Skip to main content
discipline 4 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

QURAT UL AIN AKBAR

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number12093/2020
Date01/01/2020
OutcomeStrike off

Allegation / charges

Breaches, Failures

Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision

SanctionStrike Off
CostsGBP 24,000
Dishonesty foundYes

Qurat Ul Ain Akbar, a Registered Foreign Lawyer and equity partner at Southall Solicitors (formerly Kensington Law Chambers), was found to have made false and misleading statements to SRA forensic investigation officers, the High Court and intervention agents, and failed to comply with s44B Notices and a High Court order. The Firm re-commenced practice at the former offices of an intervened firm (MLC, run by her father Dr M). The Tribunal found she falsely denied the Firm held practice papers and had clients, falsely claimed the other partner Mr Faraque had agreed to the Firm's re-commencement and provided false email addresses for him, and made false statements to the High Court about his support for her set-aside application. The Tribunal made express findings of dishonesty on allegations 1.1-1.5. On allegation 1.6 (failure to swear/serve affidavit) dishonesty was not proved but recklessness was found. The Tribunal found the misconduct at the highest level, with no exceptional circumstances, and ordered her struck off the Register of Foreign Lawyers with costs of £24,000 (reduced from £48,000 assessed and £53,719.36 claimed to reflect her limited means).

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Dishonesty
  • Misconduct was deliberate, calculated and repeated
  • Misconduct continued over a period of time
  • Concealment of wrongdoing (including clearing the office of papers between visits)
  • Sought to deflect blame onto Mr Faraque
  • Knew she was in material breach of her obligations

Mitigating factors:

  • No previous disciplinary findings

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/12093/