This case concerned allegations of professional misconduct brought by the SRA against Mr Shahid Ali. There was a Statement of Agreed Facts between the parties dated 15 October 2025 relating to certain factual matters.

Mr Ali was retained to defend Client A, a former professional Pakistani cricketer, who was charged, in 2017, by the National Crime Agency (NCA) with conspiracy to bribe players in the 2016 Pakistani Super League. Client A’s house was searched by the NCA and approximately £5,500 was seized in cash but returned to Mr Ali, on behalf of Client A, in September 2017. Mr Ali did not account for these funds in a client ledger, and they remained in the respective safes of the two firms for which he worked during the relevant period.

In December 2018 the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) issued a representation order for Client A, which covered Mr Ali’s and the fees of Mr Nawaz of counsel (now KC). This was extended in May 2019 to include representation by leading counsel, Mr James Pickup KC.

Client A also gave the Respondent £15,000 in cash in or around October 2019 and the reason for the provision of this sum was disputed between the parties. This money was also not accounted for in a client ledger for Client A. The failure to maintain proper accounting records was admitted by the Respondent, but on the basis of administrative oversight, which basis was disputed.

In October 2019 Mr Ali allegedly encouraged Client A to fabricate a misleading account to support his defence in the criminal trial, which began at Manchester Crown Court in December 2019. Client A changed his plea to guilty mid-way through the trial, following the playing of an audio recording between Client A’s co-conspirator and an undercover officer.

Mr Ali allegedly misled counsel regarding the content of this recording, which was in English and Urdu, and which was pivotal in the criminal proceedings. The Urdu parts of that conversation had not been transcribed prior to being played in court. Mr Ali, who accepted that he was a fluent Urdu speaker, had listened to the recording in August 2019 and had reported to Client A and both Counsel instructed in the case that they were not helpful to the defence and mainly inaudible.

Following an unsuccessful attempt to argue that the prosecution was an abuse of process due to earlier Pakistani Cricket Board proceedings, the trial commenced in December 2019.

The covert conversations in Urdu, when played in court, were both audible and indicative of Client A’s involvement in the conspiracy. Client A was sentenced in February 2020. From then until April 2020, Mr Ali was alleged to have provided misleading information to Person A, Client A’s wife, about the whereabouts and the purpose of the cash sums totalling approximately £20,000. Further detail or relevant events is set out under individual allegations below.

After hearing witness evidence and submissions on behalf of both parties, the Tribunal found that Mr Ali provided misleading information to Person A and in so doing was dishonest. The Tribunal applied the test for dishonesty as set out in Ivey v Genting Casinos. Mr Ali thereby also failed to act with integrity, in a way that upholds public trust and confidence in the solicitors’ profession and in the best interests of his client.

The Tribunal also found that Mr Ali failed to record Client A’s money in a client ledger, return it promptly to him or maintain proper accounting records and thereby committed numerous breaches of the Accounts Rules 2011 and 2019.

The Tribunal did not find, on the balance of probabilities, that Mr Ali suggested to, or encouraged, Client A to provide a misleading account to assist his defence, nor that Mr Ali provided, or caused to be provided, information to counsel which was misleading as to the content of an audio recording, later found to be indicative of Client A’s guilt in criminal proceedings.

The Tribunal determined that Mr Ali’s misconduct was very serious in respect of allegations 1.1 and 1.2 and ordered him to pay a fine of £40,000 within Indicative Fine Band Level 4.