JRT

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

The SRA brought serious allegations (not including dishonesty) against solicitor JRT via a Rule 5 Statement dated 6 February 2017. Multiple substantive hearings were adjourned due to the Respondent's deteriorating mental health. The Respondent applied to dismiss the proceedings, relying on Article 2 ECHR, arguing continuation posed a real and immediate risk to his life. Based on cogent psychiatric evidence from Dr Bickerton, the Tribunal found Article 2 was engaged and that neither the SRA's proposed 'middle ground' (determining allegations without sanction) nor a stay would adequately reduce the risk, as the proceedings themselves were the key aggravating factor. The Tribunal held the public interest was overwhelmed by the Respondent's Article 2 rights and dismissed all allegations. No findings on the merits were made. The Respondent's application for costs (£7,592) was refused; the Tribunal made no order as to costs applying CMA v Flynn Pharma principles.