Darren Hanison

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

Darren Hanison, former sole principal of Fortitude Law, faced 17 allegations arising from his handling of medical negligence and product-liability claims between 2015 and 2023. All 17 allegations were found proved, with express findings of dishonesty in respect of allegations 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13 and 15. Misconduct included failing to take client instructions, misleading clients about settlements, wrongful retention of settlement funds, making false costs demands, creating fake ATE insurance schedules, filing a falsified expert report at court, submitting a false PII proposal, and Accounts Rules breaches. Mr Hanison admitted 10 allegations including dishonesty and accepted strike-off was appropriate; he did not attend. The Tribunal found the misconduct at the highest level of seriousness, motivated by financial gain, with no exceptional circumstances, and ordered him struck off the Roll and to pay costs of £114,820.64.

Duties found breached:

• Act in the client's best interests
• Competence
• Honesty
• Integrity
• Prompt accounting and return of money
• Uphold public trust in the profession

Aggravating factors:

• Conduct deliberate, calculated and repeated over a long period (2015-2023)
• Motivated by financial gain
• Took advantage of trust placed in him and abused position of power and authority
• Caused significant harm to vulnerable clients and colleagues
• Experienced solicitor who knew his conduct was dishonest
• Created fake ATE insurance schedules and filed falsified expert report at court
• Multiple dishonest representations to clients, other solicitors, the SRA and the court
• Patchy/poor engagement with regulatory process, missed deadlines

Mitigating factors:

• No previous disciplinary findings
• Late admissions of many allegations
• Some degree of insight in written mitigation statement
• Mental health difficulties following heart attack in January 2023 (relied on only to explain non-attendance, not as justification)