Does dishonesty always result in a strike-off? Clare Hughes-Williams considers some exceptional circumstances
- In disciplinary cases involving solicitors, dishonesty typically results in being struck off the roll. However, the recent SRA v Goodwin case shows that exceptional mitigating circumstances can lead to alternative sanctions.
- The Goodwin decision—where a solicitor was suspended rather than struck off—joins a small group of cases where personal health issues, stress, or isolated lapses have been accepted as mitigating factors, provided strong evidence supports them.
- Despite such exceptions, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal continues to uphold a strict approach—only truly exceptional, well-documented cases avoid strike-off for dishonesty.
The recent case of SRA v Goodwin (Case No 12726-2025) is evidence, if further evidence is needed, that when the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) succeeds in proving dishonesty against a solicitor, the starting point in terms of sanction for the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) is that the solicitor should be struck off.
SRA v Goodwin
The facts of this case were that Mr Goodwin sent an email
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=43229066_1)
