Udeh Kumar s/o Sethuraju

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

In combined Court of Three Judges proceedings (OS 5/2016 and OS 1/2017), the Law Society sought sanctions against Udeh Kumar s/o Sethuraju, a senior advocate of ~29 years. Eleven charges were considered across three groups: repeated lateness/absence causing unnecessary adjournments (Rule 55(b) PCR); knowingly making false/misleading statements to the court (Rule 56 PCR), including a false certification of consent to adjournment and false statements about instructions and prison visits; and advising a client to obtain a medical certificate under false pretences and failing to advise surrender to a warrant (s 83(2)(b) LPA, Rule 17 PCR). The court expressly found the Respondent had been fraudulent and dishonest in his dealings with the court on several occasions. Rejecting the Law Society's suggestion of a 'spectrum of dishonesty' warranting only suspension, the court found no material mitigating factors and multiple aggravating factors (seniority, extensive prior disciplinary record, recalcitrance). It ordered the Respondent struck off the roll and ordered the usual costs (including disbursements) to be paid to the Law Society for both Originating Summonses and both Tribunal hearings, with no specific quantum stated.

Duties found breached:

• Not mislead the court
• Avoid wasting the court's time
• No improper communication with the court
• Cease acting on client perjury or disobedience

Aggravating factors:

• Respondent's seniority (about 29 years' standing) causing greater damage to integrity of profession
• Extensive record of prior disciplinary offences including a 3-month suspension in 2013 and multiple penalties/fines for chronic non-attendance and lateness, demonstrating a persistent pattern and recalcitrance
• Conduct went to the heart of the relationship between an officer of the court and the court's core function of administering justice