The Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability replaced the earlier Code, and candidates meet it in the heaviest sitting of the examination. Its length is deceptive: the canons read like general principles, and the numbered sections underneath are what questions actually test.
This article is a map for study — how the Code is organised, what each part is for, and how to hold it.
What the Code is
A codification of the lawyer's duties, organised by canon with numbered sections. Each canon states a general duty; the sections under it state the specific obligations, the prohibitions, and, in places, the consequences of breach.
Three consequences of that structure:
- A general answer scores badly. "The lawyer violated the canons" names nothing. The examinable unit is the canon and the specific obligation.
- Some canons overlap. A conflict of interest may engage loyalty, confidentiality and candour at once. The examinable skill is separating them without duplicating.
- The consequences are not uniform. Some breaches lead to discipline; some also to nullity, disqualification or restitution; some to all four.
The organisation, by relationship
The Code's canons group by the relationship the duty runs along. Learn the map, then learn sections inside each branch.
To the client. The core of the practice duties:
- Competence and diligence — the standard of care, the duty not to neglect matters, and the limits on delegation.
- Confidentiality — the duty to keep confidences and secrets, including after the engagement ends, and the exceptions (which is where questions live).
- Loyalty and conflict of interest — the prohibition on representing adverse interests, the treatment of a former client, and the rules on a lawyer's own dealings with the client.
- Candour and communication — telling the client the truth about the matter, including the bad parts.
- Fees — reasonableness, the prohibition on unconscionable fees, and the handling of client funds.
- Client funds and property — the duty to account, to keep separate, and to deliver.
To the courts and tribunals.
- Candour to the court — no false statements of fact or law, no suppression of authority, no misleading.
- Respect for the process — the duty not to abuse procedure, not to delay for advantage, and to comply with orders.
- Candour about authority — including the duty to inform the court of a reversal of a cited decision.
To the profession.
- Integrity — the standard is both actual and apparent.
- Advertising and solicitation — what may and may not be said about one's practice, including online.
- Unauthorised practice and the duty to report misconduct.
- Relations with other lawyers — the standard of courtesy, and the prohibition on communicating with a represented party.
To society and the administration of justice.
- Access to justice, and the duty not to refuse a case for improper reasons (with the exceptions the Code allows).
- The duty in the administration of justice — no obstruction, no abuse of process.
- The duties of a public officer where the lawyer holds office.
The four consequences, and how to state them
Most ethics answers require the consequence, and the Code's consequences fall into four families:
| Consequence | What it means | Typical trigger |
|---|---|---|
| Discipline | Sanctions ranging from reprimand through suspension to disbarment; for judges, administrative penalties | A canon breached by the lawyer or judge |
| Disqualification / inhibition | The lawyer cannot continue in the matter; the judge cannot hear the case | A conflict of interest; a relationship; prior involvement |
| Nullity | An act fails for defect — most commonly a notarial act | A notarial requirement not met; a disqualified notary |
| Restitution | Return of funds, or disgorgement of fees | Unearned fees; mishandled client funds |
Two of the four are the ones candidates forget: nullity and restitution. A question that asks "what follows" often expects both the disciplinary consequence and one of these.
How to hold the Code
Three artefacts, and they are enough:
- The relationship map (above), on one page.
- A duty table: relationship, duty, canon and section, consequence. Ten to fifteen rows covering what is examined.
- A fact-pattern bank: for each duty, one scenario that breaches it and one that does not. The second is the important one, because examinations test boundaries as often as breaches.
Build them from the Code itself, then rebuild the table from memory monthly. The rebuild is the study.
Citing the Code in an answer
The examinable form is short:
"Canon [number], Section [number] requires that… The lawyer [did X], which breaches that duty because… The consequence is [discipline / disqualification / nullity / restitution]."
If the section number will not come, name the duty precisely and attribute it to the Code — a precise duty with an approximate citation is worth more than the reverse. Keep the form consistent across the paper; markers reward recognisable accuracy.
The traps
- Reciting the canons. "The lawyer must act with integrity" is not an answer. What did this lawyer do, what specific duty did it breach, and what follows.
- One consequence where there are two. The disciplinary consequence and the practical one are often both required.
- Assuming a breach voids everything. A lawyer's misconduct does not automatically void the client's contract, and an answer that says so loses marks.
- Confusing lawyer and judge standards. The judicial code is stricter on appearance, and applies to a different role.
For the answer shape in practice, see legal ethics answers; for the notarial rules, notarial practice on the syllabus.