Skip to main content
discipline 4 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

Hwee Khoon Young

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number8446/2001
Date01/01/2001
OutcomeSuspend - Indefinite

Allegation / charges

Client Money, Solicitors' Accounts Rules, Others

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

SanctionSuspension
CostsGBP 8,351
Dishonesty foundNo

A solicitor allowed nearly $1.2 million to pass through her client account for new clients (a Bahamian company and its principals) with no genuine underlying transaction, disbursing funds largely as cash to an introducer, via her own travel agency, private bank account, and telegraphic transfers to Ladbrokes, in breach of the Solicitors' Accounts Rules and ignoring money laundering warnings despite being the firm's money laundering officer. The Tribunal found all allegations substantiated, including that she compromised her integrity and good repute, but expressly found she had NOT been dishonest, attributing her conduct to naivety and stupidity. Deciding she was not fit to practise but declining to strike her off, the Tribunal suspended her indefinitely and ordered costs of £8,351.27.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Received nearly $1.2 million into client account over three months with no discernible underlying transaction
  • Acted effectively as a banker for clients
  • Made payments in cash and via her own travel agency and private bank account
  • Ignored warning signs including Royal Bank of Scotland's refusal to open accounts (mentioning money laundering) and suspect territories (Bahamas/Florida)
  • Was the firm's money laundering officer yet failed to apply the regulations
  • No client instructions obtained or confirmed in writing

Mitigating factors:

  • No dishonesty and no personal benefit beyond £1,500 incorporation fee
  • Very candid and cooperative from the outset; admitted allegations (c) and (d)
  • Under significant personal and work pressures (father-in-law's death, family care responsibilities, husband absent)
  • Naive and inexperienced rather than deliberate; unwitting tool of client
  • Had already retired/ceased practising

⚠ figures not found verbatim in the source were dropped: ["review_dishonesty_finding_cue_present"]

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/8446/