header-logo header-logo

26 April 2017
Issue: 7743 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Leigh Day disciplinary hearing begins

Leigh Day senior partner Martyn Day, partner Sapna Malik and associate Anna Crowther have appeared at the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal this week to defend themselves against allegations of misconduct over claims that British soldiers tortured civilians in Iraq.

Lawyers for the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) told the tribunal there was evidence that the firm suppressed a document showing the alleged victims of atrocities were not Iraqi civilians but members of the Mahdi army who ambushed the soldiers. Had the list been disclosed, the £31m Al Sweady public inquiry could have been stopped and years of unnecessary torment for Iraq veterans been prevented, the SRA said. The inquiry has now been closed down and its lead solicitor, Phil Shiner of Public Interest Lawyers, has been struck off. 

All three solicitors vigorously deny the allegations. Day and Malik face 19 misconduct charges. Crowther faces one allegation.

Speaking ahead of the hearing this week, Iain Miller, partner at Kingsley Napley, who specialises in regulatory issues for the legal sector, said: ‘Unlike the recent process involving Phil Shiner, we can expect a closely fought case over the next six weeks.

‘The stakes are high with reputational damage, a large fine and even revocation of authorisation and partner strike-off being amongst the spectrum of potential outcomes if Leigh Day and its two partners cannot succeed in contesting the allegations. However, it’s a mid-sized, multi-practice firm and my view is it will ultimately weather the storm.

‘Undoubtedly Leigh Day faces an uncomfortable spotlight for its past work on Al Sweady but my prediction is they’ll be down for a bit, but most certainly not out as a result of this process.’

The hearing is expected to continue for six weeks. 

Issue: 7743 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Foot Anstey—Jasmine Olomolaiye

Investigations and corporate crime expert joins as partner

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Fieldfisher—Mark Shaw

Veteran funds specialist joins investment funds team

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Taylor Wessing—Stephen Whitfield

Firm enhances competition practice with London partner hire

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll