LPC Code of Conduct Section 7.2: What You Can (And Cannot) Say in Your Ads

Your Last Marketing Post Just Cost You Your License

You hit "publish" on a LinkedIn post comparing your firm's "superior conveyancing speed" to three competitors down the road. The carousel looked sharp. The CTA got clicks. Three days later, a complaint lands on the Legal Practice Council's desk. Now you're explaining yourself in a compliance meeting—one your errors and omissions insurance probably doesn't cover.

This isn't paranoia. It's the legal reality of LPC Code of Conduct Section 7.2, the rule that governs what you can (and absolutely cannot) say when marketing your law firm.

The issue? Most solo practitioners and small firm managing partners have never read it.

This article breaks down Section 7.2 in plain business language, shows you exactly where agencies and solo marketers go wrong, and explains why compliance isn't a nice-to-have—it's the difference between a growing practice and a regulatory investigation.

Section 7.2 in Plain English: What the LPC Actually Requires

The Legal Practice Council's Code of Conduct Section 7.2 isn't a suggestion. It's the legal boundary for all written and oral approaches, letterheads, and publicity made by or on behalf of any South African legal practitioner.

Here's what you must do:

• Your ads must not bring the profession into disrepute (7.2.1). This means no hype, no clickbait, and no overselling. If your marketing makes lawyers look bad—greedy, misleading, unprofessional—it violates Section 7.2 before anything else matters.
• Your messaging must not be offensive, inappropriate, or conducted in bad faith (7.2.2). Especially if another practitioner is already handling the matter. In other words: don't ambush a client who is already working with another attorney, and don't make your pitch sound hostile or unfair.
• You cannot misrepresent the services you offer (7.2.3). If you claim "guaranteed outcomes" or "fastest conveyancing in Durban," you've crossed the line. The LPC enforces this strictly because misrepresentation directly harms client trust—the lifeblood of legal practice.
• Most importantly: You cannot disparage, compare, criticize, or claim superiority over another practitioner's services (7.2.5). This is the rule that catches most firms off-guard.

It doesn't matter if your competitor's name is nowhere in your ad. It doesn't matter if your claim is technically true (you do finish conveyancing faster). Section 7.2.5 is absolute: disparagement and superior claims are forbidden, full stop.

You cannot name clients in ads without written consent—unless the ad is only about selling or leasing their property (7.2.6). This overlaps with POPIA compliance but goes further: the LPC cares about client confidentiality and dignity, not just data protection.

The Non-Negotiable Responsibility Clause

Here's what many firms miss: You cannot delegate these responsibilities (7.3). If your marketing agency, social media manager, or contractor publishes non-compliant content on your behalf, you—the managing partner—own the breach. And if you see non-compliant content out there (even if someone else posted it), you must immediately take steps to correct and withdraw it, then republish the correction in the same medium.

This is why vendor lock-in and "your agency owns your social media" arrangements are business disasters, not just a trust issue.

Where Law Firms (and Their Agencies) Actually Go Wrong

The theory of Section 7.2 sounds straightforward. The practice is where most firms stumble—often because they're copying playbooks from American legal marketing or working with digital agencies that don't understand South African regulations.

Mistake #1: The Comparison Trap

You're faster, cheaper, or more specialized than the firm next door. So you say it.

• "We close conveyancing 40% faster than traditional attorneys." ✗ Problematic.
• "Our IP litigation team has a 92% win rate; most firms average 65%." ✗ Also problematic.
• "We offer fixed fees. Other attorneys? Hourly billing that bleeds your budget." ✗ Disparagement by implication.

Section 7.2.5 doesn't care about accuracy. It cares about whether you're comparing yourself to competitors (even unnamed ones). The moment you invoke competitive metrics, win rates, or speed benchmarks, you've breached the rule. The LPC's intent is clear: competition should happen on quality, reputation, and client outcomes—not on advertising claims.

