MAY 2025 – ARTICLES & ITEMS OF INTEREST
MAY 2025 – ARTICLES & ITEMS OF INTEREST
COURTS SERVICE WARNS ABOUT FALSE FINES
On the 9 May 2025, the courts service published an update regarding false fines notices that are currently being circulated.
The courts service states it not does not accept payment for fine notices, or any notices, by Revolut or PayPal NOR do the following accounts belong to the Courts Service or the High Court:
- irelandhighcourt@dublin.com, and
- finesdebtrecovery@irelandmail.com
The Courts Service is urging anyone with any concerns about such notices to contact the relevant court office immediately.
To read this see and see an example of a false fine notice see https://www.courts.ie/news/courts-service-update-regarding-false-fines-notices-may-2025
LQSI AML WEBINAR
On the 28 May 2025, the LQSI hosted an AML webinar, this is now available to view in the members’ area of the LQSI website.
See www.lqsi.ie
SUCCESSION – BENEFITS OF EMPLOYEE-OWNED LAW FIRMS – FINANCIAL AND CULTURAL
In May 2025 there were two articles published on website of the Law Society of England and Wales relating to employee-owned law firms.
‘Law firms are culturally and structurally hierarchical, commonly represented by a ‘pyramid’. So why would partners make the leap to joining the ‘John Lewis economy’ and become employee-owned? Around 30 have done so. It is not right for every firm, but those that have converted note that this is preferable to the alternatives. To let private equity take a stake or sell to a ‘consolidator’ can provide quick wins for partners worrying their way through succession and being paid out on their departure. But consolidators and private equity have a chequered record in the legal sector. The structure of employee ownership means a longer payout period, but in the meantime can involve and incentivise staff in the running of the business.’
To view these articles and hear from firm’s that have done this see https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/york-firm-shuns-buyout-option-to-become-employee-owned/5123424.article and https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/features/all-in-it-together/5123401.article
FLEXIBLE AND REMOTE WORKING
One year on from the introduction of the Code of Practice for Employers and Employees on the Right to Request Flexible Working and Remote Working, in the May edition of the Law Society Gazette Rachel Jones asks what has worked, what has not, and what needs to be improved?
What has worked?
A clearer framework for requests – the code provided a formalised process and set timeframes for both employers and employees on how to handle requests for remote and flexible working.
Legitimising remote and flexible working – although employees only have the right to request remote or flexible work, with limited entitlement to actually work this way, the code has helped establish these arrangements as legitimate options, rather than just temporary pandemic measures.
What hasn’t worked?
Employer discretion over employee rights – while it is welcome news for employers, one of the biggest criticisms of the code continues to be the high degree of discretion that employers have when refusing employees’ requests to work remotely or flexibly, based on ‘business needs’.
Additionally, employees cannot challenge a refusal at the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC), unless their request was ignored or their employer did not handle their request in line with the process outlined in the code.
No right to re-request or appeal the decision – there is no obligation for the employer to reconsider an employee’s circumstances after the initial decision, which may be seen as being deficient, but should be welcome news for employers who won’t have to deal with repeated requests.
Potential for discrimination – the flexibility given to employers in granting or denying requests has also raised concerns about potential discrimination. For example, certain groups – such as parents, caregivers, and people with disabilities – are more likely to request remote work.
She concludes by saying ‘One year on, the code has brought greater structure and transparency to remote and flexible-working requests in Ireland. However, some deficiencies in the code may bring continued challenges, particularly regarding enforcement and the ability to appeal their employer’s decision. Ultimately, while the code is a step forward, its limitations mean that employees still lack a genuine right to remote working.’
To article also references caselaw in this area, to view this article in full see https://www.lawsociety.ie/globalassets/documents/gazette/gazette-pdfs/gazette-2025/may-2025-gazette.pdf#page=35
Also relating to remote and flexible working on the 7 May 2025, the Irish Legal News published a news article titled ‘First award for breach of remote working legislation’. To view this see https://www.irishlegal.com/articles/first-award-for-breach-of-remote-working-legislation
WELLBEING
On the 1 May 2025, the Law Society of Ireland’s top stories referenced a recent survey carried out by the International Bar Association (IBA) which found that there is still a lack of understanding in law firms about addressing workplace wellbeing issues.
