Eric Kawoya Kabuye

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

The Respondent, sole director and de facto COLP/COFA of Queenscourt Law Ltd t/a Hamilton Solicitors, admitted allegations 1.1 and 1.2 (facilitating/failing to prevent fraudulent property transactions causing client account shortages of at least £825,368 and misuse of the client account as a banking facility) and had allegations 1.3 (lack of control/supervision/governance), 1.4 (inadequate cooperation with the SRA) and 1.5 (manifest incompetence) found proved. The Tribunal expressly found no lack of integrity and no dishonesty, concluding his failures resulted from ineptitude/incompetence rather than any intention to mislead. Given his clean record since 2003, remorse and insight, and the limited scope of the manifest incompetence, the Tribunal imposed a 6-month suspension suspended for 12 months with practice conditions, and ordered costs of £7,500 (reduced from £53,945 for limited means).

Duties found breached:

• Uphold public trust in the profession
• No conflict between current clients
• Handle inadvertently received material
• No improper use of client money
• Firm governance, systems and compliance
• Cooperate openly with regulators

Aggravating factors:

• Manifest incompetence in conveyancing practice and management/oversight of the Firm
• Systemic failures sustained over a significant period rather than isolated lapses
• Permitted a disbarred/fined individual and a person subject to s.43 order to work at/share the Firm's premises
• Failure to properly supervise unadmitted fee-earners handling high-risk fraudulent transactions
• Significant client account shortages (minimum £825,368, potential further up to £1,610,000) never replaced
• Harm caused to property owners who bore legal and renovation costs

Mitigating factors:

• Effectively clean/unblemished regulatory record since admission in 2003
• Genuine remorse, shame and insight into failings; acknowledged being 'out of his depth'
• No finding of dishonesty or lack of integrity
• Reported concerns to the SRA ethics line and indemnity insurer
• Conduct isolated in time and practice area; voluntarily stepped away from conveyancing and managerial roles
• Positive testimonials from referees, including regulated professionals
• Limited means; suffered significant personal and financial consequences from the intervention