Anita Barnett

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

Anita Barnett, a senior solicitor at County Council A, submitted an amended witness statement of Karen Webb to the High Court on 12 June 2019 without obtaining Mrs Webb's express confirmation of the amendments and without notifying the court that the version filed had not been seen or approved by Mrs Webb. The SRA alleged breaches of Principles 2 and 6 and failure to achieve Outcome 5.1, with dishonesty (alternatively recklessness) as an aggravating feature. The Tribunal found the factual allegations proven but held that the Respondent genuinely and reasonably believed she had authority from Mrs Webb to make amendments (supported by a paralegal attendance note and a collaborative culture at the Council of delegating electronic signatures and reviewing statements), that the amendments were not material, and that she had been open and transparent, copying Mrs Webb and the CCG's solicitor. Neither the subjective nor objective tests for dishonesty under Ivey were met, nor was recklessness. The Tribunal found no lack of integrity and no breach of Principle 6. Allegations dismissed, no sanction, and no order as to costs (the Respondent's application for £22,914 costs against the SRA was refused, as was the SRA's costs application, as the proceedings were properly and not flawed).

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