should solicitors challenge their partners/superiors?

[Ellisha]

this is the kind of question that I find particularly hard in situational interviews/tests. E.g. you've been working on a project and are almost done, but then your boss tells you that there's been a massive change and you need to start over again. Or, something like helping your client pay as low taxes as possible. Are these the kinds of things you should be vocally skeptical about?
If you're told to do something that may sound a bit suspect, are you supposed to inquire further as to the reason for that task or would that be considered as over-inflitrating? I know that you're not supposed to just leave your moral compass at the door when you work at a law firm but I also would've thought that partners might be weary about hiring someone who might be too quick to challenge their bosses.

 

[M&ALawyer]

I think it’s a balance.

In reference to the examples you provided;

An executive decision made by someone senior is respected; but there’s no reason why you cant provide your input to help or communicate some objections they may not be aware of. Ultimately they are bringing in work so it’s their call at the end of the day so there are limits to how much you can challenge.

Helping clients pay as low tax as possible is perfectly fine (as long as it’s legal), so I don’t see why you would challenge at all.

Now if it’s something unprofessional or illegal (e.g discrimination, racism, actions against SRA rules) then definitely you can say you would challenge + report.

From my understanding, a task is only suspect if it brings the firm in disrepute and/or against the law. Outside of this, you can voice an opinion as long as it’s pragmatic (and not political like taxes might be).