Category: PI comparison · Reviewed by Amy Price, Account Executive · Last reviewed May 2026
The Solicitors Regulation Authority’s Minimum Terms and Conditions (MTC) sit at the centre of any conversation about professional indemnity (PI) in the UK legal sector. But solicitors regulated by the SRA are not the only legal practitioners who must hold PI as a condition of practice. CILEX practitioners, licensed conveyancers, costs lawyers and barristers each operate under a different regulatory regime with its own PI rules. For anyone running, joining, leaving or comparing legal services firms, understanding how those frameworks line up against one another matters.
This guide sets out the PI requirements of five UK legal services regulators side by side, as understood at the time of writing in May 2026. Where figures are quoted, they reflect the rule books published by each regulator at that date. Regulators update their requirements periodically, so members and firms should always confirm the current position with the relevant body before relying on these figures for compliance purposes.
This article compares the PI requirements of five UK regulators of legal services:
It does not cover patent attorneys (IPReg), trade mark attorneys, immigration advisers or notaries, all of which operate under separate regimes. Every figure quoted below reflects publicly available rule books and guidance as of May 2026 — please verify with the relevant regulator before treating any figure as current.
The reason these five frameworks differ is partly historical and partly structural. Each regulator sits under the Legal Services Board as an approved regulator under the Legal Services Act 2007, but each one regulates a different type of legal work and has set PI rules calibrated to the risks of that work and the structure of the firms it authorises.
Solicitors have always carried open-ended duties to clients, third parties and the wider public, and the SRA MTC reflects that breadth. Licensed conveyancers carry significant transaction-related risk and the CLC has its own minimum terms aligned to conveyancing exposures. Barristers, who typically operate as sole practitioners through chambers, are insured through a mutual arrangement that delivers cover in a simpler block structure. Costs lawyers carry narrower exposures focused on costs work and the CLSB’s requirements reflect that. CILEX practice firms can offer reserved legal activities through their own regulated structures, and CILEx Regulation has built rules suited to those firms.
None of this means one framework is more or less appropriate than another. Each was drafted for the practice type and risk profile of its members. What it does mean is that a firm or practitioner authorised under more than one of these regulators will need to ensure their PI satisfies the most demanding of the applicable rules.
The SRA MTC applies to every firm authorised by the SRA to deliver reserved legal activities — traditional solicitors’ firms, alternative business structures (ABS) authorised by the SRA, and recognised sole practitioners. Each authorised firm must put in place qualifying insurance that complies with the MTC for the indemnity period running 1 October to 30 September each year.
The MTC requires a minimum sum insured of GBP 2 million for each claim for most firms. Firms incorporated as limited companies or LLPs must hold a minimum sum insured of GBP 3 million for each claim. The cover operates on an each-and-every-claim basis with no aggregation across the period of insurance for the minimum layer, although excess layers above the MTC minimum may aggregate. Defence costs sit in addition to the minimum sum insured.
The MTC contains a defined aggregation clause that permits insurers to treat connected matters as one claim in limited circumstances. The minimum cover layer, however, cannot be capped in the aggregate — meaning a firm could in principle exhaust the minimum sum insured more than once during a single indemnity period.
When an SRA-authorised firm closes without a successor practice, the qualifying insurer must provide six years of run-off cover at no additional premium beyond that already paid. The MTC sets out the trigger and the duration. Firms that close should also be aware of the Solicitors Indemnity Fund Limited (SIF) historic position and any current post-six-year arrangements.
The MTC is highly prescriptive. Cover must be written on a civil-liability basis (so any civil liability arising from the practice is within scope unless specifically excluded by an MTC-permitted exclusion). Insurers must be on the SRA’s list of participating insurers, which sign up to the MTC. Permitted exclusions are narrow and defined.
If a firm cannot place qualifying insurance, it enters the Extended Indemnity Period (EIP) and Cessation Period (CP), which can ultimately lead to closure. Firms must declare their cover annually and notify any material change.
CILEx Regulation regulates Chartered Legal Executives in practice and CILEX-authorised practice firms (entities authorised to deliver reserved legal activities under the CILEX Regulation regime). The PI requirements apply to entities, not to individuals working within SRA firms.
CILEX Regulation’s PI requirements for entities are set out in the CILEx Regulation Practice Rights and Authorisation rules and supporting handbook. As understood at the time of writing in May 2026, entities are required to hold minimum cover proportionate to the firm’s turnover and reserved activity profile, with the entity rules providing detailed scaling. The figures and bands should be read directly from the current CILEx Regulation handbook because the regulator updates them periodically.
CILEx Regulation requires its authorised entities to hold cover that responds to claims in line with the regulator’s minimum terms, which are aligned with civil liability principles but are not identical to the SRA MTC.
Run-off cover is required when a CILEX-authorised entity ceases practice without a successor, for a period set out in the CILEx Regulation rules.
