.
“A minimum of one different regulator has indicated that this might additionally be a magnet for them.”
The LSB mentioned the federal government proposed new laws on NDAs in 2019 which included, amongst different issues, making certain that people signing NDAs get hold of impartial authorized recommendation. The laws is but to be launched.
Nonetheless, the exercise on NDAs, each on this jurisdiction and in others such because the US and New Zealand, would “strongly indicate that there are weaknesses within the protections supplied by current legislative and regulatory frameworks which must be addressed”.
The LSB recalled how NDA campaigner Zelda Perkins, who infamously signed one when working for Harvey Weinstein, told its conference final October that regulation and laws “doesn’t assist the career to make robust skilled moral selections and attorneys usually are not adequately held to account in respect of them”.
The paper mentioned that, given the capability for misuse of NDAs to undermine the rule of regulation and have a unfavourable affect on equality and variety, in addition to the urge for food from authorities, regulators, the sector and the general public to deal with it, there was “a powerful coverage crucial” for the LSB to hold out this work.