ICAS new disciplinary costs procedure

I refer to reports that in future disciplinary proceedings ICAS will seek to 'obtain early costs orders against defendants, and add a significant burden to the upfront costs of defending actions at ICAS tribunals'.

Dr T McMorrow, who is the Executive Director, Regulation and Compliance of ICAS, is quoted as hailing the move as 'key in reducing the potential for Institute members to cover the costs of cases' and justifies the move by saying that the current £50 levy per member towards the cost of tribunals will, as a consequence, be scrapped.

Over recent years ICAS has devoted substantial six-figure sums of members' resources to pursuing certain individual members whom they have perceived to be in breach of regulations and/or best practice. Such sums appear to have been spent with little thought as to the consequences for the Institute or proportionality as regards the anticipated outcome.

Adding the burden of the Institute's costs to the defendant's costs and expecting the Institute's costs to be paid on an interim basis is effectively removing the possibility of a substantial number of members fighting for their professional lives, due simply to the enormous cost that will be incurred, even before the matter reaches a hearing.

Michael Belloff QC, an expert on Institute disciplinary procedures, was apparently amongst the advisors to ICAS as it looked into the legality and human rights concerns. Despite Mr Belloff's eminence, and the inevitable implementation of this new scheme, ICAS is effectively turning its disciplinary procedure into a 'Star Chamber'. Members will be tried, not on the issue of whether or not they have committed an alleged offence, but on whether or not they have the resources to defend themselves against an Institute which has in the past displayed a fundamental disregard for its own resources and hence the resources of its members.

Do others agree that this proposal is unacceptable?

Robert Weinberg