CILEx Regulation publishes minimum terms for its entities. Cover is required to be on a civil-liability basis, and CILEx Regulation maintains visibility of acceptable insurers, though the mechanism differs from the SRA participating-insurer list. Members should refer to CILEx Regulation’s current published rules for precise wording requirements.
A CILEX Chartered Legal Executive working as an employee within an SRA-authorised firm is covered by that firm’s MTC-compliant insurance. The CILEX entity rules become relevant when the practitioner operates within a CILEX-authorised entity.
The CLC regulates licensed conveyancers and CLC-authorised entities that carry out conveyancing services and, where licensed, probate services. The CLC’s PI requirements apply to all CLC-authorised bodies.
The CLC operates its own Participating Insurers Agreement (PIA) and Minimum Terms and Conditions. As understood at the time of writing in May 2026, the CLC minimum sum insured sits at GBP 2 million for each and every claim. Defence costs are within or in addition to the limit per the published wording.
The CLC PIA sets out the aggregation position for CLC firms. Like the SRA MTC, aggregation is defined and limited so that the minimum cover delivers a meaningful “each claim” protection.
The CLC requires six years of run-off cover for firms ceasing practice without a successor. The CLC also operates compensation and intervention mechanisms which sit alongside the PI requirement.
CLC firms must place cover with a participating insurer on the CLC’s published list. The CLC publishes the participating insurers each year. The cover must comply with the CLC’s MTC, which addresses civil liability, defence costs, run-off and the permitted exclusions.
Firms authorised by the CLC that also undertake activities outside the CLC’s scope should consider whether additional PI is needed for the non-CLC work.
The CLSB regulates costs lawyers — practitioners authorised to conduct costs litigation and related work. Costs lawyers may work in costs firms, in solicitors’ firms (in which case the firm’s MTC cover applies), or as independent practitioners.
CLSB-regulated practitioners practising independently are required to hold PI cover proportionate to their practice. The CLSB’s rules and guidance set the minimum level of cover, which as understood at the time of writing in May 2026 is set at a level appropriate to the scope of costs work and is materially lower than the SRA MTC minimums, reflecting the narrower risk profile of costs work.
The CLSB does not maintain an MTC of the same prescriptive form as the SRA. The cover should respond on a civil-liability basis to claims arising from the costs lawyer’s practice, with aggregation following the market wording placed.
The CLSB expects practitioners to consider run-off cover on ceasing practice, with the rules setting out the appropriate position.
There is no participating insurer list for costs lawyers. Practitioners place cover in the open market subject to meeting the CLSB’s published cover requirements.
A costs lawyer working as an employee within an SRA-authorised firm is covered by the firm’s MTC policy. The CLSB rules apply where the costs lawyer practises independently or within a non-SRA structure.
The BSB regulates barristers in England and Wales. Every self-employed practising barrister must hold PI cover, and that cover is provided through the Bar Mutual Indemnity Fund Limited (BMIF), a mutual established for the Bar. Employed barristers are typically covered by their employer’s arrangements.
BMIF cover is set at a minimum of GBP 500,000 per claim for the basic limit, with most barristers carrying higher limits (commonly GBP 1 million or significantly more, depending on the nature of practice). BMIF offers a top-up scheme to substantially higher limits. As understood at the time of writing in May 2026, the minimum is GBP 500,000 but practice in commercial, chancery or other high-value areas typically requires considerably more.
BMIF cover is structured on the mutual’s published terms, including its approach to connected claims. Barristers should refer to BMIF’s certificate and terms for the specific aggregation position.
When a barrister ceases practice, BMIF continues to provide cover under its mutual arrangements for claims arising from past acts — a structural feature of mutual cover that differs from the commercial run-off model used by solicitors and licensed conveyancers.
BMIF is the designated insurer for self-employed barristers. The BSB Handbook requires barristers to hold cover at the BMIF minimum (or equivalent where BMIF agrees). There is no participating-insurer list in the SRA sense because the structure is mutual.
Barristers should check that the BMIF top-up purchased reflects the limits of their actual exposure, especially for commercial practice. The BSB does not directly underwrite cover, but its handbook makes PI mandatory.
| Regulator | Minimum sum insured | Aggregation | Run-off | Participating-insurer list | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SRA (solicitors) | GBP 2m each claim (GBP 3m for LLPs/limited companies) | Defined aggregation; minimum layer not aggregatable | 6 years post-cessation | Yes — SRA participating insurers | Most prescriptive MTC in UK legal services |
| CLC (licensed conveyancers) | GBP 2m each claim | Defined per CLC PIA | 6 years post-cessation | Yes — CLC participating insurers | Aligned to conveyancing risk profile |
| CILEx Regulation | Scaled per CILEX entity rules (varies) | Per CILEx Regulation minimum terms | Required per CILEx rules | Not a participating-insurer list in SRA form | Applies to CILEX-authorised entities |
| CLSB (costs lawyers) | Proportionate per CLSB rules (lower than SRA/CLC minimums) | Per market wording | Expected on cessation | No participating-insurer list | Reflects costs work risk profile |
| BSB / BMIF (barristers) | GBP 500,000 minimum per claim via BMIF | Per BMIF terms | Mutual cover responds post-practice | Single mutual (BMIF) | Most barristers carry top-up cover |
All figures above reflect the rule books and published positions of each regulator as understood at the time of writing in May 2026. Each regulator updates its position from time to time, and members should confirm directly with the regulator before relying on the figures.
