Geoffrey Williams KC defeats two allegations of dishonesty at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal

Geoff Williams KC was instructed by Nick Trevette of Murdochs Law Solicitors to defend a Solicitor (“G”) in contested proceedings at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal.

 

G had been admitted a Solicitor in 1991 and had never previously been made the subject of disciplinary proceedings.  By the time of the hearing he was a sole practitioner with a niche practice. G faced five allegations two of which were of dishonesty.  Admissions were made to various limbs of all allegations but dishonesty was disputed.

The first allegation of dishonesty was that G had completed a proposal form for Professional Indemnity Insurance confirming that all fee earners over the last six years had received formal Anti-Money Laundering training which was properly documented.  This however had not been the case.

The other allegation of dishonesty related to G informing the Solicitors Regulation Authority that his firm possessed a compliant Firm Wide Risk Assessment which was not in fact the case.

SRA instructed Leading Counsel to prosecute.  A Forensic Investigating Officer of SRA was called and cross examined at length.  G spent the best part of a day in the witness box himself.

 

G’s evidence was that he held a genuine belief that his staff had received appropriate Anti-Money Laundering training but as he was a sole practitioner at the time of the hearing and was fully aware of his responsibilities he was himself properly trained.  There was never any suggestion that Money Laundering had been carried out at G’s practice which did very little in-scope work.

G was also of the genuine belief that his firm had the appropriate Risk Assessment in place as he was the only fee earner carrying out in-scope work and he assessed the risk in each and every individual case.

 

Geoff placed particular evidence upon the proper test for dishonesty which emanates from the Judgment of Lord Hughes in Ivey v Genting Casinos (UK) Ltd t/a Crockfords (2017) UKSC 67.  This replaced the earlier test set out in Ghosh  and set out what is essentially a two stage test.

The Tribunal must first ascertain (subjectively) the actual state of the individual’s knowledge or belief as to the facts.  The reasonableness or otherwise of his belief is a matter of evidence (often in practice determinative) going to whether he held the belief but it is not an additional requirement that his belief must be reasonable, the question is whether it is genuinely held.

Once this test has been applied the Tribunal is then required to consider whether or not the conduct was dishonest by applying the objective standards of ordinary decent people.

The Tribunal was satisfied that G’s belief in both respects was genuinely held and consequently when moving to the second limb of the test dishonesty could not be proved and the allegations were dismissed.

Had the allegations been proved then undoubtedly it would have led to the end of G’s illustrious career in the profession.

 

The Tribunal went on to find that G had contributed many years of honest professional endeavour.  He had on advice, produced impressive character evidence and the Tribunal had accepted that G had been held in high regard by professional colleagues and clients.  G had given consistent explanations to SRA and the Tribunal and was a credible witness.  There was no loss and no gain.  In the circumstances the case was dealt with by the imposition of a fine and a Conditions of Practice Order.  G has now merged his practice with another thus gaining welcome support for the remainder of his career.

 

Geoff was expertly instructed by Nick Trevette who as usual provided enormous support for the client.  It was truly a team effort and G’s career was saved.

 

The main lesson to be learned from this case is the importance of stressing the first limb of the Ivey test when defending allegations of dishonesty.  If genuine belief can be made out, it will be exceptionally difficult for a Tribunal to make a finding of dishonesty which in the usual way is lethal to a Solicitor’s career.

 

Geoffrey Williams KC has a long established practice in the field of professional disciplinary & regulatory work. For more information, please contact his Clerks.

 

---

• Share article:

---