John Athuahene and Richard Thomas Thorburn
Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision
Two solicitors who amalgamated their practices into the Practical Law Partnership faced a complaint following multiple Law Society inspections revealing serious and repeated breaches of the Accounts Rules, failures to respond to the Law Society and fellow solicitors, failure to implement mandates, delays in registering deeds, inadequate money laundering procedures, and operating without professional indemnity insurance. After a lengthy hearing spanning several years, the Tribunal found both guilty of professional misconduct in cumulo. It expressly found the First Respondent was not dishonest but 'hopelessly incompetent.' Both were struck off the Roll of Solicitors as not fit and proper persons, and each was made liable for one half of 80% of the expenses.
Duties found breached:
- No improper communication with the court
- Keep client informed and respond promptly
- No conflict between current clients
- Handle inadvertently received material
- Prompt accounting and return of money
- Professional indemnity insurance
- AML and crime-prevention compliance
Aggravating factors:
- Repeated inspections over a long period with the same problems recurring despite advice from the Law Society
- Lack of insight into own incompetence; continued in practice after Judicial Factor appointment
- Previous findings of professional misconduct against the First Respondent
- Clients exposed to significant risk by operating without professional indemnity insurance over a prolonged period
- Persistent course of conduct hampering the Law Society in its statutory duty
Mitigating factors:
- First Respondent's ill health (diabetes, high blood pressure exacerbated by stress)
- Accounting problems inherited from predecessor firm Murray & Co
- No dishonesty or manipulation found; conduct attributed to incompetence
- A number of charges/averments were deleted or not established
⚠ figures not found verbatim in the source were dropped: ["review_dishonesty_finding_cue_present"]
Duties engaged
Documents
Source: https://www.ssdt.org.uk/findings/law-society-v-john-athuahene-and-richard-thorburn/