Skip to main content
discipline 4 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

Michael Lloyd Wilson

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number11656/2017
Date01/01/2017
OutcomeStrike off

Allegation / charges

Criminal Convictions

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

SanctionStrike Off
CostsGBP 3,397
Dishonesty foundNo

The Respondent, a solicitor and director of Global Wine Investments Limited, was convicted on indictment of possessing/acquiring criminal property under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and sentenced to 3 years imprisonment plus a 7-year directors' disqualification. Investors paid for vintage wines but received nothing, with losses of approximately £100,000. He admitted breaches of Principles 1, 2 and 6. The Tribunal found a lack of integrity (not express dishonesty) and, given the seriousness of the conviction involving money laundering and a custodial sentence, ordered him struck off the Roll and to pay costs of £3,397.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Serious criminal offence resulting in a custodial sentence of 3 years
  • Repeatedly used members of the public's money over a period to fund other businesses
  • Took advantage of members of the public including elderly people
  • Ought reasonably to have known conduct breached obligations to protect public and reputation of profession
  • High culpability money laundering case

Mitigating factors:

  • Long previously unblemished record (13 years practising with no issues)
  • Early admissions
  • Genuine remorse and insight
  • Spoke candidly before the Tribunal
  • Time in prison had a profound effect and he had matured
  • Unlikely to repeat conduct

Duties engaged

Other decisions involving this respondent

  • 128 of 2019 2021-07-31 · GLC · Jamaica · Struck off
  • 128 of 2019 2021-07-31 · GLC · Jamaica · Struck off
  • 128 of 2019 2020-10-31 · GLC · Jamaica · Guilty of Professional Misconduct

Matched by respondent name — may include a different person with the same name.

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/11656/