The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has responded to criticism over its prosecution of a junior lawyer who was struck off for lying about losing a briefcase, stating that its handling was "appropriate".

In a letter to a body representing junior solicitors, Paul Philip, the chief executive of the U.K. industry regulator, rebuffed criticism of its decision to prosecute former Capsticks solicitor Claire Matthews, who also lost her license to practice law.

In the document, seen by Law.com International's Legal Week, Philip said: "I am satisfied that our handling of this case was appropriate," and later added: "neither a person's junior position, nor health, will be an answer where the person has been found guilty of culpable dishonesty."

The U.K. regulator also added that it is currently drafting new guidance which details current practice and processes where health issues are raised during proceedings.

Matthews, who had been at Capsticks for less than a month at the time of the incident, left sensitive documents relating to Capsticks' client, the SRA, in a briefcase on a train.

In what she later told the tribunal was a state of "panic", she claimed to colleagues that the briefcase was in her possession whilst attempting to locate it, and then claimed she had lost it at a later date.

According to a freedom of information request filed by Legal Week, the data loss was reported by Capsticks to the Information Commissioner's Office who decided that no further action would be taken.

In the letter, Philip said: "It is easy to lose sight of the fact that this is not about a solicitor leaving a briefcase on a train, but that the evidence of her colleagues was that she lied to them on a number of occasions about the matter."

The SRA's letter was in response to an open statement by the Junior Lawyer Division (JLD), a subset of the Law Society which represents law students and lawyers in the early stages of their career, who said there was a "loss of confidence" in the regulator.

The JLD criticised the SRA over its handling of prosecutions involving lawyers with mental health illnesses, as well as disproportionate sanctions and costs levelled against those without the means to pay it back, citing the case of Claire Matthews as well as previous cases which they argued formed a pattern.

According to documents on the case published by the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, Matthews, who represented herself at the tribunal, was instructed to pay £10,000 in costs despite currently working at an NHS call centre earning £9 per hour.

Due to Capsticks being conflicted, the SRA called on Fieldfisher to handle the prosecution, with the firm charging a much higher hourly rate which was in part passed on to Matthews.

In a freedom of information response, the SRA said that it had not attempted to recover any of the additional costs from Capsticks.

Matthews has since launched an appeal against the tribunal verdict, and is being advised on a pro bono basis by Leigh Day. She has also started a crowdfunding campaign to fund legal costs which has raised over £13,000 so far.

It is not the first time the SRA's approach towards junior lawyers has attracted attention. Last summer various partners expressed shock after a former Ropes & Gray London trainee was barred from the profession after tracing a client's signature on to a client document that had been lost.

The JLD also cited the case of Sovani James, another solicitor who was struck off for backdating letters whilst at McMillan Williams and Emily Scott, a trainee at De Vita Platt who was struck off for misconduct despite claiming she was under firm instructions.

Both claimed they were working in extremely stressful and toxic working environments.

In December, a Paul Hastings London associate was rebuked by the SRA after being found guilty of driving while over the legal alcoholic limit.