The First and Second Respondents were partners in the firm of Gelbergs, respectively heads of the probate and conveyancing departments in that firm.

The First Respondent represented over many years a wealthy family with residential and commercial property interests in East London. Following the death of the head of the family the First Respondent acted for the executors of the estate.

It was said that the First and Second Respondent dishonestly submitted official documents relating to title and ownership of the properties to HMLR with the intention of concealing the true owners of the properties and with a view to misleading the local authority.

The First Respondent admitted his part in the allegation but denied that he had been dishonest. The Second Respondent initially adopted the same position but later resiled from this and denied all the allegations when being interviewed by the Applicant, including dishonesty, on the basis that he had relied on information given to him by the First Respondent. In his evidence before the Tribunal the Second Respondent said the First Respondent had been the perpetrator and sent out various documents to make it appear that they had been created and sent by the Second Respondent. He said he was not involved in any of the transactions and did not submit any documents to HMLR.

The First Respondent did not attend before the Tribunal to give evidence.

The Tribunal found all allegations proved with respect to both Respondents, including dishonesty, and it ordered that they each be struck off the Roll of Solicitors.