Skip to main content
discipline 4 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

Tony Kirton & Simon Andrew Clive Newbold & Zakia Khalid & Roy George & Adrian Michael Organ & Daniel Clarke

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number11684/2017
Date01/01/2017
OutcomeFine

Allegation / charges

Breaches

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

SanctionFine
CostsGBP 53,000
Dishonesty foundNo

Five respondents from Geoffrey Parker Bourne Limited and its successor GPB Solicitors LLP admitted Solicitors Accounts Rules breaches arising from a failure to properly control systems, which allowed improper transfers from client to office account and led to a £1.68m client account shortfall. The misappropriation was actually committed and concealed by a non-solicitor cashier (Mr Clarke), and no dishonesty or lack of integrity was alleged against any of the five respondents. The Tribunal approved an Agreed Outcome imposing fines (totalling £32,001 after means-based reductions), a section 43 order against Mr Kirton (a non-solicitor), and joint and several costs of £53,000.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Previous disciplinary findings against the Second and Fifth Respondents (Case No. 11080-2012), which increased their fines
  • Substantial client account shortfall of £1,681,044.96

Mitigating factors:

  • No dishonesty or lack of integrity alleged or found against any of the first to fifth respondents
  • The misappropriation was carried out and concealed by Mr Clarke (Sixth Respondent), who deleted ledgers so as to evade detection by qualified accountants and two audits
  • Respondents self-reported immediately upon discovery and cooperated fully with the SRA
  • The firm had substantial management structures, Lexcel accreditation and the Riliance compliance system, and employed a qualified accountant as Head of Finance
  • Members took prompt remedial steps including reporting, PI insurance claim, and instructing auditors
  • Client account shortfall was made good via professional indemnity insurance

⚠ figures not found verbatim in the source were dropped: ["unverified_fine_amount=32001"]

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/11684/