(unnamed respondent)

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

Mr Garrett, a former non-solicitor employee subject to a 2016 SRA section 43 order for misappropriating £89,842.73 from his firm's office account, applied to the SDT to review/quash the order following his 2021 criminal acquittal. Applying the approach from Fordham J and SRA v Arslan, the Tribunal reviewed whether the original Adjudicator's decision to impose the order, and the SRA's refusals to revoke it, were materially flawed. The Tribunal found the order was necessary when imposed and remained necessary, relying on Ms Stephens' evidence, the signed admission, and the charge over Mr Garrett's parents' house. The acquittal (based on disclosure difficulties) did not undermine the balance-of-probabilities findings. The application was refused, the order confirmed, and costs of £19,503.84 awarded against Mr Garrett. This was a review of an existing order rather than a fresh disciplinary finding, and the Tribunal made no fresh express finding of dishonesty.

Duties found breached:

• Segregate client money

Aggravating factors:

• No evidence of rehabilitation
• Signed admission/confession of misappropriation
• Charge granted over parents' home in the exact sum misappropriated

Mitigating factors:

• Acquitted of all criminal charges in 2021 (though based on disclosure issues, not vindication)