Skip to main content
discipline 3 October 2026
‹ Browse decisions

Decision record

William Peter Dooley

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
BodySolicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT)
Professionsolicitor
Case number12802/2025
Date22/06/2026
OutcomeStrike off

Allegation / charges

Breaches, Code of Conduct for Solicitors, REL's & RFL's 2019, Dishonesty, Lack of Integrity, SRA Principles 2019

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

SanctionStrike Off
CostsGBP 16,928
Dishonesty foundYes

Mr Dooley, a senior associate at Ellis Jones Solicitors LLP, failed to file appeals for two clients by the deadlines. To conceal this, on around 27 August 2021 he created backdated correspondence to the ITP falsely dated 13 August 2021 (with a deliberately misspelt email address), and fabricated email chains to clients dated 24 and 25 August 2021. In March-April 2022 he misled his supervising partner, falsely claiming the extension application had not been received due to a typographical error caused by his secretary. He admitted all allegations including dishonesty. The Tribunal found the conduct clearly dishonest with no exceptional circumstances and approved the agreed outcome of striking off. Costs were reduced from the parties' agreed £19,500 to £16,927.50 as the Tribunal considered the higher figure disproportionate given the early admission and use of external solicitors.

Duties found breached:

Aggravating factors:

  • Conduct was dishonest, pre-meditated and repeated
  • Misconduct directed at multiple persons including clients and colleagues
  • Created backdated correspondence and manipulated email chains
  • Falsely blamed his secretary for the typographical error to distance himself

Mitigating factors:

  • Self-referral to the SRA and full co-operation throughout the investigation
  • Previously unblemished professional record
  • No financial or personal gain; clients suffered no additional loss
  • Significant personal and domestic pressures at the time (young family, demanding role) - not agreed by SRA

Codes & rules applied

Duties engaged

Documents

Source: https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/case/12802/