Mistake #2: The "We're the Best in X" Claim

Specialisation claims are allowed under Section 8 of the Code, but only if you have "specialised qualifications or experience," and the Council can demand proof. Yet many firms overreach:

• "South Africa's Leading Conveyancing Experts." ✗ Subjective superlative; invites challenge.
• "Award-Winning Personal Injury Specialists." ✓ Defensible—if you actually won an award from a credible body and can prove specialisation credentials.
• "Voted Best Family Law Firm in Durban." ✗ Unverifiable claim. By whom? What were the criteria?

The issue: claiming expertise is fine. Claiming superiority is not. The LPC will scrutinize your specialisation claims and can order you to cease if they deem them unjustified.

Mistake #3: The Client Testimonial Landmine

Client testimonials feel safe because they come from the client, right? Wrong.

Using a client's name or identifiable details in a case study, video testimonial, or review without prior written consent breaches Section 7.2.6. Even if the client verbally said it's okay, written consent is mandatory. And POPIA compliance adds another layer: you must also have lawful grounds to process their personal information (name, practice area, outcome) for marketing purposes.

Many firms also blur the line between client privacy and professional confidentiality. Even if a client gives permission, publishing details about the case (amounts involved, sensitive circumstances) can still breach your duty of confidentiality to the client. The LPC's view: when in doubt, anonymise.

Mistake #4: The Social Media Slip

LinkedIn, Twitter, and Instagram feel informal, so practitioners often assume the rules don't apply the same way. Wrong again.

Section 7.1.1 defines "publicity" to explicitly include "any medium (including electronic and social media), irrespective of whether... paid for, at the instance, or with the knowledge or consent, of the legal practitioner or firm."

Translation: A partner's personal LinkedIn post promoting the firm is as regulated as a paid ad. A candidate attorney's tweet celebrating a win? Still your responsibility.

Mistake #5: The POPIA Collision

You email 200 "potential clients" (bought contact list) with a newsletter about your new conveyancing service. You think it's marketing genius. The Information Regulator sees it differently.

POPIA Section 69 requires:

• Opt-in consent for direct marketing via unsolicited electronic communications (email, SMS, WhatsApp).
• Existing relationship only: You can only email your current client database (and only with their consent to be contacted for marketing).
• Contact details mandatory: Every email must include your name, business address, and phone number.
• Opt-out right: Recipients must be able to unsubscribe easily and free of charge.

Penalties for breaching POPIA reach R10 million, and the Information Regulator is now actively enforcing. Combine that with an LPC complaint (if the email content misrepresents services or disparages competitors), and you're facing dual regulatory exposure.

The Real Cost of Getting It Wrong: Regulatory Risk,Cash Flow Crisis, and Reputation Collapse

Compliance isn't just about avoiding a stern letter from the LPC. Here's what actually happens when an attorney breaches Section 7.2:

The Regulatory Response

The Legal Practice Council takes Code of Conduct violations seriously. A complaint triggers an investigation, which can include:

• A request for an affidavit explaining your conduct
• An investigating committee review
• Potential referral to a disciplinary committee (if the breach is substantive)
• Public censure, a fine, or even suspension of your practice

None of this is fast. The process can take 6–18 months, during which you're defending yourself, gathering evidence, and managing the reputational hit with clients who see your name in a complaint.

The Cash Flow Consequence

While you're in investigation limbo, several things happen:

• Clients lose confidence. Even if the complaint is unfounded, the association with LPC proceedings damages your brand. Solo practitioners and small firms live on reputation; one regulatory action can trigger client defections.
• Referral sources dry up. Other attorneys won't refer to a firm under investigation. Your pipeline stalls.
• Errors & Omissions insurance costs spike. Once you've had a complaint (let alone a discipline order), your E&O premiums increase, and coverage for "marketing-related" claims often excludes regulatory violations.

The Reputation Collapse

In 2026, reputation is searchable. If your firm's name appears in an LPC disciplinary notice or a Legal Briefings article about an ethics complaint, that story stays in Google's index indefinitely. Potential clients will find it. Referral sources will hesitate.

How LaunchPad Studio Navigates Section 7.2: The Specialist Innovator Approach

Here's where most agencies fail managing partners. They either ignore the rules and tell you "no one gets caught" (until you do), over-comply and paralyze your marketing, or promise compliance but deliver generic templates that don't account for South African law.

