§ discipline
‹ Browse decisions

Charles Edward Shaw Rothwell

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number9686/2007
Date01/01/2007
OutcomeStrike off

Allegation / charges

Client Money, Failures, Solicitors' Accounts Rules

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

SanctionStrike Off
CostsGBP 12,000
Dishonesty foundYes

Charles Edward Shaw Rothwell, a solicitor and equity partner at Keeble Hawson, admitted six allegations of breaching the Solicitors Accounts Rules including misappropriating and misapplying clients' funds, transferring monies between unconnected client accounts and into office account to settle fees. He denied dishonesty. The Tribunal, applying the criminal standard and the Twinsectra/Barlow Clowes tests, found dishonesty in three matters (O, WM & Co and S & Co), concluding he knowingly acted with conscious impropriety to deceive his partners and relieve pressure to collect costs, though no client suffered loss. It found no dishonesty in the B and D matters (errors). Despite mitigation, the Tribunal struck him off and ordered £12,000 agreed costs.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Dishonesty found in three client matters (O, WM & Co and S & Co)
  • Failed to remedy misapplied S & Co money on discovery
  • Actions deceived partners and bookkeeping records did not reflect true position
  • Derived benefit by temporarily relieving pressure to collect costs

Mitigating factors:

  • No client suffered financial loss and client funds ultimately not lost
  • Young and relatively inexperienced solicitor at the time
  • Inundated with work and responsibility without senior support
  • Personal/domestic difficulties
  • Steps taken to put matters right financially, paying six figure sum to former partners
  • Positive testimonials as to competence and integrity
  • Admitted all factual allegations from early in proceedings

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/9686/