The Tribunal’s decision dated 22 July 2025 is subject to appeal to the High Court (Administrative Court) by the Respondent. The Order remains in force pending the High Court’s decision on the appeal.

An investigation into the Respondent’s conduct was initiated by the SRA following reports from two firms of solicitors involved in separate litigation against him. Concerns arose after the Respondent became subject to a Limited Civil Restraint Order (“LCRO”) on 6 July 2021, followed by a General Civil Restraint Order (“GCRO”) on 14 September 2021. Further concerns were raised in May 2022 regarding additional litigation characterised by repeated appeals and procedural delay.

The SRA alleged—and the Respondent admitted—that he had issued proceedings and applications found to be totally without merit and conducted litigation in a manner that drew judicial criticism. However, he denied that his conduct lacked integrity.

The Tribunal found to the requisite standard that the Respondent, a solicitor of over 20 years’ standing, and designated as Compliance Officer for Legal Practice (“COLP”) and Compliance Officer for Finance and Administration (“COFA”), had engaged in sustained improper litigation conduct during proceedings arising from a family dispute. His approach—marked by procedural attrition and repeated unmeritorious applications—represented a serious departure from the standards expected of the profession and breached the obligations of the overriding objective. The Tribunal determined on the balance of probabilities that his conduct lacked integrity.

The Tribunal determined that his culpability was high. The harm caused was exacerbated by the exceptional strain on the courts during the COVID-19 pandemic and the heightened responsibilities that attached to his senior regulatory roles. His late-stage admissions did not demonstrate meaningful insight.

The Tribunal rejected his submission that a reprimand or fine would suffice. It imposed a 12-month suspension, concluding that only this sanction could properly reflect the seriousness of the misconduct and uphold public confidence in the legal system.