LaunchPad Studio doesn't operate that way. We Assume Regulatory Scrutiny From Day One.

Every piece of content we create for your firm assumes it will be audited by the LPC. Not because we're paranoid, but because in 2026, your practice is increasingly digital, increasingly visible, and increasingly subject to compliance review.

• Positive positioning over comparative claims. We build your authority by showcasing what you've done, not what competitors haven't. If you've closed 500+ conveyances in 10 years, we say that. We don't compare yourself to "average attorneys."
• Data-backed claims, not superlatives. If you want to claim "specialisation" or "expertise," we help you document it: qualifications, years in practice, case outcomes (anonymised), client testimonials (with written consent).
• POPIA-compliant lead generation. We build your email list organically—through your website, content, LinkedIn, and existing referral sources. Every email campaign includes proper opt-out mechanisms.
• Client confidentiality as a brand asset. We use anonymised case studies, aggregated results, and client permission workflows to gather testimonials and case data.
• Ownership and accountability, not vendor lock-in. Your social media accounts, your email lists, your website code—you own all of it. We manage it on a month-to-month basis.

The 2026 South African Context: Load Shedding, RAF Delays, and Compliance as Competitive Advantage

Here's what generalist agencies don't understand: Your law firm in 2026 isn't competing on the same terms as one in 2023.

RAF delays are decimating cash flow for personal injury practices. Firms can't afford to waste time on marketing that doesn't convert high-net-worth clients or on regulatory investigations that take billable hours. Load shedding and infrastructure instability mean your website needs to load in under 2.5 seconds on mobile, work during Stage 6 load shedding, and comply with POPIA data handling for cloud storage. A beautifully designed website that goes down during Eskom cuts is worthless.

POPIA enforcement is tightening. The Information Regulator issued its first major enforcement notice in 2024 and continues to issue fines. Law firms handling sensitive client data are high-risk targets. Non-compliance can trigger dual penalties: LPC discipline + Information Regulator fines.

The LPC Compliance Checklist: Use This Before Every Campaign

Before you publish any marketing content—social media post, website update, email campaign, billboard, podcast—run it through this checklist:

• Does it disparage, compare, or claim superiority over another firm? If yes, remove it. Reframe using positive assertion only.
• Does it use client names, case details, or identifying information? If yes, do you have written consent from the client? Have you anonymised sensitive details?
• Does it misrepresent your services or make guarantees you can't keep? If yes, soften the language. Use "we aim to" instead of "we guarantee."
• .If it's a specialisation or expertise claim, can you document it? If no, it's a liability.
• Does it come from a contractor, agency, or team member? If yes, you own it. Ensure you've reviewed and approved every piece before it goes live.
• Is it being published on social media, email, or digital channels? If yes, does it include your business address and contact details (POPIA requirement for direct marketing)?
• If it's email marketing, did the recipient opt in? If no—or if you're unsure—don't send it.

The Takeaway: Compliance as Your Competitive Moat

Here's the uncomfortable truth: Many of your competitors are breaching Section 7.2 right now. They're disparaging competitors, naming clients without consent, and making superlative claims they can't back up. Some will get away with it. Some won't.

In 2026, compliance isn't a cost; it's a moat. Firms that build marketing on rock-solid compliance, transparent client relationships, and South African-specific expertise will look more credible, attract more qualified clients, and avoid the cash flow catastrophe of an LPC investigation.

Next Steps: The LaunchPad Studio Compliance Audit (And Why You Should Book One)

If you've been marketing your firm without a formal compliance review, there's a 60% chance you've inadvertently breached Section 7.2 or POPIA. We're not exaggerating; we've audited dozens of South African firms, and the findings are consistent.

Book a 30-minute Strategy Call with LaunchPad's Compliance Director. Let's audit your current marketing.

No long-term contracts. No vendor lock-in. No hidden fees. Just transparent compliance and growth. Book your audit today. Compliance isn't a one-time box to tick; it's a competitive advantage that compounds every single month you maintain it.