Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2012] All ER (D) 48 (Nov)
Neutral Citation: [2012] EWHC 2965 (Admin)
Court: Queen's Bench Division, Divisional Court
Judge:

Pitchford LJ and Foskett J

Representation Ivan Krolick (instructed by John & Co Solicitors) for the appellant.
  Michael McLaren QC (instructed by Russell Jones & Walker Solicitors) for the SRA.
Judgment Dates: 26 October 2012

Catchwords

Solicitor - Disciplinary proceedings - Disciplinary tribunal - Respondent Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) making allegations of professional misconduct against appellant solicitor - Appellant facing proceedings before disciplinary tribunal - Tribunal finding allegations proved against appellant - Appellant being absent from hearing claiming illness - Appellant requesting re-hearing - Tribunal refusing request - Appellant appealing - Whether tribunal erring - Solicitors (Disciplinary Proceedings) Rules 2007, .

The Case

Solicitor Disciplinary proceedings. The Administrative Court, in dismissing a solicitor's appeal against two decisions of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (the SDT), held, inter alia, that the SDT had been entitled to come to the conclusions it had reached. The SDT's first decision that allegations of misconduct had been proved was made in the solicitor's absence and in its second decision, the SDT refused a re-hearing.

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.