(unnamed respondent)
Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision
The Appellant, an unqualified legal assistant, appealed against an SRA Adjudicator's disqualification order under s.99 LSA 2007 prohibiting him from acting as HOLP, HOFA, Manager or Employee of an SRA-licensed body. The Adjudicator had found that, while handling injunctive and declaratory proceedings, the Appellant acted outside his authority, failed to notify the court his firm was on record, failed to properly advise the client on the injunction and its effect, and gave incorrect advice (that the injunction had lapsed) which led the client to breach the order and be found in contempt. These were found to breach Principles 2 and 7. The Tribunal, proceeding by way of review, held the Adjudicator applied the correct legal framework and that the findings and disqualification were within the range of reasonable responses and proportionate to protect the public and maintain confidence. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety and the Appellant ordered to pay costs of £15,247. No express finding of dishonesty was made.
Duties found breached:
Aggravating factors:
- Acted without authorisation and litigated without authority
- Ignored court orders
- Exposed client to risk of wrongful imprisonment (contempt)
- Persistent and grossly incompetent failings
- Acted without supervision and outside scope of authority
Mitigating factors:
- Appellant was an unqualified case handler/legal assistant
- Possible firm supervisory failings
- No prior regulatory history
- Claimed genuine insight and remorse (August 2024 letter to SRA)
- Lack of assets, unemployment and heavily mortgaged family home