Michael William Pilkington

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

Mr Pilkington, sole director of Pilkingtons Solicitors, received monies for settled cases to pay professional and non-professional disbursements on at least 50 cases but instead used the funds to keep his struggling firm running, and failed to notify the SRA of the firm's serious financial difficulties. The Tribunal found both allegations proved, including that his conduct lacked integrity (Principle 5) and was dishonest (Principle 4) under the Ivey test, rejecting his argument that there was no intention to deprive and no personal gain. Two parts of the allegations (breach of paragraph 4.2 and Principle 5 on allegation 1.2) were struck out for want of particularity. Finding no exceptional circumstances, the Tribunal struck him off the Roll. Although costs of £33,459.10 were sought, no order as to costs was made given there was no reasonable prospect he could meet a costs order (following Barnes).

Duties found breached:

• Honesty
• Integrity
• No conflict between current clients
• Uphold public trust in the profession

Aggravating factors:

• Proven dishonesty in material breach of obligation to protect the public
• Conduct was deliberate, planned and calculated
• Continued the scheme even after being told by FI Officer to cease
• Foreseeable harm that increased over time
• Books of account showed disbursements paid when not the true position
• Experienced solicitor who should have known conduct breached obligations

Mitigating factors:

• Unblemished lengthy career
• Single course of conduct, out of character
• Completely candid and transparent throughout investigation
• Admitted facts from the outset
• Misconduct occurred during extremely trying circumstances largely beyond his control
• No personal financial gain; took no money from Firm since February 2020
• Motivation to keep employees in employment