The solicitor appealed against an order striking him off the Roll of Solicitors. He had been a defendant in civil proceedings accused of assisting the former president of Zambia to dispose of very substantial stolen sums. He was said to have allowed money to pass through his client account where there was no underlying transaction. He said that the disciplinary tribunal had refused an adjournment despite confusion in the pleadings and new additional allegations being made.
Held: The Tribunal had wrongly refused an adjourment and wrongly allowed evidence going beyond the allegations. The claimant had not been challenged in the defences put forward. The findings of dishonesty were based upon the findings of the civil case, but the Tribunal had failed to allow for criticisms of the findings in the Court of Appeal. The Tribunal’s findings of gross recklessness and dishonesty could not stand.
Jackson LJ, Sweeney J
[2011] EWHC 660 (Admin)
Bailii
Solicitors (Disciplinary Proceedings) Rules 1994
England and Wales
Citing:
Applied – Constantinides v The Law Society Admn 7-Apr-2006
The appplicant appealed against a decision to strike him from the roll of solicitors for dishonesty which he denied. He had drawn documents under which his client invested substantial sums abroad, and lost. She had claimed in negligence. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Legal Professions
Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.430746