or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments
High Court allows application to have solicitor struck off the Roll, on the grounds that: (a) the findings of misconduct in respect of a conveyancing transaction were legally sustainable, although the findings of misconduct in respect of an alleged breach of an undertaking to a credit union were not; and (b) the strike-off sanction was appropriate, notwithstanding the mitigating factors in the case, where the misconduct was dishonest, rather than merely negligent or careless.
Application to strike respondent’s name off the Roll of Solicitors - application made on foot of two separate recommendations of the Disciplinary Tribunal of the Law Society - respondent did not exercise his right of statutory appeal against the findings - earlier order of High Court in July 2010 striking off respondent overturned by the Supreme Court in May 2019 and application was remitted to High Court - previous application by respondent for extension of time within which to bring statutory appeal against the findings of the Disciplinary Tribunal was refused by High Court in April 2020 - distinction between role of High Court in strike-off application brought by the Law Society and in statutory appeal from the Disciplinary Tribunal against its findings -whether relevant legislative provisions require the High Court to review the findings of the Disciplinary Tribunal in a strike-off application - whether there was a sustainable basis for the findings of the Disciplinary Tribunal in this case - whether striking the respondent off the Roll was the appropriate sanction.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.