Skip to main content
discipline 4 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

S Dhama & Others

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number10018/2008
Date01/01/2008
OutcomeCosts only, Fine, Strike off

Allegation / charges

Breaches, Client Money, Delays, Failures, Solicitors' Accounts Rules, Others

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

SanctionStrike Off
FineGBP 7,500
CostsGBP 20,000
Dishonesty foundNo

Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal decision (heard 20-21 July 2010) concerning Dhama Douglas. First Respondent Satya Prakash Dhama faced 44 allegations; all proved save allegations 12 and 30, including Accounts Rules breaches, facilitating transactions bearing hallmarks of banking/mortgage/property fraud and money laundering, employing a struck-off solicitor, conflicts of interest, breaches of numerous undertakings, and failures to comply with Adjudicator awards. No express finding of dishonesty was made; the Tribunal found his practice was out of control with total disregard for the rules. He was struck off and ordered to pay 80% of costs (not enforceable without leave). The Third Respondent was found liable for breaches occurring after he became a partner (23 January 2006) and was fined £7,500 plus 20% of costs. The Second Respondent gave lifetime undertakings not to practise and paid £20,000 costs; his allegations were left on file. Various Adjudicator directions were made enforceable as High Court orders.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Previous appearance before the Tribunal for similar Accounts Rules breaches
  • Numerous allegations showing practice was out of control and total disregard for regulations
  • Harm caused to members of the public/clients
  • Failure to honour undertakings relied upon by the profession
  • Multiple unpaid Adjudicator awards for inadequate professional services
  • Failure to comply with Tribunal's previous orders to file witness statements
  • Slow to acknowledge responsibilities and put matters right

Mitigating factors:

  • Mr Dhama's poor health and severe depression
  • Elderly and frail pensioner near insolvency
  • Had not renewed practising certificate and volunteered to be removed from the Roll
  • Third Respondent's junior role and late partnership (from Jan 2006)

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/10018/