(unnamed respondent)
Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision
Shanaz Haider, a non-authorised paralegal at Sterling Winshaw Solicitors Ltd, appealed an SRA Adjudicator's decision imposing a s.43 control order. On 16 May 2023 she completed a UTIAC1 Upper Tribunal application and an Out-of-Hours High Court application, entering her own name in the "Solicitor's name" box and as legal representative, signing the statement of truth, despite not being a solicitor or authorised to conduct High Court litigation. The matter was referred to the SRA via the Hamid jurisdiction. The Adjudicator applied the Ivey test and found dishonesty (Principle 4) and breaches of Principles 1, 2 and 5, imposing a s.43 control order with manager/ownership prohibitions, publication, and £600 costs. On review (not rehearing), the SDT refused to admit fresh medical/intention evidence (Ladd v Marshall), upheld the dishonesty finding and the proportionality of the protective s.43 order, and dismissed the appeal. The Tribunal ordered the Appellant to pay the SRA's appeal costs of £16,560.
Duties found breached:
Aggravating factors:
- Misrepresentation of professional status made to the High Court on official forms of significance
- Dishonesty inherently serious in legal services context
- Aware of firm's manual requiring supervision of all casework and court applications
Mitigating factors:
- Acted under time pressure in urgent, fast-moving circumstances
- Experiencing medical difficulties at the relevant time
- Supervising solicitor absent from the office
- Isolated lapse in a 15-year paralegal career
- Subsequently completed OISC Level 2 training