R Z Choudhury & M Kamruzzaman
Allegation / charges
Breaches, Client Money, Failures, Others, Solicitors' Accounts Rules
Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision
Rahat Zaman Choudhury, sole principal of Zaman Choudhury & Co, and his assistant solicitor Mohammad Kamruzzaman were found to have breached the Solicitors' Accounts Rules and SCC Rule 1.02. An SRA investigation found a minimum client account shortage of £101,219.86. The Tribunal found both Respondents acted dishonestly in relation to the Mrs M-O, Clients S/P & Others, and Mr S & Mrs A matters, where client cash was given to the First Respondent and used for personal purposes (e.g. daughter's wedding, airline tickets, personal loan, salary advance) and later replaced. The Tribunal applied SRA v Sharma and found no exceptional circumstances. Both Respondents were struck off the Roll. The First Respondent was ordered to pay £35,000 costs and the Second Respondent £17,000 (total £52,000), neither enforceable without leave. The First Respondent's appeal to the High Court was dismissed with £11,955.12 costs.
Duties found breached:
- No improper communication with the court
- No conflict between current clients
- Handle inadvertently received material
- No improper use of client money
- Report serious misconduct of others
Aggravating factors:
- Conduct took place over a number of months
- Client funds placed at risk
- First Respondent's cavalier and reckless disregard of proper obligations and abdication of responsibility
- Use of Second Respondent and his wife to subvert Bangladesh exchange control limits
- Both Respondents benefited from client funds
- First Respondent was not a credible witness, flippant and cavalier
Mitigating factors:
- No previous disciplinary matters
- Client funds ultimately replaced; no intention permanently to deprive clients
- Relatively small sums involved given firm's volume of business
- Second Respondent's cooperation with the SRA (charges arose from his admissions)
- Second Respondent relatively inexperienced, qualified only since 2006, misguided loyalty to First Respondent
- Good character references for Second Respondent
- Second Respondent's ill health and modest means
Duties engaged
- No improper communication with the court
- Honesty
- No conflict between current clients
- Handle inadvertently received material
- No improper use of client money
- Prompt accounting and return of money
- Accounting records, reconciliation and reports
- Firm governance, systems and compliance
- Report serious misconduct of others