The LPC Code of Conduct and your law firm website: a plain-language guide
The Legal Practice Council's Code of Conduct governs every piece of publicity a South African attorney publishes - including every page of your firm's website. Most attorneys understand that advertising is regulated. Fewer understand that the regulation is as granular as it is, and that the obligations fall personally on the practitioner, not on the agency that built the site.[1]
What "publicity" means under the Code
Rule 7 of the LPC Code defines "publicity" as any reference to a legal practitioner or firm "published or disseminated in any medium (including electronic and social media)." This is intentionally broad. Your website, LinkedIn profile, Google Business listing, directory profiles, and even email signatures all fall within its scope.
Under rule 7.2, all publicity must:
- Be factually accurate and not misleading
- Not bring the legal profession into disrepute
- Not misrepresent the nature or scope of the service offered
- Not disparage another legal practitioner or firm
- Not compare your firm favourably to another
- Not refer to a client by name without prior written consent
- Not claim specialist status unless formally recognised by the LPC Council under rule 8.1
These are not aspirational guidelines. They are conduct rules. A breach can result in a complaint to the LPC, a disciplinary hearing, and sanctions including suspension.[2]
The specialist claims trap in detail
Rule 8.1 permits attorneys to indicate areas of practice - but expressly prohibits claiming specialist status in any area of law without formal LPC recognition. The LPC has issued recognition in a small number of areas (tax law is a notable example). For all others, the following are non-compliant:
- "Specialist family law attorneys"
- "Expert commercial litigators"
- "Leading property lawyers in Cape Town"
- "South Africa's top labour law firm"
The compliance-safe alternative is to describe areas of practice without claiming superiority or specialism: "We practise family law," "Our areas of focus include commercial litigation."
Client testimonials: what the Code actually requires
Rule 7.2.6 requires prior written consent before a client's name is used in any publicity. This means a verbal "yes" is not sufficient. A written consent record must exist, it must be specific to the publication in question, and it must be kept. In practice, most firms publishing testimonials have no documented consent process at all.
Case results and settlements may be described without client identification, provided the client cannot reasonably be identified from the description. Where identification is possible, written consent is required.
The touting prohibition: rule 49.17
Touting - directly approaching potential clients without prior instruction - is prohibited under rule 49.17. This extends to digital channels. Targeted advertising that reaches prospective clients who have not sought out the firm sits in a grey area that the LPC has not yet formally resolved. The prudent position is to market through content (which responds to existing intent) rather than unsolicited direct approaches.
Website compliance checklist
| Element | Compliance standard | Rule |
|---|---|---|
| Service descriptions | No specialist claims without LPC recognition | rr. 7.2, 8.1 |
| Client testimonials | Prior written consent; consent document retained | r. 7.2.6 |
| Case results | Client not identifiable, or written consent obtained | r. 7.2.6 |
| Comparisons | No comparison to or disparagement of other firms | r. 7.2.4 |
| Rankings/awards | Factually accurate; source disclosed | r. 7.2.1 |
| Social media | Same standards apply as website | r. 7.1 |
Frequently asked questions
Who is responsible if my marketing agency publishes non-compliant content?
You are. The LPC Code places the compliance obligation on the practitioner, not the service provider. Your agency does not hold a fidelity fund certificate or admission to practise. You do.
Can I list my years of experience on my website?
Yes - stated factually. "Admitted in 2008" or "17 years of practice" are accurate statements of fact. "17 years of experience gives us an edge" begins to edge toward comparative claims.