There is meaningful common ground across all five frameworks. Each requires cover on a civil-liability basis, each requires retroactive cover for past acts, each contemplates run-off (delivered either through commercial cover or, in the case of BMIF, through mutual arrangements), and each treats PI as a condition of practice rather than an optional protection.
The clearest divergence is in prescriptiveness. The SRA MTC is the most prescriptive — it dictates the wording, the participating insurers, the minimum limit, the permitted exclusions and the run-off duration in detail. The CLC’s framework is similarly prescriptive in its sector. The CILEx Regulation entity regime sets defined requirements but for a smaller universe of firms. The CLSB and BMIF-based BSB regimes are less prescriptive in form, but in each case the practical requirement is clear and binding on the practitioner. The frameworks were designed for different parts of the legal services market and reflect those differences.
There are several common situations in which a practitioner or firm sits within more than one of these regimes. A Chartered Legal Executive employed by an SRA firm is regulated by CILEx Regulation as an individual but covered by the firm’s SRA MTC PI. A solicitors’ firm that adds licensed conveyancing through a CLC-authorised subsidiary will need cover satisfying both the SRA MTC and CLC requirements. A barrister practising through a BSB-authorised entity will need to ensure that the entity’s cover satisfies BSB requirements alongside any other applicable rules. A costs lawyer working as a partner in an SRA firm is covered by the firm’s MTC for that work.
The general rule, where two or more regimes apply, is that the PI must satisfy the most demanding of the applicable rules. That usually means using a single policy designed to meet the most prescriptive framework — most commonly the SRA MTC — and ensuring the wording does not undermine the requirements of the other regulator.
Across all five regimes, many practitioners and firms carry cover well above the regulator’s minimum. There are several drivers. Larger firms often have client-driven requirements (commercial clients commonly require GBP 5m to GBP 25m or more depending on the matter). Conveyancing exposures can reach into the millions per file, particularly for residential leasehold and high-value transactions. Costs decisions in adverse litigation can themselves consume significant cover. Barristers in commercial practice routinely buy BMIF top-up cover well into the millions.
The minimum is a regulatory floor, not a market norm. Firms reviewing cover at renewal commonly consider the size and risk profile of their typical instruction, the cover their peer group buys, and what their largest clients expect to see on a certificate of cover.
The PI market for SRA, CLC and CILEX firms is specialised. A broker familiar with the participating-insurer panels, the wording differences between insurers, and the practical implications of the regulators’ rules can help firms structure compliant placements, manage renewal timing and respond appropriately to claims and circumstances. Brokers also support firms through restructures, mergers and closures where run-off issues can be significant.
Apex Insurance Brokers Limited places PI for firms regulated by these legal services regulators. We remain neutral on whether to use a broker, an insurer directly or a comparison route — the right answer depends on the size and complexity of the firm and on its existing relationships. The point is that PI in legal services is rarely a commodity, and informed advice can be valuable.
Is the SRA MTC the only legal-services PI framework in England and Wales?
No. CILEx Regulation, the Council for Licensed Conveyancers, the Costs Lawyer Standards Board and the Bar Standards Board (with cover provided through BMIF) each operate their own PI rules for the practitioners and firms they regulate. The SRA MTC is the most prescriptive, but it applies only to SRA-authorised firms.
What happens if a solicitors’ firm cannot find an MTC-compliant insurer?
The firm enters the Extended Indemnity Period followed by the Cessation Period as set out in the SRA rules, with strict limitations on the work the firm may take on. If qualifying insurance is not obtained, the firm must close, and run-off cover then applies.
Do licensed conveyancers regulated by the CLC need different cover from solicitors who do conveyancing?
Yes. CLC-authorised entities must hold cover meeting the CLC’s Minimum Terms and Conditions and placed with a CLC participating insurer. Solicitors who do conveyancing inside an SRA-authorised firm are covered by the firm’s SRA MTC policy.
Are costs lawyers required to carry PI at the SRA minimums?
No. The CLSB sets its own requirements, which reflect the narrower risk profile of costs work. Costs lawyers working inside SRA-authorised firms are covered by the firm’s MTC policy.
How does BMIF differ from a commercial PI insurer?
