Geoffrey Martin Signey

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

Geoffrey Martin Signey, admitted 1972 and sole director/principal of Signey Law Ltd, faced nine allegations arising from the collapse of the Axiom litigation funding fund. He sold his shares to C Ltd (controlled by an unauthorised non-solicitor, Mr X) without due diligence, failed to notify the SRA, signed a blank funding application later populated with false information, signed a Litigation Funding Agreement without due diligence, and allowed the firm to receive and misuse £4,778,803 of Axiom monies (paid into office rather than client account) for improper purposes. He abrogated his responsibilities as sole director. He admitted allegations 1.1-1.8 including recklessness and lack of integrity. On allegation 1.9, the Tribunal found he acted dishonestly (both objectively and subjectively) in accepting a £30,000 ex gratia payment out of Axiom funds when resigning, having no coherent basis for it; the 'buying silence' aspect (1.9(c)) was not proved, and dishonesty on 1.9(a) was not found due to genuine belief. The Tribunal drew an adverse inference from his refusal to give evidence. He was struck off the Roll and ordered to pay costs of £44,860 (reduced from £53,857 claimed).

Duties found breached:

• Proper basis for allegations
• Integrity
• No taking unfair advantage
• Uphold public trust in the profession
• Non-discriminatory acceptance and cab-rank
• No conflict between current clients
• No improper use of client money
• Report serious misconduct of others
• Not misrepresent regulated status

Aggravating factors:

• Dishonesty alleged and proved
• Repeated misconduct by omission and deliberate, conscious disengagement from wrongdoing at the firm
• Respondent derived personal benefit of £30,000
• Should have known his conduct materially breached his obligations having been through the authorisation process
• Presided over a regulated entity where multi-million pound misappropriation of investor funds occurred
• Considerable financial harm to Axiom fund investors (losses £15,000-£250,000) and to reputation of profession
• Created his own version of Board Minutes to justify the payment which lacked credibility
• Signed his own cheque for £30,000 after having already resigned as director

Mitigating factors:

• Respondent was duped by sophisticated individuals (Mr Schools, Mr U and others)
• Was not the beneficiary of the large sums disbursed to others
• Cooperated with the Applicant and engaged with the Axiom Receivers' solicitors
• Made admissions to the facts and to allegations 1.1-1.8
• Misconduct derived from a single set of circumstances over a period of months
• Retired and no longer working