The appellants challenged the decision of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal finding them in breach of the 1998 Rules in that they had failed to prevent a former partner making unauthorised, if small, withdrawals of residual balances from client account. No dishonesty had been suggested.
Held: The tribunal had been wrong to treat the matter as one of strict liability. However, the ‘strong inference of lack of supervision’ was not rebutted, and that therefore some financial penalty, and not merely a reprimand, was merited. The fines were reduced.
Judges:
Bean J
Citations:
[2012] EWHC 2012 (Admin)
Links:
Statutes:
Solicitors Act 1974, Solicitors’ Accounts Rules 1998, Solicitors’ Code of Conduct 2007 5
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Law Society v Salsbury CA 25-Nov-2008
The Society appealed against an order quashing the striking-off of the solicitor.
Held: Bolton was still the leading case though the solicitor must be given an opportunity for a fair trial. Though it was not necessary to show a very strong . .
Cited – Hazelhurst and Others v Solicitors Regulation Authority Admn 11-Mar-2011
The claimants appealed against disciplinary orders. A member of staff had stolen substantial sums from client account. They had admitted breaches of the Accounts and Practice rules, but personally made good all losses. They said that the Solicitors . .
Cited – Akodu v Solicitors Regulation Authority Admn 13-Nov-2009
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Legal Professions
Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.462951