The Respondent was a solicitor admitted to the Roll of Solicitors on 2 December 2013.

It was alleged by the Applicant that the Respondent advised and encouraged reporters from the Daily Mail, one posing as a man seeking entry in the UK and the other as his uncle, to provide a false narrative upon which to claim asylum. The Applicant’s case relied on transcripts of covert recordings of the Respondent’s meetings with the reporters, conducted partly in English and partly in Punjabi.

The Respondent denied the alleged misconduct and challenged the accuracy of the Applicant’s translation of the conversations. Ultimately, both the Applicant and the Respondent commissioned separate translations of the covert recordings, and the Tribunal heard evidence from the translators, among other witnesses in the case.
The Tribunal did not find that the Respondent advised his purported prospective client to provide a false narrative. Rather, it accepted that the Respondent conducted an initial exploratory meeting. The furthest he went during that meeting was to rehearse potential arguments at their highest. However, he made it clear that these matters would be revisited at a future meeting, with the grounds to be finalised based on the evidence presented by his prospective client.

The Tribunal did not find the allegation proved by the Applicant to the required standard (the balance of probabilities) and it dismissed the allegation. The Tribunal made no order for costs.