BMIF is a mutual established for the Bar. It is the designated insurer for self-employed barristers in England and Wales and provides cover under terms agreed by its members. It differs structurally from a commercial open-market insurer but performs the same regulatory function of providing PI cover to practitioners.
If a firm is regulated by both the SRA and the CLC, which rules apply?
Both. The firm must hold cover satisfying both sets of minimum terms. In practice this usually means a single policy designed to meet the SRA MTC, with any CLC-specific requirements addressed in the wording, placed through insurers acceptable to both regulators.
Do these regulators publish the participating insurers or approved markets?
The SRA and CLC publish their participating-insurer lists. CILEx Regulation, the CLSB and the BSB operate different arrangements, with BMIF being the designated insurer for self-employed barristers. Members should check the current published lists with the relevant regulator.
Are these requirements likely to change?
Regulators review PI requirements periodically. The figures and structures in this article reflect publicly available rule books as of May 2026. Always check the current position with the relevant regulator before relying on these figures for compliance purposes.
{
"@context": "https://schema.org",
"@type": "FAQPage",
"mainEntity": [
{
"@type": "Question",
"name": "Is the SRA MTC the only legal-services PI framework in England and Wales?",
"acceptedAnswer": {
"@type": "Answer",
"text": "No. CILEx Regulation, the Council for Licensed Conveyancers, the Costs Lawyer Standards Board and the Bar Standards Board (with cover provided through BMIF) each operate their own PI rules for the practitioners and firms they regulate. The SRA MTC is the most prescriptive, but it applies only to SRA-authorised firms."
}
},
{
"@type": "Question",
"name": "What happens if a solicitors' firm cannot find an MTC-compliant insurer?",
"acceptedAnswer": {
"@type": "Answer",
"text": "The firm enters the Extended Indemnity Period followed by the Cessation Period as set out in the SRA rules, with strict limitations on the work the firm may take on. If qualifying insurance is not obtained, the firm must close, and run-off cover then applies."
}
},
{
"@type": "Question",
"name": "Do licensed conveyancers regulated by the CLC need different cover from solicitors who do conveyancing?",
"acceptedAnswer": {
"@type": "Answer",
"text": "Yes. CLC-authorised entities must hold cover meeting the CLC's Minimum Terms and Conditions and placed with a CLC participating insurer. Solicitors who do conveyancing inside an SRA-authorised firm are covered by the firm's SRA MTC policy."
}
},
{
"@type": "Question",
"name": "Are costs lawyers required to carry PI at the SRA minimums?",
"acceptedAnswer": {
"@type": "Answer",
"text": "No. The CLSB sets its own requirements, which reflect the narrower risk profile of costs work. Costs lawyers working inside SRA-authorised firms are covered by the firm's MTC policy."
}
},
{
"@type": "Question",
"name": "How does BMIF differ from a commercial PI insurer?",
"acceptedAnswer": {
"@type": "Answer",
"text": "BMIF is a mutual established for the Bar. It is the designated insurer for self-employed barristers in England and Wales and provides cover under terms agreed by its members. It differs structurally from a commercial open-market insurer but performs the same regulatory function."
}
},
{
"@type": "Question",
"name": "If a firm is regulated by both the SRA and the CLC, which rules apply?",
"acceptedAnswer": {
"@type": "Answer",
"text": "Both. The firm must hold cover satisfying both sets of minimum terms. In practice this usually means a single policy designed to meet the SRA MTC, with any CLC-specific requirements addressed in the wording, placed through insurers acceptable to both regulators."
}
},
{
"@type": "Question",
"name": "Do these regulators publish the participating insurers or approved markets?",
"acceptedAnswer": {
"@type": "Answer",
"text": "The SRA and CLC publish their participating-insurer lists. CILEx Regulation, the CLSB and the BSB operate different arrangements, with BMIF being the designated insurer for self-employed barristers. Members should check the current published lists with the relevant regulator."
}
},
{
"@type": "Question",
"name": "Are these requirements likely to change?",
"acceptedAnswer": {
"@type": "Answer",
"text": "Regulators review PI requirements periodically. The figures and structures in this article reflect publicly available rule books as of May 2026. Always check the current position with the relevant regulator before relying on these figures for compliance purposes."
}
}
]
}
About Apex Insurance Brokers — Apex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority, FCA firm reference 724952. Registered in England and Wales, Companies House 07014570. Last reviewed: May 2026.
Note on figures: regulator-set minimums and policy wording requirements are updated periodically by each body. The figures in this guide reflect our understanding as of writing in May 2026. Always confirm current requirements with the relevant regulator or professional body before relying on them for compliance purposes.
Apex Insurance Brokers serves UK professional services firms and commercial businesses. Call 0117 325 0027, email hello@apexinsurancebrokers.co.uk, or request a quotation.
Get a quote