Who gets to call themselves a solicitor? In England and Wales, the title is legally protected, but as the case of Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds shows, enforcement is far from robust. Despite never qualifying, Reynolds repeatedly referred to himself as a solicitor in speeches, campaign materials, and online profiles. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) investigated, issued a warning, but stopped short of prosecution.
Now, with Scotland moving to criminalise the misuse of the more generic term lawyer, the gap in English law is under fresh scrutiny. Should England follow suit and legislate more clearly who can and cannot use professional legal titles?
What is the Reynolds controversy?
Jonathan Reynolds, Labour’s Secretary of State for Business and Trade, has come under fire for repeatedly claiming to be a solicitor. He did this on his website, LinkedIn, in campaign materials, and even in a 2014 speech to Parliament. But Reynolds never qualified. He left his training contract at Addleshaw Goddard in 2010 to become an MP before completing the process.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) investigated the claims and ultimately declined to prosecute, citing proportionality and public interest. However, they issued a formal warning: if Reynolds repeats the behaviour, prosecution could follow under the Solicitors Act 1974 and Legal Services Act 2007, which make it a criminal offence to falsely claim to be a solicitor.
Under the Solicitors Act 1974, it is a criminal offence for anyone to “wilfully pretend to be or take or use the name or title of solicitor” if they are not on the roll of solicitors. The Legal Services Act 2007 makes it an offence to falsely represent that you are authorised or entitled to carry out reserved legal activities which require being a solicitor or another authorised person, even if no legal services are actually performed.
Despite this, the SRA’s initial reluctance to act has been sharply criticised. Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick publicly condemned the handling of the case and submitted new evidence to the regulator, prompting a second investigation. He argued that if a private citizen had falsely claimed legal credentials, consequences would have followed swiftly.
This case has exposed serious gaps in enforcement, and raised deeper questions about public trust, regulatory authority, and the integrity of the legal profession.
Scotland takes a different regulatory path
Meanwhile, the Scottish government has passed new legislation that goes even further. The Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Act, passed by the Scottish Parliament in May 2025, makes it a criminal offence to call oneself a ‘lawyer’ unless properly authorised. The change is a response to longstanding concerns that unqualified individuals could mislead consumers by using loosely defined legal titles.
Under the new Scottish law, anyone providing legal services for a fee who falsely uses the title ‘lawyer’ can be fined up to £2,500. The Law Society of Scotland, which retains its dual role as regulator and professional body, has been given enhanced powers to suspend solicitors, investigate complaints more quickly, and regulate legal businesses more robustly.
England’s gap in legal title protection
In England and Wales, the title ‘solicitor’ is legally protected, meaning it is prohibited to list ‘solicitor’ on a LinkedIn profile, CV, or website without being qualified. Also saying in public or to clients that you are a solicitor when you are not, and using the term in election materials, advertisements, or court representations without authorisation. However the term ‘lawyer’ remains entirely unregulated. Anyone can use it, regardless of training or qualifications.
This lack of clarity risks misleading the public and undermining the integrity of legal services. The distinction between qualified and unqualified legal advisers matters, not just for professional standards but for consumer protection, especially in areas like family law, immigration, or employment disputes. The Reynolds case shows that even high-profile breaches can go unpunished or result only in a warning.
Is it time for ‘lawyer’ to be regulated in England?
Scotland’s new offence of misusing the term ‘lawyer’ could set a precedent. Should England and Wales adopt a similar approach? There’s a strong case for doing so:
Protecting consumers: Unregulated use of legal titles can mislead vulnerable clients.
Upholding professional integrity: Misrepresenting legal credentials erodes public trust.
Enhancing regulatory authority: Current laws are too weakly enforced to act as a meaningful deterrent.
The Reynolds case may ultimately fade from headlines, but it has highlighted a clear vulnerability in the legal framework of England and Wales. If a Cabinet minister can repeatedly claim to be a solicitor without consequence, the deterrent effect of existing legislation is clearly insufficient.
