Ramachandren Narayanasamy

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

Solicitor Ramachandren Narayanasamy faced allegations that, when giving evidence in a civil claim brought by a former partner (Mr L), and in correspondence with the SRA and Malaysian Bar Council, he made untrue, evasive or obfuscating statements in breach of Principles 1, 2 and 6. The Tribunal found Allegations 1.1(ii) (knowingly untrue evidence about an accountant's letter, with dishonesty), 1.1(iii) (evasive/obfuscating evidence denying plain meaning of an email), 1.1(v) (knowingly untrue evidence about a £300,000 income condition, with dishonesty), and 1.1(vi) (evasive evidence on firm earnings) proved. Allegations 1.1(i), 1.1(iv) and 1.2 were found not proved. Express findings of dishonesty were made on 1.1(ii) and 1.1(v) applying the Ivey test. The Tribunal found no exceptional circumstances to avoid strike-off and ordered the Respondent struck off the Roll with costs of £34,884 (reduced from the £53,280 claimed). The decision is subject to appeal to the High Court.

Duties found breached:

• Honesty
• Integrity
• Uphold public trust in the profession

Aggravating factors:

• Dishonesty
• Misconduct not limited to a brief duration; prolonged line of questioning over multiple documents
• Financial motivation - stood to gain from the civil claim outcome
• Experienced solicitor and litigator aware of obligations to the court
• Lack of insight - continued to maintain he had done nothing wrong

Mitigating factors:

• Misconduct related to a single piece of litigation
• Co-operated with the SRA
• No previous disciplinary findings
• No loss caused as he was unsuccessful in the civil claim