Skip to main content
discipline 4 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

Rachael Catherine Worthington

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number12598/2024
Date23/12/2024
OutcomeStrike off

Allegation / charges

Breaches, Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, Dishonesty, Failures, Lack of Integrity, SRA Principles 2019

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

SanctionStrike Off
CostsGBP 3,500
Dishonesty foundYes

Rachael Catherine Worthington, a solicitor employed at Irwin Mitchell LLP, admitted knowingly providing false and misleading information to clients, opposing solicitors and an insurer across four probate/will dispute matters between 2020 and 2021, covering up her failures to issue claims and applications. She admitted her conduct was dishonest within Ivey and breached Principles 2, 4 and 5 and paragraphs 1.4 and 7.11 of the Code. The Tribunal, dealing with the matter on the papers via an agreed outcome, found dishonesty and no exceptional circumstances, and ordered she be struck off the Roll and pay £3,500 costs.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Conduct was dishonest
  • Deliberate and repeated misconduct
  • Occurred on numerous occasions over approximately seven months
  • Breach of position of trust with multiple clients
  • Motivated by wish to cover up failures to carry out client instructions
  • Planned misconduct

Mitigating factors:

  • Early admissions and full cooperation with the SRA
  • Newly qualified solicitor with inadequate supervision (asserted by Respondent, not endorsed by SRA)
  • Extreme work pressure and excessive chargeable targets (asserted by Respondent)
  • Serious mental health issues and suicidal ideation during period (asserted by Respondent)
  • No financial gain motive; acted out of desperation (asserted by Respondent)
  • Left the profession and did not intend to return

Codes & rules applied

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/12598/