Sovereign wealth funds and state-linked structures are often perceived as low risk because they carry an assumption of legitimacy. But how should firms assess these relationships in practice?

In this episode, Michelle Clement is joined by Colin Solomon to explore the lessons arising from the Jersey v LGL Trustees Ltd re Angola case, and what it reveals about risk classification, onboarding assumptions, professional judgement, and regulatory scrutiny.

Together, they discuss how perceptions of legitimacy can influence decision-making, what regulators look for when reviewing files in hindsight, and how firms can ensure their risk assessments and rationale stand up to scrutiny.

Colin has also prepared a summary of the case and regulatory findings. If you would like a copy, you can connect with him on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/colin-solomon-07102613/.

This episode explores the critical differences between having risk assessments and actively using them in law firms. Hosted by Michelle Clement, with AML consultant Kayleigh Smale, it emphasises how effective risk assessments can shape decision-making, influence behaviour, and ensure compliance.

This conversation is about what risk assessments are meant to evidence and why that’s harder than it looks.

In this episode of The AML Clinic Podcast, Michelle Clement is joined by Arik Oslerne to explore one of the biggest shifts currently shaping AML and client onboarding: the rise of AI.

The episode explores:

• where AI is currently adding practical value in AML and onboarding
• how automation is changing legal workflows and decision-making
• the risks of over-reliance, false confidence, and loss of context
• why AI outputs still require human challenge and interpretation
• what makes AI-supported decisions defensible under regulatory scrutiny
• how firms should think about oversight, audit trails, and accountability
• where the legal market is heading as firms increasingly embed AI into practice

The conversation focuses on the reality that regulators will still expect firms to explain how decisions were reached, what information was considered, and whether the outcome made sense in context.

Designed for law firm leaders, MLROs, compliance professionals, and risk teams, this episode offers a practical and grounded discussion on how firms can integrate AI into AML processes in a way that is effective, proportionate, and defensible.

SRA | Compliance tips for solicitors regarding the use of AI and technology | Solicitors Regulation Authority

In this episode of the AML Clinic podcast, host Michelle Clement, a former SRA AML Regulatory Manager, explores the often-overlooked aspect of recruitment in the context of AML compliance. Joined by Lauren Eager, a principal consultant at QED Legal, they discuss how hiring decisions reflect a firm's operational priorities, investment in compliance, and response to regulatory pressures. The conversation highlights the divide between firms that proactively build compliance teams and those that react only under pressure.

In this concluding episode of a three-part series, The AML Clinic Podcast brings together the core themes explored across the trilogy: how the SRA assesses seriousness, what it looks for in AML file reviews, and how internal decision-making shapes regulatory outcomes.

Michelle Clement (former SRA AML Regulatory Manager) focuses on where outcomes are truly determined in practice, at the point where risk is interpreted and judgement is applied.

Grounded in real-world environments, this episode explores:

• how risk is interpreted under pressure
• why consistency remains difficult across firms
• where technically complete files fall short
• what supports defensible decision-making

Designed for partners, MLROs, MLCOs and compliance professionals, this final instalment offers a clear view of what determines whether your AML approach stands up to scrutiny.

In this episode, former SRA AML Regulatory Manager Michelle Clement explains what the SRA actually looks for when reviewing your files, why technically complete files often fall short, and how to ensure your approach stands up to scrutiny.

In this episode of the AML Clinic Podcast, Michelle Clement explores how the SRA determines whether a breach is “serious” in practice.

Understanding how to evaluate the seriousness of breaches is essential for law firms. Many firms grasp the rules, but fewer truly understand how the SRA assesses seriousness. Knowing this can help you make defensible decisions and avoid unnecessary panic when issues arise.

In this episode, the tables are turned as I’m interviewed by Pearl Moses, the Former Head of Risk and Compliance at the Law Society who came prepared with questions gathered from AML professionals across the legal sector.

We discuss the biggest AML mistakes many law firms make, what ''does it make sense” means in practice, and how firms can challenge factual inaccuracies or misinterpretations during SRA engagement.

We also explore what the SRA looks for when reviewing files, what the FCA's take over means for the legal sector today, and why firms should focus on building defensible AML frameworks that stand up to scrutiny.