§ discipline
‹ Browse decisions

Michael Shuman and Periasamy Mathialagan

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number9116/2004
Date01/01/2004
OutcomeNo Order, Strike off

Allegation / charges

Solicitors' Accounts Rules, Others

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

SanctionStrike Off
Dishonesty foundNo

Periasamy Mathialagan, a solicitor practising as Mathis with registered foreign lawyer Michael Shuman, faced allegations of Solicitors Accounts Rules breaches, publicity/business-names non-compliance, and conduct unbefitting for involvement in dubious/fraudulent investment and bank-instrument schemes, with dishonesty alleged. The proceedings against Shuman were withdrawn on his undertaking to be removed from the Register of Foreign Lawyers. Mathialagan admitted the rules breaches and the conduct allegation save dishonesty. The Tribunal found all allegations substantiated but expressly did NOT find dishonesty, holding that while his conduct might be regarded as dishonest, he was not aware he was acting dishonestly by the standards of reasonable people (Twinsectra second limb not met); rather he showed 'extraordinary foolishness and lack of judgement'. He was struck off the Roll. Costs were ordered: Applicant's costs of £17,037.50 (inc VAT) plus FIO costs of £24,958.04 (the formal order recited the £24,958.04 figure).

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Ignored clear Law Society warning cards on money laundering and bank instrument fraud
  • Allowed his practice and client account to lend a cloak of respectability to fraudulent/dubious transactions
  • Firm derived substantial fees (c.£117,429) from such transactions
  • Took the view he was acting properly merely by following client instructions, ignoring wider duties

Mitigating factors:

  • Suffered debilitating ill health (diabetes, back injury) at the material time
  • Placed trust and reliance on his registered foreign lawyer partner Mr Shuman, who introduced the clients/transactions
  • No complaints from clients
  • Frank and detailed evidence
  • Already lost his practice, faced intervention costs and financial ruin, and suffered breakdown of his marriage
  • Positive character references and pro bono community work

⚠ figures not found verbatim in the source were dropped: ["unverified_costs_amount=41995.54"]

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/9116/