§ discipline
‹ Browse decisions

Paul Anthony Brown

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number7377/1997
Date01/01/1997
OutcomeStrike off

Allegation / charges

Others

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

SanctionStrike Off
Dishonesty foundYes

Paul Anthony Brown, admitted 1988, while an assistant solicitor at Drysdales & Janes and Barnes & Taylor, misled three clients about the progress of their matters. He falsely told Mr V that the Solicitors Indemnity Fund had agreed an interim payment of £3,000 and then paid that sum from his own resources; he prepared an affidavit which Mr V swore on false premises. He told Mr P an interim payment was available and confirmed it in writing, though no approach had been made. He gave Mrs C false progress reports (judgment on liability obtained, interim payment of £3,500, listed hearings and counsel conferences) when no proceedings had been commenced, and took her file to his new firm without authority. He also misled his employers, including by denying the Mr V arrangement several times before admitting it. The Tribunal found the allegations substantiated and expressly referred to dishonesty. Despite mitigation (diabetic condition, personal/domestic difficulties, a difficult client, no personal material gain, successful sole practice with books in order, testimonials), the Tribunal found striking off was the only appropriate sanction. Filing of the order was suspended for 28 days to allow an orderly wind-down of his sole practice. He was ordered to pay costs of £3,231.25.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Misled three separate sets of clients
  • Prepared an affidavit attested by client based on totally false premises
  • Misled two firms of employers, causing one partner to give incorrect information to a client's MP
  • Repeatedly denied the conduct when challenged before later admitting it
  • Continued misleading conduct after moving to a second firm
  • Took a client's file without authority of former employers
  • Serious consequences to clients including Mr & Mrs C losing their tenancy

⚠ figures not found verbatim in the source were dropped: ["unverified_costs_amount=3231.25"]

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/7377/