The lawyers’ group said that several of the 238 IBA committee members surveyed identified a disconnect between measurable actions and ‘lip service’ to wellbeing initiatives. More than 60% of respondents said that wellbeing and good mental-health schemes were part of their organisation’s strategy. Just under 40%, however, indicated that these programmes were actively monitored and evaluated on their success rates within their organisation.
The IBA report on the survey makes recommendations that include:
- Law firms should implement strategies enabling them to move from a reactive to an engaged and proactive approach to workplace wellbeing,
- Individuals with managerial responsibilities should be provided with sufficient training, resources, and support to enable them to appropriately foster and promote positive workplace wellbeing, and
- Bar associations, law societies, and other organisations involved in the legal profession should support law firms in adopting a new approach to wellbeing through the provision of training and support and the dissemination of relevant information, evidence, and examples of good practice.
To view this in full see https://www.lawsociety.ie/gazette/top-stories/2025/may/lip-service-on-wellbeing-concerns-iba/
CYBER CRIME – LEGAL AID AGENCY UK SUFFERS CYBER-ATTACK RESULTING IN A SIGNIGICANT AMOUNT OF PERSONAL DATA BEING ACCESSED
On the 19 May 2025, the Law Society of England and Wales website published an article titled “‘Significant’ amount of personal data accessed in LAA cyber-attack ”
Earlier this month legal aid practitioners were notified about a ‘security incident’ that prompted the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) to take its online portal offline as part of work to protect information.
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) became aware of a ‘cyber attack’ on the LAA’s online digital services on 23 April, however, on 16 May, the MoJ discovered that the attack was ‘more extensive than originally understood and that the group behind it had accessed a large amount of information relating to legal aid applicants’.
It is believed a significant amount of personal data of legal aid applicants through the digital service since 2010, had been accessed and downloaded.
The MoJ said ‘This data may have included contact details and addresses of applicants, their dates of birth, national ID numbers [national insurance], criminal history, employment status and financial data such as contribution amounts, debts and payments’.
Legal aid applicants have been urged to stay alert for any suspicious activity, such as unknown messages and phone calls.
The Information Commissioner’s Office confirmed it was notified of the breach by the Ministry of Justice and they are making enquiries.
Law Society president Richard Atkinson said: ‘The advice we have received from the LAA has been scarce and inadequate given the scale of this security breach. It is the LAA’s responsibility to address the problems with their own system including contacting all the legal aid applicants whose data has been compromised.’
Atkinson said the incident once again demonstrated the need for sustained investment to bring the LAA’s ‘antiquated’ IT systems up to date.
Another related article on the website stated, “a clearer picture of the fallout from a cyber-attack on the Legal Aid Agency is starting to emerge – with legal aid lawyers, already operating on the edges of financial viability, facing delays in getting paid.”
A solicitor told the Gazette they were particularly concerned about family cases, as case details, as well as bank statements, mortgage and car documents, are uploaded, so anyone who accessed the LAA’s systems would know a client’s vulnerabilities.
To view this article and other related articles see https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/significant-amount-of-personal-data-accessed-in-laa-cyber-attack/5123330.article
Related articles
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/laa-cyber-attack-firms-risk-doing-unpaid-work/5123379.article
FIRM FINED £120,000 FOR ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING BREACHES
On the 19 May 2025, the website of the Law Society of England and Wales published an article about a further AML fine. Essex firm Tolhurst Fisher LLP has agreed to pay £120,000 for anti-money laundering breaches in a rare case that went as far as the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.
A review of the documents provided by the firm and of eight client files found that none contained a documented client and matter risk assessment. There was also no evidence that a source of funds check had been conducted for any of the reviewed files.
At least 70% of the firm’s work came within the scope of money laundering regulations, with most of that being conveyancing.
The firm admitted failing to have the appropriate safeguards in place from 2007 to 2017. During this period, the firm had in place a policies and procedures document, but it was not reviewed or updated appropriately – even while guidance was being issued by the SRA about how to stay compliant.
On one of the files reviewed there were no source of funds checks on a £270,000 property purchase entirely funded by monies transferred by the client. In another, a business purchase was funded through a combination of client savings, a personal loan from family members and an investment loan from a third-party company. The firm failed to carry out any adequate source of funds inquiries and could not show whether any due diligence had taken place.
To view this article in full see https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/sdt-fines-firm-120k-for-15-year-breaches-of-aml-regulations/5123326.article